On Wed, Apr 19, 2006 at 08:54:49PM -0700, Joel Jaeggli wrote: > There are a lot of variables that can affect the perception of whether a > gui is fast/responsive... Without some formality in testing and benchmark > methodoly, it's all speculation. I don't have to have a methodology to show that FC5 slogs molasses in comparison to Win XP (it's a dual-boot machine). I'm reasonably certain that the culprit is X, and hence the problem unlikely to go away in the near future. FWIW, there's been a slight subjective performance improvement when transiting from 2.4 to 2.6 kernel branch. I'm still harboring the hopes that hardware acceration will make X moderately usable -- the tradeoff with Win XP is that everything freezes if there's heavy I/O. I'm not certain if dual-head adds more penalty than just double pixel real estate, but 30" displays being not yet affordable it's not an option anyway. > A perception of differing resonsiveness is not the most overt difference I > notice when going back and forth between my laptop, which is presently > running ubuntu and my desktop which is running fc4/x86_64, which again > means nothing (the hardware is wildly different albeit relativly modern in > both cases). -- Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org";>leitl</a> http://leitl.org ______________________________________________________________ ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.ativel.com 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
