Go Back   nV News Forums > Linux Support Forums > NVIDIA Linux

Newegg Daily Deals

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 09-22-08, 09:49 AM   #13
AaronP
NVIDIA Corporation
 
AaronP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 2,487
Default Re: 177.76 2D slower than 177.70 2D

queen6,

That sounds too slow to be accounted for simply by the lower performance level. Please check your system log for "Xid" messages and check the temperature of your GPU. It sounds as if it's hitting the thermal slowdown threshold.
AaronP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-23-08, 11:22 AM   #14
queen6
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 64
Default Re: 177.76 2D slower than 177.70 2D

Quote:
Originally Posted by AaronP View Post
queen6,

That sounds too slow to be accounted for simply by the lower performance level. Please check your system log for "Xid" messages and check the temperature of your GPU. It sounds as if it's hitting the thermal slowdown threshold.
AaronP,
Thanks for your reply. Un/fortunately I don't have any Xid errors and nvidia-settings report temperature around 72C. Besides I don't think it would overheat after 15 sec in gnome.

Do you have any other hints? Could you guys implement "TURN OFF POWERMIZER" button in next beta release please?


timothius:
I do have coolbits enabled, but overclocking doesn't make any difference to the clock settings whatsoever. The driver stays at 169:100 no matter what.
queen6 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-23-08, 12:04 PM   #15
spion
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 44
Default Re: 177.76 2D slower than 177.70 2D

queen6, you should really talk to the company that built your laptop.

blaming nvidia (+ in the way you do) is wrong.
spion is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-24-08, 03:14 AM   #16
queen6
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 64
Default Re: 177.76 2D slower than 177.70 2D

I'm sorry, but the laptop works well. The component which doesn't work properly is THE DRIVER. It's the tiny piece of software which has NOTHING TO DO with the manufacturer of my laptop.

If nVidia wouldn't have closed driver policy I wouldn't blame them. Since they decided to keep the closed source drivers - they are responsible for all frustration customers have.

So please try to explain WHY should I blame laptop manufacturer?

Besides I'm not really blaming nVidia here. I'm only annoyed I've spent so much money and the hardware I've bought is almost unusable. Not because it's bad - only because of stupid policy!
queen6 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-24-08, 06:43 AM   #17
spion
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 44
Default Re: 177.76 2D slower than 177.70 2D

but you knew before you bought it that it has closed driver source policy right? if you care so much about policy you should have got another product.

hardwarewise could it be possible that the laptop has some kind of cooling/power problem, happens quite often, and since noone else seems to experience your bug it prolly has to do with your hardware.
spion is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-25-08, 06:46 PM   #18
VanessaE
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 9
Default Re: 177.76 2D slower than 177.70 2D

Using the same settings as pavlinux:

"PixmapCacheSize" "2000000"
"AllowSHMPixmaps" "0"

InitialPixmapPlacement=2
GlyphCache=1

...and 1000 rounds of testing, on my GF 6600 card with an Athlon 64x2 3800+. NV driver 177.70, nothing overclocked, no programs running other than gtkperf and its controlling terminal running under KDE. This browser was *not* running during the tests.

My numbers are looking pretty pathetic:


GtkPerf 0.40 - Starting testing: Thu Sep 25 18:13:15 2008

GtkEntry - time: 4.43
GtkComboBox - time: 107.96
GtkComboBoxEntry - time: 95.51
GtkSpinButton - time: 23.26
GtkProgressBar - time: 8.20
GtkToggleButton - time: 35.11
GtkCheckButton - time: 36.92
GtkRadioButton - time: 43.93
GtkTextView - Add text - time: 101.75
GtkTextView - Scroll - time: 79.59
GtkDrawingArea - Lines - time: 5.24
GtkDrawingArea - Circles - time: 7.48
GtkDrawingArea - Text - time: 679.12
GtkDrawingArea - Pixbufs - time: 25.20
---
Total time: 1253.72


For me, 177.76 is far slower than 177.70. Didn't run any benchmarks, but I didn't need to - objects were being drawn so slowly under that version that I could easily see simple "ok/cancel" dialogs being assembled from their component parts. 177.68 was just painful to use - text was drawn so slowly that it looked like I was using an old trident card :-(

In point of fact, I can sit here and switch from one driver version to another, start X, run a few tests, and repeat, and I've found that the 173 and 177 series are both slower on my hardware than 169.*. Not really sure why.

Can another 6600 user who is NOT having performance problems post their gtkperf results?
VanessaE is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-25-08, 07:03 PM   #19
spion
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 44
Default Re: 177.76 2D slower than 177.70 2D

first.) you shouldnt use those settings on your old hardware. its mostly for the new geforce series cards.

second.) only one of your gtkperf results looks _really_ bad, that being:
"GtkDrawingArea - Text - time: 679.12"

in 177.76 those two: "GtkDrawingArea - Lines - time,GtkDrawingArea - Circles - time" are severly broken. but i guess thats the nature of beta drivers, right? and you _shouldnot_ use those performance settings.

im running a stock 6800gt without those secret settings ofc, my gtkperf looks like this:

Code:
gtkperf -a -c 1000
GtkPerf 0.40 - Starting testing: Mon Sep 22 13:46:22 2008

GtkEntry - time: 0,62
GtkComboBox - time: 13,49
GtkComboBoxEntry - time: 12,02
GtkSpinButton - time: 1,65
GtkProgressBar - time: 0,63
GtkToggleButton - time: 2,28
GtkCheckButton - time: 2,29
GtkRadioButton - time: 3,77
GtkTextView - Add text - time: 31,07
GtkTextView - Scroll - time: 7,07
GtkDrawingArea - Lines - time: 28,08
GtkDrawingArea - Circles - time: 31,31
GtkDrawingArea - Text - time: 14,15
GtkDrawingArea - Pixbufs - time: 4,15
---
Total time: 152,58
spion is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-25-08, 11:39 PM   #20
VanessaE
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 9
Default Re: 177.76 2D slower than 177.70 2D

Ok, 1000 rounds, without enabling any of those tweaks. The result is better:


GtkPerf 0.40 - Starting testing: Thu Sep 25 23:23:13 2008

GtkEntry - time: 4.81
GtkComboBox - time: 118.90
GtkComboBoxEntry - time: 98.86
GtkSpinButton - time: 12.99
GtkProgressBar - time: 12.40
GtkToggleButton - time: 52.86
GtkCheckButton - time: 45.37
GtkRadioButton - time: 50.61
GtkTextView - Add text - time: 94.32
GtkTextView - Scroll - time: 90.33
GtkDrawingArea - Lines - time: 4.30
GtkDrawingArea - Circles - time: 7.81
GtkDrawingArea - Text - time: 30.46
GtkDrawingArea - Pixbufs - time: 4.30
---
Total time: 628.32

Somehow these numbers still seem a little too high.
VanessaE is offline   Reply With Quote

Old 09-26-08, 09:14 AM   #21
tzp
Registered User
 
tzp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Hungary
Posts: 92
Default Re: 177.76 2D slower than 177.70 2D

Have you tried it under any other window manager ?
E.g. try icewm, or KDE 3.5.

Last edited by tzp; 09-26-08 at 09:17 AM. Reason: wm names
tzp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-26-08, 04:57 PM   #22
VanessaE
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 9
Default Re: 177.76 2D slower than 177.70 2D

I was using KDE 3.5.10. Here is the same test (1000 rounds) under TWM:

GtkPerf 0.40 - Starting testing: Fri Sep 26 16:42:53 2008

GtkEntry - time: 0.76
GtkComboBox - time: 11.68
GtkComboBoxEntry - time: 10.85
GtkSpinButton - time: 1.29
GtkProgressBar - time: 8.75
GtkToggleButton - time: 4.65
GtkCheckButton - time: 3.31
GtkRadioButton - time: 5.47
GtkTextView - Add text - time: 80.71
GtkTextView - Scroll - time: 63.48
GtkDrawingArea - Lines - time: 5.76
GtkDrawingArea - Circles - time: 7.34
GtkDrawingArea - Text - time: 28.62
GtkDrawingArea - Pixbufs - time: 4.16
---
Total time: 236.82

I always knew KDE was a little slower, but jeez.
VanessaE is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-29-08, 02:26 AM   #23
tzp
Registered User
 
tzp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Hungary
Posts: 92
Default Re: 177.76 2D slower than 177.70 2D

Well, 236 is much better than 628... Was it on the same machine & kernel, only twm instead of KDE ?

Nevertheless, try the 177.78 driver.
For me it helped to regain some performance (compared to 177.76) according to both gtkperf, unigine benchmarks and Cg tutorial demos, back to cca. the 177.70 level.
tzp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-29-08, 04:54 AM   #24
VanessaE
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 9
Thumbs up Re: 177.76 2D slower than 177.70 2D

As a matter of fact, yes. In particular, this is a vanilla 2.6.26.5 kernel (needed because I have a capture card that uses an experimental not-yet-in-kernel driver).

I now have 177.78 installed. As before, I merely stopped X, let the system settle to an idle state, then started X with whatever environment I wanted to test, and then let the system settle to an idle state again before I clicked the "start" button, and this time everything was kept at the default settings unless noted otherwise. No reboots were done, just stop/restart X as needed to switch environments. Here are the numbers:


*** Under TWM, 100% default settings (I keep it this way just for such situations):

GtkPerf 0.40 - Starting testing: Mon Sep 29 03:36:37 2008

GtkEntry - time: 0.75
GtkComboBox - time: 11.42
GtkComboBoxEntry - time: 10.73
GtkSpinButton - time: 1.26
GtkProgressBar - time: 8.73
GtkToggleButton - time: 4.53
GtkCheckButton - time: 3.24
GtkRadioButton - time: 5.40
GtkTextView - Add text - time: 79.54
GtkTextView - Scroll - time: 63.00
GtkDrawingArea - Lines - time: 5.34
GtkDrawingArea - Circles - time: 7.19
GtkDrawingArea - Text - time: 28.03
GtkDrawingArea - Pixbufs - time: 4.14
---
Total time: 233.30

*** Under a fresh, clean install of KDE 3.5.10 (because I got upset and erased *everything* related to it earlier), using the "Keramik" style because I can't stand the default , subpixel antialiasing turned on and set to "slight" mode (system default), and everything else at the default settings:

GtkPerf 0.40 - Starting testing: Mon Sep 29 03:50:39 2008

GtkEntry - time: 0.51
GtkComboBox - time: 12.65
GtkComboBoxEntry - time: 12.14
GtkSpinButton - time: 1.35
GtkProgressBar - time: 8.73
GtkToggleButton - time: 4.64
GtkCheckButton - time: 3.31
GtkRadioButton - time: 5.38
GtkTextView - Add text - time: 75.85
GtkTextView - Scroll - time: 63.96
GtkDrawingArea - Lines - time: 5.91
GtkDrawingArea - Circles - time: 7.50
GtkDrawingArea - Text - time: 28.35
GtkDrawingArea - Pixbufs - time: 4.14
---
Total time: 234.43

*** Under KDE 3.5.10 again, still using the "Keramik" style, this time with KDE/QT styles applied to GTK apps (this required "gtk-qt-engine" to be installed), and otherwise everything at the default settings. After restarting KDE to make the QT-->GTK feature stick:

GtkPerf 0.40 - Starting testing: Mon Sep 29 04:01:43 2008

GtkEntry - time: 0.51
GtkComboBox - time: 24.40
GtkComboBoxEntry - time: 23.92
GtkSpinButton - time: 2.58
GtkProgressBar - time: 8.56
GtkToggleButton - time: 6.09
GtkCheckButton - time: 6.17
GtkRadioButton - time: 8.26
GtkTextView - Add text - time: 79.79
GtkTextView - Scroll - time: 67.50
GtkDrawingArea - Lines - time: 5.42
GtkDrawingArea - Circles - time: 7.21
GtkDrawingArea - Text - time: 28.52
GtkDrawingArea - Pixbufs - time: 4.10
---
Total time: 273.04

*** Under XFCE 4.4.2, significantly customized (because I'd already done this long before this batch of tests), using the "Industrial" GTK theme, text anti-aliasing turned on with subpixel hinting ("slight" mode):

GtkPerf 0.40 - Starting testing: Mon Sep 29 04:08:01 2008

GtkEntry - time: 0.54
GtkComboBox - time: 33.85
GtkComboBoxEntry - time: 26.43
GtkSpinButton - time: 2.82
GtkProgressBar - time: 9.95
GtkToggleButton - time: 11.36
GtkCheckButton - time: 11.70
GtkRadioButton - time: 12.72
GtkTextView - Add text - time: 81.06
GtkTextView - Scroll - time: 73.44
GtkDrawingArea - Lines - time: 5.81
GtkDrawingArea - Circles - time: 7.35
GtkDrawingArea - Text - time: 28.41
GtkDrawingArea - Pixbufs - time: 4.16
---
Total time: 309.62

***

With these new numbers, it almost seems worth it to go back to KDE now :-)

Also, one thing I noticed is that in all these tests, the text scrolled faster as it approached the bottom of the text, and slower as it approached the top of the text.

Last edited by VanessaE; 09-29-08 at 05:34 AM. Reason: fixing a typo.
VanessaE is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Intel Ivy Bridge Core i5-3427U / Ultrabook Platform Review: Making Slower Faster News Archived News Items 0 05-31-12 05:40 AM

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:58 AM.


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