slow video - X

This is a discussion on slow video - X ; I noticed my video in X (XFree86 4.2.0) was slow. I had tested another video card. That required a different video driver, so I changed from "nv" to "nvidia". Now several of my screen savers have slow video, and glxgears ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: slow video

  1. slow video

    I noticed my video in X (XFree86 4.2.0) was slow. I had tested another
    video card. That required a different video driver, so I changed from "nv"
    to "nvidia". Now several of my screen savers have slow video, and glxgears
    reports 556 fps (normal), 3.8 fps (full-screen) and 2725 fps (hidden). Each
    of those maxes out the CPU. The card has no hardware acceleration TTBOMK,
    so it's reasonable that the full-screen rate be rather low. What can I do
    to increase the framerate? I'm running at 1536x1152, 24 bpp. Use the older
    driver?

    lspci says this:

    01:00.0 VGA compatible controller: nVidia Corporation NV5 [Riva TnT2] (rev 11) (prog-if 00 [VGA])
    Subsystem: Elsa AG: Unknown device 0c21
    Control: I/O+ Mem+ BusMaster+ SpecCycle- MemWINV- VGASnoop- ParErr- Stepping- SERR- FastB2B-
    Status: Cap+ 66Mhz+ UDF- FastB2B+ ParErr- DEVSEL=medium >TAbort- SERR- Latency: 248 (1250ns min, 250ns max)
    Interrupt: pin A routed to IRQ 11
    Region 0: Memory at dd000000 (32-bit, non-prefetchable) [size=16M]
    Region 1: Memory at df000000 (32-bit, prefetchable) [size=16M]
    Expansion ROM at deff0000 [disabled] [size=64K]
    Capabilities: [60] Power Management version 1
    Flags: PMEClk- DSI- D1- D2- AuxCurrent=0mA PME(D0-,D1-,D2-,D3hot-,D3cold-)
    Status: D0 PME-Enable- DSel=0 DScale=0 PME-
    Capabilities: [44] AGP version 2.0
    Status: RQ=31 SBA+ 64bit- FW- Rate=x1,x2,x4
    Command: RQ=31 SBA- AGP+ 64bit- FW- Rate=x4


    --
    -eben ebQenW1@EtaRmpTabYayU.rIr.OcoPm home.tampabay.rr.com/hactar
    PISCES: Try to avoid any Virgos or Leos with the Ebola virus.
    You are the Lord of the Dance, no matter what those idiots at
    work say. -- Weird Al, _Your Horoscope for Today_

  2. Re: slow video

    On Tue, 07 Sep 2004 19:02:47 GMT, Hactar staggered into the Black Sun
    and said:
    > I noticed my video in X (XFree86 4.2.0) was slow. I had tested
    > another video card. That required a different video driver, so I
    > changed from "nv" to "nvidia". Now several of my screen savers have
    > slow video, and glxgears reports 556 fps (normal), 3.8 fps
    > (full-screen) and 2725 fps (hidden). Each of those maxes out the CPU.
    > The card has no hardware acceleration TTBOMK


    > 01:00.0 VGA compatible controller: nVidia Corporation NV5 [Riva TnT2]
    > (rev 11) (prog-if 00 [VGA]) Subsystem: Elsa AG: Unknown device 0c21


    Um. The TNT2 does have hardware acceleration. It doesn't accelerate
    things as much as a GeForce 3, but it will do accelerated OpenGL.

    > What can I do to increase the framerate? I'm running at 1536x1152, 24
    > bpp. Use the older driver?


    Weird resolution, but that shouldn't matter. I think 16 bpp will be
    faster than 24, too. The "nv" X server will be slower than
    "nvidia" in all cases, especially when it comes to 3D. Did you install
    the nvidia-glx package as well as the nvidia kernel module? There will
    be a bunch of stuff in /usr/lib/opengl/nvidia/ if you did. Do you get
    any output when you do "lsmod | grep nv"? The nvidia kernel module must
    be loaded for the nvidia X server to work properly. What's in your
    XF86Config? Put that file on your webspace and follow up to this
    message with the URL.

    --
    Matt G|There is no Darkness in Eternity/But only Light too dim for us to see
    Brainbench MVP for Linux Admin / mail: TRAP + SPAN don't belong
    http://www.brainbench.com / Hire me!
    -----------------------------/ http://crow202.dyndns.org/~mhgraham/resume

  3. Re: slow video

    In article ,
    Dances With Crows wrote:
    > On Tue, 07 Sep 2004 19:02:47 GMT, Hactar staggered into the Black Sun
    > and said:
    > > I noticed my video in X (XFree86 4.2.0) was slow. I had tested
    > > another video card. That required a different video driver, so I
    > > changed from "nv" to "nvidia". Now several of my screen savers have
    > > slow video, and glxgears reports 556 fps (normal), 3.8 fps
    > > (full-screen) and 2725 fps (hidden). Each of those maxes out the CPU.
    > > The card has no hardware acceleration TTBOMK

    >
    > > 01:00.0 VGA compatible controller: nVidia Corporation NV5 [Riva TnT2]
    > > (rev 11) (prog-if 00 [VGA]) Subsystem: Elsa AG: Unknown device 0c21

    >
    > Um. The TNT2 does have hardware acceleration. It doesn't accelerate
    > things as much as a GeForce 3, but it will do accelerated OpenGL.


    Hm. OK.

    > > What can I do to increase the framerate? I'm running at 1536x1152, 24
    > > bpp. Use the older driver?

    >
    > Weird resolution, but that shouldn't matter.


    Yeah, the monitor only says it can do 1280x1024, but (1) that's not 3:4, so
    things that should be square will look squashed; and (2) I can do better.
    I wrote the resolutions by hand (this and common movie sizes, so mplayer
    doesn't have to stretch the movie). It's been running like this for about a
    year.

    > I think 16 bpp will be faster than 24, too.


    glxgears agrees with you:

    1120 fps (normal)
    75 fps (full-screen)
    3200 fps (hidden)

    The offending screensavers are much faster (in particular, the "fire" and
    "sproingies" modules from xlockmore).

    Doesn't 16bpp show banding on gradients?

    > The "nv" X server will be slower than "nvidia" in all cases, especially
    > when it comes to 3D.


    Noted.

    > Did you install the nvidia-glx package as well as the nvidia kernel
    > module? There will be a bunch of stuff in /usr/lib/opengl/nvidia/ if you
    > did.


    Guess not; that directory does not exist. I'll look around for it. Just
    install and restart X?

    > Do you get any output when you do "lsmod | grep nv"?


    nvidia 4765804 6 (autoclean)

    > What's in your XF86Config? Put that file on your webspace and follow up
    > to this message with the URL.


    http://24.94.123.65:81/XF86Config.gz

    --
    -eben ebQenW1@EtaRmpTabYayU.rIr.OcoPm home.tampabay.rr.com/hactar
    CAPRICORN: The stars say you're an exciting and wonderful person...
    but you know they're lying. If I were you, I'd lock my doors and
    windows and never never never never leave my house again. -- Weird Al

  4. Re: slow video

    On Tue, 07 Sep 2004 20:29:45 GMT, Hactar staggered into the Black Sun
    and said:

    Sorry, junk kept piling up on other fronts.

    > ,
    > Dances With Crows wrote:
    >> On Tue, 07 Sep 2004 19:02:47 GMT, Hactar staggered into the Black Sun
    >> and said:
    >> > 01:00.0 VGA compatible controller: nVidia Corporation NV5 [Riva TnT2]
    >> > (rev 11) (prog-if 00 [VGA]) Subsystem: Elsa AG: Unknown device 0c21

    >> Um. The TNT2 does have hardware acceleration. It doesn't accelerate
    >> things as much as a GeForce 3, but it will do accelerated OpenGL.

    > Hm. OK.
    >
    >> > What can I do to increase the framerate? I'm running at 1536x1152,
    >> > 24 bpp. Use the older driver?

    >> Weird resolution, but that shouldn't matter.

    > Yeah, the monitor only says it can do 1280x1024, but (1) that's not 3:4, so
    > things that should be square will look squashed


    So? I run 1280x1024 on my desktop, everything works fine. Any
    geometrical abnormalities are too small for me to notice.

    > I wrote the resolutions by hand (this and common movie sizes, so
    > mplayer doesn't have to stretch the movie)


    Yuck. Let the computer do the boring work; that's what they're good at.
    Movies vary so widely in size that I've given up on DGA and just use XV
    with the fullscreen button in gmplayer. Works great, little CPU load.

    >> I think 16 bpp will be faster than 24, too.

    > The offending screensavers are much faster (in particular, the "fire"
    > and "sproingies" modules from xlockmore). Doesn't 16bpp show banding
    > on gradients?


    Maybe. I never noticed it.

    >> Did you install the nvidia-glx package as well as the nvidia kernel
    >> module? There will be a bunch of stuff in /usr/lib/opengl/nvidia/ if
    >> you did.

    > Guess not; that directory does not exist. I'll look around for it.
    > Just install and restart X?


    That's the idea. Note that other distros may put the libraries
    somewhere else--my distro is Gentoo so it uses the package straight from
    nVidia.

    > nvidia 4765804 6 (autoclean)


    Yep, that's correct.

    >> What's in your XF86Config?

    > http://24.94.123.65:81/XF86Config.gz


    In the README that came with the nVidia modules, you'll find a detailed
    description of all the nvidia-specific options you can put in the
    XF86Config file. One thing that might help is the line
    Option "AGPMode" "3"
    ....in the Device section, which tries to use nVidia's AGP support or
    agpgart to speed up 3D operations. There are a bunch of other things
    you can tweak described in the README, so read it and try a few of them
    out. Not too many are relevant for TNT2 users though. HTH,

    --
    Matt G|There is no Darkness in Eternity/But only Light too dim for us to see
    Brainbench MVP for Linux Admin / mail: TRAP + SPAN don't belong
    http://www.brainbench.com / Hire me!
    -----------------------------/ http://crow202.dyndns.org/~mhgraham/resume

  5. Re: slow video

    In article ,
    Dances With Crows wrote:
    > On Tue, 07 Sep 2004 20:29:45 GMT, Hactar staggered into the Black Sun
    > and said:


    > > Yeah, the monitor only says it can do 1280x1024, but (1) that's not 3:4, so
    > > things that should be square will look squashed

    >
    > So? I run 1280x1024 on my desktop, everything works fine. Any
    > geometrical abnormalities are too small for me to notice.


    OK, but this way I still get a resolution that's bigger than standard
    resolutions. It won't do 1600x1200 last I checked. I used to have a crappy
    monitor signal cable (monitor/computer positions require an extension), so
    keeping the dotclock low minimized ghosting. Got a better cable, but the
    low dotclock remains.

    > > I wrote the resolutions by hand (this and common movie sizes, so
    > > mplayer doesn't have to stretch the movie)

    >
    > Yuck. Let the computer do the boring work; that's what they're good at.
    > Movies vary so widely in size that I've given up on DGA and just use XV
    > with the fullscreen button in gmplayer. Works great, little CPU load.


    Hadn't been able to get xv to work. Works now (new video driver supports
    it?), so I'll explore its characteristics.

    > > Doesn't 16bpp show banding on gradients?

    >
    > Maybe. I never noticed it.


    Well, it's so much faster that the banding would have to be really obnoxious
    to make me switch back.

    Assuming I define 24bpp and 16bpp modes in XF86Config, I can just call
    "startx -16bpp" or "startx -24bpp" to choose one, yes?

    > In the README that came with the nVidia modules, you'll find a detailed
    > description of all the nvidia-specific options you can put in the
    > XF86Config file. One thing that might help is the line
    > Option "AGPMode" "3"
    > ...in the Device section, which tries to use nVidia's AGP support or
    > agpgart to speed up 3D operations. There are a bunch of other things
    > you can tweak described in the README, so read it and try a few of them
    > out. Not too many are relevant for TNT2 users though. HTH,


    I'll check them out. Thanks.

    --
    -eben ebQenW1@EtaRmpTabYayU.rIr.OcoPm home.tampabay.rr.com/hactar
    GEMINI: Your birthday party will be ruined once again by your explosive
    flatulence. Your love life will run into trouble when your fiancee hurls a
    javelin through your chest. -- Weird Al, _Your Horoscope for Today_

  6. Re: slow video

    On Thu, 09 Sep 2004 20:23:40 GMT, Hactar staggered into the Black Sun
    and said:
    > Dances With Crows wrote:
    >> On Tue, 07 Sep 2004 20:29:45 GMT, Hactar staggered into the Black Sun
    >> > Yeah, the monitor only says it can do 1280x1024, but (1) that's not
    >> > 3:4, so things that should be square will look squashed

    >> I run 1280x1024 on my desktop, everything works fine. Any
    >> geometrical abnormalities are too small for me to notice.

    > OK, but this way I still get a resolution that's bigger than standard
    > resolutions.


    1280x1024 *is* a "standard resolution", at least if you go by the number
    of people using it. Maybe a bad way to define standards, but that's
    what you get sometimes.

    > It won't do 1600x1200 last I checked.


    On a CRT, 1600x1200 would look terrible unless the screen was enormous.
    Remember that not everything can be overcome by cranking font sizes up;
    games and things tend to have fixed-pixel-size widgets.

    >> Movies vary so widely in size that I've given up on DGA and just use
    >> XV with the fullscreen button in gmplayer. Works great, little CPU

    > Hadn't been able to get xv to work. Works now (new video driver
    > supports it?), so I'll explore its characteristics.


    XV didn't work with "nv" in any XFree86 release. The very latest Xorg
    release apparently supports XV on nVidia cards with a Free X server.
    Finally! Still no accelerated 3D on nVidia though.

    > Assuming I define 24bpp and 16bpp modes in XF86Config, I can just call
    > "startx -16bpp" or "startx -24bpp" to choose one, yes?


    Yeah, but it seems like overkill.

    --
    Matt G|There is no Darkness in Eternity/But only Light too dim for us to see
    Brainbench MVP for Linux Admin / mail: TRAP + SPAN don't belong
    http://www.brainbench.com / Hire me!
    -----------------------------/ http://crow202.dyndns.org/~mhgraham/resume

  7. Re: slow video

    In article ,
    Dances With Crows wrote:
    > On Thu, 09 Sep 2004 20:23:40 GMT, Hactar staggered into the Black Sun
    > and said:
    > > Dances With Crows wrote:
    > >> On Tue, 07 Sep 2004 20:29:45 GMT, Hactar staggered into the Black Sun
    > >> > Yeah, the monitor only says it can do 1280x1024, but (1) that's not
    > >> > 3:4, so things that should be square will look squashed
    > >> I run 1280x1024 on my desktop, everything works fine. Any
    > >> geometrical abnormalities are too small for me to notice.

    > > OK, but this way I still get a resolution that's bigger than standard
    > > resolutions.

    >
    > 1280x1024 *is* a "standard resolution", at least if you go by the number
    > of people using it. Maybe a bad way to define standards, but that's
    > what you get sometimes.


    Stipulated, but by "rolling my own" mode, I can have more pixels onscreen.

    > > It won't do 1600x1200 last I checked.

    >
    > On a CRT, 1600x1200 would look terrible unless the screen was enormous.
    > Remember that not everything can be overcome by cranking font sizes up;
    > games and things tend to have fixed-pixel-size widgets.


    Yeah, that's a limit. Already I have to use XMMS's "double size" thingy, and
    gkrellm has awfully small features. I almost never play action games, so
    that's not really a concern; however, thank goodness for Opera's
    magnification -- some web pages need ~300%!

    > > Assuming I define 24bpp and 16bpp modes in XF86Config, I can just call
    > > "startx -16bpp" or "startx -24bpp" to choose one, yes?

    >
    > Yeah, but it seems like overkill.


    I can't think of a good reason to go back to 24bpp, but I'm just keeping my
    options open.

    --
    -eben ebQenW1@EtaRmpTabYayU.rIr.OcoPm home.tampabay.rr.com/hactar
    PISCES: Try to avoid any Virgos or Leos with the Ebola virus.
    You are the Lord of the Dance, no matter what those idiots at
    work say. -- Weird Al, _Your Horoscope for Today_

+ Reply to Thread