Re: [Dri-users] DRI, GL support, and an ATI Rage Mobility chipset...

[<the...@ya...>]

 --- Leif Delgass <lde...@re...> wrote: 
> > Ok, I set LIBGL_DEBUG, and what I see when I run glquake is:
> > 
> > "libGL: XF86DRIGetClientDriverName: 6.4.8 mach64 (screen 0)
> > libGL: OpenDriver: trying /usr/X11R6/lib/modules/dri/mach64_dri.so
> > libGL: OpenDriver: trying /usr/X11R6/lib/modules/dri/mach64_dri.so
> > drmOpenByBusid: busid is PCI:1:0:0
> > drmOpenDevice: minor is 0
> > drmOpenDevice: node name is /dev/dri/card0
> > drmOpenDevice: open result is 7, (OK)
> > drmOpenByBusid: drmOpenMinor returns 7
> > drmOpenByBusid: drmGetBusid reports PCI:1:0:0"
> > 
> > I don't know what much of it means, but I don't see any errors, and
> > glxinfo does indeed say "direct rendering: Yes"...
> 
> Hi,
> 
> It looks like it's working.  What sort of numbers do you get from
> glxgears?  Also, have you tried any other GL apps, games, etc.?  
> Depending on your CPU, you might not see a big difference between
> indirect
> and direct rendering with glxgears, but you should definitely see a
> difference with "real-world" GL apps.
> 
> -- 
> Leif Delgass 
> http://www.retinalburn.net
>  

Well, I've tried glxgears, glquake (not the old pre-compiled version
that only ran on 3dfx cards), and the tux-racer demo.

Running glxgears and not resizing the window it comes up at around
~165fps.

Glquake comes in at around 2fps when I bump it down to 640*480, and
that's when there are no transparancy effects on screen (drastically
less otherwise).

Tux racer tells me 2.0 fps running full screen at 640*480. I tried
running it windowed for a while, but the frame rate was so low I
couldn't do anything, and had to [CTRL]+C to kill it.

Ok, the graphics card has only 8Mb RAM, the AGP interface is only
accelerated to 2x, but 2fps?! On quake?!  ?:/

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Everything you'll ever need on one web page
from News and Sport to Email and Music Charts
http://uk.my.yahoo.com