Dear all,
 
I evaluated the performance for DirectFB and XvMC driver for VIA C3 Unichrome display. The performance from the former was not as good as the later. On a 1GHz machine, the CPU usage from the former was almost about 70-80% for a clip like mission impossible II; however, it was about 30-40% for the same clip if the later driver was used.
 
I am not sure whether this was roughly right, since in theory (??) frame buffer has less overhead from the X services. Does this mean that the implementation of the frame buffer driver is not as good? Are there any other comparison data indicating otherwise? If so, what can I do to improve the performance of the DirectFB?
 
Thanks and best,
 
James

Software Engineer OTC Wireless, Inc. http://www.otcwireless.com
_______________________________________________
directfb-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.directfb.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/directfb-users

Reply via email to