User Tools

Site Tools



This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

Next revision
Previous revision
faq [2007/04/02 23:01]
steevithak created
faq [2009/09/21 00:00] (current)
Line 1: Line 1:
 ====== Frequently Asked Questions ====== ====== Frequently Asked Questions ======
-  * Is glxgears an accurate measure of 3D performance?​+  ​* **Is glxgears an accurate measure of 3D performance?​**\\ No, it sucks in multiple ways. But it is readily available on all computers and a significant number of people find it both interesting and better than nothing. And, despite all the complaints, you'll generally find that faster 3D cards achieve higher glxgears frame rates. A Radeon X850 with the R300 driver really is faster at most 3D operations than an nVidia GeForce FX Go5200 with the nv driver. Because glxgears doesn'​t take into account many types of 3D operations, you'll find plenty of cases where a card with a fast glxgears frame rate doesn'​t perform a specific 3D operation as fast as a card with a slower glxgears frame rate. So, if you have very specific 3D acceleration needs, you'd be crazy to base your purchase on glxgears results. ​
-    No, it sucks. But it readily available on all computers ​and a significant number ​of people ​find it both interesting ​and better than nothing.+ 
 +  * **Why aren't you using a more accurate 3D benchmark?​**\\ There isn't one that's readily available. When I started this site there was no significant data available on the relative performance of free software 3D drivers. But, because there is no readily ​available 3D benchmarking software included with X.Org, the choice I was faced with was to create a listing of glxgear results or do nothing. Most people I talked to preferred having glxgear data to no data at all. 
 +  * **When will you stop using glxgears as a benchmark?​**\\ When we can replace it with something more accurate. A suitable replacement needs to be a benchmarking utility that is included in the standard X.Org distribution, ​available on all common Linux and BSD distros, and as easy to use as glxgears. Until something like that comes along, we'll stick to glxgears. 
 +  * **Will you stop using glxgears if I send you an email complaining that glxgears sucks as benchmark?​**\\ No. 
 +  * **What if I explain in great detail all the ways in which glxgears sucks and give examples ​of cases where it's inacurate?​**\\ Nope. 
 +  * **Is there anything I can do to convince you to stop collecting glxgears results?​**\\ Yes, write a better benchmarking utility and get it included in the standard X.Org codebase. If people ​spent half the time working on a decent benchmarking utility as they do complaining about glxgears, we'd have one by now. 
 +  * **Has anyone published accurate benchmark results of a wide range of 3D hardware and drivers and compared the results with glxgears frame rates of the same cards to authenticate the claim that glxgears sucks?**\\ Not that I'm aware of. It shouldn'​t be hard to do and I'd love to see such a test done. If you do it, send me the URL and I'll add a link to the site.
faq.1175554876.txt.gz · Last modified: 2007/04/03 00:00 (external edit)