X4500 with xf86-xorg-intel, extreme low performance

IsSuE · 2009-03-12 12:04:10

Hi there!

I got a T400 with intel x4500 onboard and installed the xorg intel module from testing. Everything is fine so far, got decent Kwin performance, desktop cube rotates smooh. But when I try to play warosw, or quake3 i get around 5 fps. I think q2 and q3 should be easily playable on that graphics card. Any ideas how to improve graphics power?

I already use INTEL_BATCH=1

thx

issue

Dheart · 2009-03-12 12:40:19

Use the xorg-server and xf86-video-intel from testing. More information can be found in this thread.

IsSuE · 2009-03-12 21:10:37

IsSuE wrote:

Hi there!
I got a T400 with intel x4500 onboard and installed the xorg intel module from testing. [...]

Dheart · 2009-03-13 04:18:58

Hm... Must learn to read...
Did you try disabling kwin before starting a game?

IsSuE · 2009-03-21 21:21:49

bump

fijam · 2009-03-21 21:56:26

INTEL_BATCH does nothing, the code it used to rely upon is either removed or disabled. Please do research your myths.

If you really want to try something, grab intel-drm-next tree and master trunks of libdrm, dri2proto, xserver, xf86-video-intel and mesa, but if I were you I'd hold my horses until kernel 2.6.29, xf86-video-intel 2.7 and mesa 7.4 is released.

IsSuE · 2009-04-28 12:06:40

i am gonna bump this one, as my performance has not increased since the release of x86-video-intel 2.7 and kernel 2.6.29. Any hints?

Dheart · 2009-04-28 14:44:44

If noone answered it means noone know the answer. Also provide us with /var/log/xorg.0.log and your current xorg.conf (if you're using one)

Vamp898 · 2009-10-07 15:07:36

I know the answer. The Kernel is to old. That happens a lot of times. For example xf86-video-intel-2.8 is in extra and kernel 2.6.30 is in extra

2.6.30 does not support intel-2.8 only 2.6.31 does.

IsSuE · 2009-10-07 15:17:10

Vamp898 wrote:

I know the answer. The Kernel is to old. That happens a lot of times. For example xf86-video-intel-2.8 is in extra and kernel 2.6.30 is in extra
2.6.30 does not support intel-2.8 only 2.6.31 does.

noticed the same issue today. i downgraded to xf86-video-intel-stable, works again

Vamp898 · 2009-10-07 15:28:31

2.7.1 works with 2.6.30 but 2.7.1 is on AUR and not on extra (only god knows why)

xf86-video-intel is ONLY usefulle when the kernel is fitting. To say 2.8 is actual stable so we do it in extra is not much of interest beceause it dont works with the kernel from [core]

when xf86-video-intel-2.8 only works with the kernel from [testing] it should go into [testing] !!!

Nepherte · 2009-10-07 15:57:24

Why is it then that I'm running xf86-video-intel 2.8.1 for over a month without any problems? I take it doesn't work for you, but you really don't have to go brabling nonsense and generalizing your experience.

KlavKalashj · 2009-10-07 16:11:07

┌───/home/oscar──────────────────┐
oscar:rooompaah » pacman -Q | egrep '(kernel26|intel|mesa)'
intel-dri 7.5.1-2
kernel26 2.6.31.2-1
kernel26-firmware 2.6.31-1
mesa 7.5.1-2
xf86-video-intel 2.8.1-1

Works just fine. But performance is not very good (I don't really know what to expect from this card) and I can not play HoN until next version of mesa... hope it will be in repos soon

Last edited by KlavKalashj (2009-10-07 16:12:12)

Vamp898 · 2009-10-07 18:11:42

@KlavKalashj
you have 2.6.31^^ with that it works fine

@Nepherte
This Problem appears in Gentoo and Arch and there is an official but report for it. So the Linux Kernel Developer and 95% of every Intel Card users is brabling nonsense exept for you Ö_Ö and this problem is only with 3D Accleration so maybe you never tried any 3D stuff

I tested it about 3 times in 2 Distros

2.6.30 works not
2.6.31 works

i even self compiled both versions and tried to take the same options in configuration

On the Gentoo Forums are a lot of threads in case of this

so as i said. Whole world is brabling nonsense except for you........ sounds strange

takedown · 2009-10-07 18:22:10

here:
intel-dri 7.5.1-2
kernel26 2.6.30.6-1
kernel26-firmware 2.6.30-1
mesa 7.5.1-2
xf86-video-intel-newest 2.9.0-1

work very smooth on my thinkpad T500 and kde4.3.2

KlavKalashj · 2009-10-07 18:35:59

Vamp898 wrote:

@KlavKalashj
you have 2.6.31^^ with that it works fine

Oh, that's true Forgot! Haha. But I remember running the older version before (Now I feel like an idiot)

combuster · 2009-10-07 18:36:19

http://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php? … 12#p632212

As I've said earlier there are problems with 2.8.1 video-intel and arch kernel 2.6.30, I also get numerous problems runing et:w (cant see the mouse or change anything in the first screen after the intro), warsow complaining about DGA not found (i don't know if dga is removed from intel drivers), cant start savage:the batlle for Newerth also, while FoFiX and UFO:Alien Invasion works fine (lol, fine, barely playable, urt gives 15-20fps also).

Bad mesa, baaaad mesa

Vamp898 · 2009-10-11 00:42:19

INTEL_BATCH=1 does improve my performence about a double

Without INTEL_BATCH i cant use Compiz Fusion and KDE own Compositing was damm slow

with INTEL_BATCH=1 i can use a _lot_ of Compiz Fusion effeckts and even Sauerbraten does now work on my Notebook. Thats really great but gives me one thing to ask

what the hell does INTEL_BATCH do?

-OpenGL-
Vendor        : Tungsten Graphics, Inc
Renderer        : Mesa DRI Mobile Intel® GM45 Express Chipset GEM 20090712 2009Q2 RC3 
Version        : 1.4 (2.1 Mesa 7.5.1)
Direct Rendering        : No

maybe this helps

Last edited by Vamp898 (2009-10-11 00:46:24)

SoleSoul · 2009-10-11 02:51:09

disables direct rendering maybe?

fijam · 2009-10-11 09:21:08

Vamp898 wrote:

INTEL_BATCH=1 does improve my performence about a double
[...]
what the hell does INTEL_BATCH do?

This is most puzzling. First off, this does not work for me on i915. Nor should it. Essentially, INTEL_BATCH=1 should do nothing, since the code for this has been removed:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/xserver-xorg … comments/7
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+sour … comments/8

I also did not find a mention of it on bugs.freedesktop.org or intel-gfx mailing list. If anything, this is an obsolete hack.

How did you measure performence? Please try for example openarena (http://dri.freedesktop.org/wiki/Benchmarking).

Last edited by fijam (2009-10-11 09:25:45)

Vamp898 · 2009-10-11 12:06:47

I have OpenArena installed but this "openarena +exec anholt 2>&1 | egrep -e '[0-9]+ frames'" does not work. Just starts openarena without any output or something else

im atm on 2.6.30 beceause on 2.6.31 my touchpad does not work. And with kernel 2.6.30 my intel does not work.

Im going to update to 2.6.31 and retell you

ok thats quite really amazing. Without any reason........ my touchpad works again Ö_Ö but i seen that kernel went to core^^

ok i seen that INTEL_BATCH=0/1 does not help in any way beceause im unable to activate direct rendering

direct rendering always worked on my intel. I deactivated it just one single time to use compiz and now its deactivated for ever xD i cant activate it in any way again!

and as i knew INTEL_BATCH did only have effect when direct rendering was enabled.

Last edited by Vamp898 (2009-10-11 12:39:12)

fijam · 2009-10-11 12:29:22

openarena +exec anholt requires two config files which appear to be missing from freedesktop's website, but you should just be able to see difference in avarage fps during gameplay.

Vamp898 · 2009-10-11 12:40:44

2 Days ago where direct rendering was enabled. I seen a very big difference. Without INTEL_BATCH openarena was this slow that you cant move really. with INTEL_BATCH it worked like i would have an slower nVidia, really amazing.

But now direct rendering is disabled and no tut helps to enable it again so i cant test it. but with indirect rendering it seems that INTEL_BATCH have no effeckt

Vamp898 · 2009-10-19 22:41:13

ok guys i get it

when direct rendering is enabled

[vamp898@VampLap ~]$ glxinfo | grep direct
direct rendering: Yes

INTEL_BATCH=1 gives a _lot_ of extra speed

when direct rendering is disabled

[vamp898@VampLap ~]$ glxinfo | grep direct
direct rendering: No (LIBGL_ALWAYS_INDIRECT set)

nothing happens

i tested it with openarena

direct rendering + intel_batch = double of speed but intel_batch works only with direct rendering

intel_batch does nothing with indirect rendering

so unset LIBGL_ALWAYS_INDIRECT

Last edited by Vamp898 (2009-10-19 22:50:11)

Arch Linux

#1 2009-03-12 12:04:10

X4500 with xf86-xorg-intel, extreme low performance

#2 2009-03-12 12:40:19

Re: X4500 with xf86-xorg-intel, extreme low performance

#3 2009-03-12 21:10:37

Re: X4500 with xf86-xorg-intel, extreme low performance

#4 2009-03-13 04:18:58

Re: X4500 with xf86-xorg-intel, extreme low performance

#5 2009-03-21 21:21:49

Re: X4500 with xf86-xorg-intel, extreme low performance

#6 2009-03-21 21:56:26

Re: X4500 with xf86-xorg-intel, extreme low performance

#7 2009-04-28 12:06:40

Re: X4500 with xf86-xorg-intel, extreme low performance

#8 2009-04-28 14:44:44

Re: X4500 with xf86-xorg-intel, extreme low performance

#9 2009-10-07 15:07:36

Re: X4500 with xf86-xorg-intel, extreme low performance

#10 2009-10-07 15:17:10

Re: X4500 with xf86-xorg-intel, extreme low performance

#11 2009-10-07 15:28:31

Re: X4500 with xf86-xorg-intel, extreme low performance

#12 2009-10-07 15:57:24

Re: X4500 with xf86-xorg-intel, extreme low performance

#13 2009-10-07 16:11:07

Re: X4500 with xf86-xorg-intel, extreme low performance

#14 2009-10-07 18:11:42

Re: X4500 with xf86-xorg-intel, extreme low performance

#15 2009-10-07 18:22:10

Re: X4500 with xf86-xorg-intel, extreme low performance

#16 2009-10-07 18:35:59

Re: X4500 with xf86-xorg-intel, extreme low performance

#17 2009-10-07 18:36:19

Re: X4500 with xf86-xorg-intel, extreme low performance

#18 2009-10-11 00:42:19

Re: X4500 with xf86-xorg-intel, extreme low performance

#19 2009-10-11 02:51:09

Re: X4500 with xf86-xorg-intel, extreme low performance

#20 2009-10-11 09:21:08

Re: X4500 with xf86-xorg-intel, extreme low performance

#21 2009-10-11 12:06:47

Re: X4500 with xf86-xorg-intel, extreme low performance

#22 2009-10-11 12:29:22

Re: X4500 with xf86-xorg-intel, extreme low performance

#23 2009-10-11 12:40:44

Re: X4500 with xf86-xorg-intel, extreme low performance

#24 2009-10-19 22:41:13

Re: X4500 with xf86-xorg-intel, extreme low performance

Board footer