[Dri-users] re: DRI, GL support, and an ATI Rage Mobility

[Smitty <sm...@wa...>]

> > > I also find that the performance isn't over-impressive.  glxgears
> > runs
> > > at almost exactly the same speed with DRI as without (~200fps). 
> > Have
> > > you tried turning the screen resolution and/or colour depth down to
> > > speed things up?
> > 
> > Changing resolution shouldn't affect things with direct rendering.
> > glxgears is  certainly not fillrae-bound; if anything it's
> > state-change-bound.
> 
> Well, glxgears running fullscreen at 1024*768 comes in at around 27fps.
> I can turn the resolution down in glquake, and at 640*480 it runs at a
> half-decent speed (as long as I don't pull down that transparent
> console), but what's the point if software rendered x11quake runs
> faster at the same resolution??
> 
> I've surely missed something obvious if there aren't any errors being
> thrown up anywhere...
Yes the quality difference between software rendering and hardware
rendering. Software has to sacrifice quality to maintain a playable speed,
your hardware does not make these trade offs.

The Mach64 is no powerhouse by todays standards, and the drivers are still
being worked on as we speak.

640x480 is probably what you should be aiming for with that card.

Liam
----
it depends