On Wed, 25 Mar 2009 17:37:22 -0500 DRC <dcomman...@users.sourceforge.net> wrote:
> > In general, the JPEG encoding is still significantly slower in TigerVNC > than in TurboVNC (by more than a factor of 2.) As you can see, this is > almost entirely attributable to an increased encoding time on the server > (about 80 ms per frame instead of 40.) I will work on improving this > over the next few days. > The numbers are a bit confusing. TigerVNC is given a lower framerate, but it does so with less CPU. So what is keeping it from outputing the frames at the same rate? Is the "deferred update" setting the same in both implementations? -- Pierre Ossman OpenSource-based Thin Client Technology System Developer Telephone: +46-13-21 46 00 Cendio AB Web: http://www.cendio.com
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________ Tigervnc-devel mailing list Tigervnc-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/tigervnc-devel
