Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Radeon Gallium3D Is Running Increasingly Well Against AMD's Catalyst Driver

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

  • Radeon Gallium3D Is Running Increasingly Well Against AMD's Catalyst Driver

    Phoronix: Radeon Gallium3D Is Running Increasingly Well Against AMD's Catalyst Driver

    After last week running new Nouveau vs. NVIDIA proprietary Linux graphics benchmarks, here's the results when putting AMD's hardware on the test bench and running both their latest open and closed-source drivers. Up today are the results of using the latest Radeon Gallium3D graphics code and Linux kernel against the latest beta of the binary-only Catalyst driver.

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=20732

  • #2
    HD6870 has great performance. What's wrong with HD6950?

    The HD6870 seems to not be too far away from being just as good as the catalyst drivers, at least in some tests. I wonder if mesa can eventually surpass catalyst performance.

    I'm curious to know what's wrong with the HD6950, though. It's weird that it's about as fast as the HD6770 with mesa even though it's a much faster card with the closed drivers.

    Comment


    • #3
      I think I remember someone posting about the next LLVM version (that isn't used by the ppa) has some performance improvments. Can anyone confirm? If so, how much better is it?

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by ua=42 View Post
        I think I remember someone posting about the next LLVM version (that isn't used by the ppa) has some performance improvments. Can anyone confirm? If so, how much better is it?
        Oibaf started using llvm 3.5 lately, but these tests are done with mesa git from two weeks ago .

        And there is hyperz (which can be buggy) but enabling that increase peorformance in every case .
        Last edited by dungeon; 08-05-2014, 12:00 PM.

        Comment


        • #5
          I have got to get my hands on a 6870 one of these days...

          Comment


          • #6
            As an owner of a HD5750 (which is the same thing as a HD6750, which is just a slower version of the HD6770) I'm pretty happy to know my user experience is almost on-par. So far I have a better user experience with this GPU than I do with my intel ivy bridge setup. The only major problem I'm currently facing is Portal 2 thinks I have opengl 1.4, when I clearly don't. I have 32 bit libs for everything and it's the only game that thinks this. Portal 1, from what I recall, works fine.


            On another note, while these tests sure are impressive, one thing to keep in mind is catalyst in linux is decently behind catalyst in windows, both in features and performance. On the other hand, Windows gets all of the program-specific micro-optimizations. I'm not sure if the linux catalyst uses any of them.

            Comment


            • #7
              well?

              well where?

              Comment


              • #8
                Can confirm. HD 6870 worked great with opensource drivers before I sold it to Qaridarium.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by schmidtbag View Post
                  As an owner of a HD5750 (which is the same thing as a HD6750, which is just a slower version of the HD6770) I'm pretty happy to know my user experience is almost on-par. So far I have a better user experience with this GPU than I do with my intel ivy bridge setup. The only major problem I'm currently facing is Portal 2 thinks I have opengl 1.4, when I clearly don't. I have 32 bit libs for everything and it's the only game that thinks this. Portal 1, from what I recall, works fine.


                  On another note, while these tests sure are impressive, one thing to keep in mind is catalyst in linux is decently behind catalyst in windows, both in features and performance. On the other hand, Windows gets all of the program-specific micro-optimizations. I'm not sure if the linux catalyst uses any of them.
                  You need to cancel libstdc++.so.6 and libgcc_s.so.1 in the portal2 directory. Google it, I had the same problem.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    In real life is performing about 30% of the Catalyst performance and 10% of Catalyst rendering quality. There are missing textures, flickering etc in the most Steam games.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by boffo View Post
                      You need to cancel libstdc++.so.6 and libgcc_s.so.1 in the portal2 directory. Google it, I had the same problem.
                      Ah I didn't know that in the portal2 directory. I had to do that in the steam directory since steam itself had a GLX error when it started up. Thanks, I'll have to try that when I get back.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by verde View Post
                        In real life is performing about 30% of the Catalyst performance and 10% of Catalyst rendering quality. There are missing textures, flickering etc in the most Steam games.
                        What hardware and what game? I tested DOTA 2 with R600, R700, EG, and Cayman a few months ago and didn't see any issues (after I fixed them all ), though it was mainly R600 and R700 that needed fixing. Hyper-Z was disabled.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by verde View Post
                          In real life is performing about 30% of the Catalyst performance and 10% of Catalyst rendering quality. There are missing textures, flickering etc in the most Steam games.
                          With RadeonSI or R600g?

                          Because I have not had rendering problems in games for a long time with my Diamond Radeon HD 4670.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Vidar View Post
                            I'm curious to know what's wrong with the HD6950, though. It's weird that it's about as fast as the HD6770 with mesa even though it's a much faster card with the closed drivers.
                            I guess the driver is optimized for VLIW5 while the 6950 uses VLIW4 (see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radeon_...#Chipset_table - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TeraSca...rchitecture%29 ). I wished someone would spend some VLIW4 love to r600g.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by TAXI View Post
                              I guess the driver is optimized for VLIW5 while the 6950 uses VLIW4 (see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radeon_...#Chipset_table - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TeraSca...rchitecture%29 ). I wished someone would spend some VLIW4 love to r600g.
                              Considering only two cards in existence use VLIW4, one can understand why the FOSS driver devs don't see it as a priority. Especially if it requires much work.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X