[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: [Phoronix] Ubuntu 9.04 vs. Fedora 11 Performance



On Sat, 2009-06-13 at 12:20 +0200, drago01 wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 13, 2009 at 11:02 AM, Gilboa Davara<gilboad gmail com> wrote:
> > On Fri, 2009-06-12 at 21:49 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> >> On Sat, 2009-06-13 at 05:43 +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> >>
> >> > > and no, glxgears is not a benchmark!
> >> >
> >> > Indeed, glxgears really sucks as as a benchmark, Phoronix's benchmark suite
> >> > (as imperfect as it is) is definitely more useful.
> >>
> >> I keep meaning to file a feature request for glxgears - remove the FPS
> >> display...if it's not a benchmark, let's not make it look like one.
> >
> >
> > While not an effective benchmark, but a good tool to check that DRI/DRM
> > is working.
> >
> > Grated, it would have been nice if out-of-the-box OSS OpenGL
> > benchmarking and testing tools (outside the closed benchmarks and game
> > demos used by the Phoronix suite), but for now, we are more-or-less
> > limited to glxgears...
> 
> There are alot of open source games[1} that are useable to for benchmarking.
> glxgears is NOT a benchmark. If you don't have anything but glxgears
> than you have NO benchmark.
> 
> [1]: openarena, nexuiz, ...
> 

True,
But nexuiz, open arena and the rest of the ioquake / cube are
unavailable on most distributions (E.g. EL5) and their sheer size (100's
of MBs) makes them far less effective.
glxgears, on the other hand is available more-or-less out of the box and
requires <50K.

As long as you respect the fact that glxgears can -only- be used to
verify that your OpenGL stack is more-or-less working as it should, I
see no problem in using it.

- Gilboa


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]