[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: ATI radeon 9200, 2.6 kernel, xfree 4.3 - but still bad performance (dri failing?)



hanasaki wrote:
I have DRI working but check out my glxgears output!
    1453 frames in 5.0 seconds = 290.600 FPS
This is less than 20% of what you have! Could you help me out? Below is the output of lsmod

thanks

lsmod
Module                  Size  Used by
radeon                116332  2
[...]
via_agp                 6272  1
agpgart                27244  2 via_agp


Hi Alan,

I think we're getting closer ;-)
Did you check if the via_agp module was loaded without problems and before the agpgart module. If I load the intel-agp module after the agpgart module I also get only approx. 270 fps. In this case there is also a entry in /var/log/XFree86.0.log:
(II) RADEON(0): Direct rendering disabled

As you mentioned ealier that you tried the drivers from ati you have to consider that these drivers exchangend your opengl libs. So this could also be the reason.

Other things you can check:
In /etc/X11/XF86Config-4 under section Module
Load 	"glx" and
Load	"dri"
are necessary. Also you must have the rights to access the dri Device. So best do your tests as root. If in Section DRI mode is 0660 you have to put users in the group video so that they can access the dri device.
Also consider to switch your driver in Section "Device" back to "radeon".

I have to say that I also tried the binary only drivers from ati because I wanted to get the tv-out working. But I had problems with stability and there is another annoyance with the ati drivers: You can have either Xv fullscreen or OpenGl but not both. So I switched back to the standard X drivers and am quite happy with them.

Please consider to ask your questions to the list!

Greetings,
Michael



--
------------------------------------------------------------
E-Mail: biebl@teco.edu
WWW: http://www.teco.edu/

TecO (Telecooperation Office) Vincenz-Priessnitz-Str.1
University of Karlsruhe 76131 Karlsruhe, Germany
------------------------------------------------------------



Reply to: