Linux - SoftwareThis forum is for Software issues.
Having a problem installing a new program? Want to know which application is best for the job? Post your question in this forum.
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.
I installed Slack 12.1 recently and I've been trying to decide which WM to use and such. I like XFCE and Openbox, and I'm leaning toward openbox for a simple base. I also tried out compiz swapped in for xfwm4 just to try out some of the effects. I want to try using openbox with xcompmgr for transparency, but it's really slow!
If I run glxgears in fluxbox or xfce plain, I get over 15000 fps.
...in xfce with compiz I get about 8000 fps.
...in fluxbox or xfce with xcompmgr I get between 700 and 1500 fps!
...in xfce with xfwm4's compositing enabled I get 700 to 1500 fps also.
Isn't xcompmgr supposed to be a very basic compositor? It should at least be faster than compiz, right?
I have an nvidia 7900gs running on the latest nvidia driver. My xorg.conf contains:
Xcompmgr is just a different compositing manager. Compiz uses OpenGL and faciliates a certain X-feature which hadn't been around when the xcompmgr was developed. Xcompmgr was only meant to be kind of a case study to show what's actually possible with compositing. It works differently.
And so does Metisse, KDE 4, Metacity and Xfce - they all implemented their own stuff, so you might experience different levels of stability and speed.