Gnome 3.16 performance

bfg9800gt · 2015-07-23 14:13:10

Hello Arch community,

I have Probook 4530s with Intel and discrete ATI on board, and I'm not satisfied with gnome shell performance.
When I dragging some window all around, it feels like it's not smooth enough - unconsistent lags here and there. Gnome-shell process raises to 15-20 CPU percentage.
Especially when I moving window to another monitor or "touching" dock, which also animated.

Other than that - smooth scrolling in Firefox, not bad overall performance.

I tried to enable gnome-shell with ATI card, but failed.

What should I look at?

Thanks.

Awebb · 2015-07-23 14:51:45

You should look at why running gnome on the ATI card fails.

bfg9800gt · 2015-07-23 14:59:11

I use open source drivers for videocards. Dunno how to switch graphics with this ones.
Catalyst control center could help, but my xserver is 1.17 (unsupported by current AUR's "catalyst" package. Installing "catalyst-test" makes gdm unbootable).

Found many instructions how to disable discrete video, while I need exactly opposite.

Head_on_a_Stick · 2015-07-23 14:59:58

https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/AT … e_Graphics

bfg9800gt · 2015-07-23 15:04:27

Bumblebee requires proprietary drivers, didn't try PRIME though. I'll check it

bfg9800gt · 2015-07-23 15:18:05

Maybe I did not understand PRIME well, but it's like outsourcing OpenGL rendering to discrete card?
Ok, but I need the whole gnome being processed by ATI.

bfg9800gt · 2015-07-24 08:45:44

Compiled linux-ck with BFS scheduler, dont's see any changes.

bfg9800gt · 2015-07-24 08:54:54

Made gnome-shell and X "good" with verynice.

Lowered resolution to 800x600 - still lags.

Just want to know - is it how Intel works with Mutter? Is it considered "normal" with embedded graphics?
I have a virtualbox with Windows, and moving/dragging there is perfect though it's provided by this Intel graphics.

bfg9800gt · 2015-07-24 13:44:18

Installed KDE, it's fast and smooth. Probably problem was Mutter indeed.

c00ter · 2015-07-24 18:36:54

bfg9800gt wrote:

Just want to know - is it how Intel works with Mutter? Is it considered "normal" with embedded graphics?
I have a virtualbox with Windows, and moving/dragging there is perfect though it's provided by this Intel graphics.

Works well on my rig: i7 Haswell Mobile. No lag, standard 60 fps in glxgears, no screen tearing in VLC @ 1920 x 1080 w/1080p videos. Word of caution: Do not use the current Intel GPU sna/uxa 'fix' that is populating various Arch-based distro forums. It does not apply to GNOME 3.16 which uses Wayland by default. You can default to Xorg if you want, but Wayland works better with this chipset IMO.

Regards.

bfg9800gt · 2015-07-24 18:55:35

c00ter wrote:

Works well on my rig: i7 Haswell Mobile. No lag, standard 60 fps in glxgears, no screen tearing in VLC @ 1920 x 1080 w/1080p videos. Word of caution: Do not use the current Intel GPU sna/uxa 'fix' that is populating various Arch-based distro forums. It does not apply to GNOME 3.16 which uses Wayland by default. You can default to Xorg if you want, but Wayland works better with this chipset IMO.
Regards.

Videos are fine, 60 fps in gears too.

I noticed that lags are most noticeable when I drag some window and "touch" something like Gnome Dash (I use Dash-to-Dock extension with intellectual hiding) with it.
Dash is starting to animate hiding down, or when I touch upper panel which has autohide too. Or when I move window to second monitor. CPU raises to 30% at that time.

Funny thing: on my second monitor vsync is not working while main screen is fine.

What do you mean by using this fix? Using TearFree and sna/uxa in 20-intel.conf? I tried it, removed it eventually.

I don't use Wayland, it's too buggy. No Desktop icons working, mouse cursor lagging, right-click in terminal misplaced, remmina doesn't work at all, etc.

By default? Xwayland is half the solution. Pure wayland by default in GDM only.

At some point I think that Gnome is pretty smooth, but then I come home to my main PC, which has Arch w Gnome too, and I see REAL smoothness and 60 fps by feel.

Thanks for the reply.

bfg9800gt · 2015-07-30 14:07:17

Another thing: Uninstalling xf86-video-intel package has no impact on performance.

How can I be sure that this driver is ever used?

Chazza · 2015-07-30 15:31:51

c00ter wrote:

Word of caution: Do not use the current Intel GPU sna/uxa 'fix' that is populating various Arch-based distro forums.

I don't know what that's got to do with the issue at hand. Using UXA is a decent enough workaround for various graphical glitches that occur when using SNA with some versions of Intel Graphics. I don't think anybody claimed that switching to UXA would boost performance. In fact, the opposite would be true in that case.

bfg9800gt · 2015-07-30 15:40:39

I don't see any glitches, it's just overall sloppy performance. Stutters here and there.

Switching between UXA and SNA doesn't make any changes either.

c00ter · 2015-07-31 04:47:39

c00ter wrote:

bfg9800gt wrote:
Just want to know - is it how Intel works with Mutter? Is it considered "normal" with embedded graphics?
I have a virtualbox with Windows, and moving/dragging there is perfect though it's provided by this Intel graphics.
Works well on my rig: i7 Haswell Mobile. No lag, standard 60 fps in glxgears, no screen tearing in VLC @ 1920 x 1080 w/1080p videos. Word of caution: Do not use the current Intel GPU sna/uxa 'fix' that is populating various Arch-based distro forums. It does not apply to GNOME 3.16 which uses Wayland by default. You can default to Xorg if you want, but Wayland works better with this chipset IMO.
Regards.

You asked a direct question and I answered it directly. In referencing the sna/uxa 'fix' I meant that GNOME 3 & GDM defaults to Wayland on a vanilla Arch install. No further Xorg configuration is necessary with Intell HD 4400 chipsets such as mine. "Fixes' such as you will see pertaining to KF 5 & Plasma, screen-tearing 'fixes' etc. in other forum areas here and thereabouts. If that does not apply to your situation--and I don't run it in a virtual box so I'm no help to you there--then glean what you will from my post. Or not.

Regards.

bfg9800gt · 2015-07-31 07:18:29

c00ter wrote:

You asked a direct question and I answered it directly.

Are you replying to yourself? Can't understand your quotation.

c00ter wrote:

I don't run it in a virtual box

Virtualbox is Arch host with windows guest.

c00ter wrote:

GNOME 3 & GDM defaults to Wayland on a vanilla Arch install

I got it. Probably you can't help here.

c00ter wrote:

No further Xorg configuration is necessary with Intell HD 4400 chipsets such as mine

You just said Wayland is "default". Why do we need xorg then?

c00ter wrote:

then glean what you will from my post. Or not.

Thanks granddaddy. I will.

c00ter wrote:

I'm no help to you

Finally you're totally right.

Awebb · 2015-07-31 07:38:20

Contain your saussages, gentlemen! It's bbq season and there are Germans around!

A short search for your problem told me, that other people are also having problems with Gnome 3.16, Intel chips and X.org. If you use GDM, then it probably runs on Wayland, not X. I'm currently not on Gnome, so I cannot tell you how to tell Gnome what to use. However, the following tests come to me as obvious:

1. Start Gnome without GDM (xinitrc + startx) and see if the lag persists. I had this problem recently with SDDM+KDE and while those are two totally unrelated systems, a DM transitioning to a new graphic stack should be ruled out as the culprit.
2. Whatever backend you use, test the other backend. Gnome is currently in a transition to fully support Wayland ASAP, so regressions are to be expected.

bfg9800gt · 2015-07-31 08:05:39

Awebb wrote:

Contain your saussages, gentlemen! It's bbq season and there are Germans around!
A short search for your problem told me, that other people are also having problems with Gnome 3.16, Intel chips and X.org. If you use GDM, then it probably runs on Wayland, not X. I'm currently not on Gnome, so I cannot tell you how to tell Gnome what to use. However, the following tests come to me as obvious:
1. Start Gnome without GDM (xinitrc + startx) and see if the lag persists. I had this problem recently with SDDM+KDE and while those are two totally unrelated systems, a DM transitioning to a new graphic stack should be ruled out as the culprit.
2. Whatever backend you use, test the other backend. Gnome is currently in a transition to fully support Wayland ASAP, so regressions are to be expected.

Oh, greetins fine gentleman!

You choose your session right in the GDM, and then it opens in another tty. GDM is always running, not just transforming into user session.
I use GDM, but just "GNOME" session, no Wayland around. For me it's currently unusable. Looking forward 3.18 though.

1) You mean totally without display manager? Ok I'll test it. Also tried sddm and lightdm. Oh and when Arch in a windows guest, GDM brakes hardware acceleration: https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=197372

2) I understand it. But I use Arch at work, and having stable system is crucial for me. With all that bugs, lags and broken RDP client it's totally unusable.

Thanks for the reply.

Chazza · 2015-07-31 09:42:11

Awebb wrote:

Contain your saussages, gentlemen! It's bbq season and there are Germans around!

Had to chuckle at that one!

Regarding GDM, it does indeed default to Wayland but you can force the use of X instead if that helps, see GDM#Use Xorg backend.

Rickrock · 2015-07-31 12:07:12

If I may ask a dumb question...
I'm running Gnome 3.16 and do not even know weather I'm using Wayland or Xorg.

I see that I'm able to choose between Wayland or a default Gnome session during login, but pacman -Qs xorg-server is giving me the same output on both logins.

Last edited by Rickrock (2015-07-31 13:19:56)

bfg9800gt · 2015-07-31 12:10:22

Rickrock wrote:

If I may ask a dumb question...
I'm running Gnome 3.16 and do not even know weather I'm using Wayland or Xorg.
I see that I'm able to choose between Wayland or a default Gnome session during login, but pacman -Qs xorg-server is giving me the same output on both logins.
http://i.imgur.com/w9gA7FSm.png

You should start new thread.

GDM always has Wayland, unless configured specifically. Gnome-session with "GNOME" option in GDM starts with Xorg. "Gnome on Wayland" start gnome-session on Wayland.

Installed packages are just installed packages.

Last edited by bfg9800gt (2015-07-31 12:16:49)

bfg9800gt · 2015-07-31 12:14:47

Chazza wrote:

Awebb wrote:
Contain your saussages, gentlemen! It's bbq season and there are Germans around!
Had to chuckle at that one!
Regarding GDM, it does indeed default to Wayland but you can force the use of X instead if that helps, see GDM#Use Xorg backend.

Give a break to GDM, gnome shell is the issue.
It's just the guy who said "Wayland in Gnome is by default" probably came from future.

bfg9800gt · 2015-08-03 08:53:25

Guys, I would like to know how to disable window-to window snapping in Gnome. This thing is also annoying as puck and feels like lagging.

Is there a way to disable this?

This dude also has the same problem, unanswered: http://superuser.com/questions/948202/h … -3-desktop

Last edited by bfg9800gt (2015-08-03 09:00:52)

Arch Linux

#1 2015-07-23 14:13:10

Gnome 3.16 performance

#2 2015-07-23 14:51:45

Re: Gnome 3.16 performance

#3 2015-07-23 14:59:11

Re: Gnome 3.16 performance

#4 2015-07-23 14:59:58

Re: Gnome 3.16 performance

#5 2015-07-23 15:04:27

Re: Gnome 3.16 performance

#6 2015-07-23 15:18:05

Re: Gnome 3.16 performance

#7 2015-07-24 08:45:44

Re: Gnome 3.16 performance

#8 2015-07-24 08:54:54

Re: Gnome 3.16 performance

#9 2015-07-24 13:44:18

Re: Gnome 3.16 performance

#10 2015-07-24 18:36:54

Re: Gnome 3.16 performance

#11 2015-07-24 18:55:35

Re: Gnome 3.16 performance

#12 2015-07-30 14:07:17

Re: Gnome 3.16 performance

#13 2015-07-30 15:31:51

Re: Gnome 3.16 performance

#14 2015-07-30 15:40:39

Re: Gnome 3.16 performance

#15 2015-07-31 04:47:39

Re: Gnome 3.16 performance

#16 2015-07-31 07:18:29

Re: Gnome 3.16 performance

#17 2015-07-31 07:38:20

Re: Gnome 3.16 performance

#18 2015-07-31 08:05:39

Re: Gnome 3.16 performance

#19 2015-07-31 09:42:11

Re: Gnome 3.16 performance

#20 2015-07-31 12:07:12

Re: Gnome 3.16 performance

#21 2015-07-31 12:10:22

Re: Gnome 3.16 performance

#22 2015-07-31 12:14:47

Re: Gnome 3.16 performance

#23 2015-08-03 08:53:25

Re: Gnome 3.16 performance

Board footer