No.  Doing my own double buffering gives me a 5 to 10X speedup when I have
an NVidia card (any type) and am using the Nvidia closed source driver.  I
am using the wall clock timer from my original example program (not g_timer)
so my numbers are not scaled the same as yours.

One computer I tried was a 2 year old Dell M90 Precision laptop running
Fedora 11.

I saw about 40 FPS.

After running the test, I noticed that it was using the NV driver.  I
installed the Nvidia driver and retested.  I saw 400 FPS. I made no other
changes except to go to run level 3 and back to install the driver.

Another computer was a 5 year old IBM T41 laptop with ATI video running
Ubuntu 9.10 using the open source driver.  I saw 10 FPS (unacceptable).  I
did not try the ATI drivers as I have had problems with them in the past.

Ideally, I would like to be able to update at at least 20-30 FPS (wall clock
time) even on old hardware like the IBM above.  I am sure I could do this
with OpenGL, but rather than try that right now, I am going to experiment
some more by making Xlib calls directly.

Bob


On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 6:17 AM, <[email protected]> wrote:

> On 2 February 2010 03:14, Robert Gibbs <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Conclusion: self implemented GdkPixmap helps only when the X server can
> use
> > certain optimizations from the graphics card.
>
> Or perhaps that's backwards: doing your own double-buffering can help
> if your X server does not support fast pixmap allocate/deallocate. It
> looks like this problem only happens with some older nvidia cards (is
> that right?)
>
> John
>
_______________________________________________
gtk-list mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-list

Reply via email to