nV News Forums

 
 

nV News Forums (http://www.nvnews.net/vbulletin/index.php)
-   NVIDIA Linux (http://www.nvnews.net/vbulletin/forumdisplay.php?f=14)
-   -   NvAGP vs AGPGART (http://www.nvnews.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=48584)

APwrs 04-02-05 04:19 AM

NvAGP vs AGPGART
 
What are the benefits and differences between using the Linux AGPGART driver, and nVidia's built-in AGP driver? Thanks :).

Dragoran 04-02-05 04:21 AM

Re: NvAGP vs AGPGART
 
if both support your chipset there wont be much difference....

APwrs 04-02-05 04:59 AM

Re: NvAGP vs AGPGART
 
I have an nVidia chipset, and both do seem to support it. Right now in my xorg config file, I have the nVidia driver set up to specifically load the regular Linux AGPGART driver, and I was wondering if there would be any benefit to using nVidia's AGP driver instead.

test1000 04-02-05 08:52 AM

Re: NvAGP vs AGPGART
 
i read in the readme (i think) a while back that agpgart would be a slightly faster alternative, but don't quote me on that..

MNKyDeth 04-02-05 01:47 PM

Re: NvAGP vs AGPGART
 
I havn't tested with the 7174 drivers yet, but I think they fixed the problem using the kernel agpgart.

With the 7167 drivers using NvAGP I am getting around 7000fps with my GFFX 5800nu, and using the kernel agpgart I was only getting 4500fps with the same setup with glxgears.

This was tested on 2.6.11-ck3 kernel. When I get the time, I'll bench the newer drivers to see if they show similar results or if they fixed that kernel agpgart issue.

blueworm 04-02-05 04:20 PM

Re: NvAGP vs AGPGART
 
The simple awnser try try it whichever works best for you. I have tried it on several different platforms, and in general NvAGP is always faster on nforce chipsets, and on others it varied.

russofris 04-02-05 04:47 PM

Re: NvAGP vs AGPGART
 
I really wish the release notes were a little less ambiguous about this topic. It would be nice to have a table with something like...

KT133 ----> Use NVAGP
KT266a-400 ----> Use AGPGart
ALI ---> Use AGPGart
SIS7xx ---> Use NVAGP

And so on. Including a 2.6 vs. 2.4 kernel would also be helpful.

Thank you for your time,
Frank Russo

silentplummet 04-02-05 05:29 PM

Re: NvAGP vs AGPGART
 
russofris, perhaps you would like to take the time to compile such a list.

APwrs 04-02-05 07:32 PM

Re: NvAGP vs AGPGART
 
I tried using the built in nVidia AGP driver, and UT2K4 became super sluggish. Then I went back to using AGPGART, and it began running normally again. Apparently, with my hardware setup, AGPGART runs faster than nVidia's internal AGP driver.

zander 04-03-05 05:11 AM

Re: NvAGP vs AGPGART
 
@APwrs: NvAGP's and AGPGART's nForce chipset support is functionally identical, did you verify that NvAGP initialization didn't fail due to the presence of AGPGART?

@russofris: it doesn't really make sense to compile such a list, as chipsets supported by both AGP drivers typically work fine with either one - with no or, in a few cases, marginal performance differences. AGPGART supports a wider range of chipsets, but individual drivers have frequently been broken in the past (e.g. in the days of early Linux 2.6 kernels).

In most cases, the default AGP driver, AGPGART, is fine; if you find AGPGART doesn't work or if you suspect that NvAGP might work better, just give NvAGP a try.

russofris 04-04-05 07:56 PM

Re: NvAGP vs AGPGART
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by zander
@russofris: it doesn't really make sense to compile such a list, as chipsets supported by both AGP drivers typically work fine with either one - with no or, in a few cases, marginal performance differences. AGPGART supports a wider range of chipsets, but individual drivers have frequently been broken in the past (e.g. in the days of early Linux 2.6 kernels).

In most cases, the default AGP driver, AGPGART, is fine; if you find AGPGART doesn't work or if you suspect that NvAGP might work better, just give NvAGP a try.


Thank you.. That actually makes a lot of sense.

Frank

energyman76b 04-04-05 10:48 PM

Re: NvAGP vs AGPGART
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by russofris
I really wish the release notes were a little less ambiguous about this topic. It would be nice to have a table with something like...

KT133 ----> Use NVAGP
KT266a-400 ----> Use AGPGart
ALI ---> Use AGPGart
SIS7xx ---> Use NVAGP

that had to be

SIS/xx ---> Use AGPGART because everything after the 735 is not supported by NvAGP.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:31 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 1998 - 2014, nV News.