Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Mesa 9.2 & The R600 SB Back-End Are Good For AMD APUs

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

  • Mesa 9.2 & The R600 SB Back-End Are Good For AMD APUs

    Phoronix: Mesa 9.2 & The R600 SB Back-End Are Good For AMD APUs

    From the AMD A10-6800K "Richland" APU I've delivered OpenGL Linux benchmarks of the Radeon HD 8670D graphics and also compared the open-source Gallium3D performance to that of Catalyst. Catalyst still reigns supreme, but in this article are some benchmarks showing the performance between Mesa 9.1 and 9.2 Git and also when deploying the experimental R600 SB shader optimization back-end.

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=18908

  • #2
    Nice, there are no regressions and some performance improvements
    ## VGA ##
    AMD: X1950XTX, HD3870, HD5870
    Intel: GMA45, HD3000 (Core i5 2500K)

    Comment


    • #3
      I would like to see how catalyst compares here at same conditions ( read PM).

      Comment


      • #4
        bad

        Originally posted by Drago View Post
        I would like to see how catalyst compares here at same conditions ( read PM).
        catalyst have a inputlag on source games even with 200 fps the games are unplayable

        Comment


        • #5
          This. The only serious problem I found with free drivers is: MSAA is crap and doesn't work (full scene corruption). OTOH, the problems with Catalyst are major, and they include kernel panics, not being able to suspend + resume reliably, missing screen brightness controls (they don't work in Windows 8, work sometimes in Linux + fglrx, and work flawlessly in Linux with the free driver stack) and a horrible input lag.

          I'll repeat: Fedora 19 is purring nicely in my E-450 netbook, and everyone with E-xxx APUs should switch to the free driver stack by Linux 3.11.

          Comment


          • #6
            On related news, Wayland 1.2 RC is out.

            Comment


            • #7
              Considering everything that has happened, I think in terms of drivers both AMD and Intel can now (or at least soon) be considered to be in similar states, now that we have dynamic power management and video acceleration for radeon chips. I wonder if this will make anyone rethink their next APU purchase, or least make their choice a lot more difficult next time.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by phoronix View Post
                Phoronix: Mesa 9.2 & The R600 SB Back-End Are Good For AMD APUs

                From the AMD A10-6800K "Richland" APU I've delivered OpenGL Linux benchmarks of the Radeon HD 8670D graphics and also compared the open-source Gallium3D performance to that of Catalyst. Catalyst still reigns supreme, but in this article are some benchmarks showing the performance between Mesa 9.1 and 9.2 Git and also when deploying the experimental R600 SB shader optimization back-end.

                http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=18908
                Am I assuming correctly that this is still running with the APU running in the lowest power state?

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by pingufunkybeat View Post
                  Am I assuming correctly that this is still running with the APU running in the lowest power state?
                  Looks like default clocks, which are not necessarily the lowest state but definitely pretty low.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Nexuiz with dpm
                    http://openbenchmarking.org/result/1...UT-1307100UT60
                    Last edited by ObiWan; 07-10-2013, 02:17 PM.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Hamish Wilson View Post
                      Considering everything that has happened, I think in terms of drivers both AMD and Intel can now (or at least soon) be considered to be in similar states, now that we have dynamic power management and video acceleration for radeon chips. I wonder if this will make anyone rethink their next APU purchase, or least make their choice a lot more difficult next time.
                      I've had problems with drivers every time I've ever purchased ATI/AMD graphics cards, which is the main reason that I've chosen NVIDIA. I'd really like to support open-ness, but AMD binary drivers bothers me, and the open source ones, not quite on par with the binary drivers (until now?), Intel HD-graphics doesn't quite suffice, and noveau, while I believe and hope they'll gain on binary drivers, it seems a long way away.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by ObiWan View Post
                        Given that the article was using an APU at 4.7Ghz, and yours was at 4.1Ghz, that's pretty impressive. The other main difference that I saw was in memory allocated to the GPU (768MB in article, 2048 on yours).

                        I don't see the system logs attached, so I can't say whether your test results were with S3TC/FP Textures, but even then... mighty impressive. I'm looking forward to direct 3.9/3.10/3.11 comparisons in the coming weeks.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by ObiWan View Post
                          Wow... nearly four times faster with dpm!

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Veerappan View Post
                            Given that the article was using an APU at 4.7Ghz, and yours was at 4.1Ghz, that's pretty impressive. The other main difference that I saw was in memory allocated to the GPU (768MB in article, 2048 on yours).
                            It's within expectations, if you look at the GPU clocks. On APUs, without DPM, the driver will only use a low default clock that's about 40-45% of the maximum clock. It gets worse if the GPU supports boost states. E.g. on E-450, you'll only get 200 MHz clock without DPM. With DPM however, the GPU can clock to 500 MHz and use the boost state of 600 MHz most of the time. So if you are not memory bandwidth and/or cpu bound, you might see 3x speedups!

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by UraniumDeer View Post
                              *snip*.
                              Well, your post really had nothing to do with what I said, as I was comparing AMD to Intel, but anyway...

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X