ATI & Radeon 9600 RV350

[Claude Jones]

I've been working on this a few days, and reading about others struggling with 
the ATI driver. I can't seem to find anything definitive.

glxinfo shows among other things:

OpenGL vendor string: Mesa project: www.mesa3d.org
OpenGL renderer string: Mesa GLX Indirect
OpenGL version string: 1.2 (1.5 Mesa 6.5.1)

Running glxgears gives me:

$ glxgears
Xlib:  extension "XFree86-DRI" missing on display ":0.0".
1951 frames in 5.0 seconds = 389.746 FPS
3240 frames in 5.2 seconds = 628.040 FPS
3240 frames in 5.0 seconds = 642.329 FPS

The above are with the Livna driver; after installing it, I rebooted into 
runlevel 3 and ran fglrx-config-display; then restarted into X

I've tried various mods to xorg.conf such as disabling composite - my current 
is:

Section "ServerLayout"
    Identifier     "single head configuration"
    Screen      0  "Screen0" 0 0
    InputDevice    "Keyboard0" "CoreKeyboard"
    InputDevice    "Synaptics" "CorePointer"
EndSection

Section "InputDevice"
    Identifier  "Keyboard0"
    Driver      "kbd"
    Option	    "XkbModel" "pc105"
    Option	    "XkbLayout" "us"
EndSection

Section "InputDevice"
    Identifier  "Synaptics"
    Driver      "synaptics"
    Option	    "Device" "/dev/input/mice"
    Option	    "Protocol" "auto-dev"
    Option	    "Emulate3Buttons" "yes"
    Option	    "LeftEdge" "120"
    Option	    "RightEdge" "830"
    Option	    "TopEdge" "120"
    Option	    "BottomEdge" "650"
    Option	    "FingerLow" "14"
    Option	    "FingerHigh" "15"
    Option	    "MaxTapMove" "110"
    Option	    "VertScrollDelta" "20"
    Option	    "HorizScrollDelta" "20"
    Option	    "MinSpeed" "0.3"
    Option	    "MaxSpeed" "0.75"
EndSection

Section "Device"
    Identifier  "Videocard0"
    Driver      "fglrx"
    Option	    "VideoOverlay" "on"
EndSection

Section "Screen"
    Identifier "Screen0"
    Device     "Videocard0"
    DefaultDepth     24
    SubSection "Display"
    	Viewport   0 0
    	Depth     24
    EndSubSection
EndSection

Section "Extensions"
        Option  "Composite" "Disable"
EndSection

Am I on a fools errand? Should I forget about the ATI driver and revert?

[Claude Jones]

On Monday  April 02 2007 11:55:46 pm Claude Jones wrote:
> .2007 11:55 pm
>    
> I've been working on this a few days, and reading about others struggling
> with the ATI driver. I can't seem to find anything definitive.

OK - I figured it out. I had installed the wrong kmod for my kernel

Does anyone know if DKMS works with the ATI driver?

[Mike Chambers]

On Mon, 2007-04-02 at 21:55 -0400, Claude Jones wrote:
> On Monday  April 02 2007 11:55:46 pm Claude Jones wrote:
> > .2007 11:55 pm
> >
> > I've been working on this a few days, and reading about others struggling
> > with the ATI driver. I can't seem to find anything definitive.
>
> OK - I figured it out. I had installed the wrong kmod for my kernel
>
> Does anyone know if DKMS works with the ATI driver?

Try the ATI drivers from freshrpms, I believe Matthious has it auto
pulling dkms and using that along with his driver.

[Claude Jones]

On Tue April 3 2007, Mike Chambers wrote:
> On Mon, 2007-04-02 at 21:55 -0400, Claude Jones wrote:
> > On Monday  April 02 2007 11:55:46 pm Claude Jones wrote:
> > > .2007 11:55 pm
> > >
> > > I've been working on this a few days, and reading about others
> > > struggling with the ATI driver. I can't seem to find anything
> > > definitive.
> >
> > OK - I figured it out. I had installed the wrong kmod for my kernel
> >
> > Does anyone know if DKMS works with the ATI driver?
>
> Try the ATI drivers from freshrpms, I believe Matthious has it auto
> pulling dkms and using that along with his driver.

I did try them and couldn't get them to work for some reason. That's why I was 
asking the question. I'm a great fan of dkms and use it on all my nvidia 
based machines, but the one comment on it I could find on the freshrpms 
website did not list ATI drivers as one of the ones it could auto-build 
kernel-modules for. As far as not getting them to work, I'm still trying to 
sort out what exactly I did to fix things, since I tried so many things.

[Guillermo Garron]

On 4/3/07, Mike Chambers  wrote:
> On Mon, 2007-04-02 at 21:55 -0400, Claude Jones wrote:
> > On Monday  April 02 2007 11:55:46 pm Claude Jones wrote:
> > > .2007 11:55 pm
> > >
> > > I've been working on this a few days, and reading about others struggling
> > > with the ATI driver. I can't seem to find anything definitive.
> >
> > OK - I figured it out. I had installed the wrong kmod for my kernel
> >
> > Does anyone know if DKMS works with the ATI driver?
>
> Try the ATI drivers from freshrpms, I believe Matthious has it auto
> pulling dkms and using that along with his driver.

This may also be helpfull

http://linux.go2linux.org/node/39

regards

[John Horne]

On Mon, 2007-04-02 at 23:55 -0400, Claude Jones wrote:
> I've been working on this a few days, and reading about others struggling with 
> the ATI driver. I can't seem to find anything definitive.

Hi,

If it's any help I have the same card as you. However, I am using the
'radeon' driver. I have had no problems using it, and with beryl.
> glxinfo shows among other things:
>
> OpenGL vendor string: Mesa project: www.mesa3d.org
> OpenGL renderer string: Mesa GLX Indirect
> OpenGL version string: 1.2 (1.5 Mesa 6.5.1)

I have:

OpenGL vendor string: Tungsten Graphics, Inc.
OpenGL renderer string: Mesa DRI R300 20060815 AGP 4x x86/MMX+/3DNow!
+/SSE TCL
OpenGL version string: 1.3 Mesa 6.5.1
> Running glxgears gives me:
>
> $ glxgears
> Xlib:  extension "XFree86-DRI" missing on display ":0.0".
> 1951 frames in 5.0 seconds = 389.746 FPS
> 3240 frames in 5.2 seconds = 628.040 FPS
> 3240 frames in 5.0 seconds = 642.329 FPS

I get:

[root@ash ~]# glxgears
libGL warning: 3D driver claims to not support visual 0x4b
9319 frames in 5.0 seconds = 1863.677 FPS
8756 frames in 5.0 seconds = 1751.074 FPS
10568 frames in 5.0 seconds = 2113.578 FPS
12001 frames in 5.0 seconds = 2400.160 FPS
12645 frames in 5.0 seconds = 2528.954 FPS
10775 frames in 5.0 seconds = 2154.851 FPS

The 10-12,000 readings were because I had minimised the glxgears
display. If you have the glxgears running in front of you then I get
about 9,000 frames. Second point to note, is that I used to have a
problem with SELinux and the xorg-x11-drv-fglrx RPM files. SELinux would
cause something like glxgears to run very slow. You could either try
temporarily disabling SELinux (use 'setenforce 0'), or change the
relevant file contexts. The files I changed, and the commands were:

chcon -t textrel_shlib_t /usr/lib/xorg/modules/drivers/fglrx_drv.so
  chcon -t textrel_shlib_t /usr/lib/xorg/modules/linux/libfglrxdrm.so
> The above are with the Livna driver; after installing it, I rebooted into 
> runlevel 3 and ran fglrx-config-display; then restarted into X
>
> I've tried various mods to xorg.conf such as disabling composite - my current 
> is:

I have:

=========================================================
# Xorg configuration created by system-config-display

Section "ServerLayout"
        Identifier     "single head configuration"
        Screen      0  "Screen0" 0 0
        InputDevice    "Keyboard0" "CoreKeyboard"
EndSection

Section "Files"
EndSection

Section "Module"
        Load  "glx"
        Load  "extmod"
        Load  "dri"
EndSection

Section "InputDevice"
        Identifier  "Keyboard0"
        Driver      "kbd"
        Option      "XkbModel" "pc105"
        Option      "XkbLayout" "gb"
EndSection

Section "Monitor"
        Identifier   "Monitor0"
        ModelName    "LCD Panel 1280x1024"
 ### Comment all HorizSync and VertSync values to use DDC:
        HorizSync    31.5 - 67.0
        VertRefresh  50.0 - 75.0
        Option      "dpms"
EndSection

Section "Device"
        Identifier  "Videocard0"
        Driver      "radeon"
        Option      "AGPMode" "4"
EndSection

Section "Screen"
        Identifier "Screen0"
        Device     "Videocard0"
        Monitor    "Monitor0"
        DefaultDepth     24
        SubSection "Display"
                Viewport   0 0
                Depth     24
                Modes    "1280x1024"
        EndSubSection
EndSection

Section "DRI"
        Group        0
        Mode         0666
EndSection

Section "Extensions"
        Option      "Composite" "enable"
EndSection
=========================================================

Note: Be careful with the AGPMode option if you use it. The card will
support it (4x), but your motherboard must do so as well.
> Am I on a fools errand? Should I forget about the ATI driver and revert?

Well that's your decision :-) However,as said I have had no problems
with this setup and using the ATI card.

John.

[Claude Jones]

On Tuesday  April 03 2007 11:15:43 am John Horne wrote:
> On Mon, 2007-04-02 at 23:55 -0400, Claude Jones wrote:
> > I've been working on this a few days, and reading about others struggling
> > with the ATI driver. I can't seem to find anything definitive.
>
> Hi,
>
> If it's any help I have the same card as you. However, I am using the
> 'radeon' driver. I have had no problems using it, and with beryl.

Thanks John for this lengthy response. You may have seen later in this thread 
that I finally got my ATI driver working - it turned out I installed the 
wrong kernel-module when I installed the livna driver. However, I don't think 
that was my only issue. Also, as I'll note below, my performance, while 
considerably improved, does not seem to match yours using the radeon driver. 
If that's the case, I would like to revisit the issue and try out the radeon 
driver - using the open source driver is certainly preferable - I have found 
info to the effect that 3D acceleration is supported for our card but is 
classified as experimental - I don't mind being an experimenter, so that's no 
issue for me. Presumably, using the open source driver would eliminate the 
headache of having to update the kernel-module with each kernel update, 
right?
> > glxinfo shows among other things:
> >
> > OpenGL vendor string: Mesa project: www.mesa3d.org
> > OpenGL renderer string: Mesa GLX Indirect
> > OpenGL version string: 1.2 (1.5 Mesa 6.5.1)
>
> I have:
>
> OpenGL vendor string: Tungsten Graphics, Inc.
> OpenGL renderer string: Mesa DRI R300 20060815 AGP 4x x86/MMX+/3DNow!
> +/SSE TCL
> OpenGL version string: 1.3 Mesa 6.5.1

my glxinfo now shows:

OpenGL vendor string: ATI Technologies Inc.
OpenGL renderer string: MOBILITY RADEON 9600
OpenGL version string: 2.0.6334 (8.34.8)
> > Running glxgears gives me:
> >
> > $ glxgears
> > Xlib:  extension "XFree86-DRI" missing on display ":0.0".
> > 1951 frames in 5.0 seconds = 389.746 FPS
> > 3240 frames in 5.2 seconds = 628.040 FPS
> > 3240 frames in 5.0 seconds = 642.329 FPS

The above numbers were from before I fixed my kernel-module
> I get:
>
> [root@ash ~]# glxgears
> libGL warning: 3D driver claims to not support visual 0x4b
> 9319 frames in 5.0 seconds = 1863.677 FPS
> 8756 frames in 5.0 seconds = 1751.074 FPS
> 10568 frames in 5.0 seconds = 2113.578 FPS
> 12001 frames in 5.0 seconds = 2400.160 FPS
> 12645 frames in 5.0 seconds = 2528.954 FPS
> 10775 frames in 5.0 seconds = 2154.851 FPS

I'm now getting:

$ glxgears
14658 frames in 5.0 seconds = 2931.519 FPS
26963 frames in 5.0 seconds = 5392.432 FPS
26962 frames in 5.0 seconds = 5392.329 FPS
26963 frames in 5.0 seconds = 5392.544 FPS
> The 10-12,000 readings were because I had minimised the glxgears
> display. If you have the glxgears running in front of you then I get
> about 9,000 frames. Second point to note, is that I used to have a
> problem with SELinux and the xorg-x11-drv-fglrx RPM files. SELinux would
> cause something like glxgears to run very slow. You could either try
> temporarily disabling SELinux (use 'setenforce 0'), or change the
> relevant file contexts. The files I changed, and the commands were:
>
> chcon -t textrel_shlib_t /usr/lib/xorg/modules/drivers/fglrx_drv.so
>   chcon -t textrel_shlib_t /usr/lib/xorg/modules/linux/libfglrxdrm.so

I'm running Blag 60000 on this laptop, which is basically FC6 with a lot of 
improvements in areas that are of concern to me. Selinux is disabled by 
default in this distro, so that has not been the issue for me. Your number of 
9000 frames is what catches my attention - as you can see, I'm now getting 
close to 5400 frames, which is considerably less than you. 3d motion is 
exceptionally smooth now, and streaming video works well, but, improving 
performance is always desirable, especially if I can achieve it with the open 
source driver. I'm running glxgears from the yakuake terminal, which is a 
utility that drops a terminal window into view by pressing the F12 key when 
it's running; the glxgears are hidden by the terminal window, but, if I drag 
it into view, my performance numbers go way down; also, I just tried opening 
KDE Konsole, which is the KDE terminal window, and running glxgears from 
there produces a visible glxgears window, but horrible performance:

$ glxgears
2903 frames in 5.0 seconds = 580.379 FPS
2501 frames in 5.0 seconds = 500.029 FPS
3629 frames in 5.0 seconds = 725.697 FPS
4996 frames in 5.0 seconds = 999.057 FPS
2289 frames in 5.0 seconds = 457.643 FPS
2501 frames in 5.0 seconds = 500.028 FPS
4073 frames in 5.0 seconds = 814.484 FPS
3166 frames in 5.0 seconds = 632.975 FPS
3775 frames in 5.0 seconds = 754.901 FPS
2502 frames in 5.0 seconds = 500.230 FPS
3260 frames in 5.0 seconds = 651.906 FPS

So, there's some discrepancies there I don't fully understand...
> > I've tried various mods to xorg.conf such as disabling composite - my
> > current is:
>
> I have:
>
> =========================================================
> # Xorg configuration created by system-config-display
>
> Section "ServerLayout"
>         Identifier     "single head configuration"
>         Screen      0  "Screen0" 0 0
>         InputDevice    "Keyboard0" "CoreKeyboard"
> EndSection
>
> Section "Files"
> EndSection
>
> Section "Module"
>         Load  "glx"
>         Load  "extmod"
>         Load  "dri"
> EndSection
>
> Section "InputDevice"
>         Identifier  "Keyboard0"
>         Driver      "kbd"
>         Option      "XkbModel" "pc105"
>         Option      "XkbLayout" "gb"
> EndSection
>
> Section "Monitor"
>         Identifier   "Monitor0"
>         ModelName    "LCD Panel 1280x1024"
>  ### Comment all HorizSync and VertSync values to use DDC:
>         HorizSync    31.5 - 67.0
>         VertRefresh  50.0 - 75.0
>         Option      "dpms"
> EndSection
>
> Section "Device"
>         Identifier  "Videocard0"
>         Driver      "radeon"
>         Option      "AGPMode" "4"
> EndSection
>
> Section "Screen"
>         Identifier "Screen0"
>         Device     "Videocard0"
>         Monitor    "Monitor0"
>         DefaultDepth     24
>         SubSection "Display"
>                 Viewport   0 0
>                 Depth     24
>                 Modes    "1280x1024"
>         EndSubSection
> EndSection
>
> Section "DRI"
>         Group        0
>         Mode         0666
> EndSection
>
> Section "Extensions"
>         Option      "Composite" "enable"
> EndSection
> =========================================================
>
> Note: Be careful with the AGPMode option if you use it. The card will
> support it (4x), but your motherboard must do so as well.

Here's mine after installing the correct module and re-running 
fglrx-config-display

Section "ServerLayout"
    Identifier     "single head configuration"
    Screen      0  "Screen0" 0 0
    InputDevice    "Keyboard0" "CoreKeyboard"
    InputDevice    "Synaptics" "CorePointer"
EndSection

Section "InputDevice"
    Identifier  "Keyboard0"
    Driver      "kbd"
    Option	    "XkbModel" "pc105"
    Option	    "XkbLayout" "us"
EndSection

Section "InputDevice"
    Identifier  "Synaptics"
    Driver      "synaptics"
    Option	    "Device" "/dev/input/mice"
    Option	    "Protocol" "auto-dev"
    Option	    "Emulate3Buttons" "yes"
    Option	    "LeftEdge" "120"
    Option	    "RightEdge" "830"
    Option	    "TopEdge" "120"
    Option	    "BottomEdge" "650"
    Option	    "FingerLow" "14"
    Option	    "FingerHigh" "15"
    Option	    "MaxTapMove" "110"
    Option	    "VertScrollDelta" "20"
    Option	    "HorizScrollDelta" "20"
    Option	    "MinSpeed" "0.3"
    Option	    "MaxSpeed" "0.75"
EndSection

Section "Device"
    Identifier  "Videocard0"
    Driver      "fglrx"
    Option	    "VideoOverlay" "on"
EndSection

Section "Screen"
    Identifier "Screen0"
    Device     "Videocard0"
    DefaultDepth     24
    SubSection "Display"
    	Viewport   0 0
    	Depth     24
    EndSubSection
EndSection

Section "Extensions"
    Option	    "Composite" "Disable"
EndSection

As you can see, you're running composite enable and mine is disabled - I'll 
try your setting later, as I must leave
> > Am I on a fools errand? Should I forget about the ATI driver and revert?
>
> Well that's your decision :-) However,as said I have had no problems
> with this setup and using the ATI card.

Thanks again for your input - there are still some unexplained anomalies which 
I sure would like to understand. Again, I have a huge increase in performance 
now which is tangible - streaming video was effectively impossible on this 
machine before - the video would just freeze after a couple of frames, and 
perhaps refresh every few seconds - now it's smooth and looks great; glxgears 
was a stutterer as were most of the screen savers - now, these are smooth 
with almost no hesitations to speak of.

Maybe I need to learn some incantations... ;-)

[John Horne]

Hi,

Somehow I deleted the reply from Claude Jones, probably a bit too quick
with the keys, and I only saw that there was a reply, in the archives,
because I was looking for something else! Oh well...
> Presumably, using the open source driver would eliminate the 
> headache of having to update the kernel-module with each kernel update, 
> right?

Correct. The radeon driver is just like any of the other drivers you use
on your computer for mouse, network, etc. You don't need to do anything
with them just because the kernel has changed.
> my glxinfo now shows:
>
> OpenGL vendor string: ATI Technologies Inc.
> OpenGL renderer string: MOBILITY RADEON 9600
> OpenGL version string: 2.0.6334 (8.34.8)

So long as glxinfo says you are using direct rendering, then you are
okay.
> > I get:
> >
> > [root ash ~]# glxgears
> > libGL warning: 3D driver claims to not support visual 0x4b
> > 9319 frames in 5.0 seconds = 1863.677 FPS
> > 8756 frames in 5.0 seconds = 1751.074 FPS
> > 10568 frames in 5.0 seconds = 2113.578 FPS
> > 12001 frames in 5.0 seconds = 2400.160 FPS
> > 12645 frames in 5.0 seconds = 2528.954 FPS
> > 10775 frames in 5.0 seconds = 2154.851 FPS
>
> I'm now getting:
>
> $ glxgears
> 14658 frames in 5.0 seconds = 2931.519 FPS
> 26963 frames in 5.0 seconds = 5392.432 FPS
> 26962 frames in 5.0 seconds = 5392.329 FPS
> 26963 frames in 5.0 seconds = 5392.544 FPS
> Your number of 9000 frames is what catches my attention - as you can
> see, I'm now getting close to 5400 frames, which is considerably less
> than you.

No, you are getting better performance than I am :-) I get 9,000 frames
per 5 seconds, whereas you get 26,000. I'm not sure why, but would not
be surprised if the cards are slightly different - a '9600' against a
'9600 Pro' perhaps.
> I just tried opening KDE Konsole, which is the KDE terminal window,
> and running glxgears from there produces a visible glxgears window,
> but horrible performance:

The figures from me were from using Konsole. My understanding is that
glxgears is not actually a very good indicator of performance. I can't
remember the reasoning, so you may want to search/google for more info
on that. However, I use it just to see if it gives a figure that I
expect. For me around 2,000 FPS is what I usually get, and it (the card)
seems to be working fine at that.
> As you can see, you're running composite enable and mine is disabled

Yes, I seem to remember that I had to enable 'composite' to get beryl to
work.

However, I see that you are still using the fglrx driver. It is
difficult for me to do a direct comparison because I would have to
re-install the ati driver stuff, the start up script, the
'enable-fglrx-display' command or whatever it was! :-) I found it much
easier to just use the radeon driver. Having said that though, I do not
use 3D for much at all, so it may be that you do get better performance
with fglrx rather than radeon. I have an opengl 3d screen-saver, a 3D
game and, as mentioned, have used beryl - although I tend not to use it
now, a bit too much eye-candy! The point is that they all work fine
though.

Final point is that you may want to look through the 'radeon' man page.
There are several options in there that relate to performance. I have
tried some, but can't say I have noticed any great improvement. The
'AGPFastWrite' tends to hang my system, so I don't use that one :-)
The GARTSize option can improve performance but doesn't seem to be
mentioned in the man page. It defaults to 8Mb, but can be increased to
64.

http://free3d.org/ may provide some useful info too.

John.

[Claude Jones]

On Wed April 4 2007, John Horne wrote:
> So long as glxinfo says you are using direct rendering, then you are
> okay.

Yes, it does say that
> No, you are getting better performance than I am :-) I get 9,000 frames
> per 5 seconds, whereas you get 26,000. I'm not sure why, but would not
> be surprised if the cards are slightly different - a '9600' against a
> '9600 Pro' perhaps.

I caught that discrepancy on a re-read after my post came back from the list. 
My card is housed in an HP Pavilion laptop model ZX5000 - fairly high end for 
its time
> > As you can see, you're running composite enable and mine is disabled
>
> Yes, I seem to remember that I had to enable 'composite' to get beryl to
> work.

Disabling composite was a 'fix' suggested by many sites for getting the ATI 
driver going, which is why I set that - still haven't tried enabling it, yet
> However, I see that you are still using the fglrx driver. It is
> difficult for me to do a direct comparison because I would have to
> re-install the ati driver stuff, the start up script, the
> 'enable-fglrx-display' command or whatever it was! :-) I found it much
> easier to just use the radeon driver. Having said that though, I do not
> use 3D for much at all, so it may be that you do get better performance
> with fglrx rather than radeon. I have an opengl 3d screen-saver, a 3D
> game and, as mentioned, have used beryl - although I tend not to use it
> now, a bit too much eye-candy! The point is that they all work fine
> though.

Personally, I don't care for Beryl - don't use it after giving it a try. I'm 
in television production, and I use this box as an experimental platform for 
trying the various LInux programs for content creation - so, that's my 
interest
> Final point is that you may want to look through the 'radeon' man page.
> There are several options in there that relate to performance. I have
> tried some, but can't say I have noticed any great improvement. The
> 'AGPFastWrite' tends to hang my system, so I don't use that one :-)
> The GARTSize option can improve performance but doesn't seem to be
> mentioned in the man page. It defaults to 8Mb, but can be increased to
> 64.

Having realized that I'm getting much better performance than I thought, I'll 
probably just stick with fglrx for now, but I'll track the progress of the 
radeon driver project, and give it another shot down the road

Thanks again for your input...

[Andrey Shmigelsky]

I have installed drivers for my ATI 9800XT video card from livna repository.
Direct rendring didn't work until i disabled Composite in xorg.conf. Then i
tried  to start beryl, but beryl need composite option to be enabled.. I
don't know how to solve this problem, cause for beryl you need direct
rendring and composite option enabled, but direct rendring works only with
composite disabled..

On 4/4/07, Claude Jones  wrote:
> On Wed April 4 2007, John Horne wrote:
> > So long as glxinfo says you are using direct rendering, then you are
> > okay.
>
> Yes, it does say that
> > No, you are getting better performance than I am :-) I get 9,000 frames
> > per 5 seconds, whereas you get 26,000. I'm not sure why, but would not
> > be surprised if the cards are slightly different - a '9600' against a
> > '9600 Pro' perhaps.
>
> I caught that discrepancy on a re-read after my post came back from the
> list.
> My card is housed in an HP Pavilion laptop model ZX5000 - fairly high end
> for
> its time
> > > As you can see, you're running composite enable and mine is disabled
> >
> > Yes, I seem to remember that I had to enable 'composite' to get beryl to
> > work.
>
> Disabling composite was a 'fix' suggested by many sites for getting the
> ATI
> driver going, which is why I set that - still haven't tried enabling it,
> yet
> > However, I see that you are still using the fglrx driver. It is
> > difficult for me to do a direct comparison because I would have to
> > re-install the ati driver stuff, the start up script, the
> > 'enable-fglrx-display' command or whatever it was! :-) I found it much
> > easier to just use the radeon driver. Having said that though, I do not
> > use 3D for much at all, so it may be that you do get better performance
> > with fglrx rather than radeon. I have an opengl 3d screen-saver, a 3D
> > game and, as mentioned, have used beryl - although I tend not to use it
> > now, a bit too much eye-candy! The point is that they all work fine
> > though.
>
> Personally, I don't care for Beryl - don't use it after giving it a try.
> I'm
> in television production, and I use this box as an experimental platform
> for
> trying the various LInux programs for content creation - so, that's my
> interest
> > Final point is that you may want to look through the 'radeon' man page.
> > There are several options in there that relate to performance. I have
> > tried some, but can't say I have noticed any great improvement. The
> > 'AGPFastWrite' tends to hang my system, so I don't use that one :-)
> > The GARTSize option can improve performance but doesn't seem to be
> > mentioned in the man page. It defaults to 8Mb, but can be increased to
> > 64.
>
> Having realized that I'm getting much better performance than I thought,
> I'll
> probably just stick with fglrx for now, but I'll track the progress of the
> radeon driver project, and give it another shot down the road
>
> Thanks again for your input...
>
> --
> Claude Jones
> Brunswick, MD, USA
>
> --
> fedora-list mailing list
> [e-mail]
> To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list