Linux - HardwareThis forum is for Hardware issues.
Having trouble installing a piece of hardware? Want to know if that peripheral is compatible with Linux?
Notices
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Get a virtual cloud desktop with the Linux distro that you want in less than five minutes with Shells! With over 10 pre-installed distros to choose from, the worry-free installation life is here! Whether you are a digital nomad or just looking for flexibility, Shells can put your Linux machine on the device that you want to use.
Exclusive for LQ members, get up to 45% off per month. Click here for more info.
I finally managed to get my Radeon 9k pro up with XFree 4.2.
That involved:
- Carefully recompiling the 2.4 kernel and installing the newest
ATI 3.7.0 driver as prescribed, compiling the fglrx module.
- Commenting out a wrong "BusID 1:0:1" that fglrxconfig inserted
into /etc/X11/XF86Config-4.
Now OpenGL (Tuxracer) works fine, but 2D acceleration does not!
By modifying a line in the config file thus:
Option "no_dri" "yes"
I get this message in /var/log/XFree86.0.log :
(WW) fglrx(0): ***********************************
(WW) fglrx(0): * DRI initialization disabled! *
(WW) fglrx(0): * 2D acceleraton available (MMIO) *
(WW) fglrx(0): * no 3D acceleration available *
(WW) fglrx(0): ***********************************
and now 2D-blits go 13 times faster, but OpenGL almost stops!
I measure my 2D performance with "x11perf -copypixpix500"
and get about 2000 pr sec with accel, 150 without.
It is unbearable if one has to choose between 2D and 3D
acceleration, really. I'm writing a smooth scrolling routine for
our open source tile-based game (Freeciv), so this worries me a
litte; I'm not much for 3D.
My question is: Do GeForce users have the same problem?
More to the point, should I expect that most linux users lack 2D
hardware acceleration? I sort of hope that there may be something
lacking with my setup, but this doesn't seem to be documented
anywhere.
My configuration shows exactly the same symptoms. Enabled 3D-Acceleration decreases 2D-Performance severely. The test "Copy 500x500 from pixmap to window" looses up to 92% performance.
Gnome's reactions when moving or resizing windows get very slow when 3D-Acceleration is enabled, especially when those cool window-decorations are enabled too.
I wonder why this thread got no replies, and I didnīt find a similar thread, so Iīm bumping it up again with the following questions:
- Do other Radeon-Users experience this too?
- Is this a general Radeon-driver problem, or do you think my configuration is faulty?
Thanks for any hints.
Some System-Infos:
Duron 1.2GHZ, 384MB Ram, SuSE9.0 with actual online-updates, XFree86 Version 4.3.0.1, Gnome 2.2.2 with metacity-WM, Radeon9500 128MB with 3.7.0-25 Drivers from SuSE-FTP Server. I followed SuSEīs Radeon driver-installation guide.
I have made several test with all the radeon driver that i have (all downloaded at ati)and i think that it's a driver issue......i have the same problems as your's......up to 93% performance loss!!!
I have a athlon 2100+ radeon 9700pro via kt400 mobo 512 meg ram and mandrake 9.2/9.1.
I hope someone is able to solve this....if there's a solution....
I have Suse 9.0 with the latest updates installed. I installed the ATI 3.7.0 driver from Suse's ftp site.
Using KDE and glxgears to test 3d performance, I get 2100 frames per second.
For kicks, I decided to install Ximian Desktop (gnome based from what I can tell). With NO other changes, glxgears performance dropped to 300 frames per second.
I verified that the driver was still installed and dri was enabled, yet I cannot explain the huge degradation in performance.
I don't want to incite any linux desktop war, but is it possible that this is a Gnome issue? Or at the very least an interoperability problem between the ATI drivers and Gnome?
This is not a desktop issue. It's XFree, your "windows", that communicates
with the hardware through the vendor-specific kernel-module driver.
Problem is, when 2D accelleration is not effective, all desktop performance
will suffer enormously, plus the CPU usage will increase a lot.
I've notified ATI about the problem, hoping they can fix it. I don't really
understand "DRI" or "MMIO", but since these messages from the ATI-
specific module appeared covertly in the logfile as described above, I'm
inclined to blame ATI. Still don't know if GeForce users have the same
problem..
I also have a huge problem with the fact that the "no_dri" trick was
not documented anywhere, and I had to find out the hard way in order
to make 2D work at all.
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.