glxgear and glxinfo confusion

[T.C. Hollingsworth]

On Sat, Jan 21, 2012 at 1:08 AM, Jatin K <ssh.fedora at gmail.com> wrote:
> Dear All
>
> I've Dell Latitiude E5620 Laptop with intel HD 3000 graphics card [1],
> According glxinfo [2] that direct rendering is enabled but glxgear[3] output
> shows very low FPS
>
> is there anything wrong with Xorg configuration on my laptop ???  if direct
> rendering is enabled then FPS should (must) be higher then 1000 FPS ..is it
> ??
>
> [1]------ lshw -C video
> *-display
>       description: VGA compatible controller
>       product: 2nd Generation Core Processor Family Integrated Graphics
> Controller
>       vendor: Intel Corporation
>       physical id: 2
>       bus info: pci at 0000:00:02.0
>       version: 09
>       width: 64 bits
>       clock: 33MHz
>       capabilities: msi pm vga_controller bus_master cap_list rom
>       configuration: driver=i915 latency=0
>       resources: irq:45 memory:e1400000-e17fffff memory:d0000000-dfffffff
> ioport:4000(size=64)
>
> [2]-----glxinfo | grep render
>
> glxinfo | grep render
> direct rendering: Yes
> OpenGL renderer string: Mesa DRI Intel(R) Sandybridge Mobile
>    GL_EXT_vertex_array_bgra, GL_NV_conditional_render,
>
>
> [3]------ glxgears
>
> Running synchronized to the vertical refresh.  The framerate should be
> approximately the same as the monitor refresh rate.
> 299 frames in 5.0 seconds = 59.736 FPS
> 299 frames in 5.0 seconds = 59.724 FPS
> 300 frames in 5.0 seconds = 59.842 FPS
> 299 frames in 5.0 seconds = 59.645 FPS
> 299 frames in 5.0 seconds = 59.629 FPS
> 299 frames in 5.0 seconds = 59.741 FPS
>
>
>
> Anyone can spread light on this ??

glxgears is not an accurate benchmark:
http://wiki.cchtml.com/index.php/Glxgears_is_not_a_Benchmark

-T.C.