Low Passmark 2D Score on ARM SoC with Windows OS

[vijay]

Hello,

I executed the Passmark 2D Benchmark on the HW and the score is pretty low - 149 Points.

Here is the HW configuration under test -

SoC - ARM Based(ARCH64) with 8 Cores(3 CPU clusters with CPU Fmax of 2.1, 2.4 and 2.7 GHz)
GPU FMax - 849 MHz
OS - Windows 11
HW is headless (no display), using DP Display(External Display Monitor is connected over DP)

I did try the suggestions mentioned here - https://forums.passmark.com/performa...-for-a-slow-pc

I tried turning off G-Sync but could not find any way or option for G-Sync.

Could you please guide me to debug the low Passmark 2D Score?

Do you have any suggestions for me to try out?

How can i know which tests in 2D Benchmarks are having low points?

Appreciate your inputs.

Regards,
-Vijay

[David (PassMark)]

GPUs are sometime very weak in these ARM machines. Sometimes there are also compatibility issues with DirectX (Direct2D) and some of the subtests can't be run.

Did all the 2D tests actually run correctly?
What were the individual scores for each of the 2D tests?

[vijay]

Hello David,

Appreciate your prompt response.

Here is the individual scores for each of the 2D Tests -

Simple Vectors 9.0
Windows Interface 107
Image Rendering 8.2
PDF Rendering 41
Fonts and Text 177
Image Filters 281
Direct 2D 10
Direct 2D - SVG 16


Regarding -
"GPUs are sometime very weak in these ARM machines. Sometimes there are also compatibility issues with DirectX (Direct2D) and some of the subtests can't be run."
>> Do you have any suggestions for me to try out, like how I can improve the Passmark 2D Score and DirectX Issues?

We have a lot of traction for ARM Based Windows PC / Tablets. And it would be great if these issues are addressed / fixed.

Could you please provide any debug guidance?

Cheers,
-Vijay

[David (PassMark)]

I was thinking it might just be one or two bad results from the suite of 2D tests.
But they are pretty much all bad, some of them apocalyptically awful.

it would be great if these issues are addressed / fixed

Indeed it would be. But improving the GPU silicon and rewriting the video card device drivers for better performance isn't in our power.

I assume you already have the correct / best video card device drivers loaded for this ARM GPU?

[vijay]

oops!

How do we justify these test scores, is there any reference David?

Do we have reference numbers for Passmark 2D Scores with ARM SoC.

When I run these tests, does it generate any logs for me to check and debug. Where can i find details of these each tests and what APIs, call flow it exercise?

Thank you so much for your help and appreciate.

Cheers,
-Vijay

[David (PassMark)]

You haven't even mentioned the CPU & GPU model you are using. So there is really no possibility to saying if your results are normal or not for the hardware.

Here are the expected benchmark score for 2D for the ARM Snapdragon X Elite X1E84100 running Win11, for comparison
Simple Vectors 25
Windows Interface 160
Image Rendering 15
PDF Rendering 55
Fonts and Text 430
Image Filters 600
Direct 2D 38
Direct 2D - SVG 34

There is an help file included with the software that provides some details of the tests. To save you reading the Help file I have included the section below.
It is mostly the GDI, GDI+ and DirectX APIs. (i.e. the standard Windows graphics APIs)

[vijay]

Hello David,

Please refer below details -

OS - Windows 11

CPU
Qualcomm® QCS6490 SoC
- Arm® Cortex®-V8 processor
- Kryo Gold plus: high-performance core up to 2.7 GHz
- Kryo Gold: three high-performance cores @ 2.4 GHz
- Kryo Silver: four low-power cores @ 1.9 GHz


GPU
Adreno 643 GPU @ 812 MHz

Cheers,
-Vijay

[David (PassMark)]

I looked at a few other results for the QCS6490 CPU/GPU and their benchmarks seem to be around the same as what you measured. So pretty poor.

This chip was designed to be low powered for IoT applications. For example hand held terminals, building automation, etc.. And it is probably fine for those applications.

Performance seems to be similar to a 12 year old desktop CPU (something like the AMD FX-8350). It is probably a lot more power efficient, but I couldn't find the specs for power usage. I kind of doubt there are any tricks to turn the QCS6490 into a video processing powerhouse.