Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 52

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

  1. #11

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mmstick View Post
    Does that even apply now that the CPU governor was fixed in kernel 3.12?
    It does, since there is still a delay between when the game is requesting more performance from the CPU/GPU and the CPU/GPU coming back out of it's lower power state, that latency is what causes the extra hit to the minimum framerate.

    If you are marginal in a game and don't want to OC, just cap the speeds at their stock max and disable the power saving features and it will squeeze a few extra FPS out at the low end at the cost of a bit more heat and power consumption without having to OC or upgrade the cooling.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    43

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mmstick View Post
    Does that even apply now that the CPU governor was fixed in kernel 3.12?
    Michael, could you please run tests with the Linux kernel 3.12 & 3.13 with ondemand & performance governors to check if there are still differences?
    Afaik this was never tested after the fix landed.
    I would like to see some gaming benchmarks with min/average/max fps graphs included

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    216

    Default Thanks for the OSS APU benchmarks.

    I do have a few suggestions though,

    1. Compare Intel and AMD APUs. I'd really like to see them benchmarked side by side with open drivers.
    2. OpenCL and AMD's HSA architecture will become more and more important in the near future so we need to see OpenCL testing baked into new benchmarks. I bring this up in this thread due to OpenCL being very GPU related. Oh I do realize that open source wise support is lagging so testing with closed source drivers should be a goal,too.
    3. While testing against discreet cards is nice, it would be nice to have some APU context here. That is result from a previous generation APU should be in the graphs.
    4. non gaming OpenGL performance should be addressed to a greater extent! Games are nice but not everybody these days is considering APUs for gaming.


    The idea here is that integrated GPUs are becoming good enough for many of us to consider these days. For years I dismissed integrated GPUs out of hand but we are certainly at the tipping point right now. Effectively they are processors that are now good enough. Of course good enough depends upon what you want to do with the machine, in this case "engineering" apps are a part of my interests.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Linuxland
    Posts
    4,733

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kivada View Post
    minimum framerate is yet another thing Larabel doesn't do that all of the decent Windows hardware reviewers have been doing forever.
    Clearly I must be seeing things. Is anyone else also hallucinating the low and peak numbers?



    (Yes, he doesn't do them when he can't, ie when there is no frame time info. I too would like him to get frame time info on all apps, which would be a day's coding away, but apparently not a big priority.)

  5. #15

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by curaga View Post
    Clearly I must be seeing things. Is anyone else also hallucinating the low and peak numbers?

    (Yes, he doesn't do them when he can't, ie when there is no frame time info. I too would like him to get frame time info on all apps, which would be a day's coding away, but apparently not a big priority.)
    More like this http://hardocp.com/article/2013/12/0..._card_review/5

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    1,199

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kivada View Post
    The point was that you were wrong and Michael does include the relevant information though not in the way you'd prefer it to be presented.

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,353

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kivada View Post
    Thank You. And that is actual gameplay and not a time demo.. It's about time somebody else agrees with me.

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,353

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by liam View Post
    The point was that you were wrong and Michael does include the relevant information though not in the way you'd prefer it to be presented.
    No he doesn't. He none of his game benchmarks mean anything. The 6450 for example is benchmarked at a completely unplayable setting and cannot represent gameplay performance for that card. The way he is benchmarking that card is completely worthless. It has zero value.

    I could go on, but I've already ranted about his worthless benches multiple times.

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,353

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by duby229 View Post
    No he doesn't. He none of his game benchmarks mean anything. The 6450 for example is benchmarked at a completely unplayable setting and cannot represent gameplay performance for that card. The way he is benchmarking that card is completely worthless. It has zero value.

    I could go on, but I've already ranted about his worthless benches multiple times.
    EDIT: He's got benches that run anywhere from 3 frames to 300 frames. Nobody is going to play a game at 3 frames or 300 frames. All of his hundreds of bench results that produce values like that are worthless.

    Games should be benchmarked to produce as close to 60 frames as they possibly can. The vast majority of all of his benches should be as close to 60 frames as he can possibly make them. the value of a benchmark is -not- in the results, it's in the hardware and configuration that was used to produce the results. All of us here know that our desired result is as close to 60 frames as we can get.

    That's what he should be trying to achieve, but he doesnt even try.

  10. #20

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by duby229 View Post
    EDIT: He's got benches that run anywhere from 3 frames to 300 frames. Nobody is going to play a game at 3 frames or 300 frames. All of his hundreds of bench results that produce values like that are worthless.

    Games should be benchmarked to produce as close to 60 frames as they possibly can. The vast majority of all of his benches should be as close to 60 frames as he can possibly make them. the value of a benchmark is -not- in the results, it's in the hardware and configuration that was used to produce the results. All of us here know that our desired result is as close to 60 frames as we can get.

    That's what he should be trying to achieve, but he doesnt even try.
    The testing isn't about letting you know if a game is playable or not per se but using it as a means of measuring/comparing performance improvements and differences, etc. I don't even play video games myself nor do a majority of the companies using PTS care about the game performance from that metric.

Posting Permissions

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