Mailinglist Archive: radeonhd (427 mails)

[Matthias Hopf <mhopf@xxxxxxx>]

On May 07, 09 11:09:33 -0400, Alex Deucher wrote:
> On Thu, May 7, 2009 at 5:40 AM, Matthias Hopf <mhopf@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On May 06, 09 17:26:11 -0400, Alex Deucher wrote:
> > > On Wed, May 6, 2009 at 5:24 PM, Yang Zhao <yang@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > > Now that DRI is on by default on r5xx, we might as well set EXA as
> > > > default instead of XAA.
> >
> > What is the performance of EXA vs. XAA, what are the benefits?
>
> For most modern desktops, EXA should be faster.  It accelerates

The issue is - as in most cases - that it "should be" is not necessarily
"is" :-P

> not currently implemented.  Additionally, only EXA supports
> accelerated render transforms which means only EXA provides
> accelerated screen rotation.

That's a good point. Even though rotation isn't widely used.

> > E.g. for the intel driver both EXA and UXA are currently extremely slow
> > compared to XAA (which is no longer officially supported), which is
> > giving us quite some headaches here at SuSE.
>
> EXA performance has improved significantly in the few xserver releases
> due to improvements in the core EXA code.  Newer versions of KDE use

I'm talking about upstream current git, xserver and driver.
UXA, DRI2, GEM, and KMS enabled.
The intel driver performance is abominable at the moment.

Before switching I just want to hear from real life users that this is
actually working well. Otherwise no objections.

Matthias

-- 
Matthias Hopf <mhopf@xxxxxxx>      __        __   __
Maxfeldstr. 5 / 90409 Nuernberg   (_   | |  (_   |__          mat@xxxxxxxxx
Phone +49-911-74053-715           __)  |_|  __)  |__  R & D   www.mshopf.de
-- 
To unsubscribe, e-mail: radeonhd+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxx
For additional commands, e-mail: radeonhd+help@xxxxxxxxxxxx