Gentoo Forums
Gentoo Forums
Gentoo Forums
Quick Search: in
What are your glxgear FPS?
View unanswered posts
View posts from last 24 hours

Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3  
Reply to topic    Gentoo Forums Forum Index Off the Wall
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
friedmud
Apprentice
Apprentice


Joined: 18 Apr 2002
Posts: 258
Location: Austin, TX USA

PostPosted: Tue Aug 13, 2002 11:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Athlon 1.2 GHz with a Geforce3 TI500 at 1152x864x24bit

bash-2.05a$ glxgears
13517 frames in 5.0 seconds = 2703.400 FPS
16307 frames in 5.0 seconds = 3261.400 FPS
16309 frames in 5.0 seconds = 3261.800 FPS
16310 frames in 5.0 seconds = 3262.000 FPS
16309 frames in 5.0 seconds = 3261.800 FPS
16308 frames in 5.0 seconds = 3261.600 FPS
16308 frames in 5.0 seconds = 3261.600 FPS
16308 frames in 5.0 seconds = 3261.600 FPS
16309 frames in 5.0 seconds = 3261.800 FPS
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
nitro322
Guru
Guru


Joined: 24 Jul 2002
Posts: 553
Location: USA

PostPosted: Tue Aug 13, 2002 11:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

A little late with these, but here's my stats for a Voodoo3 3000, PIII-500, and 16-bit color:

4785 frames in 5.0 seconds = 957.000 FPS
5092 frames in 5.0 seconds = 1018.400 FPS
5091 frames in 5.0 seconds = 1018.200 FPS
5094 frames in 5.0 seconds = 1018.800 FPS
5090 frames in 5.0 seconds = 1018.000 FPS
5093 frames in 5.0 seconds = 1018.600 FPS
5086 frames in 5.0 seconds = 1017.200 FPS
4937 frames in 5.0 seconds = 987.400 FPS
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
arkane
l33t
l33t


Joined: 30 Apr 2002
Posts: 918
Location: Phoenix, AZ

PostPosted: Tue Aug 13, 2002 11:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Do the numbers really convert to real-life performance in applications?

I mean, my glxgear score is quite low, but I don't really notice much of a difference when playing Quake3, Homeworld, or any other 3d intensive game. (or even fast paced mpeg, avi, or animations of any kind)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
masseya
Bodhisattva
Bodhisattva


Joined: 17 Apr 2002
Posts: 2602
Location: Raleigh, NC

PostPosted: Wed Aug 14, 2002 12:05 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

arkane wrote:
Do the numbers really convert to real-life performance in applications?

My thought on that is that if they were, you would see Tom's Hardware use them. They use just about every metric in the book that has even remotely useful meaning.
_________________
if i never try anything, i never learn anything..
if i never take a risk, i stay where i am..
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
WhyteWolf
Apprentice
Apprentice


Joined: 01 May 2002
Posts: 168
Location: Las Vegas

PostPosted: Wed Aug 14, 2002 12:56 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

voodoo3 2000 pci
athlon 1500+ XP {1.3gig}
1280x768-16
100dpi

whytewlf@mu whytewlf $ glxgears
6763 frames in 5.0 seconds = 1352.600 FPS
7872 frames in 5.0 seconds = 1574.400 FPS
7881 frames in 5.0 seconds = 1576.200 FPS
7881 frames in 5.0 seconds = 1576.200 FPS
7872 frames in 5.0 seconds = 1574.400 FPS
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Regor
Guru
Guru


Joined: 06 Aug 2002
Posts: 545
Location: 39° 2' 48" N, 120° 59' 2" W

PostPosted: Wed Aug 14, 2002 2:03 am    Post subject: My poor crippled system's stats Reply with quote

Proc: AMD Athlon 550
AGP Host Bridge: AMD Irongate
Card: GeForce4 MX 420

$ cat /proc/driver/nvidia/agp/status
Status: Enabled
Driver: NVIDIA
AGP Rate: 1x
Fast Writes: Disabled
SBA: Disabled

Run in 1600x1200x24 with no WM or DM.

3666 frames in 5.0 seconds = 733.200 FPS
3891 frames in 5.0 seconds = 778.200 FPS
3892 frames in 5.0 seconds = 778.400 FPS
3891 frames in 5.0 seconds = 778.200 FPS
3892 frames in 5.0 seconds = 778.400 FPS

Run on top of KDE:

2941 frames in 5.0 seconds = 588.200 FPS
3428 frames in 5.0 seconds = 685.600 FPS
3645 frames in 5.0 seconds = 729.000 FPS
3572 frames in 5.0 seconds = 714.400 FPS
3529 frames in 5.0 seconds = 705.800 FPS
3639 frames in 5.0 seconds = 727.800 FPS
3595 frames in 5.0 seconds = 719.000 FPS

I guess that's acceptable for a system so crippled as this :?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
iKiddo
Guru
Guru


Joined: 27 Jun 2002
Posts: 329
Location: Europe?

PostPosted: Wed Aug 14, 2002 10:07 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

[ikiddo@ikiddo:ikiddo] glxgears
2114 frames in 5.0 seconds = 422.800 FPS
2696 frames in 5.0 seconds = 539.200 FPS
2690 frames in 5.0 seconds = 538.000 FPS
2689 frames in 5.0 seconds = 537.800 FPS
2694 frames in 5.0 seconds = 538.800 FPS
3790 frames in 5.0 seconds = 758.000 FPS
5117 frames in 5.0 seconds = 1023.400 FPS
901 frames in 5.0 seconds = 180.200 FPS
469 frames in 5.0 seconds = 93.800 FPS
399 frames in 5.0 seconds = 79.800 FPS
1782 frames in 5.0 seconds = 356.400 FPS

Resizing appearently influences the score a lot.
AMD-Athlon Classic 550
TNT2M64 16MB :oops:

*edit* 1024*768*16 the first couple of scores are the "real" ones
*edit* typo
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Malakin
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 14 Apr 2002
Posts: 1692
Location: Victoria BC Canada

PostPosted: Wed Aug 14, 2002 10:20 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

For fast writes and side band addressing to work the firmware on your video card must support it. The speedup is generally very little although it depends a lot on what software you test it with.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
crevette
Guru
Guru


Joined: 21 May 2002
Posts: 543
Location: Chrooted in Nice, France

PostPosted: Wed Aug 14, 2002 10:33 am    Post subject: ????? Reply with quote

I don't understand why system displays only 660 FPs
Athlon Tbird 1.3 Ghz
256 MB DDram
Geforce 2 Mx
_________________
http://www.mille-mathias.info
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mdpye
Tux's lil' helper
Tux's lil' helper


Joined: 18 Apr 2002
Posts: 102
Location: Nottingham, England

PostPosted: Wed Aug 14, 2002 10:51 am    Post subject: Re: ????? Reply with quote

crevette wrote:
I don't understand why system displays only 660 FPs
Athlon Tbird 1.3 Ghz
256 MB DDram
Geforce 2 Mx


Well, is that a GF2MX 200 or 400? I have a 400 which can manage ~1100FPS, but only at 16bit colour. If you have an MX200 and are using 24bit colour, don't expect miracles.
_________________
Cheers, MP
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ozric100
Tux's lil' helper
Tux's lil' helper


Joined: 23 Apr 2002
Posts: 136

PostPosted: Wed Aug 14, 2002 1:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

(EDIT) # glxgears
7784 frames in 5.0 seconds = 1556.800 FPS
7142 frames in 5.0 seconds = 1428.400 FPS
7139 frames in 5.0 seconds = 1427.800 FPS
7141 frames in 5.0 seconds = 1428.200 FPS
7142 frames in 5.0 seconds = 1428.400 FPS
7142 frames in 5.0 seconds = 1428.400 FPS
7141 frames in 5.0 seconds = 1428.200 FPS
7141 frames in 5.0 seconds = 1428.200 FPS
7132 frames in 5.0 seconds = 1426.400 FPS
11434 frames in 5.0 seconds = 2286.800 FPS
21105 frames in 5.0 seconds = 4221.000 FPS
7181 frames in 5.0 seconds = 1436.200 FPS
6809 frames in 5.0 seconds = 1361.800 FPS

Initializing CPU#0
Detected 1442.197 MHz processor. < a slight Ovclock here

AMD 1200xp Innovision nvidia mx400 64mb 1280x1024x16bbp

I moved a window over the top a few times - see the jump
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
b-llwyd
Guru
Guru


Joined: 24 Jul 2002
Posts: 302
Location: Uppsala, Sweden

PostPosted: Wed Aug 14, 2002 3:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ok, I don't know whats up with my hardware/driver combo, but these are my scores (voodoo3, duron 750, 24bpp):

640 frames in 5.0 seconds = 128.000 FPS
858 frames in 5.0 seconds = 171.600 FPS
571 frames in 5.0 seconds = 114.200 FPS
624 frames in 5.0 seconds = 124.800 FPS
780 frames in 5.0 seconds = 156.000 FPS
624 frames in 5.0 seconds = 124.800 FPS

...but Q3 is running along fine, so why should I cry ;)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
arkane
l33t
l33t


Joined: 30 Apr 2002
Posts: 918
Location: Phoenix, AZ

PostPosted: Wed Aug 14, 2002 4:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Malakin wrote:
For fast writes and side band addressing to work the firmware on your video card must support it. The speedup is generally very little although it depends a lot on what software you test it with.


Ahh okay... I'll probably just not worry about it, then.
Not worth the energy dispensed for an ounce of extra FPS :)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
arkane
l33t
l33t


Joined: 30 Apr 2002
Posts: 918
Location: Phoenix, AZ

PostPosted: Wed Aug 14, 2002 4:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

b-llwyd wrote:
Ok, I don't know whats up with my hardware/driver combo, but these are my scores (voodoo3, duron 750, 24bpp):

640 frames in 5.0 seconds = 128.000 FPS
858 frames in 5.0 seconds = 171.600 FPS
571 frames in 5.0 seconds = 114.200 FPS
624 frames in 5.0 seconds = 124.800 FPS
780 frames in 5.0 seconds = 156.000 FPS
624 frames in 5.0 seconds = 124.800 FPS

...but Q3 is running along fine, so why should I cry ;)


Wow.. ouch...
Then again, it's probably that window drawing at 24 colours..
I stick with 16 myself... everything looks fine.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Craigo
Apprentice
Apprentice


Joined: 09 Aug 2002
Posts: 249
Location: /dev/life

PostPosted: Wed Aug 14, 2002 4:33 pm    Post subject: Hmmmmmmmm! Reply with quote

This is on a AMD XP1800+ at work using a TNT2 M64 32mb ram.

2086 frames in 5.0 seconds = 417.200 FPS
3638 frames in 5.0 seconds = 727.600 FPS
7695 frames in 5.0 seconds = 1539.000 FPS
7658 frames in 5.0 seconds = 1531.600 FPS
7666 frames in 5.0 seconds = 1533.200 FPS
5078 frames in 5.0 seconds = 1015.600 FPS

Not bad for a little card but then the CPU helps I suppose..
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
WhyteWolf
Apprentice
Apprentice


Joined: 01 May 2002
Posts: 168
Location: Las Vegas

PostPosted: Wed Aug 14, 2002 4:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

b-llwyd wrote:
Ok, I don't know whats up with my hardware/driver combo, but these are my scores (voodoo3, duron 750, 24bpp):

640 frames in 5.0 seconds = 128.000 FPS
858 frames in 5.0 seconds = 171.600 FPS
571 frames in 5.0 seconds = 114.200 FPS
624 frames in 5.0 seconds = 124.800 FPS
780 frames in 5.0 seconds = 156.000 FPS
624 frames in 5.0 seconds = 124.800 FPS

...but Q3 is running along fine, so why should I cry ;)


first ... the tdfx driver doesn't do dri in 24bit
second did you install the glide drivers?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
klieber
Administrator
Administrator


Joined: 17 Apr 2002
Posts: 3657
Location: San Francisco, CA

PostPosted: Wed Aug 14, 2002 5:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

OK folks, I think there are enough posts to properly gauge the framerates that glxgears offers on various platforms, architectures and video cards.

If you want to troubleshoot specific issues that you are having with your particular computer, please post a separate thread in the forums.

locking thread.

--kurt

EDIT: People insist on starting new threads, so I'm unlocking this one. Also, Moved from Desktop Environments. --pjp
_________________
The problem with political jokes is that they get elected
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Reply to topic    Gentoo Forums Forum Index Off the Wall All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3
Page 3 of 3

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum