On Mon, Aug 25, 2003 at 12:31:32AM +0200, Michel Dänzer scribbled: [snip] > > > I fail to see how metacity can have an impact on x11perf, it certainly > > > doesn't here. > > That's not what I meant by pointing it out, but rather the comment the guy > > makes about metacity being sluggish. > > Because of the seemingly uninformed remark about it and xmms? I assume his xmms remark is just an example of the slowness, although not a very good one since xmms has always been a pain in the neck to move around :> > > The x11perf is just for comparison with some model system, I presume. > > If the bandwidth to the framebuffer is low, that may explain at least > some of the slowness you're seeing (apps using the RENDER extension slow > to handle expose events). A comment in metacity code states that it uses the pixmap backstore to avoid handling the expose events. Is it possible that the pixmap -> surface blit might be causing the slowness because of a 2D acceleration bug in the radeon driver? [snip] > > flicker. In fact, when switching to a workspace with maximized mozilla > > window displaying a largish document I'm pretty much positive that the > > window interior is redrawn twice. Anyhow, not knowing what's the cause, I > > know that metacity is really, really slow on a fast system :( > > The thing is that different people can have very different perceptions > of what's 'fast' and what's 'slow'. I can't seem to tell much difference > between metacity and sawfish here (except that opaque window resizing > works much better with metacity :), YMMV. You mean the stroboscope effect? :) marek
Attachment:
pgp_VUeF8vEAF.pgp
Description: PGP signature