XDM = X Display Manager, the original login thingy?
Compared with this:
And then results with intel:
Could someone rerun supertuxkart with current radeon on non-unity maybe:o.
One thing that I find interresting ist, that gnome-shell is sometimes the slowest and sometimes (one of) the fastest desktop(s) according to these benchmarks. How can that be? Shouldn't there be a uniform slowdown due to composite?
I guess that all compositor where tested without their respective option to disable compositing on fullscreen. That would explain why they are all in the same ballpark. For Enlightenment, we don't turn this feature on by default as most driver out there are buggy and I guess all compositor have the same behavior. So I recommend to go in Settings/Composite/Advanced/Memory/Don't composite fullscreen windows for Enlightenment if you want better number.
Now if you look at the number as a benchmark for just how fast compositor are at pushing frame, it is still interesting. I am wondering why some test case show E17 as been slow when other it is more at lead of other composite manager. I should spend time playing I guess :-)
Slightly off topic but Michael weren't you supposed to be publishing some steam benchmarks? Are these comming?
Enlightenment e17 was benchmarked with stock settings, which does mean it does not redirect fullscreen windows. It automatically does this, if the option is turned on. For full compatibility it is not default to on.
It's possible some games where run in fullscreen while others where not. We need more info. It's also possible (if the games where run in fullscreen) that specific games don't properly request fullscreen, and therefor Gnome/Unity/KDE composite them anyways. I don't know for sure, but it is interesting.Quote:
Originally Posted by oleid