From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org)
by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
(envelope-from <gentoo-user+bounces-115937-garchives=archives.gentoo.org@lists.gentoo.org>)
id 1PAYwL-0007nw-LH
for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Tue, 26 Oct 2010 02:07:06 +0000
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id DDFEEE08E6
for <garchives@archives.gentoo.org>; Tue, 26 Oct 2010 02:07:01 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mail-gy0-f181.google.com (mail-gy0-f181.google.com [209.85.160.181])
by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 84889E08AA
for <gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org>; Tue, 26 Oct 2010 01:48:08 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by gye5 with SMTP id 5so4327240gye.40
for <gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org>; Mon, 25 Oct 2010 18:48:08 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from
:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references:in-reply-to
:content-type:content-transfer-encoding;
bh=Q65LNnyVt6MwgPWvSiF6eWIEI30lAXBSwtGaDUu8lkk=;
b=acCzd7h5hDnSscL8InSjLfSp6Rei3RspYd259OaXI3CZ5WaLdISSpLu2QSEtixmPV2
J8F+fGUNBMosmUExyu80Z5mKxMixVxUhiY+9fB+J0rqp3EduEijhGf6TVPZzuRBCy9X2
06dMtEkDoyGW1yTM4SI+4oQ9wWs9/6URtiGCQ=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references
:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding;
b=spuyOqQ+2cbCfjeWy/seAbt8tQUkFbGFW28KDtp/TxAbbrUtxl5KsH6iQvTb7XcTvC
bBvcmr8qzG+fta3eULpCsn6C3qOBExvTwTTjUOk4pO0ARu+wmVQeMw5dXXg7cFeI5174
Omv04j+QU8MVnUn6TSr9ckZhmzLMqFuQWRL5Q=
Received: by 10.100.13.9 with SMTP id 9mr6155414anm.234.1288057688118;
Mon, 25 Oct 2010 18:48:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.2] (adsl-0-94-212.jan.bellsouth.net [65.0.94.212])
by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 3sm9457610ano.21.2010.10.25.18.48.05
(version=SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5);
Mon, 25 Oct 2010 18:48:06 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <4CC63353.4000406@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2010 20:48:03 -0500
From: Dale <rdalek1967@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.1.14) Gecko/20101020 Gentoo/2.0.9 SeaMonkey/2.0.9
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-user+help@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-user+unsubscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-user+subscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail <gentoo-user.gentoo.org>
X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Upgrading from FX-5200 to a GeForce 6200 512MB
References: <4CBD4C85.2010500@gmail.com> <4CC615FC.1040603@gmail.com> <201010260208.11519.wonko@wonkology.org>
In-Reply-To: <201010260208.11519.wonko@wonkology.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Archives-Salt: b4f8e26a-d87d-4a01-9e1a-81d1fa88acb9
X-Archives-Hash: 4b510df85c01d263c77425c786ddf5d0
Alex Schuster wrote:
> Dale writes:
>
>
>> So, same card as a year or so ago and same everything else but now I
>> get only about 1/10th the frame rate. What gives? Is this a driver
>> issue?
>>
> Is OpenGL working at all? Does glxinfo produce lots of output, with
> 'direct rendering: Yes' near the top? If not, your're using software
> rendering, all is done by the CPU, not the GPU.
>
> Wonko
>
That's what I am thinking. I notice here lately that my CPU is being
used a LOT more then it used to when playing videos or something. I
recently changed kernels and nvidia drivers, the kernel upgrade forced
me to upgrade nvidia. It appears to have gotten worse with each
upgrade. This is what I got from these two commands:
root@smoker / # eselect opengl list
Available OpenGL implementations:
[1] nvidia *
[2] xorg-x11
root@smoker / # glxinfo
name of display: :0.0
display: :0 screen: 0
direct rendering: Yes
server glx vendor string: NVIDIA Corporation
server glx version string: 1.4
server glx extensions:
GLX_EXT_visual_info, GLX_EXT_visual_rating, GLX_SGIX_fbconfig,
GLX_SGIX_pbuffer, GLX_SGI_video_sync, GLX_SGI_swap_control,
GLX_EXT_texture_from_pixmap, GLX_ARB_multisample, GLX_NV_float_buffer
client glx vendor string: NVIDIA Corporation
client glx version string: 1.4
client glx extensions:
GLX_ARB_get_proc_address, GLX_ARB_multisample, GLX_EXT_visual_info,
GLX_EXT_visual_rating, GLX_EXT_import_context, GLX_SGI_video_sync,
GLX_NV_swap_group, GLX_NV_video_out, GLX_SGIX_fbconfig,
GLX_SGIX_pbuffer,
GLX_SGI_swap_control, GLX_NV_float_buffer, GLX_ARB_fbconfig_float,
GLX_EXT_fbconfig_packed_float, GLX_EXT_texture_from_pixmap,
GLX_EXT_framebuffer_sRGB, GLX_NV_present_video
GLX version: 1.3
GLX extensions:
GLX_EXT_visual_info, GLX_EXT_visual_rating, GLX_SGIX_fbconfig,
GLX_SGIX_pbuffer, GLX_SGI_video_sync, GLX_SGI_swap_control,
GLX_EXT_texture_from_pixmap, GLX_ARB_multisample, GLX_NV_float_buffer,
GLX_ARB_get_proc_address
OpenGL vendor string: NVIDIA Corporation
OpenGL renderer string: GeForce FX 5200/AGP/SSE/3DNOW!
OpenGL version string: 2.1.2 NVIDIA 173.14.25
OpenGL shading language version string: 1.20 NVIDIA via Cg compiler
<<SNIPPED??
It says direct rendering is working but it sure doesn't act like it. I
watched a video a bit ago and although it was a small thing, only took
about 20% of my screen, it used just about all the CPU power. It didn't
do that a few months or so ago. It used to take only 25% or so to do a
full screen video. This is really weird.
I did take the side off my case a hour or so ago. I took my air tank
and blew it out pretty good. I also checked to make sure the fan was
turning on the video card chip. It was spinning fine and I could feel a
little bit of air. It's a small fan so I wasn't expecting a tornado or
anything. Anyway, after blowing it out AND generating a xorg-conf with
nvidia's program, I get this:
root@smoker / # glxgears
Running synchronized to the vertical refresh. The framerate should be
approximately the same as the monitor refresh rate.
2932 frames in 5.0 seconds = 586.390 FPS
1260 frames in 5.7 seconds = 222.873 FPS
2 frames in 7.6 seconds = 0.263 FPS
2 frames in 8.0 seconds = 0.249 FPS
2 frames in 7.6 seconds = 0.264 FPS
2 frames in 7.7 seconds = 0.259 FPS
XIO: fatal IO error 22 (Invalid argument) on X server ":0.0"
after 58 requests (58 known processed) with 0 events remaining.
root@smoker / #
Well, if it wasn't bad enough before, it is really bad now. The first
couple were when the window was really small. I adjusted it to full
screen which is where the 0.2 FPS comes in. That used to be about 30 or
so a while back.
This is with the nvidia generated xorg.conf file. I'm going back to my
hand made one. It seems to be a little better.
Any ideas as to why everything says it is working but it isn't?
Dale
:-) :-)