FC9 - S-L-O-W video

[Bill Davidsen]

Amadeus W.M. wrote:
> On Sat, 17 May 2008 09:03:15 -0400, Bill Davidsen wrote:
> 
>> Just an observation, on two machines which were perfectly usable with
>> FC8, after "upgrade" they are really nasty to use in terms of video.
>> Moving a windows leaves a comet trail of window outlines which take 1-2
>> seconds to clear, minimizing a window results in a trail of shrinking
>> outlines, the minimize takes seconds and a few seconds after that for
>> the outlines to fade.
>>
>> This feels like vista, in the names of cool features the video has been
>> made painfully slow. All under GNOME, I expect issues with the new KDE,
>> but if this is the "improved" X, the code or the default configuration
>> is aimed at either gamers with $500 video cards or people who like eye
>> candy and effects so much they want time to appreciate them.
>>
>> --
>> Bill Davidsen <davidsen at tmr.com>
>>    "We have more to fear from the bungling of the incompetent than from
>> the machinations of the wicked."  - from Slashdot
> 
> I'm having similar issues with video in F9. I have an onboard intel chip 
> that normally uses the i810 driver. I figured it's probably not using 
> acceleration and glxinfo showed DRI = no at one point, now when I run 
> glxinfo X crashes alltogether. However if I boot off the Live cd 
> everything is perfect. That's the weird thing. With the live cd there is 
> no /etc/X11/xorg.conf meaning that X uses builtin configuration for my 
> video chip and that works very well. I don't understand why the full-
> fledged F9 doesn't do the same. 
> 
> Also, if I boot in runlevel 5, sound works. In runlevel 3 it doesn't. 
> Yeah, and there's no sound configuration tool anymore. 
> 
> I'm downloading CentOS as we speak. 
> 
I got reasonable performance with 16 bit color instead of 24. The new X 
doesn't seem to know how to make any of my video work well, another 
machine with i965 chipset video is also dead slow at 24 bit. Both 
machines run fine on FC8, so I guess all the effort had gone into 
features, not performance for the people who aren't gamers and have low 
cost video (which used to work fine).

I see when I move a window in 24 bit color the CPU goes 100% busy as 
long as a move the Windows. At 16 bit iy takes about 30% of the CPU, 
more reasonable.

-- 
Bill Davidsen <davidsen at tmr.com>
   "We have more to fear from the bungling of the incompetent than from
the machinations of the wicked."  - from Slashdot