aceman <> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
             Status|NEW                         |RESOLVED
         Resolution|---                         |WORKSFORME

--- Comment #8 from aceman <> ---
(In reply to aceman from comment #7)
> (In reply to Michel Dänzer from comment #6)
> > > But on such a low card, wouldn't EXA be always faster than anything 
> > > openGL?
> > 
> > No, why? glamor is generally on par with EXA and for some operations such as
> > text rendering (which is among the most important in practice) significantly
> > faster. If there are any cases where glamor is significantly slower than EXA
> > for you, please file bug reports against the Server/Acceleration/glamor
> > component.
> So far I've seen glxgears fullscreen (full HD) does not manage the normal
> 60fps that EXA does. With glamor it is like 30fps. But I need to determine
> if it isn't caused by Tearfree.

After the upgrade mentioned below, glamor+tearfree also manages 60fps now.

> > > Also of interest could be that the kernel is 64bit, but all the userland
> > > ( and mesa too) are 32bit.
> > 
> > Any chance you could try if the problem also occurs with 64-bit Xorg?
> That would require upgrading the whole distro. But I have that in planning
> in the next 1-2 months.

I have upgraded the distro to full 64bit now (kernel and apps). That involved a
forced upgrade of KDE desktop to 4.0. That one has the compositor set to OpenGL
3.1 .

I haven't seen the intermittent hangs with this upgraded system ever.
Everything in the desktop is smooth and performs fine (except real OpenGL apps
of course, due to the low GPU:)). I tried both glamor and EXA. Maybe KDE 4 is
using the GPU more properly.

So I've settled on glamor, as you say it is the way forward.

Let's close the bug until I can reproduce it again. Thanks for the cooperation.

You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
xorg-driver-ati mailing list

Reply via email to