Re: GLX in bad state

"Firsly, quantify what you mean by "plays better"."

Two examples,

The Bazaar.  In WinXp I need to either look straight down or use first 
camera view (top down view) to be able to move.  In WineX3.3 (Feb Build) 
I can move quite freely in the Bazaar in normal view.  This is generally 
associated with a line of sight lag issue.  How much of that is 
WineX/DirectX/Video Driver is way beyond my ability to design any test 
that could quantify "Why can I move in normal View in WineX but not 
DirectX, in the bazaar".  The Bazaar is not a graphical nightmare.  It 
is simply a place with a lot of players, that have a lot of items on 
their character.  I am 100% confident the "lot of items" is the cause of 
the lag.

Jagged Pine Forest and/or any Luclin Expansion zones.  These zones are 
much more graphic intense than the preceding zones.  In WinXP I need to 
look down at about a 45 degree angle to the horizon.  This reduces the 
overall view by enough to allow me to move, in an acceptable way, while 
maintaining an acceptable view of my environment.  Now I choose Jagged 
Pine as it is the opposite of the Bazaar.  Meaning quite often, the zone 
is totally empty.  Just me, a lot of detail inanimate objects and some 
animate objects (Non Player Characters).  So to repeat I need to reduce 
my field of view in WinXP, by a significant percentage.  In WineX I do 
not need to adjust my Field of View.  I can move in JP as easily/fluidly 
as I can in any of the original zones (considerably less graphics details).

Now how do you design a series of test to measure the "Exactly why does 
WineX give a significantly better play experience than DirectX".

As far as using performance monitors, your talking to the wrong person.  
In my experience they are at best ...... unreliable and way to 
situational to be of any really value.

The only thing that I would accept is a program (in source format that 
can be compiled on both systems.  Assembler being the preferred source 
language as C/C++ is way to unpredictable as a cross platform 
measurement tool) that performs all of the DirectX calls in a plain 
vanilla way.  Anything that would cause the OS to become involved in any 
way, would invalidate any comparison, in my opinion.

When it comes to WineX the Video Version vs DirectX the Video version, 
it isn't clear to me how one can uncouple the respective package from 
the installed Video Drivers.   I maintain my systems with the latest 
versions of everything I am using.  I will use non WHQL versions of the 
NVidia Drivers on XP, if that is what NVidia the Company says is the 
most current.  I make this statement to underline that my WinXP is as 
current as I can keep it.  My Linux is as current as I can keep it.  I 
have zero doubts in my mind that the WinXP Video Driver from NVidia has 
a different performance profile than the Linux Video Driver from NVidia.

Jerry

Nadav Frum wrote:

>I would like to clarify that my objective is not to publicize a comparison 
>between WineX and DirectX.  I am trying to isolate performance problems in 
>WineX.  To this end I believe that benchmark statistics will be beneficial.
>
>When I use the terms WineX and DirectX I mean the gaming platform and all 
>the application levels used on these platforms.  You will notice that I 
>discuss OpenGL performance, which is not a part of the WineX code itself. 
>
>I have added some comments below.
>
>On Mon, 12 Apr 2004, "LaPeer, Jerry K." wrote:
>
>  
>
>>I may be jumping into a pool that is considerably over my head, but...
>>
>>Being the curious person that I am...
>>
>>I found this to be an interesting concept
>>                                                                           
>>"information which will allow a performance comparison between WineX and
>>DirectX"
>>                                                                               
>>How would one design a set of test, to measure performance between WineX
>>and DirectX when one does not have the ability to factor out
>>(presumably) the Linux vs MSWindows (and the various versions).
>>    
>>
>
>First establish that there is a performance difference.  Then try to find 
>the reasons and try to fix them.  OProfile is one tool which tells you 
>quite accurately what your CPU has been busy doing while you were playing 
>a game.  It will give you the amount of time spent in the Linux kernel and 
>even break it down into functions.
>                                                
>  
>
>>As an example, I have asserted that EverQuest plays better for me on
>>Mandrake 9.2, WineX than it does on Windows XP Pro or Home.  When we
>>discussed this (on an Everquest forum), I was unsure how to quantify why
>>this is true.  I would like to believe it is all WineX, but quite
>>honestly I can't bring myself to accept that as true.  I assume, there
>>would need to be a NTFS vs JFS comparison.  I assume there would need to
>>be a Linux vs MSWindows comparison.  I assume there would need to be an
>>accounting for (in Everquest context) of memory foot print models (OS
>>context) and the effects that would have on paging.
>>    
>>
>
>Firsly, quantify what you mean by "plays better".
>
>  
>
>>I have both Windows Prof with all the MS approved patches, etc.  You
>>could say I have an exemplary Out of the Box MS Windows installation.  I
>>also have a Mandrake 9.2 Linux with WineX.  They are both on the same
>>machine.  I would be more than willing/happy to run what ever
>>performance test you can design that would isolate WineX vs DirectX.  I
>>would find this most illuminating.  I am not sure I would be up for
>>testing the MS Windows Package vs the Linux Package though as that
>>sounds like a bit more work.
>>    
>>
>
>Why don't you run the Comanche 4 Benchmark?  With your dual-boot machine 
>we will be able to quantify the performance difference.  Even better if 
>you have a 128 MB GPU.  Remember to change glx_private.h to have a cache 
>size of 128, and don't forget to disable hardware shaders and sound.
>
>This is not a Linux vs. Windows show-down.  If TG wishes they can move 
>this discussion to the Beta Testers forum, and perhaps allow me access to 
>the discussion even though I am not a Beta Tester.  Maybe create a new 
>forum for performance testers.
>
>Nadav Frum
>----------
>
>  
>