Page 1 of 6 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 52

Thread: AMD R600g Performance Patches Yield Mixed Results

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    15,193

    Default AMD R600g Performance Patches Yield Mixed Results

    Phoronix: AMD R600g Performance Patches Yield Mixed Results

    Following performance benchmark results I published earlier this week comparing the open-source Radeon and AMD Catalyst driver performance under Ubuntu 12.10, Marek, the well-known independent open-source graphics driver developer, set out to explore some of the performance issues in the open-source driver. One day later, he published a patch that could quadruple the frame-rate of the Radeon Gallium3D driver. He went on to push another performance-focused patch too for this R600g driver. In this article are a fresh round of benchmarks of the open-source driver to look at the wins and losses attributed to this new code.

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=18093

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    492

    Default

    That's not what I'd call mixed results. It looks like an improvement across the board with one regression.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    51

    Default Wonderful article title again Michael

    How the heck is this mixed results?!

    It seems to me that the _only_ game where it didn't pay off is Xonotic and looking at the frame rates there I'm guessing that either that game does something weird of something else is going on (like hitting a software fallback path somewhere, for example).

    Michael, you need an attitude change.
    How about being positive for a change instead of outrageously negative...

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    424

    Default

    Only game that had an issue was Xonotic in High. That seems more like a bug in the game then a regression.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    79

    Default How can we help?

    What can we do to accelerate getting the continuous integration testing done? What do you need help with?

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    245

    Default

    It wasn't just Xonotic. From the article: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=56634.
    Marek also said, changing a heuristic is a mixed bag and can cause regressions. Hopefully, they'll be mostly ironed out soon ..

  7. #7

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rigaldo View Post
    It wasn't just Xonotic. From the article: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=56634.
    Marek also said, changing a heuristic is a mixed bag and can cause regressions. Hopefully, they'll be mostly ironed out soon ..
    Right, exactly, it seems to be bad for the more demanding cases... Xonotic high, ETQW, Unigine... Most of the tests in the article are just of ioquake3.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    17

    Default

    The closed blob's perfirmance advantage is not due to tweaks like this. I have an extremely simple test case which renders a single static rectangular texture and the open source driver is half the speed. This is the simplest fundamental operation and alas we are slower than we should be. Until fundamental problems like that are addressed, tweaks here and there for this and that game are not likely to have the expected result.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    120

    Default

    Based on the way only some games are being affected, it looks like something very specific is broken. Especially since according to that bug report, ETQW's performance is usually better, and only sometimes worse. My intuition is that this should be possible to fix without reverting the optimization, although I'm not familiar with the r600g code.

    If it turns out that the regressions can't be fixed without reverting, well, the blobs have game-specific hacks, why shouldn't r600g?

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    706

    Default

    Can we have Nouveau tests of gpus without reclocking support vs Nvidia blobs **reclocked** to frequencies used by Nouveau?

    Now we know how good Nvidia is and how good Nouveau is without actually using 100% of GPU computational powers. If we could see how Nvidia behave on smaller frequencies we could compare relative capabilities of those gpu drivers with better accuracy (and "somehow" scale up Nouveau perf in "would be" scenario where Nouv know how to reclock)


    As for article. Is Marek around to comment?

    PS While crowdfunding messa/drivers is not practical now, maybe crowdfunding x.org efforts for continous integration could be doable? Michael what do you think? Maybe you can talk about it with x.org foundation?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •