Slashdot Mirror


NVIDIA Performance On Linux, Solaris, & Vista

AtomBOB suggests a Phoronix review comparing the performance of a Quadro graphics card on Windows Vista Ultimate, Solaris Express Developer, and Ubuntu Linux. The graphics card used was a NVIDIA Quadro FX 1700 mid-range workstation part. The cross-platform benchmark used was SPECViewPerf 9.0 from SPEC. Quoting Phoronix: "Using the Quadro FX1700 512MB and the latest display drivers, Windows Vista wasn't the decisive winner, but the loser... Ubuntu 8.04 Alpha 5 with the 169.12 driver had overall produced the fastest results within SPECViewPerf. In only three benchmarks had Solaris Express Developer 1/08 outpaced Ubuntu Linux, but with two of these tests the results were almost identical.""

17 of 231 comments (clear)

  1. What is the difference? by moreati · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I've wondered this a while. What is the difference between the gaming cards and the workstation cards from Nvidia and ATI? Do they just have better DACs? Certified driver support for business apps? Or is the GPU itself somehow?

    Alex

    1. Re:What is the difference? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      The difference between the Quadros and the consumer cards used to come down to hardware OpenGL overlay support, if I remember right.

    2. Re:What is the difference? by sxeraverx · · Score: 5, Informative

      They have different priorities. Gaming cards try to keep the framerate up by degrading image (not showing every single texture, e.g.), if need be, while cards for stuff like CAD and the like lower the framerate to show every detail requested of them.

    3. Re:What is the difference? by alex4u2nv · · Score: 5, Informative

      I had the very same question, and this article from Nvidia turned out to be very enlightening.
      Quadro vs FX -- http://www.nvidia.com/object/quadro_geforce.html

      According to the article, there are some major differences between the two architectures. Where features are programmed either at the hardware layer (quadro), or at the driver layer.

    4. Re:What is the difference? by LoRdTAW · · Score: 4, Informative

      Gaming cards try to keep the framerate up by degrading image (not showing every single texture, e.g.), if need be

      Thats called culling and it is implemented in software, not hardware.

      If I remember correctly there was a simple hack posted on Toms Hardware a while back for converting a Radeon to a FireGL. You simply solder an SMT resistor to a certain trace on the chip package and it pulls a line low. That line actually signals the BIOS to report the card as a Radeon or a FireGL. So in essence the Radeon and FireGL are the EXACT SAME CARD! The only difference is the FireGL drivers look for a Radeon reporting itself as a FireGL. This keeps production simple and even the video card BIOS versions the same.

      The FireGL and Quattro cards come with optimized drivers for specific 3D programs like AutoCAD, Maya, 3DSMax, Light Wave etc. There is a drop down box that lets you select the program your using and it loads the finely tuned driver for that program.

  2. Why be suprised? by EmbeddedJanitor · · Score: 4, Insightful
    It isn't just the code that impacts performance, but the driver architecture too.

    Vista has a new driver architecture and it is goiing to take some time for MS to improve the graphic subsystem performance. It will also take NVidia a while to optimise their code for Vista.

    Even then, the Vista architecture might just have some inherent issues that are hard to code around.

    --
    Engineering is the art of compromise.
  3. Re:OpenGL? by glob · · Score: 5, Informative

    http://www.opengl.org/pipeline/article/vol003_9/

    "Some have suggested that OpenGL performance on Windows Vista is poor compared to Windows XP. This is not the case."

    --
    nostrils
  4. Re:Surprised.. by recoiledsnake · · Score: 4, Informative

    It's mostly FUD. See here (read all three parts)

    --
    This space for rent.
  5. Re:ws cards by andersbergh · · Score: 4, Informative

    There's definitely a different between say, 30 and 100 fps: http://100fps.com/how_many_frames_can_humans_see.htm

  6. Re:the difference does not matter. by recoiledsnake · · Score: 4, Informative

    What's significant here is that Windows has lost it's graphics crown. DRM and bloat or industry defection for the same reasons, we all know the root cause. Free software is simply cleaner and works better. If the ability to run DirectX 9 under Wine was not enough to move gamers to Linux, this is. Things can only go downhill for Microsoft now. Free drivers will be even cleaner and the performance gap will widen. From TFA:

    Then in September, we had looked at NVIDIA's multi-GPU performance under Linux and Windows when running two GeForce 8600GT 256MB graphics cards in SLI (Scalable Link Interface). Windows XP and the ForceWare driver had outpaced Linux in every gaming test we conducted. The drivers have a lot more influence than you give it credit for.
    --
    This space for rent.
  7. Just wait - windows graphic will reclain the crown by skeptictank · · Score: 5, Funny

    I have it on good authority that the next Windows Driver Model will run Crysis on 3 SLI 8800GTs and render it in 8-bit color at 640x480 resolution at over 50 FPS! So take that you Linux/Unix hippy beatnik freaks!

  8. Re:Headline is misleading! by kc8apf · · Score: 4, Informative

    That's interesting. Considering that I am a developer for the CHUD Tool (no quotes) and I do performance analysis and benchmarking for a living, I don't think they did anything wrong. Things that aren't running on a system rarely affect run-time performance. Going from a distribution like Ubuntu to Debian just removes a bunch of things from disk, but those things have zero impact on the metric being measured. For Vista, it might make a difference if the version used was shown to have less idle activity, but in practice, you want to compare what a typical user would be running. So, since the OSs chosen reflect typical users, the data is perfectly valid for a comparison between them. If you want absolute performance numbers, then you need to start tuning the OSs before you run the tests. Things like disabling daemons or services and unplugging network cables can cause measurable differences in some benchmarks.

    As for the CHUD Tools, they are completely inert unless you happen to be running one of the tools and even then, it isn't likely to cause any significant difference. The kernel extensions used by the CHUD Tools are designed to do absolutely nothing until they are asked to. If you are running a Time Profile in Shark, it will have some impact, but it will be limited to 1-2%.

    --
    kc8apf
  9. Re:True, but... by ozmanjusri · · Score: 4, Funny
    This just gave me a bunch of confusing text:

    No, you've just accidentally switched to Firefox on Slashdot.

    Wait a few moments, the cognitive dissonance will pass and you'll be up and trolling like a champ again.

    --
    "I've got more toys than Teruhisa Kitahara."
  10. Re:the difference does not matter. by bigpicture · · Score: 5, Interesting

    You think? I remember and have followed a similar kind of scenario, it started over 30 years ago when I was younger. It went something like this: GM was the Biggest of the Big. Had a market share greater than all other automobile manufactures combined. Had revenues higher than the GNP of 90% of the worlds nations. etc. etc. etc. They developed this Business Model called "Planned Product Obsolescence". (Your vehicle was planned to be scrap in about 10 years or before.)

    There was also another little automobile manufacturer called Toyota with a very small market share, they made crappy little vehicles, used to be called "piss pots". They had a Business Model called "Continuous Improvement". There was a historic event in 2007 that went quietly unnoticed, Toyota surpassed GM in world market share and revenues.

  11. Re:the difference does not matter. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    You argument is flawed. You're arguing because windows is better known it will always
    have the largest market share. The same could have been said about IBM pcs, or lotus 1-2-3,
    Borland's compiler suite, or wordstar word processor.

    The fact of the matter that next winner has to start out small because it gets to grab
    marketshare. Google is an excellent counterexample to your argument. They were just 2-3 people
    in 1998 working on a master's thesis project when Yahoo and AOL were the big thing. And where
    is AOL now? How much marketshare does Yahoo have for search engines?

    Personally I think that Dell selling preinstalled Linux boxes in the U.S. was the first toll
    of the death bell for Microsoft. Then walmart selling out the green PCs was the next tolling of
    the bell, and now that Asus is selling Eepc laptops I think is the first nail in the coffin for Microsoft.

    Will Microsoft die overnight? No. Will they go out with a bang? No. I think they will go out with
    a whimper within the next 5 years unless they somehow manage to reverse their course like they
    did in 1995 and embrace the fact that GPL software is here to stay and start using it.

  12. Re:the difference does not matter. by glitch23 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I bet if I randomly took 100 people off the street, put them in a room and asked what Linux was, maybe 5 at the most would have an idea, if I asked what Windows was, at the very least they could tell me it was made by Microsoft and came with their computer. Linux distros do not have the marketing capabilities that Microsoft does, and in a world where people think things should get easier to use overtime, Linux will not take even 10% of the desktop marketshare.

    These are the same people who when asked what kind of computer they have answer with "black". Also, not many people can associate the maker of the softare they use with the actual software application. You ask them which browser they use and they will say "I don't know. I just click on the blue 'e'." despite the fact that the title bar says "Internet Explorer" 100% of the time the application is open. So I hope you don't expect them to know Microsoft created it if they don't even know its name.

    As far as marketing capabilities, I hardly ever see a Microsoft commercial. When I do they don't ever specify any particular product in the commercial. How does that really sell Windows or Office? All the marketing seems to happen behind the scenes from the point of view of the end consumer using deals that happen between OEMs and Microsoft salespeople.

    --
    this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom. -- Lincoln, Gettysburg Address
  13. Re:the difference does not matter. by pizzach · · Score: 4, Funny

    History has shown that the higher quality product does not always win. But that is why Linux is destined for greatness. We have both the higher quality product and the lower quality product, GNOME and KDE! There is no way we can lose with this monopoly or great-suckiness.

    *I think I just hemorrhage about 5 mod points indirectly with this post at a poor attempt at humor
    --
    Once you start despising the jerks, you become one.