Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

15-Way Open-Source Intel/AMD/NVIDIA GPU Comparison

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • 15-Way Open-Source Intel/AMD/NVIDIA GPU Comparison

    Phoronix: 15-Way Open-Source Intel/AMD/NVIDIA GPU Comparison

    When running Fedora 19 with its updated open-source Linux graphics drivers, 15 different Intel, AMD Radeon, and NVIDIA GeForce GPUs were compared when looking at the open-source Linux OpenGL performance. The tested graphics processors span from the Intel HD Graphics 4600 "Haswell" integrated graphics to the AMD Radeon HD 7950 "Southern Islands" graphics card to the vintage Radeon X1800XL.

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=18858

  • #2
    Which hardware and driver combination have the least amount of quirks, glitches, crashes and other stability issues?

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by boog View Post
      Which hardware and driver combination have the least amount of quirks, glitches, crashes and other stability issues?
      Likely intel. Radeon at this point is pretty close but still has room for improvement. Haha I remember the days when AMD/ATI was the worst brand to go for, to the point that something like compiz would just give you a white screen. Today the radeon drivers are almost good enough to replace Catalyst.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by schmidtbag View Post
        Likely intel. Radeon at this point is pretty close but still has room for improvement. Haha I remember the days when AMD/ATI was the worst brand to go for, to the point that something like compiz would just give you a white screen.
        I've been running a 5850 for over a year without a single stability problem. Personally I feel my 2500k graphics colours look slightly washed out compared to that, but stability wise both of them equally "just work". If UVD works on the 6870 then it's probably the best card for a desktop pc, assuming you want to do some gaming.

        Originally posted by schmidtbag View Post
        Today the radeon drivers are almost good enough to replace Catalyst.
        I'd like to see the 6870s catalyst FPS because the numbers it's pushing seems to be fairly high.
        Last edited by ownagefool; 07-01-2013, 03:29 PM.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by schmidtbag View Post
          Likely intel. Radeon at this point is pretty close but still has room for improvement. Haha I remember the days when AMD/ATI was the worst brand to go for, to the point that something like compiz would just give you a white screen. Today the radeon drivers are almost good enough to replace Catalyst.
          Except for HD 7xxx cards, apparently. Which kinda shows how difficult it is to right drivers i think. If the architecture is so different from one card to the next that your existing drivers barely function it's no wonder the open-source Nvidia drivers (with now help from Nvidia themselves) are so much worse than the others.

          I really can't wait till the open AMD/Intel drivers are beating the proprietary ones on almost all fronts... hopefully then other corporations will start viewing open-source as a better catalyst (pun intended) to more stable and cross-platform drivers.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by F i L View Post
            Except for HD 7xxx cards, apparently. Which kinda shows how difficult it is to right drivers i think. If the architecture is so different from one card to the next that your existing drivers barely function it's no wonder the open-source Nvidia drivers (with now help from Nvidia themselves) are so much worse than the others.

            I really can't wait till the open AMD/Intel drivers are beating the proprietary ones on almost all fronts... hopefully then other corporations will start viewing open-source as a better catalyst (pun intended) to more stable and cross-platform drivers.
            Nouveau drivers do not get ANY help from Nvidia. Its FLOSS driver for Tegra that get some support (limited to 2D/power up).

            Comment


            • #7
              Intel is very stable if you stick to the versions Intel recommends (eg, use Ubuntu). If you deviate, intel starts to be far more unstable than radeon.

              I can only guess that radeon gets testing from a wider base, whereas everyone at the Intel OSTC is forced to upgrade in lockstep :P

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by curaga View Post
                Intel is very stable if you stick to the versions Intel recommends (eg, use Ubuntu). If you deviate, intel starts to be far more unstable than radeon.

                I can only guess that radeon gets testing from a wider base, whereas everyone at the Intel OSTC is forced to upgrade in lockstep :P
                Using Intel on arch right now and it's fine.

                Comment


                • #9
                  How suprising, I thought intel was on the top as they embraced free software. By these benchmarks it seems to be more beneficial to purchase an AMD CPU and use its internal graphic processor rather than an Intel CPU, or am I mistaken?

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by przemoli View Post
                    Nouveau drivers do not get ANY help from Nvidia. Its FLOSS driver for Tegra that get some support (limited to 2D/power up).
                    My bad, that was a typo. It should have said "(with no help from nvidia)"... not "(with now help...)".
                    I've heard about Nvidia supporting FOSS drivers for Tegra... though idk how long that will last, since they seem to be more and more interested in ARM.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      What on earth is up with the Radeon HD 6450?

                      As far as performance, most of the 5xxx-6xxx Radeons are wiping the floor with everything else.
                      I wonder if a "low-end" HD7xxx would be similar, since many of them still use the old architecture.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by lordmetroid View Post
                        How suprising, I thought intel was on the top as they embraced free software. By these benchmarks it seems to be more beneficial to purchase an AMD CPU and use its internal graphic processor rather than an Intel CPU, or am I mistaken?
                        If the only thing you care about is GPU performance...yes. But Intel smacks AMD around on CPU performance.

                        Intel: Great CPU performance, better power consumption perfectly workable and acceptable GPU performance (You wont play games on high, but low and maybe even medium should be okay), video decode support

                        AMD: Okayish CPU performance, worse power consumption (REALLY bad until you start running DPM kernels if your GPU is integrated), Good and acceptable GPU performance, no video decode support YET--You need kernel 3.10 and Mesa 9.2/10.0.

                        Personally I'm sticking to Intel Integrated graphics unless I really need a discrete card, and at that point I'll get an AMD discrete, not an AMD integrated.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by lordmetroid View Post
                          How suprising, I thought intel was on the top as they embraced free software. By these benchmarks it seems to be more beneficial to purchase an AMD CPU and use its internal graphic processor rather than an Intel CPU, or am I mistaken?
                          You can't really conclude that from these benchmarks because Haswell drivers are still immature. The previous Phoronix Haswell benchmarks showed some problems with the current Haswell drivers, in fact with current distributions Haswell performed worse than Ivy Bridge when it should be much better.

                          "No conclusions will be drawn at this time until the potential Haswell Linux performance bugs are uncovered and more extensive tests completed." http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...0k_linux&num=1

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Ibidem View Post
                            What on earth is up with the Radeon HD 6450?

                            As far as performance, most of the 5xxx-6xxx Radeons are wiping the floor with everything else.
                            I wonder if a "low-end" HD7xxx would be similar, since many of them still use the old architecture.
                            Radon 6450 is cheap low end passively cooled card, it's not meant to be a gamers card. It works fine for the markets its aimed at.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Ericg View Post
                              If the only thing you care about is GPU performance...yes. But Intel smacks AMD around on CPU performance.
                              A lot of people care about money too. AMD looks much better if the metric is performance per dollar: http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu_value_available.html

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X