Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

AMD R600g/RadeonSI Performance On Linux 3.16 With Mesa 10.3-devel

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

  • AMD R600g/RadeonSI Performance On Linux 3.16 With Mesa 10.3-devel

    Phoronix: AMD R600g/RadeonSI Performance On Linux 3.16 With Mesa 10.3-devel

    As the first part of an upcoming series of tests benchmarking the latest open-source and closed-source Linux graphics drivers for AMD Radeon and NVIDIA GeForce hardware, here's some benchmark results for several recent Radeon GPUs when tested on the current Git version of the Linux 3.16 kernel and a recent Mesa 10.3-devel snapshot.

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=20702

  • #2
    Originally posted by phoronix View Post
    Phoronix: AMD R600g/RadeonSI Performance On Linux 3.16 With Mesa 10.3-devel

    As the first part of an upcoming series of tests benchmarking the latest open-source and closed-source Linux graphics drivers for AMD Radeon and NVIDIA GeForce hardware, here's some benchmark results for several recent Radeon GPUs when tested on the current Git version of the Linux 3.16 kernel and a recent Mesa 10.3-devel snapshot.

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=20702
    Without using LLVM git the results of SI hardware seem to be useless...

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by Rakot View Post
      Without using LLVM git the results of SI hardware seem to be useless...
      agreed, most of the SI fixes are in LLVM not mesa but it seems LLVM upgrades in ubuntu are a real pain to do.

      Michael take a nice machine only to test RadeonSI hardware and freaking install ArchLinux on it and add lcarlier repo, lcarlier update everything needed at once Mesa, LLVM, libdrm, etc. to git in a daily basis

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by jrch2k8 View Post
        agreed, most of the SI fixes are in LLVM not mesa but it seems LLVM upgrades in ubuntu are a real pain to do.

        Michael take a nice machine only to test RadeonSI hardware and freaking install ArchLinux on it and add lcarlier repo, lcarlier update everything needed at once Mesa, LLVM, libdrm, etc. to git in a daily basis
        LLVM upgrades are a pain to do everywhere, I think - too many things depending on it.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Rakot View Post
          Without using LLVM git the results of SI hardware seem to be useless...
          It is not that useless performance is similar/or slighlty lower/better actually with the llvm-3.5 used, just those breakages are non existant with llvm-3.5 .

          Michael, you can mention for non oibaf users that most of these breakages are fixed in current llvm-3.5 .

          I guess oibaf just waiting this to be updated, to build against .

          http://packages.ubuntu.com/utopic/llvm-3.5

          Comment


          • #6
            Besides, right now we got in Debian Unstable first release candidate of llvm-3.5 :

            https://packages.debian.org/sid/llvm-3.5

            Maybe that can be news for you Michael .

            Comment


            • #7
              For all of the "latest gpu driver benchmarks" posted, I don't understand why you dont include some older data.. Like you do for comparisons between ubuntu versions etc.
              It would be interesting to see how the changes affect the performance of different cards while not having to go through old articles and comparing by yourself.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by jrch2k8 View Post
                agreed, most of the SI fixes are in LLVM not mesa but it seems LLVM upgrades in ubuntu are a real pain to do.

                Michael take a nice machine only to test RadeonSI hardware and freaking install ArchLinux on it and add lcarlier repo, lcarlier update everything needed at once Mesa, LLVM, libdrm, etc. to git in a daily basis
                Never knew that repo existed, awesome

                So in order to get somewhat bleeding-edge graphics support without compiling the components on your own afaik, it's oibaf on Ubuntu (and kernel), pontostroy on openSUSE (and kernel), and lcarlier on Arch (and mainline kernel; not sure on anything more daily-ish).

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by dungeon View Post
                  It is not that useless performance is similar/or slighlty lower/better actually with the llvm-3.5 used, just those breakages are non existant with llvm-3.5 .

                  Michael, you can mention for non oibaf users that most of these breakages are fixed in current llvm-3.5 .

                  I guess oibaf just waiting this to be updated, to build against .

                  http://packages.ubuntu.com/utopic/llvm-3.5
                  The whole idea of testing is to see performance change. Also due to the troubles with LLVM phoronix basically does not have relevant results for SI class hardware since a lot of demanding test just do not work.

                  If Michael wants a binary distro to do such testing I suggest to use opensuse and repos of pontostroy specifically with git versions of Mesa, drivers, kernel, x-server. Or Michael can just use livecd made by the same guy (check http://www.gearsongallium.com/ ). There are also some tests made with aid of Phoronix Test Suite.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Espionage724 View Post
                    Never knew that repo existed, awesome

                    So in order to get somewhat bleeding-edge graphics support without compiling the components on your own afaik, it's oibaf on Ubuntu (and kernel), pontostroy on openSUSE (and kernel), and lcarlier on Arch (and mainline kernel; not sure on anything more daily-ish).
                    For opensuse there are additional options for the kernel: distro kernel, current stable, current rc and aforementioned pontostoy's bleeding edge drm-next kernel. So it gives certain flexibility. I guess the same is true for other distros.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Rakot View Post
                      The whole idea of testing is to see performance change. Also due to the troubles with LLVM phoronix basically does not have relevant results for SI class hardware since a lot of demanding test just do not work.

                      If Michael wants a binary distro to do such testing I suggest to use opensuse and repos of pontostroy specifically with git versions of Mesa, drivers, kernel, x-server. Or Michael can just use livecd made by the same guy (check http://www.gearsongallium.com/ ). There are also some tests made with aid of Phoronix Test Suite.
                      I know it is better to use llvm-3.5 then llvm-3.4, but Michael only test mesa either ubuntu official or what oibaf's ppa repo provide. And as i see oibaf seems like only want to package llvm which Ubuntu official repo provide, that is safe for him because he supports different ubuntu releases and some days llvm can't even compile with some versions of gcc, etc... . So in the end problem is actually because ubuntu does not have current llvm-3.5 in the repo .

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Rakot View Post
                        For opensuse there are additional options for the kernel: distro kernel, current stable, current rc and aforementioned pontostoy's bleeding edge drm-next kernel. So it gives certain flexibility. I guess the same is true for other distros.
                        Fedora doesn't have any of those. And I don't think RPMfusion hosts such stuff either.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Sonadow View Post
                          Fedora doesn't have any of those. And I don't think RPMfusion hosts such stuff either.
                          You've got a few options with Fedora, technically. One, you can use their old personal repo system (I haven't personally used those for awhile but I assume they're still around). Two, find a copr (the replacement for the old repos, but act more like ppa/obs). Three, and the most difficult/risky, grab builds directly from koji. The last is just packages (so you'll have to do dependency resolution yourself), and most of them are used for testing purposes, but it has TONS of packages, and can be really useful if you just need a single package.
                          I believe Dave airlie has a copr for graphics, but there's bound to be others.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Does anyone know why the Caymans perform so badly compared to the other northern islands GPUs? I know they use the VLIW4 architecture, but why does that hurt performance so much?
                            As a 6950 owner my self, I feel disappointed that the situation never seems to improve for these cards.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Avenger View Post
                              Does anyone know why the Caymans perform so badly compared to the other northern islands GPUs? I know they use the VLIW4 architecture, but why does that hurt performance so much?
                              As a 6950 owner my self, I feel disappointed that the situation never seems to improve for these cards.
                              agd5f says Cayman, Trinity and Richland are VLIW4, which is only hardware other the GCNs which have support for VM. So i think if Trinity and Richland APUs is also comparabile slower, then that is clarly because of VM disabled (not implemented maybe?) for those.

                              That is what ramp up performance for GCNs with kernel 3.16 .

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X