Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: unigine heaven 3.0: Radeon gets slower and slower (mesa9.0 vs 9.1-devel)

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    292

    Default unigine heaven 3.0: Radeon gets slower and slower (mesa9.0 vs 9.1-devel)





    Yes yes i try it again and upgraded from kubuntu 12.10 mesa9.0 to oibaf mesa9.1-devel and the result is: its slower.

    Yes maybe the mesa9.0 is only faster because 9.1 calculates more openGL effects but in the end its complete useless on my hardware.

    is there any improvement planet for this kind of hardware generation? hd4000?

    or is it just another way to say: fuck you customer buy new hardware you dump ass ?

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    6,607

    Default

    It should be clear that you just need to downgrade the xserver with a ppa to use fgrlx 12-6-legacy driver. If you can not live without latest xserver then get rid of the card, you should know that since 12-4 which was the last official driver (12-6 legacy was just a bonus).

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    612

    Default

    Yes, some things are slower, but other things are a lot faster. This is a known issue with TTM. There has been a Phoronix article about it.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    292

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by marek View Post
    Yes, some things are slower, but other things are a lot faster. This is a known issue with TTM. There has been a Phoronix article about it.
    Hi Marek are you sure that the problem is the TTM (in-kernel memory management) instead of the old compiler compared to the new LLVM Compiler from hd5000-hd6970 series ?
    What’s the status of back-porting the LLVM Compiler from hd5000-hd6970 series to hd2000-hd4000 series cards?
    In my knowledge its the compiler for VLIW what makes the difference.
    I have some euro/dollar/bitcoins for you if you fix the LLVM Compiler for the hd2000-4000 cards

    I think other people also would honour this.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Berlin, Germany
    Posts
    821

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by necro-lover View Post
    in the end its complete useless
    That I would consider a spot-on characterization of synthetic benchmarks.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    292

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by chithanh View Post
    That I would consider a spot-on characterization of synthetic benchmarks.
    Good point but on the other side I also bought oil-rush with the same engine.
    This means I can use oil rush with the same result then its not a synthetic benchmark.

    Do you feel better if I do this ?

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    2,328

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by necro-lover View Post
    Hi Marek are you sure that the problem is the TTM (in-kernel memory management) instead of the old compiler compared to the new LLVM Compiler from hd5000-hd6970 series ?
    There are lots of things that could be done to improve performance. This particular change is due to limitations in ttm.

    Quote Originally Posted by necro-lover View Post
    What’s the status of back-porting the LLVM Compiler from hd5000-hd6970 series to hd2000-hd4000 series cards?
    The r600 llvm work covers all asics handled by r600g (hd2xxx-hd6xxx).

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    292

    Default

    I found the cause of the bad result surprise surprise...

    I installed windows7 on a harddriver to check this the i installed the catalyst 12.6 and run the unigine heaven 3.0 bechmark with directX and openGL..

    And the result is really a surprise... because the opensource radeon driver is ~3times faster than the windows openGL catalyst driver.

    I think the OpenGL renderer of unigine heaven 3.0 is broken by design.

    test results:





    so its complete bullshit bingo the radeon linux driver is already 3 times faster than the catalyst 12.6 in windows7

    and the DirectX renderer of the unigine engine is ~10 times faster than there openGL renderer.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    612

    Default

    If you revert the Mesa commit fa58644855e44830e0b91dc627703c236fa, you might be surprised...

Posting Permissions

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