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-108896-garchives=archives.gentoo.org@lists.gentoo.org>)
	id 1NqdGT-0008Nn-Ce
	for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sun, 14 Mar 2010 02:09:13 +0000
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 80961E0C39
	for <garchives@archives.gentoo.org>; Sun, 14 Mar 2010 02:09:12 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183])
	by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 752A4E09DD
	for <gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org>; Sun, 14 Mar 2010 01:26:38 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 152FD1B4065
	for <gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org>; Sun, 14 Mar 2010 01:26:38 +0000 (UTC)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at gentoo.org
X-Spam-Score: -3.02
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.02 required=5.5 tests=[AWL=-0.421,
	BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from smtp.gentoo.org ([127.0.0.1])
	by localhost (smtp.gentoo.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
	with ESMTP id XYExZb+R6KfF for <gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org>;
	Sun, 14 Mar 2010 01:26:31 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from lo.gmane.org (lo.gmane.org [80.91.229.12])
	by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 714041B40EE
	for <gentoo-user@gentoo.org>; Sun, 14 Mar 2010 01:26:26 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69)
	(envelope-from <lnx-gentoo-user@m.gmane.org>)
	id 1Nqcb2-0001Bs-5y
	for gentoo-user@gentoo.org; Sun, 14 Mar 2010 02:26:24 +0100
Received: from athedsl-372456.home.otenet.gr ([79.131.6.230])
        by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian))
        id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00
        for <gentoo-user@gentoo.org>; Sun, 14 Mar 2010 02:26:24 +0100
Received: from realnc by athedsl-372456.home.otenet.gr with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian))
        id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00
        for <gentoo-user@gentoo.org>; Sun, 14 Mar 2010 02:26:24 +0100
X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/
To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
From: Nikos Chantziaras <realnc@arcor.de>
Subject: [gentoo-user] Re: Compiz effects vs kwin
Date: Sun, 14 Mar 2010 03:26:34 +0200
Organization: Lucas Barks
Message-ID: <hnhdvl$hu4$1@dough.gmane.org>
References: <4B9C3376.60004@gmail.com>
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
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org
X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: athedsl-372456.home.otenet.gr
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.1.8) Gecko/20100307 Thunderbird/3.0.3
In-Reply-To: <4B9C3376.60004@gmail.com>
X-Archives-Salt: 78a310d4-eeed-454a-9d25-d9dbf8917f7f
X-Archives-Hash: 6e996d57a647984be4b972f0968bf3cc

On 03/14/2010 02:53 AM, ubiquitous1980 wrote:
> The effects in kwin (such as window wobble) are vastly less smooth than
> that in compiz.  I have noticed that compiz is faster in both kde4 and
> in gnome (with slight preference to gnome in speed) and wondering if
> this is normal, or something to do with my kwin setup.  Running on GM 965

kwin got crappy animation speed in KDE 4.4.  It was as smooth as compiz 
in 4.3.  I asked about it in the KDE mailing list, but there was zero 
interest in this regression.  So you either have to live with it, or 
switch to compiz.