![]() ![]() |
Oct 31 2005, 08:26 AM
Post
#1
|
|
|
Group: Members Posts: 178 Joined: 13-September 05 Member No.: 8,099 |
i built Mesa 6.4 with -O3 -mcpu=iwmmxt -mtune=iwmmxt to get it going faster and it runs faster from my tests:
from 16.5FPS to 18FPS @416MHZ in glxgears from 26FPS to 28FPS @624MHZ in glxgears there some demos on the build also. Sash:about the pcsx build that is on the feed,does it build with my patches? coz it is slow by 2-3 fps that my build! one thing i realy pissed is that we have such poor 3d preformence with ur Zaurus. i searched for a software-render OpenGL such as mesa with integer instead of floats but i didn`t find one. if you look at PPC they get such a good speed. i compiled foobillard with OpenGL and it runs for 3-5FPS(estimate) realy slow.
Attached File(s)
demos.tar.gz ( 842.68K )
Number of downloads: 17
mesa3d_6.4.0_armv5tel.ipk ( 1.47MB )
Number of downloads: 27 |
|
|
|
Oct 31 2005, 09:02 AM
Post
#2
|
|
|
Group: Members Posts: 388 Joined: 7-December 03 Member No.: 1,058 |
QUOTE(urielka @ Oct 31 2005, 08:26 AM) i built Mesa 6.4 with -O3 -mcpu=iwmmxt -mtune=iwmmxt to get it going faster and it runs faster from my tests: from 16.5FPS to 18FPS @416MHZ in glxgears from 26FPS to 28FPS @624MHZ in glxgears there some demos on the build also. Sash:about the pcsx build that is on the feed,does it build with my patches? coz it is slow by 2-3 fps that my build! one thing i realy pissed is that we have such poor 3d preformence with ur Zaurus. i searched for a software-render OpenGL such as mesa with integer instead of floats but i didn`t find one. if you look at PPC they get such a good speed. i compiled foobillard with OpenGL and it runs for 3-5FPS(estimate) realy slow. where is your patches? i added but not tested it |
|
|
|
Oct 31 2005, 09:05 AM
Post
#3
|
|
|
Group: Members Posts: 178 Joined: 13-September 05 Member No.: 8,099 |
so how did you build it? my patches aren`t for boost but are for building it but they also make it faster.
patches here. it runs damn slow just 6-8FPS(your build) and 8-11FPS(my build). something else that could build is Visual Boy that run as slow as 50-60%@624MHZ.
Attached File(s)
|
|
|
|
Oct 31 2005, 09:08 AM
Post
#4
|
|
|
Group: Members Posts: 388 Joined: 7-December 03 Member No.: 1,058 |
|
|
|
|
Oct 31 2005, 09:18 AM
Post
#5
|
|
|
Group: Members Posts: 178 Joined: 13-September 05 Member No.: 8,099 |
i mean ,how did it build it coz you need to hack the makefiles and some files to get it build.
and check my patches |
|
|
|
Oct 31 2005, 05:52 PM
Post
#6
|
|
![]() Group: Members Posts: 1,565 Joined: 7-April 05 From: Sydney, Australia Member No.: 6,806 |
hacking around in the floating point emulation should speed things up, not sure if gcc supports autovactorisateion for the iwmmx but i am trying to find out at the moment
|
|
|
|
Nov 1 2005, 11:57 AM
Post
#7
|
|
|
Group: Members Posts: 178 Joined: 13-September 05 Member No.: 8,099 |
only with gcc 4.0.(because of that Apple use 4.0 for VMX(aka Altivec) optimz).
the better thing i planing to do is write a arm dynamic recompiler so we will have alot of speed boost i think about 25-30FPS which will be damn good. think about this: Fifa 2003(or sooner) on the Z just amazing. tekken 3,Gta2 and all the good thigs |
|
|
|
Nov 2 2005, 02:40 AM
Post
#8
|
|
|
Group: Members Posts: 4,515 Joined: 25-October 03 From: Bath, UK Member No.: 464 |
QUOTE arm dynamic recompiler Sounds cool - is this the kind of thing which profiles itself then recompiles to make the parts which are run the most run the fastest? Si |
|
|
|
Nov 2 2005, 04:20 AM
Post
#9
|
|
![]() Group: Members Posts: 1,565 Joined: 7-April 05 From: Sydney, Australia Member No.: 6,806 |
i thoght that gcc had that built in, you just had to do multiple passes, the thing i wonder about fir autovectorisation is does gcc have support for it or only mmx/sse/altivec
i thing the speed boost from vectorising the floating point rouitnes would be better than dynamic recompalation scince thats the area thats cauising the most performance degerdation |
|
|
|
Nov 2 2005, 04:22 AM
Post
#10
|
|
|
Group: Members Posts: 4,515 Joined: 25-October 03 From: Bath, UK Member No.: 464 |
QUOTE i thoght that gcc had that built in, you just had to do multiple passes Yes, but one of those passes has to be performed on the machine. QUOTE the thing i wonder about fir autovectorisation is does gcc have support for it or only mmx/sse/altivec Although vfp has vector support, I thought that this was only for hardware floating point units? I'd assumed that as it's emulated there would be no difference (or can the emulation perform vector calculations somehow?). Si |
|
|
|
Nov 2 2005, 06:48 AM
Post
#11
|
|
![]() Group: Members Posts: 1,014 Joined: 4-January 05 From: Enschede, The Netherlands Member No.: 6,107 |
this thread has quite some info about vfp: http://maemo.org/pipermail/maemo-developer...ber/001602.html
|
|
|
|
Nov 2 2005, 08:35 AM
Post
#12
|
|
|
Group: Members Posts: 178 Joined: 13-September 05 Member No.: 8,099 |
a interpter core runs a lot slower than dynamic recompiler so building one will be the best option
|
|
|
|
Nov 2 2005, 05:11 PM
Post
#13
|
|
![]() Group: Members Posts: 1,565 Joined: 7-April 05 From: Sydney, Australia Member No.: 6,806 |
thanks for the link to the mailing list, i would be intrested to see how much of an improvment we could get, i might even do some iwmmx asm if i feel there is a good performance boost, i am planning to conver the mmx AES routines to iwmmx so mabey after that
|
|
|
|
Nov 2 2005, 05:13 PM
Post
#14
|
|
![]() Group: Members Posts: 1,565 Joined: 7-April 05 From: Sydney, Australia Member No.: 6,806 |
just a note, iwmmx includes all integer SSE stuff, so its actually a superset of your standard mmx, i dont know how this effects the code but i assume this would allow for some instructions that would take longer to do in pure mmx
|
|
|
|
![]() ![]() |
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 19th May 2013 - 02:34 AM |