[SOLVED] Games and screensavers are always extremely slow on my computer!
Linux - GeneralThis Linux forum is for general Linux questions and discussion.
If it is Linux Related and doesn't seem to fit in any other forum then this is the place.
Notices
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Get a virtual cloud desktop with the Linux distro that you want in less than five minutes with Shells! With over 10 pre-installed distros to choose from, the worry-free installation life is here! Whether you are a digital nomad or just looking for flexibility, Shells can put your Linux machine on the device that you want to use.
Exclusive for LQ members, get up to 45% off per month. Click here for more info.
Games and screensavers are always extremely slow on my computer!
I wasn't sure where to post this. I need help.
Using Windows XP on this computer, I'd play F.E.A.R. (a first-person shooter), and Civilization III, and free games, etc. I never had any problems, I could always easily handle games, heavy-duty screensavers, anything.
Using Linux, and as far as I know this is true of all the distributions, but I can't say that for sure, since I haven't tried using the games and everything on all the distributions ... I can't do anything well. I've been putting off asking a question about it, thinking maybe it was just certain games and things - or that it was something I could fix, maybe something wasn't enabled or something. But it's ridiculous. The screensavers ... I can get hardly any to work at all. 90+% of them will be so slow, it's ridiculous!!
And all the games I've tried so far are the same way!!
I just tried Lincity-NG, and it's terrible how slow it is. Pretty much every game I've tried is like this, except for Alien Arena, and I believe Nexuiz was working well for a while, but it was and is very slow when starting up the game and using the menus, too. Warsow worked well, and Alien Arena, and that's about it. Wesnoth works well.
What could possibly cause this to happen!?!?
I'm using Ubuntu 9.04 right now, and I used Users and Groups to change my user privileges ... I checked:
"Capture video from TV or webcams, and use 3d acceleration".
Nothing is helping, at all. It's very bad. I can't even use 90+% of the screensavers properly, and even then if I could tweak them to do as much as possible I'm sure they wouldn't.
This seems very strange, I can't believe that I can't do something to fix this!!!
I want to use the fireworks screensaver, or the other neat screensavers, too.
I'm using an Intel 82915G/GV/910GL Express Chipset Family with Intel GMA. Two hyperthreaded Pentuim 4 3.4GHz processors, and 1 GB of RAM. HP.
Also, as far as I know SuperTux was working well, and Pingus worked well. Hedgewars was terrible. So many of the screensavers won't work properly, very very slow.
hard to say exactly what's the issue, that said, your glxinfo output is giving an error message : "get fences failed -1", a quick poke around turned this up : http://forum.soft32.com/linux/gentoo...ict485511.html
These are posts describing similar graphics slow downs with the same "get fences failed" error message
Last edited by gearoid_murphy; 08-15-2009 at 07:29 AM.
Joe, please post the output of the above command, after booting up. Just curious about something here
Thanks,
Sasha
PS - Note the ATTENTION message where you tried changing the vblank setting; I don't understand if that means it DID set the option, or it DID NOT set it but perhaps EXPORTing the change would work? Like:
Code:
shell$ export vblank_mode=0
shell$ glxgears
..or giving the option to glxgear the old-fashioned way (if it supports it):
Code:
shell$ glxgears --vblank_mode=0
?
Last edited by GrapefruiTgirl; 08-15-2009 at 08:25 AM.
Reason: typos
joebuffer@ubuntu:~$ glxgears --vblank_mode=0
Usage:
-display <displayname> set the display to run on
-stereo run in stereo mode
-fullscreen run in fullscreen mode
-info display OpenGL renderer info
-geometry WxH+X+Y window geometry
joebuffer@ubuntu:~$ export vblank_mode=0
joebuffer@ubuntu:~$ glxgears
ATTENTION: default value of option vblank_mode overridden by environment.
get fences failed: -1
param: 6, val: 0
1002 frames in 5.0 seconds = 200.383 FPS
1057 frames in 5.0 seconds = 211.288 FPS
1022 frames in 5.0 seconds = 204.319 FPS
1063 frames in 5.0 seconds = 212.429 FPS
The games that do work "well", I don't know how well they work really compared to how they should be working.
...
I'm using an Intel 82915G/GV/910GL Express Chipset Family with Intel GMA. Two hyperthreaded Pentuim 4 3.4GHz processors, and 1 GB of RAM. HP.
OK, so according to your initial post, you're running TWO hyperthreading CPU's, which would translate to "4 CPU's" if configured correctly in the kernel.
However, based on the output you provided for my request of the dmesg command, your machine is only booting TWO cpu's.
For comparison, here's my output of the same command:
Code:
bash-3.1$ dmesg | grep CPU
SMP: Allowing 4 CPUs, 2 hotplug CPUs
NR_CPUS:4 nr_cpumask_bits:4 nr_cpu_ids:4 nr_node_ids:1
PERCPU: Embedded 26 pages at ffff880028022000, static data 74912 bytes
Initializing CPU#0
SLUB: Genslabs=13, HWalign=64, Order=0-3, MinObjects=0, CPUs=4, Nodes=1
CPU: L1 I cache: 32K, L1 D cache: 32K
CPU: L2 cache: 1024K
CPU: Physical Processor ID: 0
CPU: Processor Core ID: 0
CPU0: Thermal monitoring enabled (TM1)
CPU0: Genuine Intel(R) CPU 2160 @ 1.80GHz stepping 02
Initializing CPU#1
CPU: L1 I cache: 32K, L1 D cache: 32K
CPU: L2 cache: 1024K
CPU: Physical Processor ID: 0
CPU: Processor Core ID: 1
CPU1: Thermal monitoring enabled (TM1)
CPU1: Genuine Intel(R) CPU 2160 @ 1.80GHz stepping 02
checking TSC synchronization [CPU#0 -> CPU#1]: passed.
Brought up 2 CPUs
PM: Adding info for acpi:ACPI_CPU:00
PM: Adding info for acpi:ACPI_CPU:01
PM: Adding info for acpi:ACPI_CPU:02
PM: Adding info for acpi:ACPI_CPU:03
processor ACPI_CPU:00: registered as cooling_device0
processor ACPI_CPU:01: registered as cooling_device1
Switched to high resolution mode on CPU 1
Switched to high resolution mode on CPU 0
bash-3.1$
So, to explain the above: My motherboard supports ONE physical CPU, which can be up to a 4-Core unit, therefore booting "4 CPU's" if I had a 4-core unit installed, which I don't.
I have configged my kernel to ALLOW 4 CPU's total, incase I one day go buy a 4-core unit, but as you can see, my dmesg shows a total of 2 CPU's brought up.
Your dmesg output also shows a total of "2 CPU's brought up" which tells me that your CPU's are not being used to their full potential.
As I understand it, hyperthreading makes a CPU appear as two CPU's just like a dual-core appears as 2 CPU's.
If I'm right (and there's no guarantee of that-- I don't have/use hyperthreading) then you have not got your kernel configured correctly, either for the total number of allowed total CPU's, OR for hyperthreading enabled.
I believe you should see something like "Brought up 4 CPU's"
Would you please tell us (for informations' sake) what sort of motherboard this is? Or if a laptop, what model? Thanks
I couldn't really say ... it's an HP a1050y, but it's modified. Ordered custom a few years ago.
Everything else seems to run fast.
If it's easy enough to fix, that would be a real good thing, actually. I should get a good speed boost on top of everything already working very well.
Other than the games and screensavers, and things ...
Based on the research I just did on the 'net, that computer/motherboard supports ONE CPU, and supports hyperthreading. This means a total of TWO cpus, so that dmesg output is accurate.
However, I did read a number of reviews and support threads of that model of machine, and reports are that it is definitely not intended as a gaming machine, nor is graphics support very stellar.
Where I'd turn next if it were me looking to improve the performance of the graphics, would be to try some different video drivers. There are scores of available Intel video drivers, as well as some BETA ones. Perhaps there's a better one that you could be running. I'm not real familiar with MESA-3D either, so if this limits what drivers you could use, then this idea might be moot.
NOTE though, an onboard Intel video device, while decent, is not great performance-wise, so you'll not really achieve near the performance you would with an installed card.
Not sure what else to suggest at this time.
Sasha
Last edited by GrapefruiTgirl; 08-15-2009 at 09:15 AM.
It was customized, though, and changed from what the "default" is. You're right, it never was a major gaming machine, but I could play F.E.A.R. with no real problems, and not even use the lowest graphics setting.
Code:
joebuffer@ubuntu:~$ cat /proc/cpuinfo
processor : 0
vendor_id : GenuineIntel
cpu family : 15
model : 4
model name : Intel(R) Pentium(R) 4 CPU 3.40GHz
stepping : 1
cpu MHz : 3400.694
cache size : 1024 KB
physical id : 0
siblings : 2
core id : 0
cpu cores : 1
apicid : 0
initial apicid : 0
fdiv_bug : no
hlt_bug : no
f00f_bug : no
coma_bug : no
fpu : yes
fpu_exception : yes
cpuid level : 5
wp : yes
flags : fpu vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic sep mtrr pge mca cmov pat pse36 clflush dts acpi mmx fxsr sse sse2 ss ht tm pbe nx lm constant_tsc pebs bts pni dtes64 monitor ds_cpl cid cx16 xtpr
bogomips : 6801.38
clflush size : 64
power management:
processor : 1
vendor_id : GenuineIntel
cpu family : 15
model : 4
model name : Intel(R) Pentium(R) 4 CPU 3.40GHz
stepping : 1
cpu MHz : 3400.694
cache size : 1024 KB
physical id : 0
siblings : 2
core id : 0
cpu cores : 1
apicid : 1
initial apicid : 1
fdiv_bug : no
hlt_bug : no
f00f_bug : no
coma_bug : no
fpu : yes
fpu_exception : yes
cpuid level : 5
wp : yes
flags : fpu vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic sep mtrr pge mca cmov pat pse36 clflush dts acpi mmx fxsr sse sse2 ss ht tm pbe nx lm constant_tsc pebs bts pni dtes64 monitor ds_cpl cid cx16 xtpr
bogomips : 6802.94
clflush size : 64
power management:
Code:
joebuffer@ubuntu:~$ uname -a
Linux ubuntu 2.6.28-14-generic #47-Ubuntu SMP Sat Jul 25 00:28:35 UTC 2009 i686 GNU/Linux
Code:
joebuffer@ubuntu:~$ sensors
dme1737-i2c-0-2e
Adapter: SMBus I801 adapter at 0400
V5stby: +4.99 V (min = +0.00 V, max = +6.64 V)
Vccp: +2.24 V (min = +0.00 V, max = +2.99 V)
V3.3: +3.30 V (min = +0.00 V, max = +4.38 V)
V5: +5.00 V (min = +0.00 V, max = +6.64 V)
V12: +11.68 V (min = +0.00 V, max = +15.94 V)
V3.3stby: +3.38 V (min = +0.00 V, max = +4.38 V)
Vbat: +3.24 V (min = +0.00 V, max = +4.38 V)
CPU_Fan: 4541 RPM (min = 0 RPM)
Fan2: 2225 RPM (min = 0 RPM)
Fan4: 0 RPM (min = 0 RPM)
RD1 Temp: +69.3°C (low = +64.0°C, high = +127.0°C)
Int Temp: +42.8°C (low = -127.0°C, high = +127.0°C)
CPU Temp: +0.0°C (low = -127.0°C, high = +127.0°C)
cpu0_vid: +1.088 V
The above shows a single, hyperthreading CPU. Note the physical ID numbers. They're both = 0. So it's one physical CPU.
Modifying something is one thing, but modifying a single-CPU board to support two physical CPUs is something entirely different, and something I doubt is possible, nor would it be economically reasonable if it were possible..
Do you know exactly what was modified, and how, or to what end? I did notice that the HP site had some customization options the purchaser could select when that machine was made available, but nothing along the lines of supporting multiple physical CPUs.
Fan4 is probably not connected, or does not have the ability to monitor RPM, or has a 2-wire fan installed instead of a 3-wire unit, or lm_sensors is misconfigured and it should be reading Fan3 instead..
I think, to get back to the original problem, you need to look into other video driver(s), or perhaps something you can do in your xorg.conf to improve performance.
For example: If you're using 24bpp color depth, switch to 16 instead. You won't notice the difference on the screen, but video will work significantly faster. This assumes that your desired games won't mind; I personally use 16bpp, and all OpenGL screensavers and whatever else work fine. I've never had much reason to need 24bpp color depth.
Sasha
Last edited by GrapefruiTgirl; 08-15-2009 at 09:41 AM.
I was under the impression that for processors to be hyperthreaded, there had to be more than one.
__
I customized the computer when I ordered it from HP's site, but I didn't put a huge amount of thought into it and didn't know very much at all about computers at the time.
__
It was basically just what I said, that was changed, just the simpler stuff. Hard disk space and processor and amount of RAM, and the Intel 82915G/GV/910GL, etc. I didn't do a lot of major customizing or anything. I just picked from their choices.
I thought it didn't mean anything for a single processor to be hyperthreaded, really. I thought it had to be multiple processors or dual/quad-core processors. Even now I did ... I haven't read about hyperthreading for a long time, and I never read much about it.
No, hyperthreading came about (IIRC) just before, or right around the invention of dual core. Hyperthreading is sort-of a way of making like a dual-core CPU, without officially having two cores. It's one physical CPU though and it somehow divides up the processes but shares many resources within itself.
I don't remember the mechanics of it well enough to give you a good description/comparison, but Google & Wikipedia can definitely give you the run-down.
You *might* look into a CPU upgrade, if money allows. I didn't read far enough to note which/what would be the best performing supported CPU you could put in there, like for example a real dual-core, or even a quad core, but it may be worth investigating if you're really really desiring more performance.
Alternately, get an aftermarket video card and install that; that'd be a real graphics booster.
Meanwhile, what happens if you change to 16bpp color?
Sasha
Last edited by GrapefruiTgirl; 08-15-2009 at 09:59 AM.
It still seems funny to me, because when playing F.E.A.R. with higher graphics settings, it would get jerky and slow, but it seems to me that I was playing on a medium level setting and didn't have any problems. If I did, they weren't serious, because I switched between settings.
I'm sure, really, I just don't want to say positive, because I'm 95% sure it was medium, even. A little jerky from time to time, but not enough to worry about. I don't see why Lincity-NG, for example, would be a big deal. And the screensaver problems don't make sense. I had fancy screensavers, and 3d screen savers using Windows XP on this computer, and they were very easy to use. Not one problem.
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.
Games and screensavers are always extremely slow on my computer!
_
and it somehow divides up the processes but shares many resources within itself.
