2009/2/5 Matthias Hopf <[email protected]>: > On Jan 30, 09 18:11:57 -0800, Bryce Harrington wrote: >> On Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 01:29:49PM -0800, Eric Anholt wrote: >> > > $ glxgears >> > > Failed to initialize TTM buffer manager. Falling back to classic. >> > > 300 frames in 5.0 seconds = 59.884 FPS >> > > 299 frames in 5.0 seconds = 59.621 FPS >> > > 300 frames in 5.0 seconds = 59.818 FPS >> > >> > glxgears is not a benchmark. >> > >> > We sync to vblank because running glxgears at 1000fps is dumb. >> >> I am going to go out on a limb and guess we're going to see a crapload >> of reports of "performance regression" due to reduced glxgears frame >> rates. > > At openSUSE we print out a warning now (well, this change went into > *after* 11.1, unfortunately), that this is not a benchmark. We got really > tired of these statements.
Except that it _is_ a benchmark. Or rather waas before the change. You can argue that it's not an accurate benchmark, but even on the kernel mailing lists I've seen it used as a crude benchmark. If for example, without vsync, a user gets just 100fps on their new nvidia card, then that is clearly showing that something is wrong. > > Matthias > > -- > Matthias Hopf <[email protected]> __ __ __ > Maxfeldstr. 5 / 90409 Nuernberg (_ | | (_ |__ [email protected] > Phone +49-911-74053-715 __) |_| __) |__ R & D www.mshopf.de > _______________________________________________ > xorg mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg > _______________________________________________ xorg mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg
