Re: X.org performance?
On Mon, 20 Sep 2004 17:56:52 +0200 Benjamin Walkenhorst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hello, > > On Mon, 20 Sep 2004 19:40:30 +0530 > Subhro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > cat /etc/make.conf > > > PERL_VER=5.8.2 > PERL_VERSION=5.8.2 > PERL_ARCH=mach > NOPERL=yo > NO_PERL=yo > NO_PERL_WRAPPER=yo > > CPUTYPE=athlon-mp > > CFLAGS+= -O2 -pipe > X_WINDOW_SYSTEM=xorg > > > But like I said, I think I chose the wrong words - > X.org does not perform poorly, it's just that it sometimes will > use lots of CPU, and I am under the impression it does even more so > than XFree did. > Or is it just my perception kidding me? Try reworking a lot of thinks with out the -O2 flag. I've seen massive breakage caused by them, with little or no noticeable speed gain. ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: X.org performance?
On Tue, 21 Sep 2004 00:56:28 +0530 Subhro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > CFLAGS+= -O2 -pipe > > X_WINDOW_SYSTEM=xorg > > make this CFLAGS=-O -pipe > > -O2 is known to create more problem than it solves Thank you very much! I'm going to try rebuilding X.org as soon as I find the time... > > Regards > S. Kind regards, Benjamin -- If cars had improved at [the computer industry's] rate, a Rolls Royce would now cost 10 dollars and get a billion miles per gallon. (Unfortunately, it would probably also have 200-page manual telling how to open the door.) -- Andrew Tanenbaum, "Introduction To Distributed Systems" ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: X.org performance?
On Mon, 20 Sep 2004 17:56:52 +0200, Benjamin Walkenhorst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hello, > > On Mon, 20 Sep 2004 19:40:30 +0530 > Subhro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > cat /etc/make.conf > > > PERL_VER=5.8.2 > PERL_VERSION=5.8.2 > PERL_ARCH=mach > NOPERL=yo > NO_PERL=yo > NO_PERL_WRAPPER=yo > > CPUTYPE=athlon-mp > > CFLAGS+= -O2 -pipe > X_WINDOW_SYSTEM=xorg make this CFLAGS=-O -pipe -O2 is known to create more problem than it solves > > But like I said, I think I chose the wrong words - > X.org does not perform poorly, it's just that it sometimes will > use lots of CPU, and I am under the impression it does even more so than > XFree did. > Or is it just my perception kidding me? This could be -O2 Regards S. -- Subhro Sankha Kar School of Information Technology Block AQ-13/1 Sector V ZIP 700091 India ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: X.org performance?
Benjamin Walkenhorst said: > Especially using AcroRead burns cycles without end. This has always been the case for me with the Unix version of Acrobat Reader, regardless of what X server it's running on or even the OS. -- Charles Ulrich System Administrator Ideal Solution - http://www.idealso.com ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: X.org performance?
Hello, On Mon, 20 Sep 2004 19:40:30 +0530 Subhro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > cat /etc/make.conf PERL_VER=5.8.2 PERL_VERSION=5.8.2 PERL_ARCH=mach NOPERL=yo NO_PERL=yo NO_PERL_WRAPPER=yo CPUTYPE=athlon-mp CFLAGS+= -O2 -pipe X_WINDOW_SYSTEM=xorg But like I said, I think I chose the wrong words - X.org does not perform poorly, it's just that it sometimes will use lots of CPU, and I am under the impression it does even more so than XFree did. Or is it just my perception kidding me? Kind regards, Benjamin -- If cars had improved at [the computer industry's] rate, a Rolls Royce would now cost 10 dollars and get a billion miles per gallon. (Unfortunately, it would probably also have 200-page manual telling how to open the door.) -- Andrew Tanenbaum, "Introduction To Distributed Systems" ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: X.org performance?
cat /etc/make.conf Regards S. On Sat, 18 Sep 2004 18:39:53 +0200, Benjamin Walkenhorst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hello, > > On Sat, 18 Sep 2004 11:01:25 -0500 > Josh Paetzel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Runs like a champ. > > Good for you. =) > I'm not really saying it doesn't run sufficiently - or if I was, I > didn't mean to -, it's just that X.org is consuming large amounts of > cpu-time. > I mean, it's not like my system is getting slow, exactly, it's just > Xorg uses a lot of CPU, sometimes. > I mean, XFree did that, too, but I am under the impression that Xorg is > a little worse, in that respect. > > Or is it just my perception tricking me, while Xorg is not that > different from XFree, technically? > > > Josh Paetzel > > Kind regards, > > > Benjamin > ___ > [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" > -- Subhro Sankha Kar School of Information Technology Block AQ-13/1 Sector V ZIP 700091 India ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: X.org performance?
On Sun, 19 Sep 2004 01:43:22 +0200 [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Björn Lindström) wrote: > Benjamin Walkenhorst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > Or is it just my perception tricking me, while Xorg is not that > > different from XFree, technically? > > Is your configuration identical? Using certain modules can cost some > cycles, for instance, so if you also started using any of those with > your switch, that could explain your impression. Mmmh, I did not touch the configuration file at all. Haven't looked at it in a while, actually. I'll look there and try to disable unused/unneccessary modules. Thanks, Benjamin -- If cars had improved at [the computer industry's] rate, a Rolls Royce would now cost 10 dollars and get a billion miles per gallon. (Unfortunately, it would probably also have 200-page manual telling how to open the door.) -- Andrew Tanenbaum, "Introduction To Distributed Systems" ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: X.org performance?
Benjamin Walkenhorst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Or is it just my perception tricking me, while Xorg is not that > different from XFree, technically? Is your configuration identical? Using certain modules can cost some cycles, for instance, so if you also started using any of those with your switch, that could explain your impression. ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: X.org performance?
Hello, On Sat, 18 Sep 2004 11:01:25 -0500 Josh Paetzel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Runs like a champ. Good for you. =) I'm not really saying it doesn't run sufficiently - or if I was, I didn't mean to -, it's just that X.org is consuming large amounts of cpu-time. I mean, it's not like my system is getting slow, exactly, it's just Xorg uses a lot of CPU, sometimes. I mean, XFree did that, too, but I am under the impression that Xorg is a little worse, in that respect. Or is it just my perception tricking me, while Xorg is not that different from XFree, technically? > Josh Paetzel Kind regards, Benjamin ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: X.org performance?
On Saturday 18 September 2004 09:57, Benjamin Walkenhorst wrote: > Hello everyone, > > I am using FreeBSD 5.2.1-RELEASE on a dual AthlonMP 2400+ with > 512MB RAM, 60GB of IDE HDD (UDMA100) and a GeForce 4200Ti. 5.2.1-RELEASE-p9 Dual Athlon 2400 MP 768 Meg DDR 80 gig Western Digital 7200 RPM Geforce 4 4200 TI nv driver Fluxbox on Xorg 6.7.0 Runs like a champ. Josh Paetzel ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
X.org performance?
Hello everyone, I am using FreeBSD 5.2.1-RELEASE on a dual AthlonMP 2400+ with 512MB RAM, 60GB of IDE HDD (UDMA100) and a GeForce 4200Ti. I recently switched over X.org. After some minor hassles I actually got it to work. =) However, I *kind of feel* like performance has become worse. Especially using AcroRead burns cycles without end. But, say, switching desktops (I'm using WindowMaker) with maximized windows on them also hits the CPU considerably. ;-? Does anyone experience similar 'problems'? (I mean, it's not like my system wasn't working or something) Is there any hope this might get better with coming versions? I am using the 'nv' driver, not nVidia's. I tried the nVidia driver under Linux, once, and it made my system rather unstable. ;-/ Thanks for any hints, kind regards, Benjamin ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
