Josh Huber wrote: > > Michel Lanners <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > - Mach64/i386 without GATOS: no Xvideo (driver is broken); vlc uses 45% > > + 16% cpu (two 'consuming' threads); X uses 25% cpu. > > - Mach64/i386 with GATOS driver: Xvideo works, vlc uses 25% (other > > threads insignificant), X uses between 2% and 5% > > - Voodoo3/i386: Xvideo works, X around 25% and vlc around 30% (roughly) > > - Rage128/ppc: Xvideo works, X between 10% and 20%, rest consumed by > > vlc. > > > > The Mach64 is on a Dell laptop w/ Celeron 600, the Voodoo is a PIII/666 > > desktop, and the ppc is my TiBook/400. > > > > So the question is: why does X on the Dell use so little CPU, and why > > can't we achieve the same thing on ppc (the Voodoo was for comparison > > only)? > > The XVideo stuff for mach64 does not work on ppc in the current X,
It doesn't even have XVideo support yet. > and using the GATOS stuff helped immensely, although I still don't have > the performance on my Lombard to play DVDs, oh well. Before GATOS I > got about 55% frames deocded, after I get about 77% frames decoded. I > wonder if I'd be able to get a 23% increase, without altivec? seems > unlikely. Using DMA for the transfer _might_ make the difference, but there'd have to be DRI for mach64 first. > Oh yeah, I also pulled the endian related patch from the xfree source: Does that work in depth 16? -- Earthling Michel Dänzer (MrCooper) \ Debian GNU/Linux (powerpc) developer CS student, Free Software enthusiast \ XFree86 and DRI project member
