From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [212.224.123.68]) by lore.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6F59E1FF15E for ; Mon, 10 Nov 2025 16:29:35 +0100 (CET) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id CF2701A3F4; Mon, 10 Nov 2025 16:30:19 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <6f7c7e01-e7b0-467e-8f28-3c1c88583f4a@proxmox.com> Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2025 16:30:17 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird To: Thomas Lamprecht , Proxmox VE development discussion References: <20251110114032.125526-1-m.frank@proxmox.com> <34ee1ade-1fe2-42e1-8646-5103b9947588@proxmox.com> Content-Language: en-US From: Markus Frank In-Reply-To: <34ee1ade-1fe2-42e1-8646-5103b9947588@proxmox.com> X-Bm-Milter-Handled: 55990f41-d878-4baa-be0a-ee34c49e34d2 X-Bm-Transport-Timestamp: 1762788594942 X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.001 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address BAYES_00 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% DMARC_MISSING 0.1 Missing DMARC policy KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment SPF_HELO_NONE 0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record SPF_PASS -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record Subject: Re: [pve-devel] [PATCH qemu-server/pve-manager v1 0/2] add virtio-vga-gl Vulkan (venus) support X-BeenThere: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox VE development discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Reply-To: Proxmox VE development discussion Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Errors-To: pve-devel-bounces@lists.proxmox.com Sender: "pve-devel" On 2025-11-10 14:54, Thomas Lamprecht wrote: > Am 10.11.25 um 12:40 schrieb Markus Frank: >> To get an overview of the performance, see the benchmark below. >> >> supertuxkart (1.5) benchmark (default settings, vulkan, 1024x768): >> >> Host result (Granite Ridge integrated GPU): >> * Total frame count: 8488 >> * Total profiling time (ms): 38139 >> * Steady FPS: 92 >> * Mostly stable FPS: 137 >> * Typical FPS: 194 >> >> VM (host, 4 core, 8GiB) with venus (hostmem=8192M) result: >> * Total frame count: 3321 >> * Total profiling time (ms): 38130 >> * Steady FPS: 58 >> * Mostly stable FPS: 75 >> * Typical FPS: 86 >> > > Comparing with a benchmark in the VM with other displays would be also nice. > Most interesting would be the default (vga IIRC) and qxl (SPICE). I did, but I do not think the results are really comparable because all current display types use vulkan software rendering, which performs really badly. See below: VM virtio-gl (Vulkan, without venus, llvmpipe software rendering): * Total frame count: 762 * Total profiling time (ms): 260786 * Steady FPS: 1 * Mostly stable FPS: 2 * Typical FPS: 2 To make a more meaningful comparison, it would be better to use OpenGL with virtio-gl. This is the result I got in the same VM with virtio-gl and a similar supertuxkart benchmark using OpenGL instead of Vulkan: VM virtio-gl (OpenGL, virgl): * Total frame count: 2940 * Total profiling time (ms): 38128 * Steady FPS: 35 * Mostly stable FPS: 54 * Typical FPS: 77 OpenGL also requires software rendering with VGA and QXL. vga (OpenGL, software rendering): * Total frame count: 762 * Total profiling time (ms): 73867 * Steady FPS: 7 * Mostly stable FPS: 8 * Typical FPS: 10 qxl (OpenGL, software rendering): * Total frame count: 762 * Total profiling time (ms): 75797 * Steady FPS: 7 * Mostly stable FPS: 8 * Typical FPS: 9 > >> This benchmark showed no significant differences in performance between >> the various memory window sizes for venus. > > I probably would not expose them then for now. _______________________________________________ pve-devel mailing list pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel