On my A1 XE the font change doesn't really seem to make a difference. But then, I didn't think it was all that slow anyway.
I find it interesting that some say that is to slow, and others seem not unhappy with AmiCygnix spped wise.
Is this a matter of configuration? Expectation? The uses to which people are putting it?
My personal need was to use amicygnix an a Xserver to connect to from my linux box, so I could run certain linux apps, and wine apps faster than via Xvnc. But AmiCygnix fails dismally here (sorry to be blunt). If I connect to my linux x86 server from my AmigaOne using X under DebianPPC it is much faster than via XVnc but connecting to AmiCyngix is much slower.
Ofcourse I can just run TwinVNC under amigaos and not worry about this, but I wonder if some people are finding local apps run at an acceptable speed, perhaps it some kind of network efficiency issue? Just wondering if there is something I could tweak that might improve that aspect.
I find it interesting that some say that is to slow, and others seem not unhappy with AmiCygnix spped wise.
Is this a matter of configuration? Expectation? The uses to which people are putting it? .
That's a very good point. I'm really unsure here: Is the performance on the users computers the same as on my machine? It's true, that the performance of an AmiCygnix application is lower than a normal amiga programs, but for my personal point of view it is far away from being unusuable. Maybe my expectations are not so high.
It's still hard for me to say, where the biggest problems of AmiCygnix are. Amicygnix highly depends on the network performance. Every message, gfx operation, data exchange etc. uses the network. I can't remove that without loosing a big part of the unix compatibility. AmiCygnix was created to make easy ports possible - I don't want to change that.
Gfx hardware acceleration would help. But in a way the gfx performance is not so bad. I have a SDL port for AmiCygnix and ported "Kobo deluxe" with that. I would say, it has 95% of the performance of the native port. O.K. - the native port of SDL is also a bit slow, but can it be called unusuable??
It's still hard for me to say, where the biggest problems of AmiCygnix are. Amicygnix highly depends on the network performance. Every message, gfx operation, data exchange etc. uses the network. I can't remove that without loosing a big part of the unix compatibility. AmiCygnix was created to make easy ports possible - I don't want to change that.
What mean network ??? (usually not enough CPU power or gfx card,....).
For taking the abiworld example on amicygnix, abiworld work great and usable when typing a text on the program or deleting a line, etc....
Just the vertical scroll is a little slow and if lots of return key used, must wait to see the last one.
In another hand, the user know after some time how using abiworld and make with the speed availale on the SAM.
IMHO, all amicygnix user wish to have better speed (page scrolling on abiworld or when moving window) in the futur.
Not making 32 bit screenmode available will increase the amicygnix speed ???
First: Thanks for testing! Now I know, that fonts are not such a big problem than I thought.
Can you test another thing for me? I've found out, that some programs (especially games) are working better, when they have a task priority of -1. Games and sometimes normal apps freeze for a short time (while typing text for example), but with a priority of -1 this problem disappears.
Did you ever have such a problem? If yes, could you try to launch this problematic app and set the priority to -1 with (for example) Scout and try it again?
Quote:
What mean network ??? (usually not enough CPU power or gfx card,....).
X11 is a network system. The gfx operations and the hardware handling is done by the server. The application is only a network client, which communicates with the server. Because of this, it is possible to run the server and the application on two different machines. On the other hand this means, that EVERYTHING goes through the network: A key event is recognized by the server and then sent to the client - a rendered picture by an application (client) is sent to the server, so it can be displayed. Finally this means, that a fast AmiCygnix needs a fast network. Not only the simple data transfer rate is important, also the response of the network is vital.
Quote:
Not making 32 bit screenmode available will increase the amicygnix speed ???
No. The current version of the server doesn't support 32bit modes anyway.
First thanks for all the explanations Don't know that rendering amicygnix on the screen use a server....
Quote:
Can you test another thing for me? I've found out, that some programs (especially games) are working better, when they have a task priority of -1. Games and sometimes normal apps freeze for a short time (while typing text for example), but with a priority of -1 this problem disappears.
Did you ever have such a problem? If yes, could you try to launch this problematic app and set the priority to -1 with (for example) Scout and try it again?
Sorry I don't understand. I must put amicygnix a priority of -1 and use the program ???
Please launch AmiCygnix, launch an application (like AbiWord) and then set the priority of AbiWord to -1 by using Scout. Do it this way: Launch Scout and click on "Tasks". Search for a task called "Background CLI [Cygnix:CygnixPPC/ bin/abiword]". Select the task and click on "Priority". A requester appears, where you can change the priority.
Ofcourse I can just run TwinVNC under amigaos and not worry about this, but I wonder if some people are finding local apps run at an acceptable speed, perhaps it some kind of network efficiency issue? Just wondering if there is something I could tweak that might improve that aspect.
Here comes somethng that looks like pure advocacly, but I just want to state some relevant facts: Comparing speed of X11 to VNC isn't ``fair''. It is like comparing playback of movie on two devices, while 1-st uses framedrop (vnc) and othe struggles to draw every frame (X11). Comparing AmiCygnix to debian's xserver is unfair too (older totally unaccelerated version vs. one with accelerated 2d driver without extra software layer that exists in AmiCygnix' case. )
Native apps (sylpheed, geany) work fast. Mozilla one the other hand is slower. Gvim (remote) is very reasonable. Some things to allow faster remote display: stop using ssh 's X11 tunneling and use xauthority mechanism (via "xhost +client machnine" on A1 or via "Cygnix:CygnixPPC/etc/X0.hosts" and setting $DISPLAY on client machine).
Edit: did anyone tried to experiment with bencharking with screenmode setting+ driver combinations?
All what i miss personally in the current realisation of amicygnix, it's that the gfx redrawing are slow (redrawinf of windowses and dragging of windowses). Not madness slow, but detectable and not smooth. Dunno will be hardware acceleration help here if all of this based on networks stuff or not ..
maybe new video driver for ati on sam could help to boost up the server ?.. i think that have good 2D and 3D driver could help a lot.. here i have an ibook g3 500 Mhz with Ati Rage 128 and ubuntu runs well, much faster than sam ( and sam has a faster cpu and faster gpu.. )
Here comes somethng that looks like pure advocacly, but I just want to state some relevant facts:
Okay
Quote:
Comparing speed of X11 to VNC isn't ``fair''. It is like comparing playback of movie on two devices, while 1-st uses framedrop (vnc) and othe struggles to draw every frame (X11).
Hmm but in the linux to linux situation
debianx86_Xclient to debianppc_Xserver
is much faster than
debianx86_Xclient to debianx86_XVNC to debianppc_vncviewer
That could be because XVNC is loading the p3 server in addition to the app.
Speeds on TwinVNC under amigaos4 and vncviewer under debianppc are comparable (OS4 might even have the edge)
Quote:
Comparing AmiCygnix to debian's xserver is unfair too (older totally unaccelerated version vs. one with accelerated 2d driver without extra software layer that exists in AmiCygnix' case. )
I don't expect AmiCygnix to go as fast as linux, I just need to to be faster than VNC to be of use to me.
But I was under the impresion that DebianPPC on the A1 did not have hardware accelaeration enabled? (Or is that only 3d accel that's missing).
The important point about the comparison though, is that is not that X11 is faster than AmiCygnix but that X11 is faster than VNC thus a potentially optimised AmiCygnix could also be faster. If a linux native X11 server couldn't keep up with VNC there be little point in trying optimise AmiCygnix (for this purpose).
Quote:
Some things to allow faster remote display: stop using ssh 's X11 tunneling and use xauthority mechanism (via "xhost +client machnine" on A1 or via "Cygnix:CygnixPPC/etc/X0.hosts" and setting $DISPLAY on client machine).
I've yet to get ssh tunneling working so have always been using the method you sugest.
Please launch AmiCygnix, launch an application (like AbiWord) and then set the priority of AbiWord to -1 by using Scout. Do it this way: Launch Scout and click on "Tasks". Search for a task called "Background CLI [Cygnix:CygnixPPC/ bin/abiword]". Select the task and click on "Priority". A requester appears, where you can change the priority.
I have tested the explanation quoted and with priority -1, I can't really seen a difference of page scrolling speed with a document.
My test is to open abiworld-en.guide and simply go down the document with down arrow key.
strange: if I change abiworld-en.guide by helvetica, corrier or terminal 12, font are bold and blue and if vertical scroll the document with down arrow key, colors fonts are strange (light blue and after green...).
the speed problem is little slow abiworld menu or slow page scroll with abiworld, not the time of loading abiworld who is verry correct,.... I'm stressed to explain well what kind of low speed sometime with amicygnix (redraw menu over the program or vertical page scroll)...
question: there are a seting somewhere on amicygnix for not having solid window application moving ???
Comparing speed of X11 to VNC isn't ``fair''. It is like comparing playback of movie on two devices, while 1-st uses framedrop (vnc) and othe struggles to draw every frame (X11).
Hmm but in the linux to linux situation
debianx86_Xclient to debianppc_Xserver
is much faster than
debianx86_Xclient to debianx86_XVNC to debianppc_vncviewer
That could be because XVNC is loading the p3 server in addition to the app.
In case of client on its local xserver displayed via vnc on remote machine there are 2 gotchas: the xserver that is displayed via vnc is totally virtual and can be slowed only by lack of resourses (ram/cpu), but I bet that's not the case, what leaves the other one: it depends on the client. There are clients that will benefit from being transferred over X11 and other clients will suffer. Client that has complex gui will be slower via X11 (see complex kde apps, browser displaying complex pages, any app that has to redraw images) while VNC performance is affected by amount of damage to the display and its settings (low compression will cause higher network traffic) Also, apps that query for fonts will start up slowly on remote X11 servers.
Quote:
I don't expect AmiCygnix to go as fast as linux, I just need to to be faster than VNC to be of use to me.
What are the apps you are using?
Quote:
But I was under the impresion that DebianPPC on the A1 did not have h hardware accelaeration enabled? (Or is that only 3d accel that's missing).
Xorg's radeon driver has 2d acceleration, and xorg itself has some extensions to do the job faster (that are not present in AmiCygnix due to older version).
Quote:
The important point about the comparison though, is that is not that X11 is faster than AmiCygnix but that X11 is faster than VNC thus a potentially optimised AmiCygnix could also be faster. If a linux native X11 server couldn't keep up with VNC there be little point in trying optimise AmiCygnix (for this purpose).
Just shooting in the dark: can someone with Sam to set Cygnix/DISPLAY env var to IP:0 (in env:, not envarc: where IP is your ethernet card's IP address and test for speed of local X11 apps?
I have tested the explanation quoted and with priority -1, I can't really seen a difference of page scrolling speed with a document.
The priority of -1 doesn't help with scrolling or window movements. I think my request was unclear. It only helps, when a program freezes for a short time while working with it. This may not happen on your SAM - I don't know. I have AmiCygnix ports of some SDL games, where this problem occurs all the time. But sometimes it happens also with AbiWord or others apps here too.
Quote:
question: there are a seting somewhere on amicygnix for not having solid window application moving ???
This is a problem of the window manager "OpenBox". The window manager is responsible for the way windows are moved. OpenBox only supports opaque movements. You could switch to "mwm" (Motif Window Manager). He uses a frame for window movements, but he is less comfortable. Use myX11Setup for this.
I have a new window manager here: The Equinox Window Manager. He is a bit faster than OpenBox and supports also frame movements. Maybe you like to test it?
maybe new video driver for ati on sam could help to boost up the server ?.. i think that have good 2D and 3D driver could help a lot.. here i have an ibook g3 500 Mhz with Ati Rage 128 and ubuntu runs well, much faster than sam ( and sam has a faster cpu and faster gpu.. )
It would not help. As described above, the server uses only own routines for rendering. No system (gfx) routine is used. The only solution would be to change the code to uses system routines. And better: Port a newer server version, which uses MESA.
@Jack
[quote]Xorg's radeon driver has 2d acceleration, and xorg itself has some extensions to do the job faster (that are not present in AmiCygnix due to older version). [quote] Hmm - but when I use this driver, I have to hijack the gfx card? Or am I wrong?
This is a problem of the window manager "OpenBox". The window manager is responsible for the way windows are moved. OpenBox only supports opaque movements. You could switch to "mwm" (Motif Window Manager). He uses a frame for window movements, but he is less comfortable. Use myX11Setup for this.
I have a new window manager here: The Equinox Window Manager. He is a bit faster than OpenBox and supports also frame movements. Maybe you like to test it?
Once upon a time there was amiwm - looked like workbench 2.0 Simple than mwm
Anyway, jokes aside, one could make a minimastic environment with mwm+toolbar if he/she doesn't care tweaking text configs andtoolbar inability to display amything othern than xpm icons.
Xorg's radeon driver has 2d acceleration, and xorg itself has some extensions to do the job faster (that are not present in AmiCygnix due to older version).
Hmm - but when I use this driver, I have to hijack the gfx card? Or am I wrong?
Xorgs radeon driver relies on kernel's radeon driver. When kernel driver isn't loaded, xorg set up explicitly with radeon won't start. Edit: yes it hits the card directly. takes one of virtual consoles.
What we need is extensions. AmiCygnix: BIG-REQUESTS DOUBLE-BUFFER LBX MIT-SHM MIT-SUNDRY-NONSTANDARD SECURITY SHAPE SYNC XC-APPGROUP XC-MISC XIE
Mainly Firefox + flash at the moment as my linux inxtall has been really stripped down, also Cheese WebCam Booth.
Both work better via X type connections under linux, (when compared to VNC).
I would occasionally use blender but it won't work via VNC and it might as well not work via X (slow is not the word in this case!!!)
I also access remote shells more easily via VNC rather than ssh (except that I start VNC via ssh) as it easier to use sh with a unix console. This is usually for starting remote blender renders on the slightly faster machine.
cygnusEd wrote: The priority of -1 doesn't help with scrolling or window movements. I think my request was unclear. It only helps, when a program freezes for a short time while working with it. This may not happen on your SAM - I don't know. I have AmiCygnix ports of some SDL games, where this problem occurs all the time. But sometimes it happens also with AbiWord or others apps here too.
OK. Don't know this problem. Maybe Amicygnix user take that as normal software reaction on slow SAM....
Amicygnix can't be speed up a little by disabling some GUI settings like composition,...... ???
Quote:
I have a new window manager here: The Equinox Window Manager. He is a bit faster than OpenBox and supports also frame movements. Maybe you like to test it?
Of course, I could test (if easy to manage because I'm not skilled than other people on this thread like jack
Mainly Firefox + flash at the moment as my linux inxtall has been really stripped
This is slow. Firefox is much slower on AmiCygnix than Seamonkey.
Quote:
also Cheese WebCam Booth. Both work better via X type connections under linux, (when compared to VNC).
These two are probable slow too.
Quote:
I also access remote shells more easily via VNC rather than ssh (except that I start VNC via ssh) as it easier to use sh with a unix console. This is usually for starting remote blender renders on the slightly faster machine.
That depends on terminal window. Tabs-capable ones can reduce the number of windows.Xfce4-terminal and gnome-terminal behave reasonably. And vinced shell +extended vt setup can do the trick using native amiga window,
News feed
OS4 Feedback forum
OS4Depot Feedback forum
Amigabounty forum
OpenAmiga forum
AmiCygnix forum
ABC shell forum
AmiKit forum
Cinnamon Writer forum
CodeBench forum
Digital Universe forum
Dopus 5 forum
E-UAE forum
Gnash forum
Ibrowse forum
JAmiga forum
Odyssey forum
OWB forum
Qt forum
SmartFileSystem forum
Timberwolf forum
TouchDevice forum
TuneNet forum
Unsatisfactory Software forum
Donate
Don't know that rendering amicygnix on the screen use a server....
