On Saturday 25 February 2006 18:50, Bo Andresen wrote: > On Saturday 25 February 2006 00:36, Benno Schulenberg wrote: > > But it's working now. So tell us how many frames glxgears is doing > > now, with and without radeon. :) > > Actually the results using dri is worse than the results without dri in > terms of frame rates. Without dri I get something like 250 FPS. With dri I > get something like 228 FPS. The great difference though is when looking at > the X cpu usage. glxgears uses around 0.5 % with or without dri. But > without dri X uses 92% of the cpu resources. With dri X uses between 0.5 > and 1% cpu. So obviously dri is preferable... ;)
Either something is seriously wrong with my settings somehow or x11-drm is really crappy. A have no idea.. Fact is yesterday I was forces to boot back in to my previous kernel since the one I created for x11-drm (i.e. with dri disabled in the kernel configuration) failed me. The previous kernel had dri compiled as modules and I have never had direct rendering working with it... until now.. I am very surprised by this but it turns out direct rendering is working now with the kernel modules. And the performance is quite a bit better than before: ~ $ glxinfo | grep dir direct rendering: Yes ~ $ glxgears 6057 frames in 5.0 seconds = 1211.400 FPS 7273 frames in 5.0 seconds = 1454.600 FPS 7268 frames in 5.0 seconds = 1453.600 FPS 7275 frames in 5.0 seconds = 1455.000 FPS 7274 frames in 5.0 seconds = 1454.800 FPS 7275 frames in 5.0 seconds = 1455.000 FPS 7268 frames in 5.0 seconds = 1453.600 FPS 7275 frames in 5.0 seconds = 1455.000 FPS 7272 frames in 5.0 seconds = 1454.400 FPS 7201 frames in 5.0 seconds = 1440.200 FPS 7259 frames in 5.0 seconds = 1451.800 FPS 7270 frames in 5.0 seconds = 1454.000 FPS 7272 frames in 5.0 seconds = 1454.400 FPS I am clueless as to why this is working now when it wasn't before... -- Bo Andresen -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
