No subject

what all this composite stuff is about) it looks like
fbCompositeSrc_8888RevNPx8888mmx is an optimised special case of
fbCompositeSrc_8888x8888mmx. So I guess this could explain the speed
difference. It would be interesting to know why it is using a different
function when running on nx compared to locally, though.

I did find a solution to this particular issue: using flashplayer 10
instead of flashplayer 9 eliminates the whole issue. It seems that
flashplayer itself uses more CPU time, but the X server drops to almost
0. The system is completely responsive and 100% usable when running
flash video. Also the frame rate is several times higher. Hardly any
time is spent in the X server at all.

Unfortunately I have no clue about this composite stuff. It is some kind
of new X extension that I don't know anything about. Perhaps someone who
is more familiar with this area could comment on what those
fbCompositeSrc* functions do and whether the kind of performance I have
seen is expected?

-- 
Mario Becroft <mb at gem.win.co.nz>