<html> <head> <base href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/" /> </head> <body> <div> <a class="bz_bug_link bz_status_NEW " title="NEW --- - glCallLists performance extremely slow" href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=61412#c4">Comment # 4</a> on <a class="bz_bug_link bz_status_NEW " title="NEW --- - glCallLists performance extremely slow" href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=61412">bug 61412</a> from <a class="email" href="mailto:rexhunter99@gmail.com" title="James Ogden <rexhunter99@gmail.com>"> James Ogden</a> <pre>(In reply to <a href="show_bug.cgi?id=61412#c3">comment #3</a>) > Please, please, please don't use display lists, and don't use bitmaps. > Display lists are basically nvidia-only for performance, so it's a bad route > to go. Use normal texturing and "discard" instructions to render your > bitmaps, or normal texturing and alhpa blending if you're doing fixed > function. Sticking your textures in one big atlas and vertex data in a vbo, > you'll get way better performance than you'd ever get out of bitmap. Really dude, did you not read anything I said? It's a compatibility thing, plus the people who play this game are mostly either kids or computer illiterates so if a font texture goes bye bye because of something silly they did, I'll be the one who has to personally troubleshoot their issue. I *want* to use the proper method, but I've had that many issues in the past with relying on users being intelligent enough to keep track of their file system that I now know better. I know they're slow, I know they're deprecated and I do care, but I don't have much choice if I want to stay sane. Oh and my last machine was an AMD ATi setup, dual radeon graphics, display lists worked fine using the official drivers, or 3rd party ones, I just hate APUs which is why I upgraded as soon as the laptop died before the warranty ran out. So this isn't a case of nvidia drivers being better than the rest. (In reply to <a href="show_bug.cgi?id=61412#c2">comment #2</a>) > Yeah, I think we're relying on the meta path for glBitmap in many cases. We're > probably hitting software rasterization. > > Still, 120 fps -> 8 fps is clearly not reasonable. > > What generation of Intel hardware are you running? (lspci -nn would tell you.) > Can you post an apitrace which exhibits the problem? I'm not sure how much I trust lspci's information, it thinks I have a Xeon server processor :/ I'm running an Intel i5 Gen 3 Core processor the 3210M model IvyBridge. The VGA section for the low-performance side of things states an Intel 3rd Gen Graphics Controller. Not a lot of help on that side. (In reply to <a href="show_bug.cgi?id=61412#c1">comment #1</a>) > glBitmap, not glCallLists, is probably the real issue. It might be helpful > to see the "OpenGL renderer string" from glxinfo to identify the GPU. I > suspect the i965 driver needs some sort of glBitmap caching mechanism > (similar to what's in the gallium state tracker) to improve performance. Renderer is Mesa 9.0 I believe, like I said, it's using Mesa drivers.</pre> </div> <hr> You are receiving this mail because: <ul> <li>You are the assignee for the bug.</li> </ul> </body> </html>