Hello all:
I have an Asus F8SN with a Nvidia 9500M with 512MB VRAM. I got 10.5.4 installed and working with QE/CI support using the latest NVinject. However the OPENGL support is really slow. How can I get topengl working properly?

Alex

how do u know is slow?

I think the attached image shows pretty slow opengl tests. Also HalfLife2 on Crossover is really slow on this machine, on a Mac Book with the ATI X3100 it is much smoother and faster.

Alex

OpenGL Extension Viewer is a strange program. As well as XBench. Better try Open Mark and Cinebench.
Crossover uses windows drivers so I doubt it can run fast OpenGL.
What is ATI X3100? May be you mean Intel X3100?

It would be nice if you publish your config

Can you show your info from system profiler under the section Graphics card. I doubt very much that you do actually have QE or CI enabled.

No, OpenGL Extensions Viewer benches are very good and reliable - much better than Xbench, where GMA950 are faster than ATI 2600XT!!!! Xbench OpenGL values are for the trash (rest of valuesa are OK).

Perhaps you use Softwarerendering mode (CPU) , not hardware OpenGL mode(GPU)!
how check if sw rendering (CPU!!) or hw (GPU) rendering:
Look in TAB Extensions , there should NOT be an Apple Software Renderer .... Rendering, insted Intel GMA X3100 Renderer (HW)
I posted my ATI HD3850 Info : Renderer: ATI..... (GPU) and my Bench Vales at 1600x1200/32 Bit/BenchMode
Also in the test this is shown upper left corner Renderer:

If it shows Intel GMA X3100 then all is right, i would set the framebuffer as standard).
X3100 isnt so fast in higer resolution - as yours.

Attached is the system profiler screen shot, ioreg and kext txt files. Thanks for everyone's help.

Alex DeWolf

Try setting one of your corners in expose to put the display to sleep then re awake it and re-run the tests

Ade.

Well what I was saying is that it seems like rendering on my Asus laptop with the Nvidia 9500M and 512MB VRAM is slower than my Mac Book with the Intel (sorry not ATI) X3100 with shared memory.
Here is a screenshot of the extensions tab.

Thanks
Alex

See my post above!

Ade.

I did this and no change.

Alex

Does anything else seem smoother?

Ade.

Nope.

Alex

They are both useless for any kind of real world benchmarking.

Using these the apps the results between my Geforce 7900GS and Geforce 8800GTX were hardly substantial. (and to average joe meaningless)
But any in game experience with 3D was incredibly dramatic. Using a benchmark tool like Santaduck's UT2004 tool showed the difference.

They are useful for things like noticing when hardware acceleration is or isn't working and maybe a rough level of performance, but other than that, not much.

Well check this out. There is an almost 10 fold speed improvement in the opengl test (1st screenshot is before and 2nd is after) However, HalfLife2 is still choppy.

Alex

bump

Then try it at higer res or (above 2000x1400 - like gamemagazines testresolutions), better aktivate the FSAA (Multisampling) to 4 or 8.
You will see a BIG difference between both cards !!!
FSAA ist very hard work for GPU and also VRAM-Speed. OpenGL driver differences and CPU-Limits have not more such a big effect aktivating FSAA*4 or FSAA*8.
ALSO:
real word game benches ahve some MINUS:
- much more CPU + RAM dependend - bad comparable between different CPU + RAM systems
- an GPU which wins GOLD on UNREAL may not get any upper place (means loose) in an other game bench (Crysis)
- its too much work to get an GPU value which is only comparable for systems with SAME MB RAM, SAME CPU TYPE, SAME CPU GHZ
conclusion:
real world benches are only great for testing GPUs in ONE system and it is a must to test at least 3 differnet real world games to get an good average bench value.
Game Magazines or HW Mags tests this way - one test pc , 3 games, 10 cards. To much work and not possible for us - complete different CPU+RAM systems, noone has chance to have 3+ realword games with same resolution, same game settings,...
Running OpenGLExtensionsViewer Benches (switching on FSAA at least *2, newer cards *4 or *8) helps here really for "homeuser GPU tests".

So it is proven that on laptops there are problems getting the nvidia hardware activated. Even though it says hardware accelorated the fact is it lies and isn't true so beware laptop users with nvidia cards we need a fix for this ASAP.

Thanks

Ade

To check this you can test with OpenGLExtensionvierer the results from "hw opengl" and Apple Software Rendering".
If the two OpenGLExtemsiomsViewer Benchmark values are near the same hw opengl isnt really/not 100% working - even shown in systemprofiler as CI/QE card.
If HW Bench values are at least by 10* higher(faster) than SW bench values, hw opengl is working, maybe some driver glitches with your mobile gpu.
HOW: Look at my screenshoot , easy switch between those 2 modes (HW OPENGL / Apple Softwarerendering).

My ATI3850 is in Apple Software Rendering Mode > 200 Times (openGl 1.1 -2.0) SLOWER than HW Rendering, At 2.1 20 times faster. Running in my res: 1600x1200/ 32 Bit, C2D 2.4 GHZ. The smaller the resolution or faster the CPU, the less the difference between both modes.
So your Mobile GPUs should be at very least 20 times faster in HW OpenGL Mode in all is OK, or even 10 times faster with some OpenGL driver problems.

OK I ran this first using Apple software rendering then Nvidia's open GL engine. Ineed the Apple software rendering is like 100 times slower. What I am wondering about are the numbers for the last 2 tests. Is this why HalfLife2 is so slow?

Alex

I have read somewhere that adding platform=X86PC to the boot up fixes it but unfortunately this does not work on my laptop it panics, maybe you could try this.

Ade.

Your Nvidia is really fast. I have no such result while all other tests and games work fine.
OneGl Extension Viewer in WindowsXP run with the same speed as sowtware renderer in MacOSX.
Try Cinebench that exists in both WinXP and in MacOX

Why are we getting faster speeds when activating/deactivating "Sleep Display" is it a driver bug that is not fixable or can it be fixed?

Thanks

Ade.

Here is a HalfLife2:Episode 2 screenshot with FPS displayed (11 FPS). I still can't figure this out.

Alex



Cinebench R10 results (NOTE:I have to boot with cpus=1 so only single cpu results):

CINEBENCH R10
****************************************************

Tester : Alex DeWolf

Processor : Intel T9300
MHz : 2.4 GHZ
Number of CPUs : 1
Operating System : OS X 32 BIT 10.5.4

Graphics Card : NVIDIA GeForce 8600 GTS OpenGL Engine
Resolution : <fill this out>
Color Depth : <fill this out>

****************************************************

Rendering (Single CPU): 2462 CB-CPU
Rendering (Multiple CPU): --- CB-CPU


Shading (OpenGL Standard) : 4370 CB-GFX


****************************************************


Alex



Here are my Cinebench R10 results (NOTE: I have to boot with cpus=1 so there are only single cpu results):
CINEBENCH R10
****************************************************

Tester : Alex DeWolf

Processor : Intel T9300
MHz : 2.4 GHZ
Number of CPUs : 1
Operating System : OS X 32 BIT 10.5.4

Graphics Card : NVIDIA GeForce 8600 GTS OpenGL Engine
Resolution : <fill this out>
Color Depth : <fill this out>

****************************************************

Rendering (Single CPU): 2462 CB-CPU
Rendering (Multiple CPU): --- CB-CPU


Shading (OpenGL Standard) : 4370 CB-GFX


****************************************************


Alex

Here's the Cinebench 10 results. I have top boot with cpus=1 so only single cpu usage:
CINEBENCH R10
****************************************************

Tester : Alex DeWolf

Processor : Intel T9300
MHz : 2.4 GHZ
Number of CPUs : 1
Operating System : OS X 32 BIT 10.5.4

Graphics Card : NVIDIA GeForce 8600 GTS OpenGL Engine
Resolution : <fill this out>
Color Depth : <fill this out>

****************************************************

Rendering (Single CPU): 2462 CB-CPU
Rendering (Multiple CPU): --- CB-CPU


Shading (OpenGL Standard) : 4370 CB-GFX

Using the highest native resolution of my LCD 1680x1050. Obviously if you enable features that are more optimized/supported for newer cards you will see a difference.
The OP isn't using those those settings so comparing to other cards can led to false assumptions. (Although in his case something is wrong as they are incredibly low.)


Never said it was perfect. The point was that the values produced by these benchmarks are essentially useless to most people. (What does a 40 point different mean?)
The tools I suggested was for evaluating real performance (for that system), not necessarily as a tool for comparing GPU performance between different machines.


Like I said, except for cases like the OP's where performance is exceptionally low, these numbers don't tell average users much. Unless they are comparing to others that run with the exact same settings (which often isn't the case, just look at the various threads posting their benchmarks), then getting a 300 compared to a 400 result doesn't mean much.

Alex DeWolf, are the results the same using different games and are the frame rates the same in native games?

I think your problem is not the OpenGL itself, its a problem of CROSSOVER with your GPU/iopenGL !

If real OS X games work well, and only Crossover Games not, contact Crossover / Forum - i think you will not be alone with this GPU type.

I am checking this out



I got and ran Cinebench R10. The results are attached, I have to run with CPUS=1.

Alex

I got Cinebench R10 and ran it. Here are the results (I have to run with cpus=1):
CINEBENCH R10
****************************************************

Tester : Alex DeWolf

Processor : Intel T9300
MHz : 2.4 GHZ
Number of CPUs : 1
Operating System : OS X 32 BIT 10.5.4

Graphics Card : NVIDIA GeForce 8600 GTS OpenGL Engine
Resolution : <fill this out>
Color Depth : <fill this out>

****************************************************

Rendering (Single CPU): 2462 CB-CPU
Rendering (Multiple CPU): --- CB-CPU


Shading (OpenGL Standard) : 4370 CB-GFX


****************************************************


Alex

Looks like we got to the same conclusion.

Alex, if so enable logging in Crossover and attach the log file.

Looking but can't find logging in Crossover...
Attached is Cinebench R10 results I have to use cpus=1.

Alex



Ok I figured it out. The log is attached. Let me know if I used the correct log settings.

Alex

P.S. This worthless forum software will only let me attach certain file extensions. Please mods fix this.

Well I downloaded the Halo demo and it is unplayably slow. Something is really wrong. Any ideas?

Alex

Mac demo or also Crossover ?

First check if the Mac HALO DEMO is Universal Binary or PPC (Finder Info).
IF PPC then its unplayable on Intel , doesnt matter 1 or 2 Cores.
Halo UB is near unplayable with only one Core.

I would run itunes and the visualizer - or OpenGL Screensaver they are all OpenGL with low CPU usage , good for check.

An screensaver (UB) demo like : http://www.uselesscreations.com/mac/fish/D...m3DSS.Trial.dmg
Its OpenGL, may CPU load is very low but it will use GPU medium to high.
Fishs and Water should seen smooth moving.

Remember also your 1 core problem:
If those Itunes Visuals and 3D Screensaver works good (both low-medium CPU usage)
and you cant PLAY modern 3D Shooter (with or without Crossover) its the missing 2. CORE is main Problem!!!
Games like HALO 2.03 (UB) or other high CPU Usage Games will simply not work without both cores aktive.
Crossover with an modern 3D shooter needs much, much CPU power of both cores - even highend C2Ds get full CPU load on 2 cores.

So it sounds like I am stuck until a BIOS patch is available for the 2nd CPU? iTunes and the opengl screensaver are fine. The Halo demo does appear to be a universal binary:

alex-dewolfs-macpro31:Halo Demo adewolf$ file *
Demo Read Me.rtf: Rich Text Format data, version 1, Apple Macintosh
EULA.rtf: Rich Text Format data, version 1, Apple Macintosh
HID.bundle: directory
Halo Demo: header for PowerPC PEF executable
Halo.nib: directory
Maps: directory
Read Me.rtf: Rich Text Format data, version 1, Apple Macintosh
Shaders: directory
Xiph License.rtf: Rich Text Format data, version 1, Apple Macintosh
demo.mov: Apple QuickTime movie (fast start, compressed header)
alex-dewolfs-macpro31:Halo Demo adewolf$ pwd
/Users/adewolf/Desktop/Halo Demo

Xplane demo also not running well:
alex-dewolfs-macpro31:MacOS adewolf$ file *
X-Plane: Mach-O universal binary with 2 architectures
X-Plane (for architecture ppc): Mach-O executable ppc
X-Plane (for architecture i386): Mach-O executable i386
alex-dewolfs-macpro31:MacOS adewolf$ pwd
/Users/adewolf/Desktop/X-Plane 9 Demo1/X-Plane.app/Contents/MacOS

Any ideas on fixing the BIOS? I already checked out osrom.net and requested a modded bios 2 weeks ago. My particular machine Asus F8SVN is not there.
Looks like I will have to go back to Linux for full support of this GPU/laptop

Alex

Get Cinebench for Windows and test it in Crossover. You can compare OpenGL speed in MacOSX and in Crossover.

Sorry but it is a bit irritating to get this machine with a pretty fast graphic card and native openGL apps run slower than an integrated GPU. I gave up and am back on Linux (Dream Linux) and all openGL apps are running very smoothly. Sorry. With QE/CI support it should not be too difficult to openGL working properly but it seems to be beyond me right now.

Alex
PS I would love to be back on OSX, so I will keep an eye out on 9500M support.

OK I got a modded BIOS and Half Life2 runs just as fast on Windows or Linux in Crossover games. Yay!! So this was completely related to the cpus=1 issue. Thanks all.

Alex