Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The Open-Source Linux Graphics Card Showdown

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

  • #16
    Its most likely similar but not the same, best ask icculus.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by Kano View Post
      Its most likely similar but not the same, best ask icculus.
      for his question it just doesn't matter.

      "similar" means similar but he writes like "there is no similar"

      please translate this in your autistic language.

      he want closed source games in the benchmark doom3 is one of them!

      because the game engine IS NOT THE GAME! and michael benchmark the GAME and not only the engine without game content!

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by Qaridarium View Post
        for his question it just doesn't matter.

        "similar" means similar but he writes like "there is no similar"

        please translate this in your autistic language.
        Forum troll strikes again! Prey uses MODIFIED iDTech4. Iodoom3 is not going to work.

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by Drago View Post
          Forum troll strikes again! Prey uses MODIFIED iDTech4. Iodoom3 is not going to work.
          now we get bullshit Spam. "Modified" means: the doom 3 engine can also be "Modified" to fit in the same role.

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by Kano View Post
            Well all cards are tested with the same cpu if your driver as high cpu usage then a slow cpu will not give you the same result. In most cases the single core speed of a cpu helps to scale with older engines - if you are searching for benchmark records, over 60 fps is usally never needed. doom 3 is certainly a bit slow, should be compared with win maybe to see the raw performance of the chip. If you like you can oc it a bit as well, with simple engines it should scale well, the only "reference" oc test i found was using bf3. Of course for several cards you can install binary drivers and get much more speed, intel has got only one driver - if the performance is not fast enough for you then all you can do is to add an extra card. For desktop systems thats a piece of cake. But laptops the intel hd 4000 seems to be a good choice, no hybrid solutions which only work with weird hacks.
            You bring up an important point. Following that fact, since the INTEL GPU is IGP *in* the CPU, any power consumption comparisons for it are meaningless unless the CPU is swapped over to one withOUT IGP. The thing is going to sit there sucking down at least SOME power, whether you're running it or not.

            I also question the performance tests. Intel is known for playing games in order to benchmark higher. It wouldn't surprise me one bit if there was something sneaky in the CPU that knows when someone else's GPU is attached and does something like cutting memory bandwidth. Intel is known for pulling sneaky crap, like designing CPUs FOR the benchmarks, rather than the real workload.

            Some people are going to flame me for this, but the reason why Intel beats AMD on benchmarks is because AMD is actually innovative -- reinvent the wheel, then wait for software to catch up, rather than bolting a supercharger onto an '85 Lada and calling it fast.

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by droidhacker View Post
              I also question the performance tests. Intel is known for playing games in order to benchmark higher. It wouldn't surprise me one bit if there was something sneaky in the CPU that knows when someone else's GPU is attached and does something like cutting memory bandwidth. Intel is known for pulling sneaky crap, like designing CPUs FOR the benchmarks, rather than the real workload.
              LOL and people call me paranoid... but yes intel isn't a nice guy.


              Originally posted by droidhacker View Post
              Some people are going to flame me for this, but the reason why Intel beats AMD on benchmarks is because AMD is actually innovative -- reinvent the wheel, then wait for software to catch up, rather than bolting a supercharger onto an '85 Lada and calling it fast.
              intel prefer the better "manufacturing technology" instead of the better architecture.

              intel 22nm vs amd 45nm or 32nm...

              intel should be spitted into 2 companies 1 for architecture and one for manufacturing then amd gets the same 22nm resources and intel need to fight against the SAME manufacture technology!

              Comment


              • #22
                Thats incorrect. The gpu part has got different voltage pins, you can select the differently to gpu voltag on Z boards. The default is that it is disabled as soon as you add a PCI-E gfx card, but you can force it to stay enabled if you want to use it together with virtu (on win). Intel even sells chips with disabled gpu part, not yet for ivb, but for snb like:

                http://ark.intel.com/compare/52273,52274

                Just a matter of time, then intel has got too many ivb cpus without working gpu and wants to sell those too
                Last edited by Kano; 04-27-2012, 01:22 PM.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by johanar View Post
                  Nice test, but I think it's near impossible to tell which curve corresponds to which graphics card in those graphs. The colors are way too similar.
                  Thank you i thought it was only me.
                  There are so many colors so why only use shades of the same colors.
                  Why not use distinct colors instead?
                  Example: brown, black, red, orange, violet, blue, green, yellow, turquoise, pink.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by Kano View Post
                    Thats incorrect. The gpu part has got different voltage pins, you can select the differently to gpu voltag on Z boards. The default is that it is disabled as soon as you add a PCI-E gfx card, but you can force it to stay enabled if you want to use it together with virtu (on win). Intel even sells chips with disabled gpu part, not yet for ivb, but for snb like:

                    http://ark.intel.com/compare/52273,52274

                    Just a matter of time, then intel has got too many ivb cpus without working gpu and they want to sell those too
                    Its not just about turning the part off. Yes, it will use less, but we're talking about semiconductors here, not a mechanical circuit breaker. Go back to your hardware engineering classes and remember that 0v is not equal to exactly 0v, its just how you interpret some range CLOSE to 0v that is not exactly equal. If the hardware is *present*, and not physically removed from the circuit ENTIRELY, it will continue to consume some amount of power.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by Nille_kungen View Post
                      Thank you i thought it was only me.
                      There are so many colors so why only use shades of the same colors.
                      Why not use distinct colors instead?
                      Example: brown, black, red, orange, violet, blue, green, yellow, turquoise, pink.
                      I think he's already using turquoise, blue, and green.....

                      Edit: also red, brown, and orange...
                      Last edited by droidhacker; 04-27-2012, 01:29 PM.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by droidhacker View Post
                        I think he's already using turquoise, blue, and green.....

                        Edit: also red, brown, and orange...
                        Shouldn't an Algorithm along the lines of

                        Code:
                        // num_of_lines and an array of line objects assumed here called line
                        const ColorMax= #FFFFFF;
                        int ColorStep = ColorMax/num_of_lines;
                        for (int i =0; i < num_of_lines; i++)
                        {
                             templine* = line[i]
                             templine->setColor(ColorStep*i);
                        }
                        work out for the best? that way the colors are all equidistant from each other
                        Last edited by Luke_Wolf; 04-27-2012, 02:09 PM.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by droidhacker View Post
                          I think he's already using turquoise, blue, and green.....
                          Well there are different shades of those colors thats not as close.
                          And you shouldn't use same color in different shades in the same graphs unless there bright and dark.
                          If you use them as he does now then you need to alter the lines and start using different lines like dotted ... ----
                          It should be easy to follow the graphs curves and now which curve that represents each graphics card.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by Luke_Wolf View Post
                            Shouldn't an Algorithm along the lines of

                            Code:
                            // num_of_lines and an array of line objects assumed here called line
                            const ColorMax= #FFFFFF;
                            int ColorStep = ColorMax/num_of_lines;
                            for (int i =0; i < num_of_lines; i++)
                            {
                                 templine* = line[i]
                                 templine->setColor(ColorStep*i);
                            }
                            work out for the best? that way the colors are all equidistant from each other
                            Interesting idea, but it won't work.
                            It will be ESPECIALLY bad if you select an EVEN number of steps.

                            The problem is that the color selection is not just a number of 3 bytes, it is 3 distinct ONE byte numbers representing the red, green, and blue components.
                            You see, the problem works like this; when you divide the byte space into some number of chunks in the manner you propose, you'll end up varying the most significant byte by that factor, leaving the least significant bytes alone. I.e., you can end up with the following sequence for choosing 8 steps;
                            #1FFFFF
                            #3FFFFF
                            #5FFFFF
                            ...
                            #FFFFFF
                            That will, of course, be a sequence of turquoise progressively brighter as it gets closer to #FFFFFF

                            Simiarly, you can't just drop down into the three bytes and progress as 000000, 111111, 222222, ..., FFFFFF, because that will get you greyscale.

                            You might want to pick numbers that are along the basis of ON/OFF like so;
                            FFFFFF <-- don't use this one though, because white on white is a bad choice.
                            FFFF00 <-- yellow
                            FF00FF <-- purple
                            00FFFF <-- turquoise
                            FF0000 <-- red
                            00FF00 <-- green
                            0000FF <-- blue
                            000000 <-- black

                            Now you can go through a second time using "half's".
                            7F7F7F <-- grey
                            7F7F00 <-- dark yellow
                            7F007F <-- dark purple
                            ...
                            etc.
                            Darks are good.... they tend to contrast well with brighter colors.

                            Mix and match the darks and light bytes;
                            FF7F7F <-- pink
                            7F7FFF <-- light blue
                            ...
                            lights, on the positive side, tend to contrast VERY well against darks, but also tend to be bad since they don't contrast well against WHITE.
                            FF7F00 <-- orange. Now we're talking.

                            Maybe some QUARTER colors;
                            7F3F00 <-- brown
                            7F003F <-- kind of a dark redish purple, quite distinct.


                            Colors are funny things to work with mathematically. The main thing you need to keep in mind is that you have to treat colors as THREE numbers, not just ONE.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by Nille_kungen View Post
                              Well there are different shades of those colors thats not as close.
                              And you shouldn't use same color in different shades in the same graphs unless there bright and dark.
                              If you use them as he does now then you need to alter the lines and start using different lines like dotted ... ----
                              It should be easy to follow the graphs curves and now which curve that represents each graphics card.
                              That was a joke.... but yes, absolutely. You need high contrast between similar types of colors. You can easily tell the difference between FFFFFF, 7F7F7F, and 000000, despite being varying intensities of the same color.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                To put this problem to rest, Michael should FORGET about algorithms for picking colors. Just hard code numbers in an array of, say, 50 numbers, ordered such that you can pick them in a LINEAR fashion for maximum contrast.

                                http://geography.uoregon.edu/datagra...lor_scales.htm

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X