Date: Sun, 19 Sep 2004 01:56:14 +0200 From: Benjamin Walkenhorst <krylon@gmx.net> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: X.org performance? Message-ID: <20040919015614.6313c9db.krylon@gmx.net> In-Reply-To: <s38ekkz16ud.fsf@numerus.ling.uu.se> References: <20040918165741.20d10137.krylon@gmx.net> <200409181101.25973.josh@tcbug.org> <20040918183953.0666ea91.krylon@gmx.net> <s38ekkz16ud.fsf@numerus.ling.uu.se>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, 19 Sep 2004 01:43:22 +0200 bkhl@elektrubadur.se (Bj=F6rn Lindstr=F6m) wrote: > Benjamin Walkenhorst <krylon@gmx.net> writes: >=20 > > Or is it just my perception tricking me, while Xorg is not that > > different from XFree, technically? >=20 > Is your configuration identical? Using certain modules can cost some > cycles, for instance, so if you also started using any of those with > your switch, that could explain your impression. Mmmh, I did not touch the configuration file at all. Haven't looked at it in a while, actually. I'll look there and try to disable unused/unneccessary modules. Thanks, Benjamin --=20 If cars had improved at [the computer industry's] rate, a Rolls Royce would now cost 10 dollars and get a billion miles per gallon. (Unfortunately, it would probably also have 200-page manual telling how to open the door.) -- Andrew Tanenbaum, "Introduction To Distributed Systems"
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040919015614.6313c9db.krylon>