Date: Tue, 10 Jun 1997 09:02:47 -0700 From: Amancio Hasty <hasty@rah.star-gate.com> To: Mr M P Searle <csubl@csv.warwick.ac.uk> Cc: multimedia@freebsd.org Subject: Re: matrox millenium / XFree86 3.3 xbench results 8) Message-ID: <199706101602.JAA06312@rah.star-gate.com> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 10 Jun 1997 13:31:13 BST." <2477.199706101231@wrasse.csv.warwick.ac.uk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>From The Desk Of Mr M P Searle :
> > {hasty} awk -f scripts/xstones.awk < results/matrox.run
> > TOTAL 1947365 lineStones
> > TOTAL 964984 fillStones
> > TOTAL 452761 blitStones
> > TOTAL 61404537 arcStones
> > TOTAL 3285909 textStones
> > TOTAL 993398 complexStones
> > TOTAL 1139709 xStones
> > ^^^^^^^
> > I am in love !
> >
> > resolution 1280x1024 color depth: 8
> >
> > Not too long ago X servers based on et4000 used to clock in around 10 to
> > 15k xstones. In such a short time to get this kind of performance
> > is almost a miracle .
> >
>
> But why run it in 8bpp? (Have you got any figures for 16 or 24bpp?)
>
> BTW, I'm fairly sure this is more than Xi claim for the Millenium, the
> fastest card under AccelX. IIRC AccelX/Millenium does 1.0-1.1 MxStones.
> They also have no numbers for higher bpps...
>
> Thanks, Michael.
>
Hi,
I will run the xbench for 32bits when I get home tonite. Typically I run at 16
or 32bits.
About my benchmark figures , I was running fvwm95 and my ftp and web site
were open so in short the figures are not optimal. Nor my intention was
to show the fastest xbench rather the relatively quick performance of the
the X server. Is hard for me to post such high figures since I am an S3 fan 8)
Enjoy,
Amancio
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199706101602.JAA06312>