Re: Doom3 benchmarks.

[Adam K K. <ad...@vo...>]

Roland Scheidegger wrote:
> Adam K Kirchhoff wrote:
>> Just thought I'd post some updated benchmarks of Doom3.  These were
>> all run with the first timedemo at 640x480, and (for the open source
>>  drivers) with ColorTiling turned on in the xorg.conf file.  I'll
>> list all tests with the open source drivers first:
>>
>> x700 + r300 (with arb renderer) - 5.5 FPS (There's not much point in
>>  testing it with the r200 or arb2 renderers at the moment.)
> What's the problem with arb2? The r300 driver does not
> currently support the r200 render path (and I doubt it will in the
> future - there's just not enough interest in supporting ATI_fs on r300
> which is not widely used).
>
Doom3 does not render properly with the arb2 renderer with the r300
driver at the moment.  There are huge problems with textures.  In
addition, there appears to be some very slow software fallback when
rendering the explosion from the rocket launcher and firing from BFG.

>> 9000 (with arb renderer) - 15.9 9000 (with r200 renderer) - 15.4
>>
>> The huge performance increase I get by using an r200 card is pretty
>> consistent with what I see in other games.
> There seems to be some performance problems with the r300 driver. I
> don't think anyone knows what's going on but I could be wrong...
>
>> WIth the fglrx driver:
>>
>> x700 + fglrx (with arb renderer) - 4.4 x700 + fglrx (with r200
>> renderer) - 28.7
>>
>> 9000 + fglrx (with arb renderer) - 3.9 9000 + fglrx (with r200
>> renderer) - 16.4
> Looks like fglrx has some performance problems too... I can't remember
> it being that slow with the arb path, what driver version is this? arb
> path should always be faster quite a bit as the scene complexity is
> lower (no bump maps etc. though you can switch them off for the other
> render paths too).

8.23.7. 

Adam