Intel ( i845G ) profiling

Carsten Haitzler (The Rasterman) raster at
Wed Mar 5 20:21:51 PST 2008

On Wed, 05 Mar 2008 15:44:31 +1100 Daniel Kasak <dkasak at>

> Some discussion regarding EXA performance for my graphics chip motivated
> me to do some profiling. 

good man! i'm really happy our little benchmark toys have proven useful :) this
whole chicken and egg game we have with xrender/exa etc. performance (client
space won't rely on it until its pretty much universlly "really fast" and
drivers wont accelerate it until client space utterly relies on it) is a
problem and i hoped that performance benchmark suites would be a goof bridge.
basically xrender with software fallbacks should not be appreciably slower than
a pure software pipeline. as such things like a gl pipeline should be a good
indication of were things should be - if done optimally (if the gl pipeline is
optimal too) and xrender should be close to gl speeds.

anyway - i'm glad its useful. keep up the benchmarking and lets hope not too
long from now most chipsets and drivers are running smoothing with xrender.

ten i can get onto my next favorite game and bitching about the quality of the
rendering ( e.g. filtered downscaling in xrender :):) )

> I've used 2 different apps to benchmark, expedite ( an evas-based
> benchmark from the Enlightenment team ) and an internal application
> which uses Gtk2. I tested with a couple of different driver setups
> ( exa, xaa, xaa with no-offscreen-pixmaps ). I also tested some
> combinations with a compositing manager named ecomorph, which is a port
> of compiz to run on Enlightenment. Profiling was done with sysprof from
> svn.
> For the expedite tests, I ran the full auto test, with various renderers
> ( software, xrender, gl ). I kept the output of each expedite run ( see
> the .txt files in the profile tarball ). Quite counter-intuitively,
> expedite gives EXA a better score overall than XAA. I'm not sure what to
> say about that. Certainly for some benchmarks it scores lower. I suppose
> Gtk2 makes most use of those features which EXA doesn't score so well at
> in the expedite tests? Or something like that. At any rate, all of the
> apps that I use are Gtk2 apps ( other than Enlightenment ).
> For the internal application ( see
> for a
> screenshot ), I loaded it up, moved to a client, and then clicked on
> each of the pages. I waited until the page finished rendering, then I
> clicked on the next page. With XAA, each page will render in just under
> half a second, which isn't too bad. With EXA, each page takes between 1
> and 2 seconds, which is quite noticably slower than XAA, and a little
> painful to watch. Whack a compositing manager on top, and it gets worse
> still ( ie completely unusable, whereas with XAA it's OK ... not
> brilliant, but OK ).
> A tarball of the sysprof profiles and expedite output can be found at:
> Software setup - all these are compiled with gcc-4.1.2 with
> CFLAGS="-march=pentium4 -g -O2 -pipe -ftracer -fweb" ...
>  - mesa-7.0.2
>  - xorg-server-
>  - xf86-video-i810-
>  - libpixman-0.1.6
>  - glibc-2.7
> If someone wants me to profile something different, please feel free to
> ask :)
> --
> Daniel Kasak
> IT Developer
> NUS Consulting Group
> Level 5, 77 Pacific Highway
> North Sydney, NSW, Australia 2060
> T: (+61) 2 9922-7676 / F: (+61) 2
> 9922 7989
> email: dkasak at
> website:
> _______________________________________________
> xorg mailing list
> xorg at

------------- Codito, ergo sum - "I code, therefore I am" --------------
The Rasterman (Carsten Haitzler)    raster at

More information about the xorg mailing list