On Tuesday 16 February 2010 15:48:49 Radek Polak wrote: > On Monday 15 February 2010 19:33:56 Rui Miguel Silva Seabra wrote:
> I think that this is very unfortunate explanation. To me it looks like > somebody said that freerunner's graphics sucks and there is no way it will > ever be faster and it was taken as a fact. Graphics performance is better of what it seemed could be archieved at the beggining, but Glamo's bus slowness is not something "someone said", it's a fact. Also, qtopia (qtextended, qtmoko) do a lot less effects on graphics than enlightment, that's why it's faster. If you turn off shadows, transparency, etc, you can get shr graphics as fast as qtopia. If you don't believe me, you can try SHR's Neo Theme. You will see it's not X, but eyecandy what makes SHR slower than qtopia. You can search lists archives for several threads about this matter, it was spoken to death. >Now i just change a few kernel config options and few line patch (thanks to >Thomas White) and the graphics speed is very nice. In QVGA it can probably >match iPhone or any Android device. No, it can't, at least until we have an OpenGL driver. But it's true that using VGA resolution is a handicap for such a slow graphics chip, and it would be better QVGA for this hardware. Fact is that glamo is a graphics "decelerator". It's known that Neo1973 was faster than FreeRunner on graphics (even on VGA), despite of slower processor.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ Openmoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
