Yet another benchmark, glmark2, in a very recent core i5 client.
Scores: No WM: 2058 marco --no-composite: 1894 compiz : 1878 metacity --no-composite: 742 xcompmgr: 716 marco --composite: 708 metacity --composite: 441
In an ideal world, gnome-flashback would support compiz first, then `metacity --no-composite` but with the speed of `marco --no-composite`.
They're 4-5 times faster than the proposed `metacity --composite`!!!
/me will definitely ask the Mate people if they still support `marco --no-composite`...
Yet another benchmark, glmark2, in a very recent core i5 client.
Scores:
No WM: 2058
marco --no-composite: 1894
compiz : 1878
metacity --no-composite: 742
xcompmgr: 716
marco --composite: 708
metacity --composite: 441
In an ideal world, gnome-flashback would support compiz first, then `metacity --no-composite` but with the speed of `marco --no-composite`.
They're 4-5 times faster than the proposed `metacity --composite`!!!
/me will definitely ask the Mate people if they still support `marco --no-composite`...