Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

A Fresh Look At The NVIDIA vs. Radeon Linux Performance & Perf-Per-Watt For August 2018

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #21
    Yeah you mean the video game presets, hmm, wish they be kept consistent between articles as it makes it hard to compare.

    Comment


    • #22
      2 cents on the general Nvidia/AMD choice - I had a weird issue with Nvidia 1060 - it crashed when there was static electricity around. Go around on the dry floor, then touch the keyboard - PC crashes, only way out is hard reset. Didn't have this issue once after switching to AMD RX 560. Everything is properly grounded of course. Weird.

      Comment


      • #23
        Originally posted by theriddick View Post
        These are worse results then that of the June 1st ones for some reason, in particular look at Mad Max results. With a 5ghz CPU here we should see overall better performance for AMD since the drivers are more CPU bound then NVIDIA, but we don't.

        https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pa...onix14-29-gpus
        A new driver will be out this week with performance improvements.... Minutes after publishing yesterday's article, I was told by NVIDIA that a regression they spent weeks analyzing after they were puzzled by some of my earlier test results had been figured out and solved.
        Michael Larabel
        http://www.michaellarabel.com/

        Comment


        • #24
          Originally posted by Michael View Post

          A new driver will be out this week with performance improvements.... Minutes after publishing yesterday's article, I was told by NVIDIA that a regression they spent weeks analyzing after they were puzzled by some of my earlier test results had been figured out and solved.
          Jesus they doing active performance regression fixing just by reading your articles?
          Wish this kind of service would exist for RadeonSI.

          Comment


          • #25
            Originally posted by Strunkenbold View Post

            Jesus they doing active performance regression fixing just by reading your articles?
            Wish this kind of service would exist for RadeonSI.
            They had noticed a change in performance between some of my benchmarks and after a lot of back and forths, sending over my system image, and a few weeks of debugging on their end, they figured out what was going on and will be fixed in the next driver release.
            Michael Larabel
            http://www.michaellarabel.com/

            Comment


            • #26
              Originally posted by Strunkenbold View Post
              Jesus they doing active performance regression fixing just by reading your articles?
              Wish this kind of service would exist for RadeonSI.
              We have been doing that for at least a couple of years AFAIK.

              The same kind of thing happens on the compute side - I noticed that Michael's numbers were a lot lower than ours, and after some investigation we realized that the SHOC settings Michael was using had execution times too short for DPM to ramp up the GPU clocks.
              Last edited by bridgman; 08-21-2018, 12:13 PM.

              Comment


              • #27
                Originally posted by theriddick View Post
                These are worse results then that of the June 1st ones for some reason, in particular look at Mad Max results. With a 5ghz CPU here we should see overall better performance for AMD since the drivers are more CPU bound then NVIDIA, but we don't.

                https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pa...onix14-29-gpus
                This driver should fix it: https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pa...Linux-Released

                Testing now.
                Michael Larabel
                http://www.michaellarabel.com/

                Comment


                • #28
                  Originally posted by bridgman View Post

                  We have been doing that for at least a couple of years AFAIK.

                  The same kind of thing happens on the compute side - I noticed that Michael's numbers were a lot lower than ours, and after some investigation we realized that the SHOC settings Michael was using had execution times too short for DPM to ramp up the GPU clocks.
                  'SHOC settings'?

                  BTW Where is AMD's 'fix'

                  Comment


                  • #29
                    Originally posted by nuetzel View Post
                    'SHOC settings'?
                    https://openbenchmarking.org/innhold...6c0496f7117467

                    IIRC the default was -s 1 or -s 2... we found that going to -s 4 made the performance largely independent of DRM tuning nuances.

                    Originally posted by nuetzel View Post
                    BTW Where is AMD's 'fix'
                    They have been dribbling in over the last few years. Or am I not understanding your question ?

                    Comment


                    • #30
                      Originally posted by bridgman View Post

                      https://openbenchmarking.org/innhold...6c0496f7117467

                      IIRC the default was -s 1 or -s 2... we found that going to -s 4 made the performance largely independent of DRM tuning nuances.

                      They have been dribbling in over the last few years. Or am I not understanding your question ?
                      First part: Yes, I know. (See some Tested-by: DN ;-)) Second part, you sent the fix (above).
                      Thank you!

                      (I didn't know what 'SHOC' was. - Silly me.)
                      Last edited by nuetzel; 08-21-2018, 11:21 PM.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X