this post was submitted on 27 Jan 2025
26 points (93.3% liked)

Linux

11303 readers
26 users here now

Welcome to c/linux!

Welcome to our thriving Linux community! Whether you're a seasoned Linux enthusiast or just starting your journey, we're excited to have you here. Explore, learn, and collaborate with like-minded individuals who share a passion for open-source software and the endless possibilities it offers. Together, let's dive into the world of Linux and embrace the power of freedom, customization, and innovation. Enjoy your stay and feel free to join the vibrant discussions that await you!

Rules:

  1. Stay on topic: Posts and discussions should be related to Linux, open source software, and related technologies.

  2. Be respectful: Treat fellow community members with respect and courtesy.

  3. Quality over quantity: Share informative and thought-provoking content.

  4. No spam or self-promotion: Avoid excessive self-promotion or spamming.

  5. No NSFW adult content

  6. Follow general lemmy guidelines.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
MigratingtoLemmy@lemmy.world
26
X11 vs Wayland cursor latency (mort.coffee)
submitted 4 months ago by Feathercrown@lemmy.world to c/linux@lemmy.world
7 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

I don't think he should have included the starting frame-- if the cursor were theoretically instant, his method records it with a 1 frame delay, and this +1 frame error happens on every test. Correcting this actually makes Wayland more laggy proportionally, although it makes both less laggy absolutely.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] A_A@lemmy.world 7 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

Latency raw data :

Gnome Variant Δ camera frames Average (Δ) Δ milli seconds Δ monitor refreshes
X11 5 4 3 4 5 4 6 5 1 4 4 4 3 4 4 4 4.00 16.7 2.4
Wayland 6 5 6 5 5 6 6 4 8 6 5 5 5 6 5 6 5.5625 23.2 3.3
Δ(Δ) - - ~1.5 ~6.5 ~1.0

instead of calculating the average one could decide to drop the data points that are way outside of their goups.
Doing so, in the first group I would neglect the value of Δ = 1 or 6 frame and in the second group I would neglect the value of 4 or 8 frames

Results :
X11 : from 3 to 5 frames
Wayland : from 5 to 6 frames
Δ(Δ) = 5.5 - 4 = 1.5

Still it doesn't change the final result that the difference between these two Gnome versions is 1.5 camera frames at 240 frames per second.

[–] Feathercrown@lemmy.world 3 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Good analysis

[–] A_A@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Thanks. Also, after a bit of thought, i do believe you are right saying that we should remove one frame of all the raw camera data. ... it will, as you say, decrease the absolute values and make Wayland more laggy proportionally, yet, it doesn't change the absolute difference.