10-50% CPU used by xorg?

[m h]

On Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 12:12 PM, Eric Anholt <eric at anholt.net> wrote:
>
>  On Thu, 2008-02-28 at 09:19 +0100, Clemens Eisserer wrote:
>  > Hi Eric,
>  >
>  > > EXA is bound to be slow on 965 until we land the render fixes (currently
>  > >  sitting on intel-batchbuffer, but we could probably just cherry-pick
>  > >  them out since they're orthogonal to the batchbuffer work).  But if
>  > >  you're seeing issues on 915 or earlier, the only improvement we're
>  > >  expecting to see is from TTM-backed buffers, which might help if you're
>  > >  limited by migration (or might not).
>  >
>  > So does that mean GMA950 based chips will not benefit of the batchbuffer work?
>  > I got several different answers to this questions, some say "yes it
>  > will", others say "only 965".
>  >
>  > It would be great if you could clearify this.
>
>  Yes, to clarify above: The expected result on pre-965 is just that it
>  will change performance for different workloads, some for better, some
>  for worse.  It's not like on 965 where we've got changes that are
>  speeding up everything you do with Render.  I can imagine both large
>  improvements for the "better" case and large losses for the "worse"
>  case.
>
>
>

(Pardon the dumb question).  Will this batch-buffer work get around
the DRI being disabled on wide (dual screen) monitors?