Jump to content
DiaboliK

Better OpenGL benchmarking, GioFX OpenMark

87 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

Don't get me wrong, I like OGLE Viewer - it allows you a far more detailed look at your card's abilities than OM; especially in separating the abilities of newer and older cards etc etc... It's just that, for a "quick'n'dirty" overview of raw speed, it's a bit of an over-kill, IMHO.

 

I'd be interested to see the OGLE Viewer results for 7900s with high LOD/AA vs 7600GTs at same settings. I suspect the high core speed of the 7600GTs lets you draw a lot of relatively simple polygons but, once it has to process them more it should fall off relatively to the slower but more sophisticated high-end cards. That, or the kext just doesn't take advantage of those cards as it should - I'm speculating here...

 

P.S. A page I found very useful for card specs is:

http://users.erols.com/chare/video.htm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Advertisement

Kind of offtopic, but here's a screen I took of my results with my 7900 GS in the OGLE Viewer.

 

picture1rq2.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Kind of offtopic, but here's a screen I took of my results with my 7900 GS in the OGLE Viewer.

 

Hmm... that's rather poor.

 

this is my 7600gt

 

oglev7600gtvc8.png

 

Could you rerun your test with the following settings:

 

1280X1024X32 (60Hz) Display Mode

Tick multisample set to 4

Untick LOD, set slider to 0

Anistropy set to 16

Tick Use Fog

 

This the same GT with those settings

 

oglev76gt2fh1.png

OGLEV7600gt.tiff

OGLEV76gt_2.tiff

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So the kexts aren't unbalanced then?

 

I think they probably use the same kexts, I thought that maybe they are not taking full advantage of your card. Seem like they are; just that the 7600GT is really good at churning out simple polygons. But the (relative) small number of pixel/vertex shaders shows when you start processing the output more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is the Benchmarks of my Hackintosh:

 

Display Card: Leadtek/Winfast PX7900GS TDH

 

1280X1024X32 (60Hz) Display Mode

Tick multisample set to 4

Untick LOD, set slider to 0

Anistropy set to 16

Tick Use Fog

 

screenshot01ir4.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's the results for my 7900 GTO 512 MB.

 

Test settings:

1280X1024X32 (60Hz) Display Mode

Tick multisample set to 4

Untick LOD, set slider to 0

Anistropy set to 16

Tick Use Fog

 

post-57247-1176126599_thumb.jpg

 

Interesting that the results are basically the same as the 7900GS in this test, but that my card pulls away quite handily in the OpenMark test, posting a score that is approximately 50% faster.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

using the settings established above for OpenGL Extensions Viewer:

 

Display Mode: 1280 x 1024 x 33bpp (60Hz)

Framebuffer: Standard

 

untick Multisample set slider to 4

untick LOD Bias set slider to 0

tick Antisotropy set slider to 16

tic Use Fog

 

my results are:

Picture%202.png

 

 

i have nVidia GeForce 7600 GT with 256 VRAM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
using the settings established above for OpenGL Extensions Viewer:

 

Display Mode: 1280 x 1024 x 33bpp (60Hz)

Framebuffer: Standard

 

untick Multisample set slider to 4

untick LOD Bias set slider to 0

tick Antisotropy set slider to 16

tic Use Fog

 

my results are:

Picture%202.png

i have nVidia GeForce 7600 GT with 256 VRAM

 

you are supposed to tick Multisample ;-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

These are my results:

 

stock conditions

 

score 294 with Open GL

 

fsb=166

 

score 373 with Open GL

 

My stupid question:changing the fsb at the boot influences the performance on the entire system as indicated , or the becnhmarks results are not real at all , 'cause the time is not set correctly ? ( I mean the clocktime is going slower)

 

:wacko:

post-72445-1176826691_thumb.jpg

post-72445-1176838531_thumb.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
or the becnhmarks results are not real at all , 'cause the time is not set correctly ? ( I mean the clocktime is going slower)

 

:thumbsup_anim:

 

yep that's the one. The bios sets your fsb, not the fsb=xxx switch. That only tells OS X what fsb it's running on. Now, if the real time is faster than the reported time, the benchmark will think the card did more "work" in a shorter period = inflated results.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

thanks consolation for clarification!

ok a bit OT ,

Is it possible overclock from inside xp virtual (parallels) and after switch off it , having in the osx running a real overclock?

 

:):star_smile:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
thanks consolation for clarification!

ok a bit OT ,

Is it possible overclock from inside xp virtual (parallels) and after switch off it , having in the osx running a real overclock?

 

:):star_smile:

 

parallels runs a virtual machine, XP won't see your real hardware.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

wohoo! new card!

 

XFX 7600GT Fatal1ty Fanless : natit dual v02 and 10.4.9 nvidia kexts all stock

 

openmark bench : 18000

 

post-14143-1177394162_thumb.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pretty fast card, a clear 2000 points over a stock 7600GT. What is it clocked at default? And it's even fanless... sweet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Pretty fast card, a clear 2000 points over a stock 7600GT. What is it clocked at default? And it's even fanless... sweet.

 

 

I think stock core clock is 560mhz or 580mhz : and this cards core clock is 650mhz

 

the card's cooling is quite nice and adiquate but im gonna be lapping and polishing that it up to be a bit cooler. :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is my first time to do this test.So is this result ok and is higher FPS better or not?

Graphic card : ATI X1950XTX 512RAM but this test see my card as X1900 series.

 

2004280215491894491_rs.jpg

 

 

2001717131653995107_rs.jpg

 

2006051215794550965_rs.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Could it be that the ATI drivers perform much better in OSX right now than Nvidia Drivers?

 

Here are my NVIDIA 7900 GTO results - I'm using a Dual Screen Setup, 1st mon: 1280x1024@85, 2nd mon: 1440x900@60hz.

 

bench01.jpg

 

Still, the ATI results MacIntelrator posted are mucho better.

 

Also, I've been trying Maya on OSX86 and it's unbearably slow. Marking Menus take about 0.25 to 0.50 seconds to accept, nothing is instant, it just feels totally sluggish.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Radeon X800 Stock

OpenMark final score: 9750

 

Sorry for no screenshot. It beach-balls at the end and never takes it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×