| Summary: | [IVB/BYT-M/BDW] Unigine-Heaven4.0 on IVB/BYT-M/BDW performance is slower(↓2x) ) than HSW_GT3e. | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | Mesa | Reporter: | zhoujian <jianx.zhou> |
| Component: | Drivers/DRI/i965 | Assignee: | Ian Romanick <idr> |
| Status: | VERIFIED NOTABUG | QA Contact: | Intel 3D Bugs Mailing List <intel-3d-bugs> |
| Severity: | major | ||
| Priority: | medium | CC: | eero.t.tamminen |
| Version: | unspecified | ||
| Hardware: | All | ||
| OS: | Linux (All) | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| i915 platform: | i915 features: | ||
| Attachments: |
ivb_dmesg.log
heaven4.0_strace_log |
||
|
Description
zhoujian
2014-08-19 08:56:33 UTC
Created attachment 104874 [details]
ivb_dmesg.log
Created attachment 104875 [details]
heaven4.0_strace_log
> Unigine-Heaven4.0 on IVB/BYT-M/BDW very slower(↓2x) than HSW_GT3e, this issue doesn’t exist on Unigine-Heaven3.0.
Heaven (v4) is memory BW bound and GT3e has more of that (with its 128MB L4) than IVB/BYT/BDW devices have have currently so Heaven being clearly faster on it is to be expeced.
Are you saying that Heaven v3 is same speed on GT3e as it's on BYT? If it's system memory bandwidth bound (= memory accesses don't fit into L4), I can buy it being fairly same speed as on IVB & BDW as the devices we currently have, have same bandwidth. However, if BYT is same speed, that is definitely wrong.
(In reply to comment #3) > > Unigine-Heaven4.0 on IVB/BYT-M/BDW very slower(↓2x) than HSW_GT3e, this issue doesn’t exist on Unigine-Heaven3.0. > > Heaven (v4) is memory BW bound and GT3e has more of that (with its 128MB L4) > than IVB/BYT/BDW devices have have currently so Heaven being clearly faster > on it is to be expeced. > > Are you saying that Heaven v3 is same speed on GT3e as it's on BYT? If it's > system memory bandwidth bound (= memory accesses don't fit into L4), I can > buy it being fairly same speed as on IVB & BDW as the devices we currently > have, have same bandwidth. However, if BYT is same speed, that is > definitely wrong. I didn't mean that.Both of them are slower on IVB/BYT-M/BDW comparing with they are on HSW-GT3e. What I wanted to express is that Heaven v4 is too slow. besides, Heaven v3 is faster than Heaven v4. Heaven v4 is memory bandwidth bound. With its L4, GT3e has more memory bandwidth than the other HW configurations you listed, so Heaven being faster there is to be expected. As to Heaven 3 being faster than Heaven 4, besides being different versions of the demo, they also use a different version of the Unigine engine, so there can well be performance affecting differences in what they do. Is there some other platform (like Windows/Intel or Mesa/Nvidia) where there isn't a performance difference between v3 and v4? Does old v3 render correctly with Mesa (hard to say now with bug 82897, but before that issue came up)? (In reply to Eero Tamminen from comment #5) > Heaven v4 is memory bandwidth bound. With its L4, GT3e has more memory > bandwidth than the other HW configurations you listed, so Heaven being > faster there is to be expected. > > As to Heaven 3 being faster than Heaven 4, besides being different versions > of the demo, they also use a different version of the Unigine engine, so > there can well be performance affecting differences in what they do. > > Is there some other platform (like Windows/Intel or Mesa/Nvidia) where there > isn't a performance difference between v3 and v4? Does old v3 render > correctly with Mesa (hard to say now with bug 82897, but before that issue > came up)? Test on HSW-GT3e with Windows 8.1, Heaven 3 also faster than Heaven 4 by 52%. Close this bug as not a bug. |
Use of freedesktop.org services, including Bugzilla, is subject to our Code of Conduct. How we collect and use information is described in our Privacy Policy.