Sysmon x1000 9250 speed @ zzd10h

Hi,

On my x1000, 9250 speed at rect fill 640x480 hardware is 30% slower than the comparator x1000 in sysmon.





Is the comparator 9250 running on pci or pcie?
Is it a 128bit card or a 64bit card?

@ddni

No , only the bench Was Made before the last kernel update

Hi ddni,
The 9250 SDLbenched here is a 128bits on PCI slot.

But it was made months ago...

@tlosm
A previous kernel decreased gfx performance ?

I am struggling to get a smooth experience in Star trek holodeck from Huno. Would this 30% make a difference?

Which 9250 do you have? Exact model number would be useful to help me find one. Thanks.

@ddni
OK, i will give you the model tomorrow.

Or maybe a different SDL version ?
What is yours ? Version / size / date ?

@zzd10h

Thanks.
I will check sdl tomorrow.

@ddni
I remember that I had a problem at startup of StarTrek, Frogatto,,,one time.

The screen was greyed and splitted in 3 vertical parts.

It was because I had removed by mistakes the 800x600 screenmodes of my 9250 (or the 640x480 or 1024x768).

Do you still have this low resolution ?

@zzd10h

Yes , something become better something become worst...
Eg the RAM become faster but some precedute of video slower.
In any way last update make the system more stable .

@zzd10h

Yes I have those resolutions.
I use your config for star trek.

@ddni

Quote:

You almost certainly have a 64-bit 9250. If you look at the results, the performance is pretty similar except for the 640x480 fill rect result. That's a tell-tale sign that the 640x480 fill rect test was VRAM bandwidth limited, but the others weren't.

If you ran a GfxBench2D test with these two cards, you'd probably see the cards have similar performance with small operations (e.g., 32x32 blits), but that the 128-bit card would pull ahead with the larger ones.

For example, compare the following two results:
- 128-bit Radeon 9250
- 64-bit Radeon 9250

Notice how the 64-bit card's performance with 512x512 size operations is about half that of the 128-bit card. That matches what you'd expect from having half the VRAM bandwidth.

Hans

@ddni

Here is a picture of my 9250 128bits card.

http://zzd10h.amiga-ng.org/X1000/X1000_9250_128bits.JPG

In the top right corner
4L78C232

in the bottom right white sticker :

0C78-24-A
C78G010N
256MB
LF0914B 09025-010
W9425G8EH-5
H925H256RPN-R

I bought too another 9250 before this one, a "new" one (red card in a orange box) who is worst than this second-hand one.

I will add your results in SysMon benchmark.
Bye

@ddni

What kind of adapter are you using for the pci card?

Hi antique it is directly connected to the first x1000 pci slot.
On the second pci slot I seem to lose red from the displayed image.

Thanks for your explanation Hans. Seems that I need a better 9250. If we knew how far off Warp3D or Gallium were it would make the decision easier!

@ddni

So the first pci is 66mhz? I thought it was 33. But didn't someone use a pci adapter for the pcie port?

X1000 PCI Slots are slow (really slow) and will be only be useful with network or graphic cards.

If you want to use a Radeon 92xx on your X1000, use a PCI-E slot with an adapter.

@K-L

The 128bit 9250s seems to work reasonably well on the x1000 33mhz pci slots.
My 9250 doesn't work properly on the pcie slot - corrupted display.

X1000 simply needs the OS to catch up with the capabilities of the hardware. Gallium 3D with an interim Warp3D release are long overdue. I know this work is ongoing, but progress is interminably slow for a simple user like me.
In spite of this I would not swap my X1000 or AOS4. The frequent amiupdates, recent Qt, Browser, SmTube, games and other recent releases keep the fun factor high!

Hats off and a big thanks to the dedicated AOS4 developers out there - this includes the core devs who work on 4.2 but are bound by NDAs

@ddni

Are there some adaptors that won't work? Or should them all work as expected?

@Antique

Not sure, I use my one for my network card and it works well. As said before, it does not seem to like my graphics card though.

Tricky situation, as the 9250 may be fine and the adpater may not be reliable. Still I cant change the fact that the 9250 is 64bit....

Quote:

BTW, it's possible to filter the GfxBench2D results by motherboard, CPU, & graphics card. The UI isn't done, but I've posted a set of links to filtered results, here.

I used the filter to help find the results that I posted earlier.

Hans

It's important which PCI adapter you use. All PCI-e 1x -> PCI Adapter's ive tested brings only a 33 Mhz PCI slot.
I use now a PCI-e 8x -> PCI-X 133 Mhz Adapter (a PCI-X slot is PCI 66Mhz compatible)








Which bring good transfer rates:




http://hdrlab.org.nz/benchmark/gfxbench2d/OS/AmigaOS/Result/1312