Acceleration with fglrx driver is very slow

[kenshi]

Ahoy. I have a laptop with a Radeon X1200 graphics adaptor. I've installed the driver and compiled the module in Debian. I've set up Xorg and glxinfo says it's using direct rendering, yet it's running so slowly. glxgears runs at a little less than 1000 fps. fgl_glxgears runs at about 200 fps. (I'm not sure what it typically runs at.) I'm trying to play FlightGear but it runs as slow as 5 fps. I've searched all over the internet and tried everything I can think of but can't find a solution to this issue. Here's the output of certain programs and files.

glxinfo

name of display: :0.0
display: :0 screen: 0
direct rendering: Yes
server glx vendor string: SGI
server glx version string: 1.2
server glx extensions:
GLX_ARB_multisample, GLX_EXT_import_context, GLX_EXT_texture_from_pixmap,
GLX_EXT_visual_info, GLX_EXT_visual_rating, GLX_OML_swap_method,
GLX_SGIS_multisample, GLX_SGIX_fbconfig, GLX_SGIX_visual_select_group
client glx vendor string: SGI
client glx version string: 1.4
client glx extensions:
GLX_ARB_create_context, GLX_ARB_get_proc_address, GLX_ARB_multisample,
GLX_EXT_import_context, GLX_EXT_visual_info, GLX_EXT_visual_rating,
GLX_MESA_allocate_memory, GLX_MESA_swap_control,
GLX_MESA_swap_frame_usage, GLX_NV_swap_group, GLX_OML_swap_method,
GLX_OML_sync_control, GLX_SGI_make_current_read, GLX_SGI_swap_control,
GLX_SGI_video_sync, GLX_SGIS_multisample, GLX_SGIX_fbconfig,
GLX_SGIX_pbuffer, GLX_SGIX_swap_barrier, GLX_SGIX_swap_group,
GLX_SGIX_visual_select_group, GLX_EXT_texture_from_pixmap
GLX version: 1.2
GLX extensions:
GLX_ARB_create_context, GLX_ARB_get_proc_address, GLX_ARB_multisample,
GLX_EXT_import_context, GLX_EXT_visual_info, GLX_EXT_visual_rating,
GLX_MESA_swap_control, GLX_NV_swap_group, GLX_OML_swap_method,
GLX_SGI_video_sync, GLX_SGIS_multisample, GLX_SGIX_fbconfig,
GLX_SGIX_swap_barrier, GLX_SGIX_swap_group, GLX_SGIX_visual_select_group
OpenGL vendor string: ATI Technologies Inc.
OpenGL renderer string: ATI Radeon X1200 Series
OpenGL version string: 2.1.8494 Release
OpenGL extensions:
GL_AMD_performance_monitor, GL_ARB_depth_texture, GL_ARB_draw_buffers,
GL_ARB_fragment_program, GL_ARB_fragment_program_shadow,
GL_ARB_fragment_shader, GL_ARB_framebuffer_object,
GL_ARB_half_float_pixel, GL_ARB_half_float_vertex,
GL_ARB_map_buffer_range, GL_ARB_multisample, GL_ARB_multitexture,
GL_ARB_occlusion_query, GL_ARB_pixel_buffer_object,
GL_ARB_point_parameters, GL_ARB_point_sprite, GL_ARB_shader_objects,
GL_ARB_shading_language_100, GL_ARB_shadow, GL_ARB_shadow_ambient,
GL_ARB_texture_border_clamp, GL_ARB_texture_compression,
GL_ARB_texture_cube_map, GL_ARB_texture_env_add,
GL_ARB_texture_env_combine, GL_ARB_texture_env_crossbar,
GL_ARB_texture_env_dot3, GL_ARB_texture_float,
GL_ARB_texture_mirrored_repeat, GL_ARB_texture_non_power_of_two,
GL_ARB_texture_rectangle, GL_ARB_transpose_matrix,
GL_ARB_vertex_array_object, GL_ARB_vertex_buffer_object,
GL_ARB_vertex_program, GL_ARB_vertex_shader, GL_ARB_window_pos,
GL_ATI_draw_buffers, GL_ATI_envmap_bumpmap, GL_ATI_fragment_shader,
GL_ATI_meminfo, GL_ATI_separate_stencil, GL_ATI_texture_compression_3dc,
GL_ATI_texture_env_combine3, GL_ATI_texture_float, GL_EXT_abgr,
GL_EXT_bgra, GL_EXT_blend_color, GL_EXT_blend_equation_separate,
GL_EXT_blend_func_separate, GL_EXT_blend_minmax, GL_EXT_blend_subtract,
GL_EXT_compiled_vertex_array, GL_EXT_copy_texture,
GL_EXT_draw_range_elements, GL_EXT_fog_coord, GL_EXT_framebuffer_blit,
GL_EXT_framebuffer_multisample, GL_EXT_framebuffer_object,
GL_EXT_gpu_program_parameters, GL_EXT_multi_draw_arrays,
GL_EXT_packed_depth_stencil, GL_EXT_packed_pixels,
GL_EXT_point_parameters, GL_EXT_rescale_normal, GL_EXT_secondary_color,
GL_EXT_separate_specular_color, GL_EXT_shadow_funcs, GL_EXT_stencil_wrap,
GL_EXT_subtexture, GL_EXT_texgen_reflection, GL_EXT_texture3D,
GL_EXT_texture_compression_s3tc, GL_EXT_texture_cube_map,
GL_EXT_texture_edge_clamp, GL_EXT_texture_env_add,
GL_EXT_texture_env_combine, GL_EXT_texture_env_dot3,
GL_EXT_texture_filter_anisotropic, GL_EXT_texture_lod_bias,
GL_EXT_texture_mirror_clamp, GL_EXT_texture_object,
GL_EXT_texture_rectangle, GL_EXT_texture_sRGB, GL_EXT_vertex_array,
GL_KTX_buffer_region, GL_NV_blend_square, GL_NV_conditional_render,
GL_NV_texgen_reflection, GL_SGIS_generate_mipmap,
GL_SGIS_texture_edge_clamp, GL_SGIS_texture_lod, GL_WIN_swap_hint,
WGL_EXT_swap_control
...


fglrxinfo

display: :0.0 screen: 0
OpenGL vendor string: ATI Technologies Inc.
OpenGL renderer string: ATI Radeon X1200 Series
OpenGL version string: 2.1.8494 Release


xorg.conf

Section "ServerLayout"
Identifier "aticonfig Layout"
Screen 0 "aticonfig-Screen[0]-0" 0 0
EndSection

Section "Files"
EndSection

Section "Module"
Load "GLcore"
Load "glx"
Load "dri"

SubSection "extmod"
Option "omit xfree86-dga"
EndSubSection

EndSection

Section "InputDevice"
Identifier "Generic Keyboard"
Driver "kbd"
Option "XkbRules" "xorg"
Option "XkbModel" "pc104"
Option "XkbLayout" "us"
Option "XkbVariant" "dvorak"
EndSection

Section "InputDevice"
Identifier "Configured Mouse"
Driver "mouse"
EndSection

Section "Monitor"
Identifier "Configured Monitor"
EndSection

Section "Monitor"
Identifier "aticonfig-Monitor[0]-0"
Option "VendorName" "ATI Proprietary Driver"
Option "ModelName" "Generic Autodetecting Monitor"
Option "DPMS" "true"
EndSection

#Section "Device"
# Identifier "Configured Video Device"
# Driver "ati"
#EndSection

Section "Device"
Identifier "aticonfig-Device[0]-0"
Driver "fglrx"
BusID "PCI:1:5:0"
Option "VideoOverlay" "on"
Option "OpenGLOverlay" "off"
Option "UseInternalAGPGART" "yes"
EndSection

Section "Screen"
Identifier "aticonfig-Screen[0]-0"
Device "aticonfig-Device[0]-0"
Monitor "aticonfig-Monitor[0]-0"
DefaultDepth 24
SubSection "Display"
Viewport 0 0
Depth 24
EndSubSection
EndSection

Section "DRI"
Mode 0666
EndSection

[bridgman]

What is your screen resolution and CPU speed ? Does the performance improve significantly at lower resolutions ?

[kenshi]

The processor is a dual-core 1.8 GHz. My default resolution is 1280x800. At 320x200, there's only about a 5% increase in speed in glxgears. It uses very little CPU either way.

[bridgman]

The glxgears program is so far removed from a typical application that it's barely worth running other than making sure you have some kind of 3D support. I don't think your glxgears numbers sound unreasonable.

How does the flightgear performance change at lower resolution ?

When you say "it uses very little CPU either way" is that when running glxgears ? How is the CPU load when running FlightGear ?

[kenshi]

FlightGear uses a pretty heavy load, at least on one of the cores. It mostly stays between 60 and 80%. I don't think there's a way to change the resolution while fullscreen. I dramatically reduced the window size which did give me a couple more fps, but it still only averages about 10 to 12. I suspect it's still calculating the standard resolution, whatever it is, and then scaling it down. I wish I had another 3D game installed. TuxRacer just crashes off the bat.

[bridgman]

My guess is that you are being limited by vertex shader processing being done on the CPU, but that is only a guess. A good next step would be to play with some of the options to lighten the load. Turning off AI traffic and sound might also be worth considering, just to make sure they aren't getting in the way.

http://wiki.flightgear.org/index.php?title=Command_Line_Parameters

I didn't see an easy way to find out what options are currently selected, unfortunately. Maybe it gets printed in a log ?

Anyways, start by nuking things like fog/haze/snow. The FlightGear documentation mentions that "in general, GPUs which rely on shared memory should be avoided" (like the X12xx) but with some tweaking it should be possible to get decent performance on your laptop.

[kenshi]

I had already tried a few options to try to increase the speed, but here you go.

fgfs --disable-random-objects --disable-ai-models --disable-sound --disable-clouds --disable-clouds3d --shading-flat --disable-textures --visibility=3000

With all of that, it's still dropping into the single digits and it's pretty dull visually.

[crumja]

The X1200 is widely known as a pretty bad chip in terms of performance. Your glxgears numbers match with the X1200 I had.

[bridgman]

Is anyone else running FlightGear that could sing out with their own experiences ? What I would expect is that X12xx is faster than the competing IGP parts of the time but slower than, say, an X300 or X1300.

The big deal with the X12xx was that you could play games on it in the first place (at a time when most IGPs were not really useable for gaming), not that it was a particularly *fast* gaming system.

One possibility is that the open drivers (which advertise fewer OpenGL functions) might force FlightGear to use a simpler code path which might, as a result, run a bit faster even though the drivers are less efficient overall. I don't want to ask kenshi to change drivers unless someone has some experience running FlightGear on similar hardware with the open drivers recently.

[kenshi]

Well I didn't know this was such a piece of crap video card. I'll just try to set the game up on my desktop. It has a decent Nvidia card.

[bridgman]

Well, considering the budget for the graphics core in an IGP part (maybe $5.00 tops) it's a damn good video card :D

It would still be great if people could post their own experiences with flightgear on entry-level hardware. We still don't fully understand why the frame rate isn't increasing more at low resolutions. It's possible that the open drivers might actually give you more performance with that specific app, but that is only a guess.

[kenshi]

I can't get the open drivers to work with DRI. For some reason, I don't have an agpgart module.