GLX slow in fullscreen mode - MDK 9.1

[szczuka]

Hi!

My thread follows series of previous complains about strange behaviour of GLX in Mandrake 9.1. Detailed description follows.

System: Dell Inspiron 8100 Laptop with NVidia2 Go card (0x0112), 16 MB VRAM, 1400x1050 LCD display

OS: Mandrake Linux with original kernel 2.4.21-0.13mdk running KDE:;)

Upgrade to the latest drivers 1.0.4363
went smoothly.:cool:

Problem: Any given application that uses GL libs runs extremely slow in full screen mode. :confused: This is not the case for the same applications running in small window.

The behaviour of glxgears is the perfect example here.:eek: Another example are GL sreensavers in KDE and TuXRacer game.

I have checked every point as suggested in README, as well as I did all tweaks to config files suggested in this forum (including addition of /lib/tls/ annd so on to library path) - to no avail :(

I attach to this message the file GL-check.txt where I documented the checks and included output of ldd, glxinfo and glxgears (where jumps to full screen are marked) together with XF86Config-4 and
XF86.0.log.

I do have some experience with Linux and I really can't find any source of problem here. Everything is installed and configured exactly by the book. No error messages, no glitches during startup, module loading and program starting.

I am really puzzled, some constructive help will be much appreciated.

Marcin

[how]

how slow is it? how many fps in tuxracer, glxgears and screensavers?
considering you are running at full screen 1400x1050
things got to be slow. try 1024x768.

[Andy Mecham]

It's certainly possible that you're running out of video memory when you jump to full screen - assuming you're running a 24bit display, you're already near 12MB with your desktop.

--andy

[szczuka]

Hi again!

Thankis for prompt reaction.

There may be indeed memory capacity problem, however test I have run in lower resolutions are undecisive.
Generally in 1024x768 glxgears (which I use as test vehicle) runs slower than in 1280x1024, but faster than 1400x1050.
Surprisingly, the 800x600 and 640x480 are not much better (only 30-40%) than 1024x768. This is kind of strange, considering the fact that this program runs pretty fast in 1400x1050 when launched in window of size 640x480.

Definitely, there may be something about lack of memory.
The question follows - can I do something to improve the situation (frame rate)?
Running at lower than native resolution on laptop's LCD is not feasible.

Marcin

[Andy Mecham]

You can run in 16bit color, which would decrease your memory usage.

--andy