I don't recall who often I have heard people stating that 2D rendering will be accelerated by your 3D engine because of compiz or similar bullshit.
2D is accelerated by the GPU if the driver is capable (currently all major dirvers except fglrx). period.
The same goes for Xorg. Yes X11 core drawing is mostly fallback, but XRender is usually accelerated quite well, despite the fact that its 2D.
I don't see how "3D" differs between XP and Vista, when talking about D3D or OpenGL.3D in NT6.0 is in some cases faster because it actually mostly runs inside the GPU. Catch my drift?
As far as I know, compositing is disabled for fullscreen games (would be really stupid anyway).This performance gain is mostly held back by compositing which puts extra burden on the GPU. It is also why games like Crysis runs slower in Vista than it does on XP, while it's designed for Vista and even then it is not crippled (on XP you miss some graphical features and Crysis only runs on one core).
Last edited by Linuxhippy; 10-03-2009 at 10:33 AM.
So if a driver accelerates 10% of operations stable, and 25% if I turn on experimental switches, I don't call it capable
Last edited by Linuxhippy; 10-03-2009 at 03:32 PM.