Originally Posted by AaronP
Yes, I ran one on each X screen. Have you tried 169.04?
OK, I just did switch from 100.14.23 to 169.04. I still see a big difference, just about twofold, in performance
between "-W 128 -many" (~100 Mpix/sec/window) and "-W 128 (without -many)" (~210-220 Mpix/sec/window) --
about the same as with 100.14.23.
I do find one case where -many doesn't matter. (Don't know whether this mattered with 100.14.23 or earlier.)
Had found earlier that GL_TEXTURE_RECTANGLE_ARB is much speedier than GL_TEXTURE_2D
for the same texture-tile size. Using things like "-W 128" or "-W 256x270" selects TEXTURE_RECTANGLE,
but omitting -W tests with GL_TEXTURE_2D. (All the examples listed in txspeed.c's comments used -W.)
So: with *no* -W, so that it uses 128x128-pixel GL_TEXTURE_2D's, I get about 84 Mpix/sec/window,
regardless of -many.
Is that a clue? Can I ask what sort of speeds you see?
Output from some examples attached (BENCHMARKS.txt). This is the same setup as for the nvidia-bug-report attached earlier, except that it's now running the upgraded nvidia driver.
Thanks for looking into this!