Arch Linux

ammon

Member

Registered: 2008-12-11

Posts: 413

Nexuiz

I have compiled nexuiz from abs, with all flags possible. I let the gcc decide that (CFLAGS="-march=native -O2 -pipe") My CPU is 64bit Core2Duo and OS is arch 64bit
I was hopping to get more fps, but no... I get 90 fps top.
On ubuntu, i used nexuiz from repositories (i386, 32bit) and i get 140-170 fps.

Why is precompiled ubuntu nexuiz (32bit) faster then custom compiled 64bit nexuiz on Arch, that suposed to be faster anyway?

Xyne

Administrator/PM

Registered: 2008-08-03

Posts: 6,963

Website

Re: Nexuiz

Are you comparing the same versions?
Are you sure that you're using the same settings?
What FPS do you get with the pre-compiled client from Alientrap/Sourceforge (the zip folder is self-contained, you can run it in-place without any installation)
What about with the pre-compiled client on Ubuntu?

If you don't get any answer here, post a thread on the Alientrap forum.

Last edited by Xyne (2008-12-11 19:38:21)

---

My Arch Linux Stuff • Forum Etiquette • Community Ethos - Arch is not for everyone

ammon

Member

Registered: 2008-12-11

Posts: 413

Re: Nexuiz

No, I am comparing 2.4.1 on ubuntu and 2.4.2 on arch. But I've read that people get more fps with never version due to some improvments
Yes, settings are same... Thats why i am wondering .

I have not tried pre-compiled client from Alientrap/Sourceforge...

Dieter@be

Forum Fellow

From: Belgium

Registered: 2006-11-05

Posts: 2,000

Website

Re: Nexuiz

Maybe xorg and xorg-server are older on ubuntu (7.3,1.4 where arch has 7.4,1.5).  Now, the newer version should by slightly faster, but also changes in video drivers have occurred.  I read on arch-general that one particular user had slower fps in glxgears because his card was vsynced since the 1.5 upgrade.

---

< Daenyth> and he works prolifically
4 8 15 16 23 42

ammon

Member

Registered: 2008-12-11

Posts: 413

Re: Nexuiz

Yes, xorg server is older in ubuntu. I had some problems with xorg server, some bugs... But i worked around them, thanks to wiki. And, yes i have less fps on glx gears. Why's that? What is going on with xorg?

P.S.
Just finished compiling nexuiz with march=core2 flag. Same thing, but it is worth to try.
Same thing, it is all the same... FPS is lower then in ubuntu.
Should i blame new nvidia drivers and xorg or some one else?

Last edited by ammon (2008-12-11 23:52:20)

Xyne

Administrator/PM

Registered: 2008-08-03

Posts: 6,963

Website

Re: Nexuiz

I'd go through every xorg and nvidia setting that I could find if I were you. I'd also post on the Alientrap forum to see if anyone knows anything about this. They're usually very quick to reply.

---

My Arch Linux Stuff • Forum Etiquette • Community Ethos - Arch is not for everyone

ammon

Member

Registered: 2008-12-11

Posts: 413

Re: Nexuiz

there... posted on alientrap. If i find solution i will post it here.

ammon

Member

Registered: 2008-12-11

Posts: 413

Re: Nexuiz

I have no solution.. but i have some test results.
Test config:
Inter Core2 Duo 2.0 Ghz
Nvidia 8400M G
- same xorg.conf and same nvidia-settings-rc

Glxgears on ubuntu 8.04 (nvidia 169.12 and Xorg 7.3) - cca 4500 fps
Glxgears on ubuntu 8.04 (nvidia 173.14.12 & Xorg 7.3) - cca 2800 fps
Glxgears on Arch (nvidia 177.80 & Xorg 7.4) - cca 870 fps
Glxgears on Arch (nvidia 177.82 & Xorg 7.4) - cca 880 fps

Performance and quality of Nvidia driver is decreasing as you can see.
Maybe we should log Nvidia & Xorg versions and their performance to avoid performance loss with new versions.
Please moderator open sticky forum for that. I'll ask in AUR Discussion and AUR Package Requests subforum to make older Nvidia drivers available in AUR.
(Oldest i could find is 177.80)

rostoQ

Member

Registered: 2008-06-25

Posts: 40

Re: Nexuiz

Could you make some more (real) benchmarks with some games, since glxgears isn't the most indicative test?

ammon

Member

Registered: 2008-12-11

Posts: 413

Re: Nexuiz

I know, but it was fastest way to show you what i mean. I will do some real tests soon...