More smooth and reactive

Hi all! I’ve got a question, not a real problem: i would like to know if there is a way to make my laptop’s graphic a little bit more smooth and reactive, because sometimes i give a look to other distros (even if my home is OpenSuse lol!) and i see that can be better than that. What can i check to improve this side?

I’m on a HP 250 G6, with 8GB RAM, VGA Intel HD Graphics 620, CPU I5-7200U and i use an SSD drive. I’m using GNOME as de.

Thanks to all, have a nice day!

Are you using Gnome Wayland or Gnome Xorg?


I’m using Xorg, so:



…and the other is empty

In the system BIOS (F10 at boot), any setting for GPU ram? Perhaps explain some more on how you mean reactive as in startup of applications? Perhaps a list of applications that you have issues with?

I’m looking for a general improve, not for a particolar application. In example: also when i enter the gnome application list pressing “windows button” on the keyboard and navigate switching windows, looking for any application, the animation are not completely fluid, are a little bit “rough” most of the times. In other distros (on the same laptop) i’ve seen these animation more smooth, but i’ve not changed nothing in BIOS, so i don’t know if it can depend from there (however i will give a look also there :slight_smile: ).

I would like to repeat that it’s not a real problem, just a minor thing that could be a little better i think, but i don’t know how :expressionless: .
Have a nice day!

Is Gnome Wayland an option for you?

Please provide here using code tags around your paste input and output from the following:

inxi -Gxx

You may need to first install inxi.

I’ve bad experience with Wayland, sometimes i had problem to start many apps, other times i had a lesser smooth behaviour than X. I’m not sure if it was my fault or not :smiley: but it happaned many times so i definitively choose X.

That’s all:

hunpan@localhost:~> inxi -Gxx
  Device-1: Intel HD Graphics 620 vendor: Hewlett-Packard driver: i915 
  v: kernel bus ID: 00:02.0 chip ID: 8086:5916 
  Display: x11 server: X.Org 1.20.8 driver: modesetting unloaded: fbdev,vesa 
  alternate: intel compositor: gnome-shell resolution: 1366x768~60Hz 
  OpenGL: renderer: Mesa DRI Intel HD Graphics 620 (KBL GT2) 
  v: 4.6 Mesa 20.0.4 compat-v: 3.0 direct render: Yes 

In overview (press super key) I use the mouse to scroll workspaces, or just alt+tab to get to an open window. I have an older intel GPU but does have lots of ram (1.5GB) allocated.

glxinfo -B

name of display: :1
display: :1  screen: 0
direct rendering: Yes
Extended renderer info (GLX_MESA_query_renderer):
    Vendor: Intel Open Source Technology Center (0x8086)
    Device: Mesa DRI Intel(R) HD Graphics P4000 (IVB GT2) (0x16a)
    Version: 20.0.4
    Accelerated: yes
    Video memory: 1536MB

Mmm i also have more RAM, so it should flows better i guess…

Extended renderer info (GLX_MESA_query_renderer):
    Vendor: Intel Open Source Technology Center (0x8086)
    Device: Mesa DRI Intel(R) HD Graphics 620 (KBL GT2) (0x5916)
    Version: 20.0.4
    Accelerated: yes
    Video memory: 3072MB

So how are your boot times?


What applications do you have running? What about RAM usage?

free -h

This may be of interest to you…

Other accounts of Gnome lagging with some Intel graphics hardware…

Maybe some kernel tweaks can be had, don’t know as have zero issues here with intel GPU.

@OP, install glmark2 and run that as your user.

I think these output are good, also because the installation on this laptop is very young, so few apps, few daemons at startup, …

hunpan@localhost:~> systemd-analyze
Startup finished in 2.756s (firmware) + 1.514s (loader) + 2.575s (kernel) + 3.994s (initrd) + 26.538s (userspace) = 37.379s reached after 26.476s in userspace
hunpan@localhost:~> free -h
              total        used        free      shared  buff/cache   available
Mem:          7,7Gi       1,2Gi       5,5Gi       147Mi       1,0Gi       6,1Gi
Swap:         2,0Gi          0B       2,0Gi

Interesting, maybe the reason is simply the balance between performance and battery saving, but if that’s it, i prefer to save battery against increase frame rate :slight_smile:

To be honest, it’s late, i’m so tired and i wasn’t expecting an image moving on my screen when i gave the command… it scared me a little bit lol!lol!

hunpan@localhost:~> glmark2
    glmark2 2017.07
    OpenGL Information
    GL_VENDOR:     Intel Open Source Technology Center
    GL_RENDERER:   Mesa DRI Intel(R) HD Graphics 620 (KBL GT2)
    GL_VERSION:    3.0 Mesa 20.0.4
[build] use-vbo=false: FPS: 1730 FrameTime: 0.578 ms
[build] use-vbo=true: FPS: 1950 FrameTime: 0.513 ms
[texture] texture-filter=nearest: FPS: 1830 FrameTime: 0.546 ms
[texture] texture-filter=linear: FPS: 1812 FrameTime: 0.552 ms
[texture] texture-filter=mipmap: FPS: 1822 FrameTime: 0.549 ms
[shading] shading=gouraud: FPS: 1792 FrameTime: 0.558 ms
[shading] shading=blinn-phong-inf: FPS: 1795 FrameTime: 0.557 ms
[shading] shading=phong: FPS: 1798 FrameTime: 0.556 ms
[shading] shading=cel: FPS: 1795 FrameTime: 0.557 ms
[bump] bump-render=high-poly: FPS: 1453 FrameTime: 0.688 ms
[bump] bump-render=normals: FPS: 1934 FrameTime: 0.517 ms
[bump] bump-render=height: FPS: 1922 FrameTime: 0.520 ms
[effect2d] kernel=0,1,0;1,-4,1;0,1,0;: FPS: 1482 FrameTime: 0.675 ms
[effect2d] kernel=1,1,1,1,1;1,1,1,1,1;1,1,1,1,1;: FPS: 938 FrameTime: 1.066 ms
[pulsar] light=false:quads=5:texture=false: FPS: 1784 FrameTime: 0.561 ms
[desktop] blur-radius=5:effect=blur:passes=1:separable=true:windows=4: FPS: 785 FrameTime: 1.274 ms
[desktop] effect=shadow:windows=4: FPS: 1097 FrameTime: 0.912 ms
[buffer] columns=200:interleave=false:update-dispersion=0.9:update-fraction=0.5:update-method=map: FPS: 634 FrameTime: 1.577 ms
[buffer] columns=200:interleave=false:update-dispersion=0.9:update-fraction=0.5:update-method=subdata: FPS: 539 FrameTime: 1.855 ms
[buffer] columns=200:interleave=true:update-dispersion=0.9:update-fraction=0.5:update-method=map: FPS: 713 FrameTime: 1.403 ms
[ideas] speed=duration: FPS: 1168 FrameTime: 0.856 ms
[jellyfish] <default>: FPS: 1484 FrameTime: 0.674 ms
[terrain] <default>: FPS: 222 FrameTime: 4.505 ms
[shadow] <default>: FPS: 1265 FrameTime: 0.791 ms
[refract] <default>: FPS: 438 FrameTime: 2.283 ms
[conditionals] fragment-steps=0:vertex-steps=0: FPS: 1618 FrameTime: 0.618 ms
[conditionals] fragment-steps=5:vertex-steps=0: FPS: 1622 FrameTime: 0.617 ms
[conditionals] fragment-steps=0:vertex-steps=5: FPS: 1628 FrameTime: 0.614 ms
[function] fragment-complexity=low:fragment-steps=5: FPS: 1634 FrameTime: 0.612 ms
[function] fragment-complexity=medium:fragment-steps=5: FPS: 1640 FrameTime: 0.610 ms
[loop] fragment-loop=false:fragment-steps=5:vertex-steps=5: FPS: 1583 FrameTime: 0.632 ms
[loop] fragment-steps=5:fragment-uniform=false:vertex-steps=5: FPS: 1582 FrameTime: 0.632 ms
[loop] fragment-steps=5:fragment-uniform=true:vertex-steps=5: FPS: 1535 FrameTime: 0.651 ms
                                  glmark2 Score: 1424 

A stupid question, just for curiosity: recently i’ve tried to install gentoo on a laptop for fun, and the question is: recompiling the kernel here on opensuse can improve this graphic fact in any way?

That’s a reasonable score, mine was 1082… no recompiling won’t help, you could look at excluding modules to speed up kernel boot (yours is 2.5 seconds), but very slow on your userspace, I would expect sub 10 seconds, unless manually logging in?

Startup finished in 2.118s (kernel) + 1.810s (initrd) + 2.873s (userspace) = 6.802s reached after 2.859s in userspace

Interesting, maybe the reason is simply the balance between performance and battery saving, but if that’s it, i prefer to save battery against increase frame rate

Yes, I understand your reasoning here. :slight_smile:

Hi! I have no manually access or password if it’s what you mean, all is automatic.


So what is slowing your log in to userspace…

Can you show the output from;

systemd-analyze blame | head -n10
systemd-analyze critical-chain


hunpan@DESKTOP-RL4K40C:~> systemd-analyze blame | head -n10
26.193s plymouth-quit-wait.service                                                               
 6.864s btrfsmaintenance-refresh.service                                                         
 3.925s display-manager.service                                                                  
 3.888s apparmor.service                                                                         
 3.340s polkit.service                                                                           
 3.191s initrd-switch-root.service                                                               
 3.131s systemd-udevd.service                                                                    
 2.998s systemd-fsck@dev-disk-by\x2duuid-245E\x2dC65E.service                                    
 2.793s firewalld.service                                                                        
 2.710s systemd-journal-flush.service  

hunpan@DESKTOP-RL4K40C:~> systemd-analyze critical-chain
The time when unit became active or started is printed after the "@" character.
The time the unit took to start is printed after the "+" character.

└─display-manager.service @15.329s +3.925s
  └─systemd-logind.service @18.839s +754ms
    └─tmp.mount @15.225s +13ms
      └─dev-sda2.device @14.186s