Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 34

Thread: AMD RadeonSI Gallium3D Begins Simple CL Demos

  1. #11

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by smitty3268 View Post
    There are already Unigine tests in PTS, but Michael never seems to use them for some reason. And then there's a lot of possible games he could test through Steam now, but he doesn't seem interested in adding any of those, either.
    Most of the time when I try running Unigine on the open drivers usually results with incorrect rendering. I have half-working benchmarks for a few Valve games but there still seems to be a bug with Steam where the games aren't exiting gracefully automatically after completing the tests but the process is still active.

    There's also FurMark and other PTS tests too, except that they don't work cleanly with GL3 Mesa yet.

    Beyond that, unfortunately there's not many more free as in beer quality OpenGL games (I don't mind paying for benchmarks, but hampers the ability of others then to reproduce the results and compare them to my data, etc).

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    1,185

    Default

    well i can say my radeon 7770 has gotten really fast lately even in low profile[my msi 7770 seem to hate reclock and crash the kernel]<-- eye measure, but for all my uses is so far way ahead of fglrx[i bet fglrx is faster in FPS for games but with this thing latency is almost 0, glitches is almost 0, responsiveness is outstanding, UVD is working like a boss, opencl is getting there, chrome fly with this card, webgl examples hit 60 cap always without glitch]

    great job the FOSS driver team

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Toronto, ON, Canada
    Posts
    31

    Default

    @Michael care to elaborate on your issues with RadeonSI? Your experiences seem inconsistent with our own and the many positive comments in this forum. We're putting a lot of effort into improving RadeonSI so now is a good time for constructive feedback.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    3,181

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Michael View Post
    Most of the time when I try running Unigine on the open drivers usually results with incorrect rendering.
    Ahh, that's interesting to hear. Have you reported any of these bugs? I'm not aware of any bugs that the developers are working on, and it won't get fixed if no one knows about it.

    Quote Originally Posted by Michael View Post
    I have half-working benchmarks for a few Valve games but there still seems to be a bug with Steam where the games aren't exiting gracefully automatically after completing the tests but the process is still active.
    Yeah, i know. It's steam's fault, but the bottom line is that your priority #1, #2, #3, and #4 should be getting Steam working, whether it's buggy or not, even if you have to add ugly hacks to PTS. Think of all the page hits you got on those articles talking about rumors Steam was coming to linux. I don't understand why this doesn't seem to be a priority for you. You'd be doing yourself a favor with all the extra attention you'd get.

    Quote Originally Posted by Michael View Post
    There's also FurMark and other PTS tests too, except that they don't work cleanly with GL3 Mesa yet.
    Right. Those tests seem disappointingly synthetic, but i have to imagine they'd be a lot better than another Quake 3 test. Hopefully the drivers add support soon, when Mesa gets GL3.2 support added and working.

    Quote Originally Posted by Michael View Post
    Beyond that, unfortunately there's not many more free as in beer quality OpenGL games (I don't mind paying for benchmarks, but hampers the ability of others then to reproduce the results and compare them to my data, etc).
    Free as in beer benchmarks are nice, but when you don't have anything available that can stress the cards then being able to reproduce results is of limited usefulness. I don't think anyone would care if you started posting benchmarks of proprietary games that require buying them, as long as they are actually useful - as in, they are popular apps that many people actually use (like Valve games) or apps that stress the GPU in a particular way that the free benchmarks do not - such as being modern engines not based off of Quake 3.
    Last edited by smitty3268; 05-24-2013 at 08:02 PM.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    39

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Michael View Post
    Most of the time when I try running Unigine on the open drivers usually results with incorrect rendering.
    There are known problems with Unigine engine (it's not r600g's problems) that require workarounds to make it work properly. Setting the following environment variables is enough to make it work properly on my card (AMD HD5750), I believe it should be enough for any cards supported by r600g:

    Code:
    MESA_EXTENSION_OVERRIDE=-GL_ARB_shader_bit_encoding force_glsl_extensions_warn=true
    That is for Heaven 3.0 (4.0 doesn't work for some other reasons, but I guess new version won't change much anyway). This should also work for Tropics and Sanctuary (but you need to build 32-bit mesa/drivers for them because they are 32-bit apps).

    Quote Originally Posted by Michael View Post
    I have half-working benchmarks for a few Valve games but there still seems to be a bug with Steam where the games aren't exiting gracefully automatically after completing the tests but the process is still active.
    Well, of course it can be worse than a fully automatic benchmark, but I guess you can obtain some results anyway if you want. It would be more interesting and attract a lot more people to your website than benchmarks of ancient Quake3 engines.

    Quote Originally Posted by Michael View Post
    There's also FurMark and other PTS tests too, except that they don't work cleanly with GL3 Mesa yet.
    Yes, these require newer GL versions, so they are not going to work right now, but it has nothing to do with many real games & apps that work with r600g.

    Quote Originally Posted by Michael View Post
    Beyond that, unfortunately there's not many more free as in beer quality OpenGL games (I don't mind paying for benchmarks, but hampers the ability of others then to reproduce the results and compare them to my data, etc).
    Michael, most GPU benchmarks in the internet are based on the proprietary games for windows, and nobody complains that he can't reproduce the results because he can't buy the game.

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,353

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Michael View Post
    Most of the time when I try running Unigine on the open drivers usually results with incorrect rendering. I have half-working benchmarks for a few Valve games but there still seems to be a bug with Steam where the games aren't exiting gracefully automatically after completing the tests but the process is still active.

    There's also FurMark and other PTS tests too, except that they don't work cleanly with GL3 Mesa yet.

    Beyond that, unfortunately there's not many more free as in beer quality OpenGL games (I don't mind paying for benchmarks, but hampers the ability of others then to reproduce the results and compare them to my data, etc).
    Michael, Most people don't mind paying for games that they enjoy. Just because a game needs to be payed for doesnt mean that people don't have it. Sure there will be people that don't have it, but if they enjoy it, then they will pay for it.

    Those are the best kind of benchmarks. The most useful benchmarks are those that stress test useful software on useful hardware in useful scenarios.

  7. #17

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by duby229 View Post
    But nobody ever said that the OSS drivers would. It's been said repeatedly on these very forums that 70% of catalyst is about as close to the ideal as could be achieved. I'm certain that the open drivers have already passed that. The performance expectations were made perfectly clear from the beginning years ago. And it surpassed them. I don't understand where this nonsense about poor performance is coming from. Your very own benchmarks proved multiple times that the open drivers perform damn good.
    I get superior performance with the open source drivers compared to Catalyst, provided I used the r600-sb backend and force enable power management. In fact I get close to double the performance with some games under Wine, although I suspect there may be issues with Catalyst on my system for it to fail that badly. I did run benchmarks on another thread and found that there is only a 15% performance loss between r600-sb and Windows for Half-Life 2: Lost Coast.

    However, this was only tested with my A10-4600M APU. Perhaps much higher end cards end up being bottlenecked compared to Windows. Or don't work well yet such as the radeonsi supported cards (although I have a dedicated radeonsi card, and it worked worse than the APU with catalyst, despite being 20-30% faster in theory)

    So yeah, with r600-sb we've already reached good enough. Now we just need it ported to radeonsi, or for the LLVM compiler to get a lot better.

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    186

    Default

    I am glad to see this work being carried out. Currently the open source implementation is about 60-70% of the performance of the proprietary driver in Bitcoin mining, so it is unacceptably low for that purpose. For many other workloads 60% might be plenty. Can't wait to ditch catalyst but for that to happen the Bitcoin mining performance must be >90% of the proprietary alternative. It is a very simple workload so making it work should not be that hard.

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    ฿ 16LDJ6Hrd1oN3nCoFL7BypHSEYL84ca1JR
    Posts
    1,052

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tstellar View Post
    These all work for me on Evergreen, what GPU are you using?
    radeonsi, just to show that with current mainline it's pretty much broken. Haven't tested the proposed patches and probably won't because if they work they'll be in git master soon enough anyway.

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    France
    Posts
    595

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by duby229 View Post
    But nobody ever said that the OSS drivers would. It's been said repeatedly on these very forums that 70% of catalyst is about as close to the ideal as could be achieved. I'm certain that the open drivers have already passed that. The performance expectations were made perfectly clear from the beginning years ago. And it surpassed them. I don't understand where this nonsense about poor performance is coming from. Your very own benchmarks proved multiple times that the open drivers perform damn good.

    I understand that many people play the open source shooters you like to use as benchmarks, but they don't stress modern hardware, therefore they -can't- represent what the hardware can do. It's just not possible with the games that you benchmark to represent performance on modern cards. You really -need- to update the game benchmarks to include modern day games that can stress modern day cards.

    EDIT: Reach out to game developers and let them know that you need a solid stress test. PTS would be a kick ass way of showing off their stuff. It really is cool software. It just needs benchmarks that can stress modern GPU's. Talk to developers (or publishers) and let them know. Voice your need.
    Play Xonotic with "Ultimate" settings, you'll have an hard time getting more than 60 FPS with an open source driver.

Posting Permissions

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