Brice Goglin wrote: > Helge Hafting wrote: > >> Minor severity as the driver works as intended. >> >> I find the low performance odd though. If the accelerator hardware >> is slower than VESA for some operations, then surely the unaccelerated VESA >> way could be used for those things. So it seems to me it doesn't >> need to be slower in any cases. >> >> >> My testcase is to play the game cuyo at levels 2 or 9. (package cuyo) >> This is a tetris-like 2D game. It updated the screen 10 times >> a second, and has a irritating failure mode: If it can't >> finish drawing in 1/10s, then it refuse to take input >> until the drawing queue clears. So it may break very noticeably >> when there is too much animation going on. >> >> Now, perhaps that isn't the best way to design a game, but >> it shows a performance problem. >> >> The ati driver (and the NV driver) easily falls into this trap when >> there is lots of animation in the cuyo window. The game >> becomes quite unplayable. >> >> This simply doesn't happen with the VESA driver. CPU load stays >> below 25% always. >> >> The processor in this case is a 2.4GHz pentium-M, >> lspci shows: >> 01:00.0 VGA compatible controller: ATI Technologies Inc Radeon RV100 QY >> [Radeon 7000/VE] >> >> Another machine with a pci radeon 9200 SE and a 1.8GHz opteron >> shows the same problem. >> >> A third machine with a 1.8Ghz core duo and a nvidia card has >> this problem too, but of course that is a different package >> > > Can you try with > Option "AccelMethod" "EXA" > in the Device section of your xorg.conf? > Thanks for the tip - this change made tremendous difference. Using the ATI driver, the game is now as snappy as VESA - and X probably respond better to bigger drawing jobs.
The EXA option solved my problem completely. :-) Helge Hafting _______________________________________________ xorg-driver-ati mailing list [email protected] http://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-driver-ati
