From owner-freebsd-chat Fri Jul 28 02:24:17 1995 Return-Path: chat-owner Received: (from majordom@localhost) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.11/8.6.6) id CAA02981 for chat-outgoing; Fri, 28 Jul 1995 02:24:17 -0700 Received: from irz301.inf.tu-dresden.de (irz301.inf.tu-dresden.de [141.76.1.11]) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.11/8.6.6) with SMTP id CAA02969 for ; Fri, 28 Jul 1995 02:24:04 -0700 Received: from sax.sax.de by irz301.inf.tu-dresden.de with SMTP (5.67b+/DEC-Ultrix/4.3) id AA27328; Fri, 28 Jul 1995 11:23:25 +0200 Received: by sax.sax.de (8.6.12/8.6.12-s1) with UUCP id LAA12193 for chat@freebsd.org; Fri, 28 Jul 1995 11:23:17 +0200 Received: (from uucp@localhost) by uriah.heep.sax.de (8.6.11/8.6.9) with UUCP id KAA22593 for chat@freebsd.org; Fri, 28 Jul 1995 10:58:09 +0200 Received: by bonnie.tcd-dresden.de (8.6.8/8.6.6) id KAA02710; Fri, 28 Jul 1995 10:44:40 +0200 Date: Fri, 28 Jul 1995 10:44:40 +0200 From: j@bonnie.heep.sax.de (J Wunsch) Message-Id: <199507280844.KAA02710@bonnie.tcd-dresden.de> To: chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FBSD 2.0.5 / XF86 3.11 Performance Reply-To: chat@freebsd.org Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc In-Reply-To: References: Organization: Private U**x site, Dresden. Sender: chat-owner@freebsd.org Precedence: bulk Something for the curiosity corner: 8^) In article you write: >In article phils@satori.tv.tek.com (Phil Staub) writes: > >> >> Having just installed FreeBSD 2.0.5 and XFree86 3.1.1 on my system, I >> was somewhat dismayed to see that graphics performance seems to have >> slowed by about 2/3 from FBSD 2.0R and XFree86 3.1. I'm using the S3 >> server in 1024x768 or 1152x900 resolution on a 2 meg #9 GXE64 (not >> Pro). The processor is a 486DX266 with 16 Meg of ram. >> > >My son seems to have accidently stumbled onto an interesting piece of >information. > >He wanted to see how slowly xengine would run when he toggled the turbo >switch to the "slow" position. Imagine his surprise (and mine) when it >went back up to the speed I'm used to seeing it run at! This is in >spite of the fact that the turbo light went off and the speed display >changed to slow speed. > >I now suspect that something in the boot sequence is reading the >switch and mis-interpreting its setting, then setting a control >register to low speed. Either that or unconditionally setting the >register to low speed, regardless of the state of the switch. > >Can someone comment on this hypothesis? > >Thanks, >Phil > >-- >------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >Phil Staub, phils@tv.tv.tek.com >TV/Communications Test Division >(503) 627-6910 -- cheers, J"org private: joerg_wunsch@uriah.heep.sax.de http://www.sax.de/~joerg/ Never trust an operating system you don't have sources for. ;-)