OS/2, eCS & ArcaOS - Technical > Hardware

OS/2 Video Performance

(1/4) > >>

Neil Waldhauer:
People ask me what video card to buy to run OS/2. I usually tell them to run the graphics built into the motherboard. For some time, Intel CPU have graphics built in. This is an inherently better design than having a separate video card.

I ran the SysBench benchmark program on my Quebopeep (Lenovo M93p Tower computer) with Intel Core-i7 CPU connected to the monitor with a standard VGA cable. I installed the standard AMD Radeon HD8490 PCIe-16 video card with 1 GB video RAM. The graphics card has no VGA, but I used a DisplayPort to VGA adapter to connect the monitor. Here is how the two graphics setups compared.

Intel HDA Graphics
PM Graphics Marks: 268
DIVE Marks: 18062

AMD Radeon HD8490
PM Graphics Marks: 127
DIVE Marks: 2917

So you can see that the high performance video card is between 2 and 6 times slower than the built-in graphics on the motherboard.

Dave Yeo:
OTOH, My old I5-2400's built in graphics gives,
PMGraphics score 190
Dive Marks 7511


--- Quote from: Neil Waldhauer on October 21, 2021, 01:47:28 am ---Intel HDA Graphics
PM Graphics Marks: 268
DIVE Marks: 18062

--- End quote ---

For OS/2  "DIVE -> Video bus bandwidth" is more significant. Since built-in graphics have bigger VBB  all other marks are also bigger for built-in. In most cases built-in graphics is even faster then HW solutions supported by SNAP (ATI x850).

Dariusz Piatkowski:
Interesting question Neil...the hardware has certainly gotten significantly faster, but our software has not kept up, so the challenge is in deciding what hardware speed increases translate to better OS/2 performance.

Here is an example, my old ATI X850 XT PE gives me the following results:

PM Graphics Marks: 1159
DIVE Marks: 2139

...and based on these hardware results, how does that translate to human perception of faster/slower screen updates?

So specifically, if the new hardware is so much faster, given that the current video drivers do not provide hardware acceleration, is it worth moving from something like the aged SNAP drivers (where I've got my two monitors) to a single screen, because all other applications become blazing fast?

Perhaps it is, but that would have to be driven by something like FF, Thunderbird, PMView, VLC and others working much quicker.

I have yet to see this. In fact, the combo of my old ATI X850 XT PE hardware and the supporting SNAP drivers will have to be pried out of my cold dead hands before I give up the functionality of that dual screen!!!  8)

Sigurd Fastenrath:
My own build Thinkpad 25/2:

PM Graphic Marks: 58.294
Dive Marks: 7336.388


[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

Go to full version