From owner-freebsd-x11@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Apr 16 11:40:03 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: x11@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 930051065670 for ; Fri, 16 Apr 2010 11:40:03 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from onemda@gmail.com) Received: from mail-ww0-f54.google.com (mail-ww0-f54.google.com [74.125.82.54]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 23F8A8FC2A for ; Fri, 16 Apr 2010 11:40:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: by wwa36 with SMTP id 36so1521676wwa.13 for ; Fri, 16 Apr 2010 04:40:02 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:received:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=6GKl+ZvsJYUePZ9n7oa7/TMbdrnplNC1dnuGv4sn/TI=; b=kfaxg8CaE50ZYFaFdjRNEaJkedKaexfZz8Of9EAGv/E266jXGUf7764zFWZdm5jlLa I5K72MW/IuU3N2LdAH5vsTpaOfgOwiKzomDoXMlJgLmQTE8RbClOECDHaydzYTwLDpng I91RTsT/mfp0j/3o5UBuXcYuJ86smGIxTD/rE= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; b=qoihz7IZu1X3QWCVAdNuuDpGWyhrx85MrzM+k4KWtaMyhuluQK4MOUe4LJnMZSOk05 euRc4J8D5DqD38hF1loI84gsWYXHNWVBairBsfzCTBozFXqtw8Vw+xu1dGfpKEeGMDAy /rqvHPz1URCBz4QgHfH1DxIiVJVxJILcquc0o= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.216.49.76 with HTTP; Fri, 16 Apr 2010 04:09:37 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <20100311134413.GH19740@bsdcrew.de> <20100404000033.GG86236@server.vk2pj.dyndns.org> <4BBA21F7.70405@FreeBSD.org> Date: Fri, 16 Apr 2010 11:09:37 +0000 Received: by 10.216.154.84 with SMTP id g62mr1521331wek.176.1271416178249; Fri, 16 Apr 2010 04:09:38 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: From: Paul B Mahol To: Warren Block Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Cc: x11@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [Call for Testing] X.org 7.5 for FreeBSD X-BeenThere: freebsd-x11@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: X11 on FreeBSD -- maintaining and support List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 16 Apr 2010 11:40:03 -0000 On 4/5/10, Warren Block wrote: > On Mon, 5 Apr 2010, Robert Noland wrote: >>> Seems functional for desktop use, including composite. Attempting to run >>> >>> nexuiz is a mistake, with the frames showing up at about 1 every twenty >>> seconds or so. >> >> With which version of mesa? 7.4 or 7.6? > > Now with 7.6: > > Radeon Mobility HD2400 (128M, Toshiba Satellite A215) > > At xorg "Virtual 1024x768" and nexuiz 640x480 16-bit and lowest effects > settings, it's about 2 seconds between screen updates in the GUI > (higher virtual resolution makes it slower, at native 1280x800 it's 5 > seconds between input and screen update). > > The game takes 30 seconds or so to start, and it's seconds between input > and movement. In fairness, this is without ACPI (won't boot with it) > and this Toshiba is basically built for Windows, so it may be something > else interfering. Possibly thermal CPU throttling because of the ACPI > problems. Data at http://www.wonkity.com/~wblock/radeon/mobHD2400/ . > > Just for comparison... > > Radeon FireGL9000 (32M, Dell Inspiron 8500) > > At 1920x1200, nexuiz can be started, but it's about 10 seconds between > screen updates for the GUI and the game. At xorg.conf 1024x768 or less, > with all nexuiz settings at their lowest, it's still not really > playable, but runs nearly interactively. Faster than the Toshiba, > anyway. In my case (i945GM) nexuiz is unplayable (from the begining), but other games like urbanterror, tremulous/tremfusion, openarena, or even wine + bunch of other games are just fine. So if this is not regression I would not care about it.