[mesa3d] performance on cygwin

2004-04-23 Thread ZXPLESPAC001, Ext
Just a little information message for Mesa3d performance on Cygwin.
This is the ouput of progs/demos/readpix (from MesaDemos-6.0.1) :

- benchmark with "standard" cygwin x11 and my personnal build of glut-3.7
(static)
GL_VERSION = 1.2 (1.4 Mesa 5.0.2)
GL_RENDERER = Mesa GLX Indirect
Loaded 194 by 188 image
Benchmarking...
Result:  184 reads in 4.014000 seconds = 1671860.488291 pixels/sec

- benchmark with Mesa 6.0.1 DLLs (build for cygwin with my personnal
patches)
GL_VERSION = 1.5 Mesa 6.0.1
GL_RENDERER = Mesa X11
Loaded 194 by 188 image
Benchmarking...
Result:  3186 reads in 4.00 seconds = 29049948.00 pixels/sec

WOOWW :->

PS: Here are the used packages:
cygwin cygwin-1.5.9-1.tar.bz2
xorg-x11-base xorg-x11-base-6.7.0.0-7.tar.bz2
xorg-x11-bin xorg-x11-bin-6.7.0.0-4.tar.bz2
xorg-x11-bin-dlls xorg-x11-bin-dlls-6.7.0.0-4.tar.bz2
glut glut-3.7-EL-1.tar.bz2


-- 
Eric Lassauge -

CE COURRIER ELECTRONIQUE EST A USAGE STRICTEMENT INFORMATIF ET NE SAURAIT ENGAGER DE 
QUELQUE MANIERE QUE CE SOIT EADS ASTRIUM SAS, NI SES FILIALES.

SI UNE ERREUR DE TRANSMISSION OU UNE ADRESSE ERRONEE A MAL DIRIGE CE COURRIER, MERCI 
D'EN INFORMER L'EXPEDITEUR EN LUI FAISANT UNE REPONSE PAR COURRIER ELECTRONIQUE DES 
RECEPTION. SI VOUS N'ETES PAS LE DESTINATAIRE DE CE COURRIER, VOUS NE DEVEZ PAS 
L'UTILISER, LE CONSERVER, EN FAIRE ETAT, LE DISTRIBUER, LE COPIER, L'IMPRIMER OU EN 
REVELER LE CONTENU A UNE TIERCE PARTIE.



This email is for information only and will not bind EADS Astrium SAS in any contract 
or obligation, nor its subsidiaries.

If you have received it in error, please notify the sender by return email. If you are 
not the addressee of this email, you must not use, keep, disseminate, copy, print or 
otherwise deal with it.

-


Re: [mesa3d] performance on cygwin

2004-04-23 Thread Alexander Gottwald
On Fri, 23 Apr 2004, ZXPLESPAC001, Ext wrote:

>   Just a little information message for Mesa3d performance on Cygwin.
> This is the ouput of progs/demos/readpix (from MesaDemos-6.0.1) :
> 
> - benchmark with "standard" cygwin x11 and my personnal build of glut-3.7
> (static)
> GL_VERSION = 1.2 (1.4 Mesa 5.0.2)
> GL_RENDERER = Mesa GLX Indirect
> Loaded 194 by 188 image
> Benchmarking...
> Result:  184 reads in 4.014000 seconds = 1671860.488291 pixels/sec
> 
> - benchmark with Mesa 6.0.1 DLLs (build for cygwin with my personnal
> patches)
> GL_VERSION = 1.5 Mesa 6.0.1
> GL_RENDERER = Mesa X11
> Loaded 194 by 188 image
> Benchmarking...
> Result:  3186 reads in 4.00 seconds = 29049948.00 pixels/sec
> 
>   WOOWW :->
> 
> PS: Here are the used packages:
> cygwin cygwin-1.5.9-1.tar.bz2
> xorg-x11-base xorg-x11-base-6.7.0.0-7.tar.bz2
> xorg-x11-bin xorg-x11-bin-6.7.0.0-4.tar.bz2
> xorg-x11-bin-dlls xorg-x11-bin-dlls-6.7.0.0-4.tar.bz2
> glut glut-3.7-EL-1.tar.bz2

Can you give more information on the used software?

- Is mesa 6 linked to the X11 client or to the xserver?
- was mesa 6 compiled with direct 3d support?
- have you tested other OpenGL programs too (eg glxgears) 

bye
ago
-- 
 [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
 http://www.gotti.org   ICQ: 126018723


Re: [mesa3d] performance on cygwin

2004-04-23 Thread Brian Paul
ZXPLESPAC001, Ext wrote:
Just a little information message for Mesa3d performance on Cygwin.
This is the ouput of progs/demos/readpix (from MesaDemos-6.0.1) :
- benchmark with "standard" cygwin x11 and my personnal build of glut-3.7
(static)
GL_VERSION = 1.2 (1.4 Mesa 5.0.2)
GL_RENDERER = Mesa GLX Indirect
Loaded 194 by 188 image
Benchmarking...
Result:  184 reads in 4.014000 seconds = 1671860.488291 pixels/sec
With indirect rendering, the images are getting sent over a socket 
from the server to the client.  It's not a fast path.


- benchmark with Mesa 6.0.1 DLLs (build for cygwin with my personnal
patches)
GL_VERSION = 1.5 Mesa 6.0.1
GL_RENDERER = Mesa X11
Loaded 194 by 188 image
Benchmarking...
Result:  3186 reads in 4.00 seconds = 29049948.00 pixels/sec
In this case, the glReadPixels is basically a memcpy() from the color 
buffer to the user-allocated buffer.

If you'd run stand-alone Mesa, you'd get much faster results too.  I 
see 47103588 pixels/sec.

You should also test reading from the front color buffer too get the 
full picture.

-Brian