** Changed in: xserver-xorg-video-intel
Importance: Unknown => High
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/252094
Title:
MASTER: Poor graphics performance on Intel
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing
** Changed in: xserver-xorg-video-intel
Importance: High => Unknown
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/252094
Title:
MASTER: Poor graphics performance on Intel
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing
This page was last modified on 20 May 2009, at 14:08.
2-Year old page bro! Even the radeon driver has matured significatly since
then.
On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 12:31 AM, actionparsnip <
andrew.woodhead...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> I'd just like to add:
> http://wiki.cchtml.com/index.php/Glxgears
I'd just like to add:
http://wiki.cchtml.com/index.php/Glxgears_is_not_a_Benchmark
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/252094
Title:
MASTER: Poor graphics performance on Intel
--
ubuntu-
Hi friend it’s looking a nice informative post in this blog . Thanks and like
to share my thought here.
http://www.xigmapro.com/e-commerce-website-design-and-development/";>Ecommerce
Website Design Company
--
MASTER: Poor graphics performance on Intel
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/252094
You
this is not only for intel drivers
804.3 hardy
lspci|grep VGA
01:00.0 VGA compatible controller: VIA Technologies, Inc. UniChrome Pro IGP
(rev 01)
this just hit me over the last week
webcam is giving me 1.2 fps
--
MASTER: Poor graphics performance on Intel
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/252
Figured I'd make an update.
Mesa git fixed some issues for me.
unreal tournament isn't hoping around anymore.
Actually is pretty smooth now.
Blender's latest available build still renders outside the container
window but some of the glitches were fixed. You still can't see the
selection window.
http://anholt.livejournal.com/41306.html
()_- [ We do use ut2004. It does stutter with 2.6.31rc (unstable code)
due to a performance improvement that requires a Mesa fix to avoid the
stuttering. The Mesa fix has been undergoing review.]-_()
}-._
He never mentions the fix. I haven't had time to loo
Quote from Storm's URL : " within Mesa there are regressions where we
could not even complete OpenGL tests with the current Karmic stack that
had run fine under Ubuntu 9.04". Although it says the stack has less
glitches, which is at least some improvement.
--
MASTER: Poor graphics performance on
Just for info:
Intel Linux Graphics On Ubuntu Still Flaky
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=intel_q309_flakes&num=3
--
MASTER: Poor graphics performance on Intel
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/252094
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, wh
I updated 9.10 again today
A new kernel and Intel driver got installed.
2.6.30-10 has lowered performance considerably.
The new upgrades to Xorg have a few issues with external LCD's.
Stepping back to 2.6.30-9 stablized things as long as I didn't push past the
resolution of my laptop's
onboard dis
I updated my system to the latest drivers and X, and it works fine
(better then before to be sure).
No screen flicker. However, when I try to change the brightness through
the shortcut keys on my laptop keyboard, or through the brightness
applet in gnome, the screen flicker and CPU get high, but a
Last time I tested with last intel, X and kernel 2.6.30 (rc7?) versions
available the results were poor and not stable.
Has anyone got it working fine? (no render errors and good fps on
googleearth and tux racer?)
Has anyone got it working fine on a eee 901?
Jose
2009/6/28 Bryce Harrington
> I
I think we can close this one now. The issue is largely resolved in
Karmic, and the commentary on this bug seems to have degenerated past
usefulness. Other bug reports are tracking kernel patches and other
fixes proposed for Jaunty.
** Changed in: xserver-xorg-video-intel (Ubuntu Karmic)
2009/6/5 Radu Cristian Fotescu :
> 1. The freedesktop bug #18389 was closed with NOTOURBUG, which does NOT
> solve it.
>
> 2. The freedesktop bug #18389 was opened for openSUSE, so this does NOT
> solve Ubuntu's bug.
>
> 3. As long as Jaunty is affected by this bug, the bug status can NOT be
> Inva
you should try windows 7, it's very neat, been using it since ubuntu started
having issues with video.
The only times I boot back into ubuntu now, are to try and fix the video.
--
MASTER: Poor graphics performance on Intel
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/252094
You received this bug notification
1. The freedesktop bug #18389 was closed with NOTOURBUG, which does NOT
solve it.
2. The freedesktop bug #18389 was opened for openSUSE, so this does NOT
solve Ubuntu's bug.
3. As long as Jaunty is affected by this bug, the bug status can NOT be
Invalid!
I stop using Ubuntu effective now, and I
Radu, please respect the Code of Conduct. The bug status for xf86-video-
intel was set by the Bug Watch Updater to invalid, because the
freedesktop bug #18389 was closed. As you wrote, this bug is well known.
I never said, that this bug does not exist. I am affected of this bug,
too. To solve this
Radu, your comments are inappropriate, please remain civil. Remember
many of the people assisting with people's bugs are volunteers, and
expressing your frustration here (while valid) does not help move things
towards a solution.
In this case Benjamin is correct, and is simply repeating informati
Dear Benjamin MOTU,
Whatever is needed to be "specific" about this bug is written in the Ubuntu
9.04 Release Notes, right here:
http://www.ubuntu.com/getubuntu/releasenotes/904#Performance%20regressions%20on%20Intel%20graphics%20cards
"Users of Intel video chipsets have reported performance regr
Zack, please file a new bug report and add all relevant information.
This bug report is too long and not specific enough.
--
MASTER: Poor graphics performance on Intel
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/252094
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subsc
OK. Can't try the current (20090603) xorg-edgers build for performance
because it just plain won't run games, but I believe this is a known
problem.
Meanwhile, on the latest Jaunty proposed versions UXA is about half the
speed of EXA on a couple of games. Which bug are you using to track UXA
perfo
** Changed in: xserver-xorg-video-intel
Status: Confirmed => Invalid
--
MASTER: Poor graphics performance on Intel
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/252094
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
J.P. wrote:
> FWIW my ThinkPad R61i had a drastic improvement after upgrading the kernel to
> the 2.6.29 line following the 'optimal' config per this HOWTO:
> http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1130582
>
> Unfortunately, the text will garble up after suspending/hibernating or
> switching us
I can confirm both: drastic improvement as well as problems after
returning from suspension on my R50e. But it could/should still be
faster and there are still some "minor" glichtes in the screen without
having used suspension.
--
MASTER: Poor graphics performance on Intel
https://bugs.launchpad.
FWIW my ThinkPad R61i had a drastic improvement after upgrading the kernel to
the 2.6.29 line following the 'optimal' config per this HOWTO:
http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1130582
Unfortunately, the text will garble up after suspending/hibernating or
switching users. Restarting X solve
@bouazza: we're not quite there yet. In fact, we haven't even begun
talking about catching up to windows. The main reason is that the
graphics drivers for intel are currently (relatively) unstable. If you
read the bug description, intel is doing a major rework of their linux
drivers.
In particular
The reason I'm not satisfied with this "improvement" is that we are just
back to the Hardy performances, so nearly 0% loss and gain on graphics
performances ...
But even on Hardy, Windows games that were smoothly playable under
Windows Vista are totally unplayable now, even with these "improvement
I would call a 4-6X improvement an HUGE improvement. However it was Jaunty (and
Intrepid) that showed a big drop in performances, so with that guide I can use
Compiz and some Wine games again as I did on Hardy. And that is why people
compare Jaunty to Hardy. The modified Jaunty performs better t
Well, when I measure performance improvement, I usually use PPRacer, but
even if the FPS goes from ~5 to ~20~30 ( Intel X3100 card ), I still
think that there's no improvement ...
We have to compare to the Intel graphics performances under Windows XP (
my brother's PC with its Intel 8XX card runs
@bouazza: I means that Tux Racer now runs at 25-35 FPS instead of 1-2 in
Jaunty. Just by adding UXA it was only 10-25 FPS. I followed ALL the
"Bleeding-Edge Configuration" steps in the guide, else the performances was
almost unchanged; but the configuration and the result may depend on your
gra
@bouazza: Yes, I still have crashes, but they're much more infrequent
now (once every 2 days). I did a dist-upgrade after adding the PPA, so
there may have been other packages (most likely mesa) fetched as well.
How are you measuring performance improvement?
--
MASTER: Poor graphics performance o
Well, I installed the 2.6.30rc7 kernel, libdrm/libdrm2 and the intel
driver from xorg-edgers .
The rendering errors with Compiz are corrected, I don't even see crashes
now, but still no performances improvements ...
I have an Intel X3100 card, do I need to install another package ? Do I
have to i
@NB : What do you mean with "good performances" ? Good scores which can
compete with Windows XP ?
--
MASTER: Poor graphics performance on Intel
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/252094
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
ub
After I followed this HOW TO, I'm getting good performances:
http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1130582
On my case (I'm using a 945) I had to upgrate the kernel to 2.6.30 rc
--
MASTER: Poor graphics performance on Intel
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/252094
You received this bug notificati
Hello !
@Richard Guo : Are you getting those good performances only using libdrm
and intel driver packages from Xorg Edgers ? Sounds really good !
What about crashes ? I mean, those who freeze the entire system ( not
possible to switch to console mode ), are they still present ?
--
MASTER: Poor
Sounds like the kde session manager may have crashed, stalled and another
copy got loaded.
I'm not experienced enough with the internals of KDE to give you a deffinate
hypothesis.
A lot has changed from 3.5 up to 4.2.
Buntu is starting to become more like Slackware.
On Tue, May 19, 2009 at 6:38
Performance is now drastically higher using libdrm 2.4.9 and intel
driver 2.7.1 in UXA mode on a GM965 (PPA: https://launchpad.net/~xorg-
edgers/+archive/ppa). Though glxgears is hovering around 600 fps now
(see reason: http://qa-rockstar.livejournal.com/7869.html), actual 2D
rendering speeds and 3
Hi there,
I've the same problems with kubuntu and jaunty on a minimac with 945G.
After googling around I found different proposals. To get some solutions
to work I opened a file with 'sudo kate' from konsole. Kate was starting
but I got an error-message like this 'Could not start ksmserver. Check
My performance gains reverted after I allowed updates.
I did see that one was xf86-intel-2.6.4 or something to that nature.
I had no freezing on my 945GM. This is a Sony Vaio laptop so for those that
are interested.
It's was a clean Kubuntu 9.04 install with only the kernel added in.
I'm not sure
linux-2.6.30-rc(ANY) solves the problem with speed, but still freezes in
a few (10-20-30) minutes of work in UXA mode. And this time it freezes
not only X desktop, but the whole system -- it's not possible to switch
into console anymore (and yes, DontZap=false).
Upgrading from xorg-edgers (in addi
http://kernel.ubuntu.com/~kernel-ppa/mainline/v2.6.30-rc5/linux-
image-2.6.30-020630rc5-generic_2.6.30-020630rc5_i386.deb
http://kernel.ubuntu.com/~kernel-ppa/mainline/v2.6.30-rc5/linux-
headers-2.6.30-020630rc5_2.6.30-020630rc5_all.deb
19fps in Neverwinter Nights and ut2004 runs smooth as it did
Why not contact MichaelLaurable at phoronix and have a standard testing
suite made for intel graphics performance, something generic enough that
all who use it will have something more reliable to report on than
glxgears then benchmarking of good vs bad performance would be easier..
--
MASTER: P
** Tags added: performance
--
MASTER: Poor graphics performance on Intel
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/252094
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubunt
Andy, it's not helpful for me, the kernel from
http://people.ubuntu.com/~apw/lp314928-jaunty/ .
00:02.0 VGA compatible controller [0300]: Intel Corporation Mobile
945GM/GMS, 943/940GML Express Integrated Graphics Controller [8086:27a2]
(rev 03)
xserver-xorg-video-intel = 2.6.3-0ubuntu9
1). 2.6.2
One of the specific issues that has been identified on Intel graphics,
is that we no longer have an MTRR for the AGP aperture. We look to have
isolated the issue there, and have produced test kernels. For those of
you with Intel graphics on Jaunty perhaps you could test the kernels
listed on bug
Jaunty results on a eee 901 with 'out-of-thebox' configuration.
*NO COMPIZ: glxgears 600fps+ NO rendering errors, GoogleEarth smooth (sun &
atmosphere off) ppracer 18fps
COMPIZ ON: glxgears 570fps + rendering erros when moving the window,
GoogleEarth less smooth (sun & atmosphere off) ppracer 18f
My results on an Thinkpad X60 - everything is back to normal with Kernel
2.6.30:
Ubuntu 9.04, kernel 2.6.30-020630rc3-generic:
EXA: pp-racer ~100 FPS, glxgears 1577 FPS equiv to intrepid with INTEL_BATCH=1
no hangs, suspend/resume works fine, console switching works fine googleearth
usable but me
In addition, the xorg-edgers packages and the rc4 kernel break
acceleration on i915 chipsets completey.
--
MASTER: Poor graphics performance on Intel
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/252094
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
Seems that hibernation is broken because of intel driver too.
I've just tested it on my MSI Wind U100, and system hibernates and
resumes normally only after deleting "splash" kernel option from
/boot/grub/menu.lst for 2.6.30-rc2 kernel (option "quiet" has no
matter). With "splash" option system fr
@Gnurou : C'est tout à fait correct. Even if it doesn't freeze nor
crash, UXA breaks hibernation: upon resuming, the screen is black and
dead. I can switch to other VT, but not to restore the X session.
OTOH, all the reports concerning "Intel blabla [8086:27a2] (rev 03)" are
almost useless: there
@Radu: UXA (at least on vanilla Jaunty) is known to be unstable for
some configurations (including mine). Your mileage may vary, but in no
way this could be considered a fix.
--
MASTER: Poor graphics performance on Intel
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/252094
You received this bug notification be
@320-321:
Unfortunately, 2.6.30rc4 broke fatally suspend-to-disk (can't resume at
all if previously hibernated), despite suspend-to-ram working, so I had
to drop it.
As we were officially advised against UXA, I have not tried it, but I've
just added it to xorg.conf, and, for kernel 2.6.28-11 with
@Gnurou: No one will put _release_candiate_ kernel into any updates. So there
are two ways:
1) Wait until linux 2.6.30 release (when?)
2) Backport those patches, which solved the problem.
People say Mandriva 2009.1 has intel-2.7.0, and this whole issue solved.
And I'm sure they didn't put R.C. in
Just to confirm #310, installing 2.6.30 and enabling EXA made
performances very good. Desktop effects very smooth, so it ppracer. In
addition it seems to be stable. Unfortunately, my wifi is not working
with that kernel. :(
Now we just need to make pigs fly and put that into Jaunty updates.
I rea
@Radu:
Ok, let me paraphrase. The problem seems to be solved algorithmically,
architecturally, and conceptually. And those very concerned users CAN,
AT LAST, AFTER SUCH A LONG TIME, fix it by just installing some software
pieces/versions.
For not so concerned or experienced users -- yes, the solu
@Radu: Like it or not, most people prefer the ppracer frame rate as an
indicator, you don't have to play the game, and can even uninstall it
after doing the tests- but it's generally a better 'real world'
indicator, and easier to get a FPS number from than Compiz or KDE4.
"GAMES ARE NOT A VALID BE
@Serghei:
#define _solved FALSE
The problem is 3-fold:
(1) updating to intel-2.7.0-1 is useless unless a major kernel update is made
too;
(2) updating to intel-2.7.0-1 is *not* necessary as long as simply updating the
kernel to 2.6.30rc{2,3,4} fixes the issue for intel-2.6.3 (which is the
offi
Just trying to be constructive :
It is said that "glxgears is not a benchmark".
Would it be hard to make a glxgear that would be one with reproducible
results ? If running ppracer is considered as a benchmark, why not have
a glxgear that does everything like a game (including some artificial
comp
UXA is noted here as a possible solution for EXA issues. What's wrong?
Test result for kernel-2.6.30rc2 + intel-2.7.0-1 (AccelMethod=UXA) on MSI Wind
(Intel GM945):
Everything works stable, desktop doesn't freeze for almost 20 hours of
work (earlier it was freezing every 1-3-5 hours).
There ar
Using EXA (and no other options in XOrg), I get a slightly higher peak
in ppracer, with less fall off when more stuff is on screen. However
Xorg now eats ~20% of CPU time so I'm going back to UXA.
--
MASTER: Poor graphics performance on Intel
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/252094
You received th
@Tom: I don't want to start a flamewar, but:
§1: I have never used GPU-intensive games in DOS and Windows (were
Commander Keen, Pushover and Many Faces of Go... GPU-intensive?), I have
never used GPU-intensive games in Linux (unless gnotravex and quarry +
gnugo + grhino qualify for that), and I WI
For instance, I get ~5 frames/sec extra in ppracer using rc4 over the
stock Jaunty kernel (using UXA)
--
MASTER: Poor graphics performance on Intel
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/252094
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
@Radu: Please post numbers based on ppracer, if you can- glxgears only
shows how quickly the screen gets blanked (ish), so it's not a good
guide to real world performance.
--
MASTER: Poor graphics performance on Intel
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/252094
You received this bug notification becau
No need for any newer intel driver! Kernel 2.6.30-rc4 fixes the issue by
itself! At least for my [8086:27a2] (rev 03) using EXA.
(http://kernel.ubuntu.com/~kernel-ppa/mainline/v2.6.30-rc4/linux-
image-2.6.30-020630rc4-generic_2.6.30-020630rc4_i386.deb)
kernel 2.6.30-020630rc4-generic:
* 1276
I can confirm: installing both 2.7.99 intel driver from xorg-edgers AND
linux kernel 2.6.30-rc2 has solved performance issues (at least with
compiz) and image corruptions with opengl. Now I'm checking for UXA
desktop freeze, and will report after night or two of notebook working.
PS: MSI Wind U100
Btw. I guess most of this problems should be fixed in Karmic. I have tested
-intel 2.7.0 with Kernel 2.6.30, UXA and KMS and it is very fast on my i915.
All Compiz animations seems smoth and doesn't lag. Even textured video seems to
be fast.
Glxgears shows still ~300 frames but as we all know it
Hi,
I did some more or less systematic benchmarks using the current 2.6
driver and the backported 2.4 driver (Reinhard Tartler's) on the i915,
G35 and GM965 chipsets. I thought I'd share them, maybe they can be of
use.
https://www.hackerspace.lu/wiki/Tracking_intel_performance_regression
--
MAS
Or maybe if there are many i81x users out there you could write a
petition or similar to Intel. As soon as the whole UXA, KMS operation is
stabilized it should them safe a lot of work
(http://keithp.com/blogs/Sharpening_the_Intel_Driver_Focus/) so maybe
they have some spare time for older chips. Es
On Thu, Apr 30, 2009 at 12:45:14PM -, James Strother wrote:
> But, have you considered supplying a package with an older version of
> xserver that could run the i810 driver?
To be honest, we're stretched pretty thin already just maintaining one
version of X.org. At over 180 separate packages,
@Bryce: Well, many people, myself included, wrote in the beta and RC
wiki'ed release notes about it, but it seemed each new release reset the
list of release notes, rather than engaging the people from the previous
release and asking them if it was fixed or not. You'll see I've poped
into the forum
Bryce,
Thanks for the update, very informative. You mentioned in your post
several reasons for not reverting to an older, more stable version of
the -intel driver. And I agree that this would probably be counter-
productive, in my experience the -intel driver has never really been
stable on olde
On Thu, Apr 30, 2009 at 06:26:46AM -, Tom Chiverton wrote:
> Bryce: The notice was yup, the link to page with step-by-steps for new
> X, kernel and MTRR wasn't, and should have been, ideal world permitting.
In the future, I hope we'll have your help in drafting release note
entries for remaini
Bryce: The notice was yup, the link to page with step-by-steps for new
X, kernel and MTRR wasn't, and should have been, ideal world permitting.
--
MASTER: Poor graphics performance on Intel
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/252094
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubunt
> a) the information about how to fix any issues wasn't included in the
release notes. To me, it felt like Ubuntu was ignoring the problem, or
worse trying to hide it.
Actually the information was included here:
http://www.ubuntu.com/getubuntu/releasenotes/904#Performance regressions on
Intel gra
Cheers for the update Bryce, I'm sure, even if the tone is heated at times
everyone appreciates that someone, somewhere, is at least working on it !
I worry, however, about two things
a) the information about how to fix any issues wasn't included in the release
notes. To me, it felt like Ubuntu w
Thank you everyone who has contributed towards analyzing this bug for
Jaunty. As many of you know, the Intel performance issues were not
completely fixed for the Jaunty release, and I understand you are
probably as frustrated as I am that it remains an issue for so many
people. To those who have
Things were working fine on 8.10 until the updates released around April 3rd.
Problem persists on Jaunty.
Got an Intel 965 (PCIID: 8086:2a02).
This bug is related:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/karmic/+source/xserver-xorg-video-intel/+bug/359392
--
MASTER: Poor graphics performance on Intel
** Also affects: linux (Ubuntu Karmic)
Importance: Undecided
Status: New
** Also affects: xserver-xorg-video-intel (Ubuntu Karmic)
Importance: Wishlist
Status: In Progress
--
MASTER: Poor graphics performance on Intel
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/252094
You received this b
Tried ForceEnablePipeA + UXA on Juanty beta over an eee 901. Results:
- Rendering errors on Compiz went away.
- Glxgears FPSs dro from 600 to 150.
- GoogleEarth crash due to libssl 0.9.8 error (couldn't test performance)
- Planetpenguin racer: not very smooth 3-4 fps at 1024x600
- Tremulous didn't
When I try to enable UXA, startx just freezes during startup.
I have also noticed, when I run glxgears, it says "Failed to initialize
GEM." Could this because I am using the 2.6.28 *server* version of the
kernel?
On Sun, Apr 12, 2009 at 3:44 PM, andrehsiqueira
wrote:
> On my notebook Toshiba U20
Note to eee pc users.
>From what I've gathered, the intel driver now defaults to the EXA
acceleration method which relies on the GEM memory manager. That should
be fine and dandy however note that GEM is not part of the 2.6.27
kernel. So if by any chance you got your kernel from array.org and did
On Jaunty 9.04 beta.
Atenciosamente
André Henrique de Siqueira
"O mundo precisa mais de atitudes
do que de lamentações."
2009/4/12 JoseLVG
> On Jaunty or Ibex?
>
> I tried it (ForceEnablePipeA + UXA) on a eee 901 with 8.10 Intrepid Ibex
> and
> it did not fix anything.
>
> My eee 901 has an Intel 945GME, no one else has this chipset?
There are many who have that chipset. Some of them have reported
various bugs related to it and some of those bugs have even been
tagged as such:
https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+bugs?field.tag=945gme
I would guess that for issues rela
On Jaunty or Ibex?
I tried it (ForceEnablePipeA + UXA) on a eee 901 with 8.10 Intrepid Ibex and
it did not fix anything.
My eee 901 has an Intel 945GME, no one else has this chipset?
Jose
2009/4/12 andrehsiqueira
> On my notebook Toshiba U205 S5034 - with Intel VGA compatible
> controller: In
On my notebook Toshiba U205 S5034 - with Intel VGA compatible
controller: Intel Corporation Mobile 945GM/GMS, 943/940GML Express
Integrated Graphics Controller (rev 03), I fix the performance issue by
a change into xorg.conf:
Section "Device"
Identifier "Configured Video Device"
On Saturday 11 April 2009 17:15:13 Jordan Wilberding wrote:
> [snip]
>
> I tried:
> Option "AccelMethod" "XAA"
> In my xorg.conf, but that just makes xorg crash.
Same here. I also have a GM45 (Lenovo Thinkpad T500).
--
MASTER: Poor graphics performance on Intel
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/25
Thanks for the guidance. I reported this as a new bug:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/xserver-xorg-video-
intel/+bug/359629
--
MASTER: Poor graphics performance on Intel
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/252094
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, w
I am also having troubles with the intel driver and jaunty glxgears is
slow, playback is slow, typing is not as responsive..
I have an intel G45 card.
I tried:
Option "AccelMethod" "XAA"
In my xorg.conf, but that just makes xorg crash.
--
MASTER: Poor graphics performance on Intel
https://bug
> I hope, this report helps somehow.
I'm sorry, but this information in this place won't help. If you file
a new bug report, attach Xorg.0.log, the output of `lspci -vvnn` and
the information above, it may help. If you use the ubuntu-bug program,
it will attach a lot of useful information to the b
I also have a fall-back in performance, I can't play xmoto, so this is a
serious bug for me!:)
st...@skynet:~$ glxinfo | grep render
Failed to initialize GEM. Falling back to classic.
direct rendering: Yes
OpenGL renderer string: Mesa DRI Intel(R) G33 20090326 2009Q1 RC2 x86/MMX/SSE2
st...@skyne
** Description changed:
I experience significant performance loss with ubuntu 8.10 alpha 3 with my
Intel DG965WH based system and SVDO/ADD2 video card. Actually, the performance
loss started with ubuntu 8.04.1; I upgraded to see if there was any performance
gain with the new version. While "g
The bug below has been fixed in the most recent patch (xserver-xorg-
video-intel 2:2.6.3-0ubuntu8)
"Some users of Intel i8x5 video chipsets are unable to load X, getting
an error message of "Fatal server error: Couldn't bind memory for BO
front buffer". As a workaround, use the VESA driver by logg
Re: Marek in #276: Can anyone from the 9.04 team confirm that either
a) all the required updates will be in place at release time to kill the nasty
performance problems (I think that means another minor kernel rev., newer X and
intel X driver ?)
or
b) decide these new parts of X/intel driver are
Bruce: what?
Jacob: I believe that patch gives the ability to disable GEM in the drm module,
at load-time of the module. This way people who don't yet have stable GEM
support can disable it.
I have not tested the patch, but it seems like it may work. The same bug
upstream also submitted the firs
Please don't spam this report with "Windows is better, I'm going back"
comments.
--
MASTER: Poor graphics performance on Intel
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/252094
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing
Ofir:
The patch you are referring to does not disable GEM support, it only
provides an option to turn it on or off at build time. According to
that, it's on by default (and I think that's how it should be -- GEM is
the "right way" to go about memory management, it just isn't completely
supported b
Carey Underwood (a reply to your comment in
https://bugs.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/xserver-xorg-video-
intel/+bug/303011):
Here is a direct link to the patch:
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/attachment.cgi?id=24417
And this is the comment of the author:
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.
OK on a T60 with 945GM I installed a clean 9.04 beta.
glxgears where around 250fps tearing and extremely slow.
I change xorg.conf and added the option for UXA
glxgears has now jumped to 450fps, still not right, but it's an improvement.
Had anyone gone further?
Any fixes yet?
Do we have any of the
I have been following this thread for a while hoping for a solution to the poor
performance of Intel GMA965 X3100 on Intrepid 8.10 64bit. Compiz was always
stuttering, scrolling was laggy, and slight tearing with videos.
So I was reading this other bug
(https://bugs.launchpad.net/xserver-xorg-vi
1 - 100 of 133 matches
Mail list logo
