I think someone pointed out that this is no longer the case - too many
problems with other software and so 250hz has been the default since the
early 2.6 kernels
BillK
On Mon, 2006-05-08 at 08:28 +0300, Tero Grundström wrote:
> On Mon, 8 May 2006, Hemmann, Volker Armin wrote:
>
> > On Sunday 07
On Mon, 8 May 2006, Hemmann, Volker Armin wrote:
On Sunday 07 May 2006 23:21, Tero Grundström wrote:
On Sun, 7 May 2006, Hemmann, Volker Armin wrote:
I went 250Hz a long time ago, and it did not hurt me in any way. But I am
also only using vanilla kernels without patches ;)
Whether its patch
P-M 1.2Ghz, CFQ 250Mhz.
I have found 1000hz doesn't help much with response (on my last system),
but did slow most benchmarks slightly - 250 was a good compromise.
I'll give the ant scheduler a try on the next reboot as I originally
went CFQ as ant seemed to cause lockout on high disk use - but t
On Sunday 07 May 2006 23:21, Tero Grundström wrote:
> On Sun, 7 May 2006, Hemmann, Volker Armin wrote:
> > On Sunday 07 May 2006 19:20, Tero Grundström wrote:
> >> Anyways, 1000Hz is still the preferred setting for desktop (according to
> >> menuconfig and CK). That is of course only if you don't h
W.Kenworthy wrote:
I have just set up a Sony Vaio with an i915 that runs ~850-900fps -
acceptable, but how does this compare with your i915?
Sorry if you already mentioned this, but I have come on this thread
late.
Billk
My laptop is a Pentium M 1.73GHz with 1GB memory.
With gentoo-sources I
I have just set up a Sony Vaio with an i915 that runs ~850-900fps -
acceptable, but how does this compare with your i915?
Sorry if you already mentioned this, but I have come on this thread
late.
Billk
On Sun, 2006-05-07 at 18:37 -0400, JimD wrote:
> marcin wrote:
...
>
> I can't get to my NVid
marcin wrote:
I have tried some other tests
If I set "export __GL_SYNC_TO_VBLANK=1" then everything is OK!
glxgears has 75 (as my vertrefresh) even if cpu burns
Without VBLANK
I have noticed that glxgears takes a lot of sys time.
$ watch -n 0,1 "cat /proc/stat | grep cpu0 | cut -d' ' -f4"
and
On 5/7/06, marcin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 5/7/06, JimD <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> marcin wrote:
> > On 5/7/06, JimD <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> marcin wrote:
> >>
> >> > Can anyone tell me how to "increase priority" for OpenGL?
> >> >
> >> > Thanks, Marcin
> >>
> >> I am using gentoo-
On Sun, 7 May 2006, Hemmann, Volker Armin wrote:
On Sunday 07 May 2006 19:20, Tero Grundström wrote:
Anyways, 1000Hz is still the preferred setting for desktop (according to
menuconfig and CK). That is of course only if you don't have problems.
yeah, but 250 is not worse in 'responsiveness' -
Hi,
AS stinks, when mldonkey is running. The whole system crawls, while waiting
for some moment, where it can access the harddisk, that is abused by
mldonkey.
CFQ is much better in that szenario.
BTW, nbench is a CPU/memory benchmark, right? So why should the IO-scheduler
has an influence on
On Sunday 07 May 2006 19:20, Tero Grundström wrote:
> On Sun, 7 May 2006, Hemmann, Volker Armin wrote:
> > On Sunday 07 May 2006 17:41, Tero Grundström wrote:
> >> On Sun, 7 May 2006, Hemmann, Volker Armin wrote:
> >>> are you sure?
> >>> AFAIR 250 is default since som time.
> >>
> >> No, 1000 has
On 5/7/06, JimD <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
marcin wrote:
> On 5/7/06, JimD <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> marcin wrote:
>>
>> > Can anyone tell me how to "increase priority" for OpenGL?
>> >
>> > Thanks, Marcin
>>
>> I am using gentoo-sources with the Anticipatory I/O sched and did not
>> notice a
marcin wrote:
On 5/7/06, JimD <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
marcin wrote:
> Can anyone tell me how to "increase priority" for OpenGL?
>
> Thanks, Marcin
I am using gentoo-sources with the Anticipatory I/O sched and did not
notice a slow down when I ran glxgears and nbench. I get about 980 fps
on
On 5/7/06, marcin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 5/7/06, JimD <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> marcin wrote:
>
> > Can anyone tell me how to "increase priority" for OpenGL?
> >
> > Thanks, Marcin
>
> I am using gentoo-sources with the Anticipatory I/O sched and did not
> notice a slow down when I ran
On 5/7/06, Eugene Rosenzweig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
marcin wrote:
> Hi
>
> I've been comparing lately performance OpenGL apps against different
> kernels 2.6.x and 2.4. Overall performance is comparable but a scheduler
> of kernel 2.6 is very annoying (to say at least).
>
> Simple test:
>
> K
On 5/7/06, JimD <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
marcin wrote:
> Can anyone tell me how to "increase priority" for OpenGL?
>
> Thanks, Marcin
I am using gentoo-sources with the Anticipatory I/O sched and did not
notice a slow down when I ran glxgears and nbench. I get about 980 fps
on my laptop with
On Sun, 7 May 2006, Hemmann, Volker Armin wrote:
On Sunday 07 May 2006 17:41, Tero Grundström wrote:
On Sun, 7 May 2006, Hemmann, Volker Armin wrote:
are you sure?
AFAIR 250 is default since som time.
No, 1000 has always been the default for 2.6. kernels.
not anymore!
unpacked a 2.6.16 ta
marcin wrote:
> Hi
>
> I've been comparing lately performance OpenGL apps against different
> kernels 2.6.x and 2.4. Overall performance is comparable but a scheduler
> of kernel 2.6 is very annoying (to say at least).
>
> Simple test:
>
> Kernel 2.6
>
> "glxgears" gives 1320 fps but if I simultane
marcin wrote:
Can anyone tell me how to "increase priority" for OpenGL?
Thanks, Marcin
I am using gentoo-sources with the Anticipatory I/O sched and did not
notice a slow down when I ran glxgears and nbench. I get about 980 fps
on my laptop with or without nbench running. What kernel sour
On 5/7/06, Tero Grundström <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Sun, 7 May 2006, marcin wrote:
> If by "Low latency desktop" you mean "Preemptible Kernel
> (Low-Latency Desktop)" then i have tried this and it doesn't help.
> I set the kernel timer frequency to 100 Hz.
There are other things that affec
On Sunday 07 May 2006 17:41, Tero Grundström wrote:
> On Sun, 7 May 2006, Hemmann, Volker Armin wrote:
> > On Sunday 07 May 2006 15:43, Rohit Sharma wrote:
> >> I have not tried it myself, but there is an option in kernel config
> >> which facilitates the role of "Low latency desktop" in the 2.6 ke
On Sunday 07 May 2006 17:41, Tero Grundström wrote:
> On Sun, 7 May 2006, Hemmann, Volker Armin wrote:
> > On Sunday 07 May 2006 15:43, Rohit Sharma wrote:
> >> I have not tried it myself, but there is an option in kernel config
> >> which facilitates the role of "Low latency desktop" in the 2.6 ke
On Sun, 7 May 2006, marcin wrote:
If by "Low latency desktop" you mean "Preemptible Kernel
(Low-Latency Desktop)" then i have tried this and it doesn't help.
I set the kernel timer frequency to 100 Hz.
There are other things that affect the latencies too. One is the timer
frequency setting. T
On Sun, 7 May 2006, Hemmann, Volker Armin wrote:
On Sunday 07 May 2006 15:43, Rohit Sharma wrote:
I have not tried it myself, but there is an option in kernel config
which facilitates the role of "Low latency desktop" in the 2.6 kernels.
A parameter can be set to 1000 [default] and can be lower
On Sun, 7 May 2006, Rohit Sharma wrote:
marcin wrote:
Hi
I've been comparing lately performance OpenGL apps against different
kernels 2.6.x and 2.4. Overall performance is comparable but a scheduler
of kernel 2.6 is very annoying (to say at least).
I have not tried it myself, but there is a
On 5/7/06, Rohit Sharma <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
marcin wrote:
> Hi
>
> I've been comparing lately performance OpenGL apps against different
> kernels 2.6.x and 2.4. Overall performance is comparable but a scheduler
> of kernel 2.6 is very annoying (to say at least).
I have not tried it mysel
On Sunday 07 May 2006 15:43, Rohit Sharma wrote:
> marcin wrote:
> > Hi
> >
> > I've been comparing lately performance OpenGL apps against different
> > kernels 2.6.x and 2.4. Overall performance is comparable but a scheduler
> > of kernel 2.6 is very annoying (to say at least).
>
> I have not trie
marcin wrote:
> Hi
>
> I've been comparing lately performance OpenGL apps against different
> kernels 2.6.x and 2.4. Overall performance is comparable but a scheduler
> of kernel 2.6 is very annoying (to say at least).
I have not tried it myself, but there is an option in kernel config
which faci
Hi
I've been comparing lately performance OpenGL apps against different
kernels 2.6.x and 2.4. Overall performance is comparable but a scheduler
of kernel 2.6 is very annoying (to say at least).
Simple test:
Kernel 2.6
"glxgears" gives 1320 fps but if I simultaneously execute (for example) "nb
29 matches
Mail list logo