Comment 6 for bug 360138

Look, bug 242094 is not really a bug. It is a collection of comments
from people who have various levels of performance problems on various
hardware. Those people experience several different bugs. As a bug
report it is not useful at all. It could have been closed as "invalid"
but it is kept open since it gives people a place to vent their
frustrations and look for workarounds (which should really be done in
a forum, not in a bug report, but even though Tormod Volden set up a
forum thread for this and posted its link in the bug report, people
still comment there) Read its bug description under [update].

@VangelistX: A bug report which does not have the required information
is not Invalid, it is simply Incomplete. The correct(tm) response is
to ask for the missing information, and set the status to Incomplete
(and preferably subscribe yourself to the bug, so you can set the
status to Confirmed once all information is there).

@andrehsiqueira: If you are intrested in following up on this, even
though you found a workaround that works for you, you may unset the
duplicate flag, upload the output of `lspci -vvnn`,
/var/log/Xorg.0.log, and give some very specific examples of things
that are slow, and how slow they are (preferably in fps). Also, go
through the performance troubleshooting guide at
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/X/Troubleshooting/IntelPerformance and report
back on the things you can look for. Finally, look at
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/X/Reporting if there is more information that
may be useful in a bug report. If you don't care about doing all of
this, you may leave this bug at its status quo.

For information about why
       Option "AccelMethod" "uxa"
is not used by default in Jaunty, see the recent posts about that on
ubuntu-x mailing list, https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-x/ .