# nvidia-drivers-100+ performance degradation?

## jonnevers

glxgears performance under nvidia-drivers-100.14.11

```
user host ~ $ glxgears 

NVIDIA: Direct rendering failed; attempting indirect rendering.

26184 frames in 5.0 seconds = 5232.232 FPS

26227 frames in 5.0 seconds = 5218.731 FPS

25087 frames in 5.0 seconds = 5013.830 FPS

25378 frames in 5.0 seconds = 5062.829 FPS

24640 frames in 5.0 seconds = 4921.637 FPS...
```

glxgears performance under nvidia-drivers-1.0-9755-r1

```
user host ~ $ glxgears 

77760 frames in 5.0 seconds = 15551.955 FPS

84144 frames in 5.0 seconds = 16828.801 FPS

83302 frames in 5.0 seconds = 16660.320 FPS

84040 frames in 5.0 seconds = 16807.924 FPS
```

amd64 3700+

2gig DRR-400 ram

XFX 9750GT

2.6.22-rc6-ragnarok1

I've had similiar performance number decreases with all of the 100+ series drivers on a variety of kernels.

am I missing something? some new configuration options? or is the intent of these drivers not my series of gfx card?

The performance decrease just stumps me and I'm wondering if anyone else has seen something similiar. I understand the glxgears is not a good benchmark but in this case it does the job.

----------

## PaulBredbury

 *jonnevers wrote:*   

> NVIDIA: Direct rendering failed; attempting indirect rendering.

 

Did you forget to: stop xorg, modprobe -r nvidia, and then restart xorg?

```
/etc/init.d/xdm stop

modprobe -r nvidia

/etc/init.d/xdm start
```

If not, look for other errors in /var/log/messages

----------

## jonnevers

 *PaulBredbury wrote:*   

>  *jonnevers wrote:*   NVIDIA: Direct rendering failed; attempting indirect rendering. 

 

wow. duh.

yes. I completely unloaded the module and brought xorg down and verified that only the base system was running.... but I overlooked that error entirely...

----------

## jonnevers

even though I overlooked the error being generated that time, the problem persists but the error dosen't. having changed nothing on the system:

latest in portage:

```
username hostname ~ $ uname -a

Linux hostname 2.6.22-rc6-ragnarok1 #1 SMP Tue Jun 26 17:05:52 EDT 2007 x86_64 AMD Athlon(tm) 64 Processor 3700+ AuthenticAMD GNU/Linux

username hostname ~ $ eix -s nvidia-drivers

[I] x11-drivers/nvidia-drivers

     Available versions:  1.0.8776-r1 (~)1.0.9631-r1 (~)1.0.9746-r1 (~)1.0.9755-r1 (~)100.14.09

     Installed versions:  100.14.09(16:43:15 06/29/07)(kernel_linux)

     Homepage:            http://www.nvidia.com/

     Description:         NVIDIA X11 driver and GLX libraries

username hostname ~ $ glxgears 

26412 frames in 5.0 seconds = 5282.384 FPS

26476 frames in 5.0 seconds = 5295.072 FPS

26223 frames in 5.0 seconds = 5244.399 FPS

26340 frames in 5.0 seconds = 5267.861 FPS
```

and coping that to 11.14.11:

```
millerj blue ~ $ uname -a

Linux blue 2.6.22-rc6-ragnarok1 #1 SMP Tue Jun 26 17:05:52 EDT 2007 x86_64 AMD Athlon(tm) 64 Processor 3700+ AuthenticAMD GNU/Linux

millerj blue ~ $ eix -s nvidia-drivers

[D] x11-drivers/nvidia-drivers

     Available versions:  1.0.8776-r1 (~)1.0.9631-r1 (~)1.0.9746-r1 (~)1.0.9755-r1 (~)100.14.09

     Installed versions:  100.14.11(16:35:47 06/29/07)(kernel_linux)

     Homepage:            http://www.nvidia.com/

     Description:         NVIDIA X11 driver and GLX libraries

millerj blue ~ $ glxgears 

26429 frames in 5.0 seconds = 5285.715 FPS

26208 frames in 5.0 seconds = 5241.429 FPS

26321 frames in 5.0 seconds = 5264.023 FPS

25842 frames in 5.0 seconds = 5168.340 FPS

26216 frames in 5.0 seconds = 5243.021 FPS
```

there was nothing of note (no errors) in /var/log/messages, /var/log/Xorg.0.log, or dmesg.

full /etc/init.d/xdm stop && modprobe -r nvidia prior to even building the next driver version.

9755-r1 is back to around 16k.

This performance decrease is apparent in ut2k4 as well.

----------

## DownSet

I actually noticed a bit of a jump in performance with the 100's from the 9755's.  I cant note anything I've done differnt from any other nvidia user though, agpgart is set as M in kernel, and I have a pretty basic xorg.conf.

```
Section "Device"

        Identifier  "Card"

        Driver      "nvidia"

        Card        "** NVIDIA (generic)                   [nv]"

        BusID       "PCI:1:00:0"

        Option   "UseEdidDpi"   "FALSE"

        Option   "DPI"   "96 x 96"

        Option      "RenderAccel" "true"

        Option      "AddARGBGLXVisuals" "true"

        Option      "AllowGLXWithComposite"

EndSection

```

I've never trusted glxgears for a true bench number though, since I lost fps in gears but gained fps in unigine(or maybe I should'nt trust unigine  :Razz: .)

http://img527.imageshack.us/img527/3356/marknn0.jpg

http://img527.imageshack.us/img527/3400/wsndmarkqg7.jpg

```
mike@Mike-PC ~ $ glxgears

86428 frames in 5.0 seconds = 17285.593 FPS

85081 frames in 5.0 seconds = 17016.153 FPS

84691 frames in 5.0 seconds = 16938.186 FPS

```

Are you getting direct rendering in glxinfo?

----------

## jonnevers

 *DownSet wrote:*   

> Are you getting direct rendering in glxinfo?

 

it looks like direct rendering is in fact working, still ~5200 with the 100.x.x drivers. I'm going to look into unigine and maybe try using the kernel agpgart.

```
username hostname ~ $ glxinfo 

name of display: :0.0

display: :0  screen: 0

direct rendering: Yes

...

OpenGL version string: 2.1.1 NVIDIA 100.14.11
```

[edit]

Unigine is really nice, thanks for telling me about it. I had never heard of it before. my results:

100.14.11: http://monkeydisaster.net/unigine_20070630_100.14.11_4xAA16xAF.html

FPS: 26.9

Scores: 571

9755:http://monkeydisaster.net/unigine_20070630_97.55_4xAA16xAF.html

FPS: 73.9

Scores:	1566

[edit]

fixed URLs, thanks.Last edited by jonnevers on Sun Jul 01, 2007 9:16 am; edited 1 time in total

----------

## Genewb

 *DownSet wrote:*   

> 
> 
> [...] since I lost fps in gears but gained fps in unigine(or maybe I should'nt trust unigine .)

 

Those are the best rendered graphics I have ever seen   :Shocked:  Makes me wish I had bought a card with more memory just to set 8x AA instead of 4x  :Wink: 

----------

## PaulBredbury

jonnevers: "distaster" --> "disaster"

----------

## xanas3712

well, the new drivers aren't better for compiz on my system.  If I'm using one of the opengl-using visualizations with compiz it makes the system pretty unuseable, but with 9755 it works fine.  (glxgears causes the same issue with compiz using those drivers).

I haven't tried 10.14.11 yet, just .9 so I'll check that out to see if it's better.

EDIT: not so much, but games still work fine (didn't mention that on the previous, wow works fine in compiz even with the "problem" for glxgears & amarok visualizer stuff)

for me glxgears only will get around 60fps (and I did turn off sync to vblank in ccsm & in nvidia-settings.. so it's odd)Last edited by xanas3712 on Sun Jul 01, 2007 4:54 am; edited 1 time in total

----------

## SiberianSniper

I feel left out... my performance is exactly the same with the .9xxx and 100.x.x drivers

----------

## PaulBredbury

This might help:

```
export __GL_YIELD="NOTHING"
```

From /usr/share/doc/nvidia-drivers-100.14.11/README.bz2

----------

