Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

NVIDIA's Release Happiness Continues Into April

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

  • #31
    Originally posted by Melcar View Post
    Yeah sure.

    Windows XP:

    36 61 139

    Ubuntu 8.10:

    36 66 181

    Ultimate preset. Only settings on CCC being forced on both OS' are mipmaps (High) and Catalyst AI (Advanced). Latest end-user drivers.
    Alien Arena performs identical on both OS' with the same settings. The same goes for Urban Terror and Warsow. Furmark (running under Wine in Ubuntu) gives out the same scores.

    Fglrx has good 3D performance. No surprise really. Where it sucks is in common desktop situations, specially when you try to accelerate them. Again, no surprise given where the driver comes from. These issues are being worked on. Sure, even I would like all these things fixed as quickly as possible, but given that the codebase is rather "new", the delays are understandable.

    Drop you CPU clock by 20% and compare to your current results. Then clock your CPU back up, hen drop your vid card clocks by 20% and re-test and compare. I'm pretty sure you will find that your CPU is what is holding you back on Urban, Nexiuz and Warsow when your only running @ your 1680 res.

    Comment


    • #32
      And? I'm talking about GPU performance here.

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by Melcar View Post
        And? I'm talking about GPU performance here.
        So am I, fact that they are getting identical performance is more then likely that you are cpu limited with those titles and not hitting a GPU bottleneck. Those games really don't push the video card much.

        Comment


        • #34
          Unigine Tropics
          OpenGL
          1680x1050
          4x AA
          16x AF
          Shaders High
          Textures High
          Filter Trilinear
          Reflection
          Refraction
          Occlusion
          Volumetric

          Ubuntu 8.10
          fps: 25.7
          score: 648

          Windows XP
          fps: 26.6
          score: 670

          Unigine Sanctuary
          OpenGL
          1680x1050
          4x AA
          16x AF
          Shaders High
          Textures High
          Filter Trilinear
          Translucence
          Parallax Mapping
          Occlusion
          Reflection
          Refraction
          Scattering
          Volumetric
          HDR
          DOF

          Ubuntu 8.10
          fps: 28.1
          score: 1190

          Windows XP
          fps: 28.1
          score: 1191

          Comment


          • #35
            Just my two cents, with my NVIDIA card I don't pay attention to releases because it works correctly, with my ATI/AMD card in my laptop I keep on hoping that they fix my long standing issues.

            At this point, I can't recommend ATI to anyone running Linux.

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by deanjo View Post
              Measured with? With ATI's recent history of not rendering full scenes again it wouldn't be surprising that the linux binary is actually rendering less. Also what modes were you running in? What were the renderers? Ogl, DX9, DX10? Have you taken screenshots of both screens to compare?
              Measured with an application I am developing. No abnormal optimizations I can detect. Running with the highest possible settings (purely GPU-bound), using quad-buffer stereo and disabling vsync brings the fps down to ~61 on Vista and ~72 on ArchLinux. This is at 1280x1024 on the 9.3 drivers. Reproducible with both OpenGL 2.1 and 3.0 contexts.

              As pointed out above, fglrx has excellent 3d performance. Video and compiz are the workloads it struggles with, which is understandable given the workstation background of the driver.

              Comment


              • #37
                So the argument boils down to the nvidia-using people trying to present themselves as 'practical', "yes it's a blob but who cares, it works better than anything ATI has to offer", and the ati-using people stress the philosophical / ideological side and the advantages of using FOSS software.

                (I'm ignoring fglrx here since it's a pile of horseshit imho.)

                In essence I think both sides have good arguments. Though as an ATI user, my only problem with the nvidia-argument is that performance has never been the _only_ key issue on Linux. I mean, the approach of "it should just work and work well" is very Windows-centric. So everyone of you who preaches it here and elsewhere, why do you use Linux to begin with?

                I mean, Linux doesn't have many areas where its applications are superior in functionality to Windows; there are just as many and varied programs for Windows, so you can't be complaining about that either; and games are still largely a Windows domain, so that's not a reason by itself to use Linux either.

                So why do you even use Linux with this approach of "it should just work and I shouldn't be bothered with it"? Isn't that just using the wrong OS?

                Maybe people who have the wrong mentality should just keep to Windows instead of switching and bringing the wrong views with them about how software should be. And that sentence cannot be accused of some form of elitism: I have been a Windows user myself longer than Linux, I only switched about five years ago.

                Comment


                • #38
                  The problem with ATI is always that when you find a problem which seems to be specific to one app and that app is unknown than you are basically ignored for long time (if you call it normal that bug found with gl2benchmark took over 1 year to fix then you must be a huge fan). If a very widely used app then chances are higher that there would be a fix. But in some cases ATI always fails. fglrx is even worse than the limited xv support of the free driver. xv with fglrx is unable to provide flickerfree video and shows green bars with some res which are not divideable by 16. Nv has absolutely no problem showing the same video with xv or vdpau nor has the free driver. As this problem seems to generic to all fglrx drivers nobody really tested video playback, thats 100% sure.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    They problem is not because of ATI's 'a little bit inferior' driver land, it's because it is well below expectation.

                    I've waited FGLRX to solve some very basic problems for like 3 years. My switch to nvidia is triggered by Ubuntu 9.04's release. Nvidia's blob is already compatible with X-Server 1.6, but FGLRX? no f**king way they could accomplish that. OSS? The holy brand new 3D stack still gonna take another year to mature.

                    IMO before this promised 3D stack is proven to be useful, I'd better stick with nvidia. I'm a programmer with 15 years of experience and 10+ years of 3D programming, and currently in employment in a respectable 3D CAD company as a software engineer (and is well paid). I want to contribute to the OSS world with some easy to use Linux OGL Shader development tool as my hobby project (ShaderStudioMAX was my one manned project in 2003-ish and yes, it was for Windows exclusively because I wasn't using Linux until since 2005). Guess which card I have to stick to, just so I could use as a working OpenGL platform? ATI's OpenGL stack is so broken that it even ignores whether there is a Depth buffer being created or not in glutInitDisplayMode() call. Quite pathetic for them and I know for sure that even if I fire the bug report they will ignore it.

                    What do you call a very sick man who refuses to accept any medical treatment? A DEAD MAN.

                    Fortunately for ATI they chose a death-and-rebirth way to fix it.
                    Last edited by FunkyRider; 04-08-2009, 06:14 AM.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by Melcar View Post
                      Unigine Tropics
                      OpenGL
                      1680x1050
                      4x AA
                      16x AF
                      Shaders High
                      Textures High
                      Filter Trilinear
                      Reflection
                      Refraction
                      Occlusion
                      Volumetric

                      Ubuntu 8.10
                      fps: 25.7
                      score: 648

                      Windows XP
                      fps: 26.6
                      score: 670

                      Unigine Sanctuary
                      OpenGL
                      1680x1050
                      4x AA
                      16x AF
                      Shaders High
                      Textures High
                      Filter Trilinear
                      Translucence
                      Parallax Mapping
                      Occlusion
                      Reflection
                      Refraction
                      Scattering
                      Volumetric
                      HDR
                      DOF

                      Ubuntu 8.10
                      fps: 28.1
                      score: 1190

                      Windows XP
                      fps: 28.1
                      score: 1191

                      Now don't you find it odd that similar system (PhenII,9850@3.01Ghz,8800GT first single and then sli) with exception of the GPU get identical results?

                      OpenGL
                      1680x1050
                      4x AA
                      16x AF
                      Shaders High
                      Textures High
                      Filter Trilinear
                      Reflection
                      Refraction
                      Occlusion
                      Volumetric

                      openSUSE 11.1
                      fps: 25.7
                      score: 648

                      Windows XP 64
                      fps: 26.6
                      score: 669
                      Again, you are CPU limited.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Originally posted by Melcar View Post
                        Unigine Tropics
                        OpenGL
                        1680x1050
                        4x AA
                        16x AF
                        Shaders High
                        Textures High
                        Filter Trilinear
                        Reflection
                        Refraction
                        Occlusion
                        Volumetric

                        Ubuntu 8.10
                        fps: 25.7
                        score: 648

                        Windows XP
                        fps: 26.6
                        score: 670

                        Unigine Sanctuary
                        OpenGL
                        1680x1050
                        4x AA
                        16x AF
                        Shaders High
                        Textures High
                        Filter Trilinear
                        Translucence
                        Parallax Mapping
                        Occlusion
                        Reflection
                        Refraction
                        Scattering
                        Volumetric
                        HDR
                        DOF

                        Ubuntu 8.10
                        fps: 28.1
                        score: 1190

                        Windows XP
                        fps: 28.1
                        score: 1191

                        Now don't you find it odd that similar system (PhenII,9850@3.01Ghz,8800GT first single and then sli) with exception of the GPU get identical results?

                        OpenGL
                        1680x1050
                        4x AA
                        16x AF
                        Shaders High
                        Textures High
                        Filter Trilinear
                        Reflection
                        Refraction
                        Occlusion
                        Volumetric

                        openSUSE 11.1
                        fps: 25.7
                        score: 648

                        Windows XP 64
                        fps: 26.6
                        score: 669
                        Again, you are CPU limited. BTW the same test using the DX renderer in windows yielded an average of 27.1 but with such small variances that is easily attributed to standard deviation due to various background processes, cpu clock drift, etc.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          [...] My switch to nvidia is triggered by Ubuntu 9.04's release. Nvidia's blob is already compatible with X-Server 1.6, but FGLRX? no f**king way they could accomplish that. OSS? The holy brand new 3D stack still gonna take another year to mature.
                          Ubuntu 9.04 comes with an fglrx release that supports XServer 1.6 (R600+ only, IIRC) and open source drivers that support XServer on R100-R700.

                          Just pointing this out.

                          ATI's OpenGL stack is so broken that it even ignores whether there is a Depth buffer being created or not in glutInitDisplayMode() call.
                          I've been using ati hardware since 2003 (R300) and I have never ever seen this - even with their old and ugly OpenGL stack. There are problems when you start pushing the drivers (e.g. try FBO blit with 24/32 bit depth buffers), but ati is not alone in that regard (last time I checked, nvidia cards could not attach a 24bit depth buffer to an FBO, if your context used a 16bit depth buffer and vice versa).

                          And again, fglrx is inferior in 2d and video, but performs quite well in 3d. The open-source drivers are better in 2d and video, but lose in 3d. Nvidia drivers tend to be more balanced, but at least with ati you have a choice.

                          The grass always looks greener on the other side, but you'll be disappointed if you assume that nvidia drivers are flawless. Check their forums for long-standing issues that have not been fixed.

                          Edit: #deanjo:
                          score: 669 vs score: 1191

                          I wouldn't call that similar.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Originally posted by BlackStar View Post
                            ...

                            Edit: #deanjo:
                            score: 669 vs score: 1191

                            I wouldn't call that similar.

                            That seems to be his Tropics score. Either way, CPU limited or not, the GPU will still work and go under stress. The point I was making was that the driver does perform well in 3D. Besides, if I go by Deanjo's logic everything 3D in Linux is CPU limited and nothing can indicate true GPU performance, which leads me to question why the hell everyone is bitching about poor 3D performance with fglrx (since you know, nothing can show true 3D performance).

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Originally posted by Melcar View Post
                              That seems to be his Tropics score. Either way, CPU limited or not, the GPU will still work and go under stress. The point I was making was that the driver does perform well in 3D. Besides, if I go by Deanjo's logic everything 3D in Linux is CPU limited and nothing can indicate true GPU performance, which leads me to question why the hell everyone is bitching about poor 3D performance with fglrx (since you know, nothing can show true 3D performance).
                              Not everything is GPU limited, Games such as ET:QW, Quake4 and even old Doom3 are not CPU limited when ran at higher resolutions.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                That seems to be his Tropics score.
                                Which indicates a large difference, no?

                                Not everything is GPU limited, Games such as ET:QW, Quake4 and even old Doom3 are not CPU limited when ran at higher resolutions.
                                Parse error. Care to rephrase? (These sentences seem to make sense on their own, but not when put together like this.)

                                You say that Doom3 is GPU limited on high resolutions, while Unigine is CPU limited? I really doubt that - Doom3 is primarily CPU bound (shadow volume extrusion on the CPU). Its shaders are simple, the polygon count is low, it really doesn't stress a modern GPU at all. Unigine tropics is *much* harder on the GPU.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X