On Wed, 2 Jun 2010 00:31:49 +0200 Benjamin Zores <ben@...> said:
> On Sun, May 23, 2010 at 11:33 AM, Brett Nash <nash@...> wrote:
> > On Sun, 23 May 2010 11:28:45 +0200
> > Benjamin Zores <ben@...> wrote:
> >> On Sun, May 23, 2010 at 11:25 AM, Brett Nash <nash@...> wrote:
> >> > If you have time, I'd love to see any benchmarks you can
> >> > generate ;-)
> >> That is planned as soon as the whole distro is functionnal and when I
> >> manage to get my hands on the board.
> >> I could however have some tests on N900 but this will involve much
> >> more work. I'll let you know ASAP anyhow (probably a 2 weeks).
> > 2 weeks is fine ;-) Looking forward to it ;-)
> Took me a bit less than 2 weeks actually.
> So I managed to run Expedite on my board and seems to have pretty
> decent results.
> Attached is a copy of the benchmark scores.
> I only did it using software_x11 renderer right now as I still have
> issues with GLES renderer (distro/driver issue, not Evas related).
> So, the board is an OMAP3 ARMv7 Cortex-A8 SoC clocked at 720 MHz (IGEPv2
> board). I've been running in 720p with a 32bits framebuffer on Linux 18.104.22.168.
> X.Org 1.7.5 is used without composite nor any window/desktop manager
> and is running with omapfb_xorg driver.
> The system nearly has no processes running (except vital/mandatory
> ones) - GeeXboX OS.
> All EFLs (including expedite) have been cross-compiled using GCC 4.4.4
> with -O4 -mcpu=cortex-a8 -mfpu=neon -mfloat-abi=softfp.
> ELFs are based on r49141, so including the latest ARM NEON optimizations.
> The final Evas score is:
> 170.88 , EVAS SPEED (WEIGHTED)
> FYI, I used to ran Expedite (older EFL revision, without latest ARM
> optimizations) on OMAP3 TouchBook,
> using OpenEmbedded derivated distro, with GLES on Xorg/fbdev driver
> (slow as hell) and score used to be around 13 only !!
> I remember N900 test results to be higher than what I measured on
> Touchbook (but my own tests were much lower than Raster's ones)
> but definitely not as high as a 171 score.
> So it definitely seems like a very good improvement.
> Full details in attachment.
you need to take current evas and run on the other platforms. why? we now weigh
results based on a finger-in-the-wind guess at real-life usage. so some tests
get a low multiplier, some high in the weighting to produce the final result,
BUT... you have a problem. the textblock intl result has rediculous results.
you need to watch it render - and my bet is that its not rendering anything
there - it's blank. you're missing fonts for other languages (japanese,
chinese, korean, arabic, etc. etc.). you cannot really use those results there
as one of your tests is actually broken and as a result is tweaking the final
number to be totally unrealistic. generally the right thing to do is to compare
2 runs of the same version of expedite (well at least so they both do the
weighting and have the same tests) and test-by-test look at it and the relative
results per test and take a guess if that particular rendering/display is used
much in your apps/usage etc. if not- ignore it.
------------- Codito, ergo sum - "I code, therefore I am" --------------
The Rasterman (Carsten Haitzler) raster@...