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

Thread: AMD APU vs. Radeon GPU Open-Source Comparison

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    14,554

    Default AMD APU vs. Radeon GPU Open-Source Comparison

    Phoronix: AMD APU vs. Radeon GPU Open-Source Comparison

    Earlier this month I ran some benchmarks showing that with the very latest open-source AMD Linux graphics driver code, the AMD APU Gallium3D performance can be ~80%+ the speed of Catalyst, the notorious Linux binary graphics driver. For end-users curious what the AMD A10-6800K "Richland" APU performance is comparable to when it comes to discrete Radeon graphics cards with the R600 Gallium3D driver, here's some weekend comparison benchmarks.

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=19438

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Greece
    Posts
    351

    Default RAM speed?

    What was the speed of RAM used in the test? It is well known that APUs are bottlenecked by memory bandwidth, and especially AMD's apus scale well with increased RAM bandwidth.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    369

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TemplarGR View Post
    What was the speed of RAM used in the test? It is well known that APUs are bottlenecked by memory bandwidth, and especially AMD's apus scale well with increased RAM bandwidth.
    I was going to ask the same question. There is a huge difference between 1333 and even 1866.

  4. #4

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by benmoran View Post
    I was going to ask the same question. There is a huge difference between 1333 and even 1866.
    The performance scales with DDR3 speed, seeing that all AMD mobos claim to be able to hit at least DDR2 2133 and that DDR3 2133 stock speed low voltage and timing ram is within $5 of 1866 for the same capacity it only makes sense to use that as a baseline.

    Ram OC tests with the AMD APUs show that the GPU is heavily limited by the ram and will continue to scale pretty much linearly with that speed if you don't let the timings get out of hand and kill the performance gains.

    For the APUs upping your latency timings to 13-13-13-31 just to hit a higher MHZ is going to be no better then 11-11-11-27 at a lower Mhz. I forget the formula right now to calculate it.

    If you intend to game with them go for at least DDR3 2.4Ghz and disable the power saving modes.

  5. #5

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by templargr View Post
    what was the speed of ram used in the test? It is well known that apus are bottlenecked by memory bandwidth, and especially amd's apus scale well with increased ram bandwidth.
    ddr3-2133.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    148

    Default Offtopic

    Unigine Valley 1.0 and Heaven 4.0 works pretty nice on RadeonSI (and R600g) now.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    France
    Posts
    561

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kivada View Post
    If you intend to game with them go for at least DDR3 2.4Ghz and disable the power saving modes.
    Disabling power saving modes will not increase your performance, it will only waste power.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    84

    Default

    Thank you Michael for linux OSS APU performance.

  9. #9

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Calinou View Post
    Disabling power saving modes will not increase your performance, it will only waste power.
    The tests don't show that, disabling the power saving features raises your minimum framerate. While this does nothing for your max framerate, the max framerate doesn't matter, minimum and frame latency do. So what if you can hit 500FPS nose up to a blank wall when your framerate consistently falls below 30FPS during heavy action?

    I take it you don't understand this concept because minimum framerate is yet another thing Larabel doesn't do that all of the decent Windows hardware reviewers have been doing forever.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    384

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kivada View Post
    The tests don't show that, disabling the power saving features raises your minimum framerate. While this does nothing for your max framerate, the max framerate doesn't matter, minimum and frame latency do. So what if you can hit 500FPS nose up to a blank wall when your framerate consistently falls below 30FPS during heavy action?

    I take it you don't understand this concept because minimum framerate is yet another thing Larabel doesn't do that all of the decent Windows hardware reviewers have been doing forever.
    Does that even apply now that the CPU governor was fixed in kernel 3.12?

Posting Permissions

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