Am Donnerstag, 11. November 2004 22:30 schrieb Roland Scheidegger: > Dieter Nützel wrote: > > Let me try on r200 ;-) > > > > Some feedback for Roland's hyperz-dri-7.patch and > > hyperz-drm-14.patch. => rv path on my r200.
Now with hyperz-drm-15.patch. > > First I've change only drm. -0x1002 0x514C CHIP_R200 "ATI Radeon QL > > R200 8500 LE" +0x1002 0x514C CHIP_R200|CHIP_IS_RV "ATI Radeon QL R200 > > 8500 LE" > You shouldn't need this change in theory, as it should have no effect if > hierarchical-z isn't used. You probably can't change only the CHIP_IS_RV > bit, you need to change dri to not use hierarchical-z at the same time. Backed it out. > > +/* if (rmesa->r200Screen->chipset & > > R200_CHIPSET_REAL_R200) + > > rmesa->hw.ctx.cmd[CTX_RB3D_ZSTENCILCNTL] |= > > RADEON_Z_HIERARCHY_ENABLE;*/ } > > ok. That really shows that non-rv cards can be treated the same as rv > cards, if hierarchical-z is just disabled. If we can't figure out how to > get hierarchical-z working, this might be an option (it should also > simplify things quite a bit, since hierarchical-z can have issues with > some apps if they change z-test or something like that). Nothing changed, here. > > => * NO 'black horizontal lines' anylonger. - GREAT * but some speed > > regression, of course > > but it's still faster than without hyperz, yes? Sure;-) Now I get: quake3-smp, 640x480 window on 1280x1024x24 (32) desktop 180 fps 182 fps 180 fps progs/demos> ./gears 16881 frames in 5.000 seconds = 3376.200 FPS 17437 frames in 5.000 seconds = 3487.400 FPS 17438 frames in 5.000 seconds = 3487.600 FPS 17357 frames in 5.000 seconds = 3471.400 FPS 17446 frames in 5.000 seconds = 3489.200 FPS 17455 frames in 5.000 seconds = 3491.000 FPS 17460 frames in 5.000 seconds = 3492.000 FPS 17458 frames in 5.000 seconds = 3491.600 FPS Changed to fullscreen (window) 2122 frames in 5.000 seconds = 424.400 FPS 1821 frames in 5.000 seconds = 364.200 FPS 1822 frames in 5.002 seconds = 364.254 FPS 1822 frames in 5.001 seconds = 364.327 FPS 1822 frames in 5.002 seconds = 364.254 FPS progs/demos> ./gloss 2321 frames in 5.001 seconds = 464.107 FPS 2438 frames in 5.002 seconds = 487.405 FPS 2436 frames in 5 seconds = 487.2 FPS 2440 frames in 5 seconds = 488 FPS 2441 frames in 5.002 seconds = 488.005 FPS Was ~400 without hyperz > It's of course expected > that it is slower than when you got black stripes (since that's because > the depth buffer wasn't cleared, so lots of incoming fragments are just > discarded even though they shouldn't be discarded). black, is black,... ;-) > What did you get when using the normal path for your card? No pattern? I have to try, again, when I've time, again. -Dieter ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by: Sybase ASE Linux Express Edition - download now for FREE LinuxWorld Reader's Choice Award Winner for best database on Linux. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_idU88&alloc_id065&op=click -- _______________________________________________ Dri-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dri-devel
