Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

FGLRX Catalyst and Resizing with Desktop Effects

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Originally posted by bridgman View Post
    Just curious, what were the "stupid answers" from the support desk ? All they said was "you're sending this to the wrong place" and offered a couple of alternatives including the recommended bug tracker (the Bugzilla database at http://ati.cchtml.com. Our developers do look at *that* bug tracker.

    When you persisted they asked you to read their previous response again (in the "solution" field), ie they were saying "DUDE, YOU'RE BUGGING THE WRONG PEOPLE" as nicely as possible
    Exactly - it was so much annoying... I hate closed source drivers.

    Comment


    • #32
      Perhaps try this?

      http://aseigo.blogspot.com/2009/01/t...gbvisuals.html

      Comment


      • #33
        Another one with the same problem. I'm using Debian testing and I have an ATI EAH3850. All drivers I've tested are buggy (lag when I try to restore, minimize, maximize and scale windows). I have tried all the possible combinations in xorg (there's a thread in compizfusion forum with "hacks" to improve the driver perfomance), but they won't fix the problem.

        But when I activate compiz under Ubuntu 8.04 it works perfectly: no lag, no scaling issues. What is the difference between Ubuntu and Debian drivers? If we had the chance to install Ubuntu driver in Debian/Arch/... or guess where is that difference we may solve the problem.

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by rampage7 View Post
          Exactly - I've mentioned in few places this problem about six months ago, when I've bought Radeon 4850. From these times, there was six drivers releases from Ati, and any of these drivers didn't resolve this problem.
          Resolving 'this problem' isn't as easy as you might think. When you trigger a resize of an application window that's using dynamically sizing widget toolkit ( such as modern Linux desktop apps do ), the application re-renders the whole window. The reason for this is that when you create a window, you place your widgets inside containers and then tell the toolkit which widgets should resize to take up available space, etc. This means that you can design an app that works well at 800x600, but when someone opens the window fullscreen at 1280x1024, the widgets will resize to take available space, and the app will look good ( as opposed to the behaviour of, say, lots of Windows apps ... think VB or Access apps ... that will just display their content in the top-left corner of the screen and everything else will be blank ).

          So each pixel that you increase the window size by in the X or Y direction means the application will recalculate where everything should go, and then render it.

          So if you've got poor XRENDER acceleration, you're really going to notice when you're resizing windows, because you're firing off LOTS of resize events and continually repainting the application window.

          Comment


          • #35
            Yes, and? We're talking 3GHz multi-core machines here. Not some Pentium 2 300Mhz machine. The drivers have to be written in an incredibly crappy manner to produce this slowness in today's monster machines.

            There's no real excuse.

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by RealNC View Post
              Yes, and? We're talking 3GHz multi-core machines here. Not some Pentium 2 300Mhz machine. The drivers have to be written in an incredibly crappy manner to produce this slowness in today's monster machines.

              There's no real excuse.
              I wouldn't be surprised if fglrx containted NO acceleration for later ( r600+ ) chipsets for 2D operations. Keep in mind they dropped the 2D engine completely for the r600. If this is the case, I suppose the excuse is 'there is currently no acceleration for that'.

              Now I'm not defending ATI's drivers. I'm just explaining they 'why' bit. I was one of the original ones to vote for XRENDER acceleration at: http://ati.cchtml.com/show_bug.cgi?id=7 ... bug #7. Have YOU voted?

              Comment


              • #37
                I voted. But I find it ridiculous to vote for something like that. It's like voting to get basic features done.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by RealNC View Post
                  Yes, and? We're talking 3GHz multi-core machines here. Not some Pentium 2 300Mhz machine. The drivers have to be written in an incredibly crappy manner to produce this slowness in today's monster machines.

                  There's no real excuse.
                  Exactly. Vista can do similar operations with rapid speed - there are no reasons why Linux/X11 can't do that.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    I've found a tip that seems to make life with fglrx in KDE 4 a little bit less miserable:

                    In System Settings -> Desktop Effects -> "Advanced" tab, select "Always" in the "Keep window thumbnails" list.

                    After this, restoring minimized windows is fast. Doesn't fix the slow as hell resizing and maximizing, but restoring minimized windows is always fast even the windows are maximized while minimizing/restoring them.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by RealNC View Post
                      I voted. But I find it ridiculous to vote for something like that. It's like voting to get basic features done.
                      Only that is not a basic feature, regardless of what the crowd may yell. You want your flashy composited windows to be as snappy as what you get with a regular, sane desktop environment.

                      The worst part is that you won't stop when windows move OK; then it will be that the video doesn't look good when displayed in three corners of a cube, or that your desktop icons are half a pixel off when you have the blur-raining-on-the-rocks plugin on, or that wine+WoW+compiz+latest OGL screensaver somehow crashes your machine, or that the colour of your socks doesn't match that of your KDE gadgets whith the lastest and greatest fglrx.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Crap! My socks don't match after all. Damn you AMD!

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Hmm, my maximum and resizing windows works very well without compositing. With compositing my resizing is sloow. But hey. Couldn't it just be a bug in the compositing? Without its very fast on my machine.

                          HD3650 and kde 4.2 on kubuntu.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Originally posted by melcar View Post
                            crap! My socks don't match after all. Damn you amd!
                            i told you!!!

                            :-)

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              It *is* a basic feature. Compositing is now standard in most OSes. OS X, Windows and Linux. If you still like GUIs that look like those from years ago, OK. But today, Vista Aero, OS X Aqua and Linux Desktop Effects is something people take for granted when buying a new graphics card. I didn't pay 300 bucks to get a graphics card that's slow as molasses in Linux with compositing while it's fast as hell in Vista.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Originally posted by yotambien View Post
                                Only that is not a basic feature, regardless of what the crowd may yell.
                                It's hard to tell whether you're being sarcastic or not. Maybe it's just because I've got a headache. But I put it to you that 2D acceleration IS a basic feature. I'd then take issue with the rest of your points. The reasoning is simple ... ATI developed this driver, justified by the claim that they could do better then the OS crowd. The OS crowd is addressing all the issues you are claiming are not required. I therefore expect ATI's driver to exceed what the OS crowd is doing. Otherwise there is a problem with the original justification for the driver.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X