[Bug 33318] New: 3DMark2001 SE: upgrading to Wine 1.5.27 reduces performance score by 20%
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=33318 Bug #: 33318 Summary: 3DMark2001 SE: upgrading to Wine 1.5.27 reduces performance score by 20% Product: Wine Version: 1.5.27 Platform: x86-64 OS/Version: Linux Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: -unknown AssignedTo: wine-bugs(a)winehq.org ReportedBy: vernetzt(a)mail.ua Classification: Unclassified Created attachment 44068 --> http://bugs.winehq.org/attachment.cgi?id=44068 Screenshots with example scores for Wine 1.5.27 and Wine 1.4.1 I'm running Linux Mint 13 x86_64 with kernel 3.5.0-26-generic and X.Org Server 1.13.0 on my laptop (ThinkPad X61s with Intel X3100 graphics, see [1]). Before upgrading Wine from 1.4.1 version to version 1.5.27 using the Ubuntu Wine PPA [2] I decided to run 3DMark to see if the upgrade affected performance. I then ran 3DMark after upgrading Wine. The result was an unexpected, consistent 20% drop in the score. The scores (averaged from three trials) were as follows: Wine 1.4.1: 2614 Wine 1.5.27: 2080 I'll see if this can be reproduced on a machine with a different graphics chip. [1] http://www.thinkwiki.org/wiki/Category:X61s [2] http://www.ubuntuupdates.org/ppa/wine?dist=precise -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=33318 Danyil Bohdan <vernetzt(a)mail.ua> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Attachment #44068|0 |1 is obsolete| | --- Comment #1 from Danyil Bohdan <vernetzt(a)mail.ua> 2013-04-02 13:15:41 CDT --- Created attachment 44069 --> http://bugs.winehq.org/attachment.cgi?id=44069 Screenshots with (correct) example scores for Wine 1.5.27 and Wine 1.4.1 Oh snap, I swapped 1.5.27 and 1.4.1 windows in the previous image. Again, 1.5.27 actually gets a _lower_ score. Sorry. -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=33318 Austin English <austinenglish(a)gmail.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Keywords| |download, performance, | |regression Component|-unknown |directx-d3d --- Comment #2 from Austin English <austinenglish(a)gmail.com> 2013-04-02 16:52:48 CDT --- I suppose you could run a regression test, though I doubt one single patch affected things that badly.. -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=33318 André H. <nerv(a)dawncrow.de> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |nerv(a)dawncrow.de, | |stefan(a)codeweavers.com --- Comment #3 from André H. <nerv(a)dawncrow.de> 2013-04-02 19:32:49 CDT --- Adding Stefan as he does gaming benchmarks on Wine -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=33318 --- Comment #4 from Stefan Dösinger <stefan(a)codeweavers.com> 2013-04-02 23:58:57 CDT --- There have been some ups and downs over the years, but I think the major performance regressions should be fixed. I'm afraid I'll have to ask you to run a regression test over all those Wine versions. -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=33318 --- Comment #5 from Danyil Bohdan <vernetzt(a)mail.ua> 2013-04-03 11:44:38 CDT --- I ran 3DMark2001 SE on a work machine today, a desktop PC with an Nvidia GeForce GTS 250 graphics card running Linux Mint 13 LTS with kernel 3.2.0-39-generic, X.Org Server 1.11.3 and nouveau drivers (reporting as "Gallium 0.4 on NVCF"). The difference in performance is considerably smaller but it is still there. Due to the lack of time I was only able to perform a single trial for each version. The scores were as follows: Wine 1.4.1: 10664 Wine 1.5.27: 9375 I'm not sure when and if I'll be able to test each patch version for this regression, though. -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=33318 --- Comment #6 from Danyil Bohdan <vernetzt(a)mail.ua> 2013-04-03 11:47:26 CDT --- Created attachment 44077 --> http://bugs.winehq.org/attachment.cgi?id=44077 GeForce GTS 250/nouveau scores for Wine 1.5.27 and Wine 1.4.1 -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=33318 --- Comment #7 from Austin English <austinenglish(a)gmail.com> 2013-04-03 19:52:04 CDT --- With nvidia binary drivers and a GTX 480, the difference between 1.4 and 1.527 was 1%. Seems to be mesa. -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=33318 --- Comment #8 from Stefan Dösinger <stefan(a)codeweavers.com> 2013-04-04 01:17:18 CDT --- I have 3 systems performing automated performance tracking on a Radeon X1600 (r300g), Radeon HD 5770 (r600g) and Geforce 7600 (nvidia binary). Data is available here: http://openbenchmarking.org/result/1304031-STEF-WINE15222&track_view=400 (r300g) http://openbenchmarking.org/result/1304037-STEF-WINE15299&track_view=400 (r600g) http://openbenchmarking.org/result/1304031-FO-WINE1524915&track_view=400 (nvidia, new) http://openbenchmarking.org/result/1302087-FO-WINE1523835&track_view=400 You have to read the results right to left, and the graphs are a bit of a mess. r300g spotted a small performance drop in 3DMark2k1 around Wine 1.4. r600g was switched from fglrx to r600g at some point, screwing up performance comparisons. Furthermore the r600g results are unreadable because the website is confused - download the raw XML and put it into Libreoffice or gnuplot or something. The nvidia box was upgraded from some ancient ubuntu to a modern arch a few test revisions back, which broke the link between the old and new results and caused a ~5% performance drop. Unfortunately the old results are unreadable as well because of one misguided test result :-( . I really have to nag Michael Larabel about that... -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=33318 --- Comment #9 from Danyil Bohdan <vernetzt(a)mail.ua> 2013-04-04 04:17:23 CDT --- Created attachment 44086 --> http://bugs.winehq.org/attachment.cgi?id=44086 Drop in Radeon X1600 (r300g) score in version 1.5.4 Stefan, I found a big drop in your benchmark results for r300g between Wine 1.5.3 and Wine 1.5.4. The 3DMark2001 score goes from 5445 down to 4654. Unlike the score in 3DMark2000, which drops from 6903 to 2247 in the same release but then rises to 8225 in 1.5.19, it never seems to recover. See the attached image. -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=33318 --- Comment #10 from Stefan Dösinger <stefan(a)codeweavers.com> 2013-04-04 05:30:20 CDT --- Oh right, this just looks so small because of the big one-time spike. I really wish this website had a way to remove broken results... Once upon a time I bisected the 3Dmark2000 regression and ended up with a8a201cf61b39f79be980c4f193905bf8c0276c4. This patch shouldn't have an effect on 3DMark 2001 because the drop in 2000 was a bug in ddraw.dll, which was fixed by a61f68fc5ab67e9c08665bd1861d6811be42d30f. Nevertheless, you could try to disable GL_ARB_map_buffer_range in directx.c (just remove it from the extension table at the top). If that helps, we have a pointer in the right direction. -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=33318 --- Comment #11 from Rico <kgbricola(a)web.de> 2013-04-04 08:38:21 CDT --- I got the following with r600g (HD 4350 - RV710): 29893d81621b50e3acca1f2c34767867a9256ecb^ (wine 1.5.3 fast): 5400 29893d81621b50e3acca1f2c34767867a9256ecb (wine 1.5.4 slow): 4300 1.5.27: 4000 29893d81621b50e3acca1f2c34767867a9256ecb is the first bad commit commit 29893d81621b50e3acca1f2c34767867a9256ecb Author: Henri Verbeet <hverbeet(a)codeweavers.com> Date: Wed May 2 21:47:58 2012 +0200 wined3d: Determine index buffer location based on vertex buffer locations. :040000 040000 fc5dd836116dec3047a41fe7b28c22d4ef4261c8 72a5445b837c0fa479e611f985543f319d528c0a M dlls -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=33318 --- Comment #12 from Henri Verbeet <hverbeet(a)gmail.com> 2013-04-04 09:39:19 CDT --- Is it drawing pre-transformed vertices a lot, or e.g. hitting drawStridedSlow() for some other reason? The buffer_get_sysmem() in there is potentially slower if the index buffer was moved to VRAM. In general I don't think 3DMark 2000 or 2001 or particularly interesting benchmarks for current hardware though. -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=33318 --- Comment #13 from Danyil Bohdan <vernetzt(a)mail.ua> 2013-04-04 10:13:53 CDT --- Commenting out GL_ARB_map_buffer_range in dlls/wined3d/directx.c improves the average score on my X61s from 2080 to 2218. This is in the latest version (Wine 1.5.27-127-ga62b767, git commit a62b7679356abde12a0d4c86926d010099d1393b). -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching all bug changes.
https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=33318 Austin English <austinenglish(a)gmail.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Regression SHA1| |29893d81621b50e3acca1f2c347 | |67867a9256ecb -- Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=33318 --- Comment #14 from Ken Sharp <imwellcushtymelike(a)gmail.com> --- Any improvement in Wine 1.7.45 or later? -- Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=33318 Stefan Dösinger <stefandoesinger(a)gmx.at> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|stefan(a)codeweavers.com |stefandoesinger(a)gmx.at -- Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=33318 winetest(a)luukku.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |winetest(a)luukku.com --- Comment #15 from winetest(a)luukku.com --- (In reply to Danyil Bohdan from comment #13)
Commenting out GL_ARB_map_buffer_range in dlls/wined3d/directx.c improves the average score on my X61s from 2080 to 2218. This is in the latest version (Wine 1.5.27-127-ga62b767, git commit a62b7679356abde12a0d4c86926d010099d1393b).
The commit doesn't seem to revert anymore. What do you actually comment out? I found this from source /* GL_ARB_map_buffer_range and GL_APPLE_flush_buffer_range provide the same * functionality. Prefer the ARB extension */ gl_info->supported[APPLE_FLUSH_BUFFER_RANGE] = FALSE; Is this actually fixed already? I got a result of 25997 Got the 3dmark from here https://www.techpowerup.com/downloads/285/futuremark-3dmark-2001-free-versio... -- Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=33318 --- Comment #16 from Henri Verbeet <hverbeet(a)gmail.com> --- I have patches that bring the score up to slightly above the one for 1.4.1 on my hardware (AMD CYPRESS, Mesa 13.0.2). Unfortunately those won't make it into the 2.0 release. -- Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=33318 --- Comment #17 from Henri Verbeet <hverbeet(a)gmail.com> --- Is this still an issue with current git? -- Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=33318 --- Comment #18 from winetest(a)luukku.com --- (In reply to Henri Verbeet from comment #17)
Is this still an issue with current git?
I got a lot higher number now. 29478 compared to 25997. Run the test only once now and then. -- Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=33318 Stefan Dösinger <stefandoesinger(a)gmx.at> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED --- Comment #19 from Stefan Dösinger <stefandoesinger(a)gmx.at> --- I've benchmarked this app on my MacBookPro10,1 running Linux: 92671487050dfe0d377eb0248b9d458e7156e3ba (the commit before the regression): 2880x1800: 19109 3dmarks 640x480: 42464 Wine 2.0: 2880x1800: 17025 3dmarks 640x480: 37168 Wine 2.0-348 (sorry, forgot to write down the exact SHA1): 2880x1800: 19421 3dmarks 640x480: 40877 I'll call it fixed. I suspect afb2aa2512d4c5ffa7256ce5137bc2c142a5d065 fixed it. I will confirm this and set the fix SHA1 once I have done so. There is still a difference in the CPU limited case (42464 -> 40877 3dmarks). -- Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=33318 Stefan Dösinger <stefandoesinger(a)gmx.at> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Fixed by SHA1| |afb2aa2512d4c5ffa7256ce5137 | |bc2c142a5d065 --- Comment #20 from Stefan Dösinger <stefandoesinger(a)gmx.at> --- I can confirm that afb2aa2512d4c5ffa7256ce5137bc2c142a5d065 fixed this. -- Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=33318 Alexandre Julliard <julliard(a)winehq.org> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|RESOLVED |CLOSED --- Comment #21 from Alexandre Julliard <julliard(a)winehq.org> --- Closing bugs fixed in 2.2. -- Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=33318 Michael Stefaniuc <mstefani(a)redhat.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Target Milestone|--- |2.0.x -- Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=33318 Michael Stefaniuc <mstefani(a)winehq.org> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Target Milestone|2.0.x |--- --- Comment #22 from Michael Stefaniuc <mstefani(a)winehq.org> --- Removing the 2.0.x milestone from bugs included in 2.0.5. -- Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
participants (1)
-
wine-bugs＠winehq.org