You are not logged in.

#1 2009-10-11 00:15:44

AquaFox
Member
Registered: 2007-06-08
Posts: 62

Intel Graphics Card's Full Potential

I have an integrated Intel Graphics card:

$ lspci | grep -i vga
00:02.0 VGA compatible controller: Intel Corporation Mobile GM965/GL960 Integrated Graphics Controller (rev 03)
$ glxgears
1310 frames in 5.0 seconds = 261.990 FPS
1413 frames in 5.0 seconds = 282.515 FPS
1417 frames in 5.0 seconds = 283.380 FPS
1419 frames in 5.0 seconds = 283.771 FPS
1408 frames in 5.0 seconds = 281.422 FPS

When I play Nexuiz it's pretty choppy and I'm pretty sure it's slower than it should be. I have no xorg.conf so I let X decide the best settings for me. I think I need to use AccelMethod UXA, but I can't get a good xorg.conf made.

How do I find the Xorg.conf that X makes for me when I start it without Xorg.conf?

Do you know what else I could do to boost my speed?

Thanks

Offline

#2 2009-10-11 01:20:09

Square
Member
Registered: 2008-06-11
Posts: 431

Re: Intel Graphics Card's Full Potential

The intel linux graphics drivers are undergoing huge changes right now, so performance has dropped considerably. You essentially have these two options:

1. Wait for intel to get performance back up again.
2. Revert to the 'stable' package in the AUR (requires downgrading the kernel as well, and possibly other packages) in order to achieve greater performance (EXA acceleration is what you're after, which has been dropped)

I must say, I too am upset lately with performance, but there isn't much you can do unless you'd like to start hacking away at the source and submitting packages.


 

Offline

#3 2009-10-11 16:22:59

zuargo
Member
From: Concepción, Chile
Registered: 2009-08-20
Posts: 116

Re: Intel Graphics Card's Full Potential

I too have a intel integrated graphics card:

$ lspci | grep -i vga
00:02.0 VGA compatible controller: Intel Corporation 82915G/GV/910GL Integrated Graphics Controller (rev 0e)

but apparently the performance of my card is a little better than yours:

$  glxgears
1466 frames in 5.0 seconds = 293.018 FPS
1512 frames in 5.0 seconds = 301.849 FPS
1850 frames in 5.0 seconds = 369.720 FPS
1789 frames in 5.0 seconds = 357.719 FPS
1702 frames in 5.0 seconds = 339.950 FPS
1807 frames in 5.0 seconds = 361.344 FPS
1778 frames in 5.0 seconds = 355.496 FPS
1828 frames in 5.0 seconds = 365.446 FPS
1804 frames in 5.0 seconds = 360.790 FPS

I am using the xf86-video-intel and intel-dri drivers both contained in the extra repository. Also I use xorg.conf:

Section "ServerLayout"
    Identifier     "X.org Configured"
    Screen      0  "Screen0" 0 0
    InputDevice    "Mouse0" "CorePointer"
    InputDevice    "Keyboard0" "CoreKeyboard"
EndSection

Section "Files"
    ModulePath   "/usr/lib/xorg/modules"
    FontPath     "/usr/share/fonts/misc"
    FontPath     "/usr/share/fonts/100dpi:unscaled"
    FontPath     "/usr/share/fonts/75dpi:unscaled"
    FontPath     "/usr/share/fonts/TTF"
    FontPath     "/usr/share/fonts/Type1"
EndSection

Section "Module"
    Load  "record"
    Load  "dri"
    Load  "dbe"
    Load  "glx"
    Load  "extmod"
    Load  "dri2"
EndSection

Section "InputDevice"
    Identifier  "Keyboard0"
    Driver      "kbd"
EndSection

Section "InputDevice"
    Identifier  "Mouse0"
    Driver      "mouse"
    Option        "Protocol" "auto"
    Option        "Device" "/dev/input/mice"
    Option        "ZAxisMapping" "4 5 6 7"
EndSection

Section "Monitor"
    Identifier   "Monitor0"
    VendorName   "Monitor Vendor"
    ModelName    "Monitor Model"
    Modeline "1024x768_60.00"  64.11  1024 1080 1184 1344  768 769 772 795  -HSync +Vsync
EndSection

Section "Device"
        ### Available Driver options are:-
        ### Values: <i>: integer, <f>: float, <bool>: "True"/"False",
        ### <string>: "String", <freq>: "<f> Hz/kHz/MHz"
        ### [arg]: arg optional
        #Option     "NoAccel"                # [<bool>]
        #Option     "SWcursor"               # [<bool>]
        #Option     "ColorKey"               # <i>
        #Option     "CacheLines"             # <i>
        #Option     "Dac6Bit"                # [<bool>]
        #Option     "DRI"                    # [<bool>]
        #Option     "NoDDC"                  # [<bool>]
        #Option     "ShowCache"              # [<bool>]
        #Option     "XvMCSurfaces"           # <i>
        #Option     "PageFlip"               # [<bool>]
    Identifier  "Card0"
    Driver      "intel"
    VendorName  "Intel Corporation"
    BoardName   "82915G/GV/910GL Integrated Graphics Controller"
    BusID       "PCI:0:2:0"
EndSection

Section "Screen"
    Identifier "Screen0"
    Device     "Card0"
    Monitor    "Monitor0"
    DefaultDepth   24
    SubSection "Display"
        Viewport   0 0
        Depth     1
        Modes "1024x768" "800x600" "640x480"
    EndSubSection
    SubSection "Display"
        Viewport   0 0
        Depth     4
        Modes "1024x768" "800x600" "640x480"
    EndSubSection
    SubSection "Display"
        Viewport   0 0
        Depth     8
        Modes "1024x768" "800x600" "640x480"
    EndSubSection
    SubSection "Display"
        Viewport   0 0
        Depth     15
        Modes "1024x768" "800x600" "640x480"
    EndSubSection
    SubSection "Display"
        Viewport   0 0
        Depth     16
        Modes "1024x768" "800x600" "640x480"
    EndSubSection
    SubSection "Display"
        Viewport   0 0
        Depth     24
        Modes "1024x768" "800x600" "640x480"
    EndSubSection
EndSection

About your question:

How do I find the Xorg.conf that X makes for me when I start it without Xorg.conf?

You must make the xorg.conf file, run as root:

# X -configure

Then a xorg.conf file will be created in the root directory (/root/xorg.conf.new). Copy that file in /etc/X11 and rename it to xorg.conf.

About your another question:

Do you know what else I could do to boost my speed?

Maybe using the xorg.conf file your speed will increases

Greetings

Last edited by zuargo (2009-10-11 16:28:06)

Offline

#4 2009-10-11 19:45:14

AquaFox
Member
Registered: 2007-06-08
Posts: 62

Re: Intel Graphics Card's Full Potential

Maybe that's because you have a smaller resolution? Mine is 1200x800.

Does Intel have an expected date for when the driver will improve?

Offline

#5 2009-10-11 20:19:16

Marcel S
Member
Registered: 2008-02-16
Posts: 4

Re: Intel Graphics Card's Full Potential

Here also an Intel integrated graphics card:

lspci | grep -i vga
00:02.0 VGA compatible controller: Intel Corporation Mobile 945GM/GMS, 943/940GML Express Integrated Graphics Controller (rev 03)

glxgears
2221 frames in 5.0 seconds = 443.639 FPS
2236 frames in 5.0 seconds = 446.650 FPS
2247 frames in 5.0 seconds = 449.397 FPS
2249 frames in 5.0 seconds = 449.788 FPS
2250 frames in 5.0 seconds = 449.551 FPS
2243 frames in 5.0 seconds = 448.046 FPS
2244 frames in 5.0 seconds = 448.784 FPS
2260 frames in 5.0 seconds = 451.898 FPS
2250 frames in 5.0 seconds = 449.886 FPS
2261 frames in 5.0 seconds = 452.104 FPS
2258 frames in 5.0 seconds = 451.559 FPS
2249 frames in 5.0 seconds = 449.246 FPS
2252 frames in 5.0 seconds = 450.397 FPS
2251 frames in 5.0 seconds = 450.190 FPS
2260 frames in 5.0 seconds = 451.548 FPS
2252 frames in 5.0 seconds = 450.397 FPS
2253 frames in 5.0 seconds = 450.589 FPS
2250 frames in 5.0 seconds = 449.552 FPS
2254 frames in 5.0 seconds = 450.242 FPS
2251 frames in 5.0 seconds = 450.198 FPS
2249 frames in 5.0 seconds = 449.789 FPS
2253 frames in 5.0 seconds = 450.151 FPS
2242 frames in 5.0 seconds = 448.215 FPS
2252 frames in 5.0 seconds = 450.360 FPS

Also using the x86-video-intel driver and a xorg.conf

Gr. Marcel

Offline

#6 2009-10-11 20:25:42

zuargo
Member
From: Concepción, Chile
Registered: 2009-08-20
Posts: 116

Re: Intel Graphics Card's Full Potential

Marcel can you show us your xorg.conf?

What resolution do you use?

Last edited by zuargo (2009-10-11 20:27:42)

Offline

#7 2009-10-11 20:28:21

stefanwilkens
Member
From: Enschede, the Netherlands
Registered: 2008-12-10
Posts: 624

Re: Intel Graphics Card's Full Potential

AquaFox wrote:

Maybe that's because you have a smaller resolution? Mine is 1200x800.

Does Intel have an expected date for when the driver will improve?

we have been biting the dust since 2.6.28, things have only gone downhill since we lost EXA. Don't expect things to improve on short notice I suppose smile


Arch i686 on Phenom X4 | GTX760

Offline

#8 2009-10-11 20:31:25

uncholowapo
Member
From: US
Registered: 2009-03-29
Posts: 238

Re: Intel Graphics Card's Full Potential

You got to keep in mind that CPU clock speed aids in the rendering. For example on my Pentium Dual Core at 800Mhz:

juan ~  $  glxgears
1433 frames in 5.0 seconds = 286.567 FPS
1456 frames in 5.0 seconds = 291.099 FPS
1459 frames in 5.0 seconds = 291.233 FPS
1461 frames in 5.0 seconds = 292.094 FPS
1461 frames in 5.0 seconds = 292.122 FPS
1446 frames in 5.0 seconds = 289.070 FPS
1458 frames in 5.0 seconds = 291.572 FPS
1462 frames in 5.0 seconds = 292.399 FPS

While at 1.47Ghz:

juan ~  $  glxgears
1754 frames in 5.0 seconds = 350.494 FPS
1904 frames in 5.0 seconds = 380.556 FPS
1732 frames in 5.0 seconds = 346.386 FPS
1757 frames in 5.0 seconds = 351.375 FPS
1907 frames in 5.0 seconds = 381.171 FPS
1735 frames in 5.0 seconds = 346.897 FPS
1742 frames in 5.0 seconds = 348.273 FPS
1920 frames in 5.0 seconds = 383.929 FPS
1739 frames in 5.0 seconds = 347.629 FPS
1735 frames in 5.0 seconds = 346.810 FPS

Keep in mind glxgears is not a good benchmark. But all in all the graphics suck. Back then I used to get into the 1000FPS range at the lowest clock speed. World of Goo runs horribly on my Arch, but on Vista it runs super smooth. I'm real anxious for intel to get everything in order so I can play at 1080p on my 1280x800 screen tongue

Last edited by uncholowapo (2009-10-11 20:32:44)

Offline

#9 2009-10-11 20:38:52

zuargo
Member
From: Concepción, Chile
Registered: 2009-08-20
Posts: 116

Re: Intel Graphics Card's Full Potential

stefanwilkens wrote:
AquaFox wrote:

Maybe that's because you have a smaller resolution? Mine is 1200x800.

Does Intel have an expected date for when the driver will improve?

we have been biting the dust since 2.6.28, things have only gone downhill since we lost EXA. Don't expect things to improve on short notice I suppose smile

whatever Marcel has a better FPS that ours (me and Aquafox)

Offline

#10 2009-10-11 20:45:30

combuster
Member
From: Serbia
Registered: 2008-09-30
Posts: 711
Website

Re: Intel Graphics Card's Full Potential

Well Anholt get's pretty ticked off when u even mention glxgears in any context so I wouldn't consider this relevant also. But to tell you the truth the problem is not with intel drivers, mesa 7.5.1 is the one that brought regression, even though there were few commits I really hate to bisect right now to see wich one regressed performance. Right now fofix is choppy as hell, extremetuxracer gets 25fps and urban terror drops fps to 11 at times... Cant even start most of the games (enemy territory, warsow, savage etc). I really really hope that mesa 7.6 will hit the repo's soon, even though it doesn't boost performance by great margin there are improvements. It's just that I got sick of testing xorg, mesa, video-intel from git and gnome from unstable that for now packages from repo's will suffice (except for the custom kernel)...

Offline

#11 2009-10-11 20:55:30

AquaFox
Member
Registered: 2007-06-08
Posts: 62

Re: Intel Graphics Card's Full Potential

So now I play the waiting game sad.

Offline

#12 2009-10-11 23:28:48

sokuban
Member
Registered: 2006-11-11
Posts: 406

Re: Intel Graphics Card's Full Potential

stefanwilkens wrote:

we have been biting the dust since 2.6.28, things have only gone downhill since we lost EXA. Don't expect things to improve on short notice I suppose smile

Since 2.6.28? I think you got things backwards. We've been biting the dust since about a year ago, and 2.6.28 was a major milestone (I think it was called GEM) where we finally had something half decent working. (We are still of course biting the dust.)

At least that's how it's been for me. Losing EXA didn't really have an effect on me, by the time EXA was gone UXA was okay enough for me. (Before it had major bugs and glitches.)

EDIT: Wait, what does "biting the dust mean"? Does it mean "close to, but avoided problem?" or "had a problem but put up with it?" (I thought it meant the latter when I first wrote the post, then I realized it could mean the former.)

Oh, and the obligatory:

$ lspci | grep -i vga
00:02.0 VGA compatible controller: Intel Corporation Mobile 945GM/GMS, 943/940GML Express Integrated Graphics Controller (rev 03)
$ glxgears
2537 frames in 5.0 seconds = 507.283 FPS
2550 frames in 5.0 seconds = 509.914 FPS
2540 frames in 5.0 seconds = 507.917 FPS
2547 frames in 5.0 seconds = 509.311 FPS
2513 frames in 5.0 seconds = 502.539 FPS

Last edited by sokuban (2009-10-11 23:35:46)

Offline

#13 2009-10-12 00:05:18

AquaFox
Member
Registered: 2007-06-08
Posts: 62

Re: Intel Graphics Card's Full Potential

Okay. I got the latest kernel update 2.6.31.3-1. I installed libgl (I don't know if I had it before or not). And I added 'export INTEL_BATCH=1' to bashrc. I'm still not using xorg.conf and I get this output in glxgears.

$ glxgears
1714 frames in 5.0 seconds = 342.689 FPS
1700 frames in 5.0 seconds = 339.997 FPS
1700 frames in 5.0 seconds = 339.752 FPS
1722 frames in 5.0 seconds = 344.370 FPS
1776 frames in 5.0 seconds = 354.951 FPS
1711 frames in 5.0 seconds = 342.162 FPS
1655 frames in 5.0 seconds = 330.739 FPS

Tremulous is 40 to 50 fps.

It's a bit better. I don't know if it's the best it could be or not.

Offline

#14 2009-10-12 00:15:17

uncholowapo
Member
From: US
Registered: 2009-03-29
Posts: 238

Re: Intel Graphics Card's Full Potential

exporting INTEL_BATCH=1 for everything is a bad idea. It should be used for 3D applications only.

Last edited by uncholowapo (2009-10-12 00:15:42)

Offline

#15 2009-10-12 02:30:18

AquaFox
Member
Registered: 2007-06-08
Posts: 62

Re: Intel Graphics Card's Full Potential

Why is that?

Offline

#16 2009-10-12 07:37:00

Pyntux
Member
From: Serbia
Registered: 2008-12-21
Posts: 310

Re: Intel Graphics Card's Full Potential

I have this card:

00:02.0 VGA compatible controller: Intel Corporation Mobile GM965/GL960 Integrated Graphics Controller (rev 0c)

and I can just say that I have better performance with 'stable' driver from aur, and I got this from glxgears with xf86-video-intel from extra:

1239 frames in 5.0 seconds = 247.735 FPS
1295 frames in 5.0 seconds = 258.755 FPS
1292 frames in 5.0 seconds = 258.323 FPS
1268 frames in 5.0 seconds = 253.268 FPS

My xorg.conf is default one, without anything from wiki, some lines or something...CPU core2duo 1.8, 2gb ram...Dell laptop...

Last edited by Pyntux (2009-10-12 07:37:30)


I do not speak English, but I understand...

Offline

#17 2009-10-12 08:02:35

JGC
Developer
Registered: 2003-12-03
Posts: 1,664

Re: Intel Graphics Card's Full Potential

First of all:
glxgears is NOT A BENCHMARK!

Second, the speed of intel graphics in benchmarks depends a lot on your CPU. A Core Duo with Intel graphics won't do Nexuiz-glx, no matter what driver or resolution. I can play Nexuiz without too much slowdowns at 1280x1024 with KMS on a G33 and E6750, as long as you attach the cooler with all 4 pushpins and you don't do speedstepping. The G33 is nothing more than a spiced up 945G, the G965 should be superior.

Offline

#18 2009-10-12 10:00:38

Marcel S
Member
Registered: 2008-02-16
Posts: 4

Re: Intel Graphics Card's Full Potential

zuargo wrote:

Marcel can you show us your xorg.conf?

What resolution do you use?

Section "ServerLayout"
    Identifier     "X.org Configured"
    Screen      0  "Screen0" 0 0
    InputDevice    "Mouse0" "CorePointer"
    InputDevice    "Keyboard0" "CoreKeyboard"
EndSection

Section "Files"
    ModulePath   "/usr/lib/xorg/modules"
    FontPath     "/usr/share/fonts/X11/misc"
    FontPath     "/usr/share/fonts/X11/cyrillic"
    FontPath     "/usr/share/fonts/X11/100dpi/:unscaled"
    FontPath     "/usr/share/fonts/X11/75dpi/:unscaled"
    FontPath     "/usr/share/fonts/X11/Type1"
    FontPath     "/usr/share/fonts/X11/100dpi"
    FontPath     "/usr/share/fonts/X11/75dpi"
    FontPath     "/var/lib/defoma/x-ttcidfont-conf.d/dirs/TrueType"
EndSection

Section "Module"
    Load  "record"
    Load  "dbe"
    Load  "dri"
    Load  "glx"
    Load  "dri2"
    Load  "extmod"
EndSection

Section "InputDevice"
    Identifier  "Keyboard0"
    Driver      "kbd"
EndSection

Section "InputDevice"
    Identifier  "Mouse0"
    Driver      "mouse"
    Option        "Protocol" "auto"
    Option        "Device" "/dev/input/mice"
    Option        "ZAxisMapping" "4 5 6 7"
EndSection

Section "Monitor"
    Identifier   "Iiyama"
    VendorName   "Monitor Vendor"
    ModelName    "Monitor Model"
EndSection

Section "Device"
        ### Available Driver options are:-
        ### Values: <i>: integer, <f>: float, <bool>: "True"/"False",
        ### <string>: "String", <freq>: "<f> Hz/kHz/MHz"
        ### [arg]: arg optional
        #Option     "NoAccel"                # [<bool>]
        #Option     "SWcursor"               # [<bool>]
        #Option     "ColorKey"               # <i>
        #Option     "CacheLines"             # <i>
        #Option     "Dac6Bit"                # [<bool>]
        #Option     "DRI"                    # [<bool>]
        #Option     "NoDDC"                  # [<bool>]
        #Option     "ShowCache"              # [<bool>]
        #Option     "XvMCSurfaces"           # <i>
        #Option     "PageFlip"               # [<bool>]
    Identifier  "Card0"
    Driver      "intel"
    VendorName  "Intel Corporation"
    BoardName   "Mobile 945GM/GMS, 943/940GML Express Integrated Graphics Controller"
    BusID       "PCI:0:2:0"
EndSection

Section "Screen"
    Identifier "Screen0"
    Device     "Card0"
    Monitor    "Iiyama"
        DefaultDepth    24
    SubSection "Display"
                Modes        "1280x1024" "800x600"
    EndSubSection
EndSection


Gr. Marcel

Offline

#19 2009-10-12 12:34:02

Zariel
Member
Registered: 2008-10-07
Posts: 446

Re: Intel Graphics Card's Full Potential

GLX Gears is not representative of performance and features, when intel switched from EXA -> UXA the FPS dropped a huge amount, but ive notived that kde compositing is getting much faster.

Offline

#20 2009-10-12 16:06:29

ArchArael
Member
From: Switzerland
Registered: 2005-06-14
Posts: 485

Re: Intel Graphics Card's Full Potential

arael(~)glxgears
Segmentation fault
arael(~)

Yay!! big_smile

hmm Well, it's not fun but sad after all.

Offline

#21 2009-10-12 18:24:30

AquaFox
Member
Registered: 2007-06-08
Posts: 62

Re: Intel Graphics Card's Full Potential

JGC wrote:

First of all:
glxgears is NOT A BENCHMARK!

Second, the speed of intel graphics in benchmarks depends a lot on your CPU. A Core Duo with Intel graphics won't do Nexuiz-glx, no matter what driver or resolution. I can play Nexuiz without too much slowdowns at 1280x1024 with KMS on a G33 and E6750, as long as you attach the cooler with all 4 pushpins and you don't do speedstepping. The G33 is nothing more than a spiced up 945G, the G965 should be superior.

If G965 is superior then why won't it do Nexuiz-glx?

Also, can anyone tell me why INTEL_BATCH=1 for everything is a bad idea?

Offline

#22 2009-10-12 18:52:47

Sharpeee
Member
From: Denmark
Registered: 2008-10-19
Posts: 59

Re: Intel Graphics Card's Full Potential

Wow guys. I just do not have these kinds of problems! My graphics performance has been getting better and better for months now. I actually think I'm close to my old performance by now!

$ lspci | grep -i vga
00:02.0 VGA compatible controller: Intel Corporation Mobile 945GM/GMS, 943/940GML Express Integrated Graphics Controller (rev 03)

$ glxgears 
4112 frames in 5.0 seconds = 822.242 FPS
4301 frames in 5.0 seconds = 860.116 FPS
4452 frames in 5.0 seconds = 890.243 FPS
4109 frames in 5.0 seconds = 821.749 FPS
4382 frames in 5.0 seconds = 876.276 FPS
4298 frames in 5.0 seconds = 859.494 FPS

Right now I'm using

$ pacman -Qs xf86-video-intel
local/xf86-video-intel-newest 2.9.0-1 (xorg-video-drivers)
    X.org Intel i810/i830/i915/945G/G965+ video drivers!

from AUR. But I'm getting the same performance with the driver in 'extra'. I don't use a 'xorg.conf' file.

Last edited by Sharpeee (2009-10-12 18:53:14)

Offline

#23 2009-10-12 20:05:55

b9anders
Member
Registered: 2007-11-07
Posts: 688

Re: Intel Graphics Card's Full Potential

I have the same card as the OP and my framerates are at 1000+.

I use the git versions of mesa and the intel driver from AUR and find it well worth it. Better than ever before smile

Offline

#24 2009-10-12 20:39:59

zuargo
Member
From: Concepción, Chile
Registered: 2009-08-20
Posts: 116

Re: Intel Graphics Card's Full Potential

b9anders wrote:

I have the same card as the OP and my framerates are at 1000+.

I use the git versions of mesa and the intel driver from AUR and find it well worth it. Better than ever before smile

Is there some kind of guide to install that packages?

Thanks

Offline

#25 2009-10-12 21:07:29

b9anders
Member
Registered: 2007-11-07
Posts: 688

Re: Intel Graphics Card's Full Potential

install yaourt and then type

yaourt -S intel-dri-git xf86-video-intel-git

should make the needed packages compile.

Offline

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB