Originally posted by Kivada
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
20-Way Radeon Comparison With Open-Source Graphics For Steam On Linux Gaming
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by brosis View PostSo unfortunate for HD6950. It gets beaten constantly by HD6870. Although the market prices are nearly same, its clear that 6950 architecture is heavily underperforming now.
It looks like the best bang for the buck is still HD5850/70 and HD6850/70.
Even with these results, it looks like it would be a decent step up from the Diamond Radeon HD 4670 1GB GDDR3 I am currently using, which has only just recently been showing its age to me.
Comment
-
Originally posted by justmy2cents View Postjust currrious, is the fact that 6450 is so slow bug in mesa or is this card really so bad?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radeon_HD_6000_Series
Comment
-
Originally posted by Kivada View PostIt's both slow and old. It's one step off of the slowest card of the HD6 era but still only has 64-bit GDDR3. If you are looking for a gaming capable card you will want to limit your search to only GPUs with at least 128-bit GDDR5 so that whatever low end GPU it is ends up not being bottlenecked by it's memory bandwidth. http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...eId=1&name=ATI
It's more likely there is a serious regression or some bug in the benchmarking.
Comment
-
Originally posted by brosis View PostSo unfortunate for HD6950. It gets beaten constantly by HD6870. Although the market prices are nearly same, its clear that 6950 architecture is heavily underperforming now.
It looks like the best bang for the buck is still HD5850/70 and HD6850/70.
The HD6950 HD6970 and HD6990 are the only 3 GPUs in existence that used VLIW4.
There are millions more VLIW5 GPUs out there like the HD5870 and HD6870 which means that the code base for those cards is far more optimized. My guess is that the only reason the HD6900 series even works at all is because the architecture is similar enough to the older VLIW5 design that it wasn't too difficult to get it to light up.Last edited by Kivada; 27 August 2014, 01:26 PM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by ModplanMan View PostI'm sorry but regardless of its limitations an HD6450 and HD5450 should be getting at least 30fps on nearly all of the titles tested. I've owned an HD6450 for 2 years and have played tf2, portal, cs:source all with frames around 40-60+ fps (rarely tested them without vsync). Source engine games are not that punishing at all, almost any low end GPU or Intel graphics should play them at above 30fps, only exceptions being maybe Portal 2 on some settings and Dota 2.
It's more likely there is a serious regression or some bug in the benchmarking.
You can enable it if it is stable for you.
But there are some new patches on ML about the metter Marek posted recently, which can make hyperz slightly stablier, less artifacts prone and even more faster than it is now .Last edited by dungeon; 27 August 2014, 01:42 PM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Kivada View PostIt's both slow and old. It's one step off of the slowest card of the HD6 era but still only has 64-bit GDDR3. If you are looking for a gaming capable card you will want to limit your search to only GPUs with at least 128-bit GDDR5 so that whatever low end GPU it is ends up not being bottlenecked by it's memory bandwidth. http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...eId=1&name=ATI
I was just curious since one of my desktop (no gaming) cards is 6450 and for those needs i always buy amd. seems so strange that it is completely beaten by all my other cards when it was the last one i bought now, if i compare price i payed for 750Ti and 6450 price/perf is abysmal and i bought them at same time. note that i don't really care how much slower oss vs catalyst is, nor how good NVidia is compared to it. 6450 card performs really well for what is meant to and oss drivers are a blessing. i just noticed i could probably buy better price/performance amd card if i checked things before buying, which bring it to... it's my own damn fault, lol
Comment
-
Keep in mind, small cards are slow but use the least power as well
Originally posted by justmy2cents View Postthanks for reply and... nah, for gaming i use 750Ti. what i care with amd is fluid desktop experience with oss drivers.
I was just curious since one of my desktop (no gaming) cards is 6450 and for those needs i always buy amd. seems so strange that it is completely beaten by all my other cards when it was the last one i bought now, if i compare price i payed for 750Ti and 6450 price/perf is abysmal and i bought them at same time. note that i don't really care how much slower oss vs catalyst is, nor how good NVidia is compared to it. 6450 card performs really well for what is meant to and oss drivers are a blessing. i just noticed i could probably buy better price/performance amd card if i checked things before buying, which bring it to... it's my own damn fault, lol
Comment
Comment