Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

AMDGPU-PRO 18.50 vs. ROCm 2.0 OpenCL Performance

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

  • AMDGPU-PRO 18.50 vs. ROCm 2.0 OpenCL Performance

    Phoronix: AMDGPU-PRO 18.50 vs. ROCm 2.0 OpenCL Performance

    When recently publishing the PlaidML deep learning benchmarks and lczero chess neural network OpenCL tests, some Phoronix readers mentioned they were seeing vastly different results with using the PAL OpenCL driver in AMDGPU-PRO (Radeon Software) compared to using the ROCm compute stack. So for seeing how those two separate AMD OpenCL drivers compare, here are some benchmark results with a Vega GPU while testing ROCm 2.0 and AMDGPU-PRO 18.50.

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=27430

  • #2
    Typos:

    Originally posted by phoronix View Post
    The Radeon Software AMDGPU-PRO 18.50 PAL OpenCL driver was benchmarks followed
    Originally posted by phoronix View Post
    ROCm 2.0 was generally faster than the the OpenCL driver
    Originally posted by phoronix View Post
    more performance tuning as its clear from some of t
    Last edited by tildearrow; 01-19-2019, 01:33 PM. Reason: one more

    Comment


    • #3
      That cl_mem test, explains a lot..

      AMD should put more work on that, curiously the Bandwith was much higher on Rocm, which is good...
      Once that cl_mem issue of read/write been solved, rocm will do a Big Jump in Performance.

      My wish, for Rocm2.1
      Solve the read/writes issue, and please provide a compatibility mode for Rx580( in mobos/CPUs without PCIe Atomics ),
      Nvidia also does the same

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by tuxd3v View Post
        That cl_mem test, explains a lot..

        AMD should put more work on that, curiously the Bandwith was much higher on Rocm, which is good...
        Once that cl_mem issue of read/write been solved, rocm will do a Big Jump in Performance.

        My wish, for Rocm2.1
        Solve the read/writes issue, and please provide a compatibility mode for Rx580( in mobos/CPUs without PCIe Atomics ),
        Nvidia also does the same
        Actually looks like the benchmark is probably just naive... ROCm 2.0 appears to be optimizing for kernel latency, which is potentially part of why it is faster in other benchs, and which is why read bandwidth is lower but write is unaffected with a naive bencmark (this goes in a queue anyway). Note however that the enqueued Read and Write are both much faster on ROCm.

        Comment


        • #5
          Is there a guide how to get ROCm working with mainline kernel without installing whole amdgpu-pro graphics stack? Some people claim it's possible, but I didn't manage to get it working. I tried installing pre-built binaries as https://rocm.github.io/ROCmInstall.html suggests, but it didn't work for me. Also, those binaries come unsigned for some reason...

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by khnazile View Post
            Is there a guide how to get ROCm working with mainline kernel without installing whole amdgpu-pro graphics stack? Some people claim it's possible, but I didn't manage to get it working. I tried installing pre-built binaries as https://rocm.github.io/ROCmInstall.html suggests, but it didn't work for me. Also, those binaries come unsigned for some reason...
            This is the wrong place to ask... Also ROCm has nothing to do with amdgpu-pro they are separate things. The easiest route is probably thier recommended rock-dkms if on Debian.

            If you want to get ROCm working with an upstream kernel... then you'll just have to try several ones to see which one works probably 4.18 and 4.19 would be a good place to start. Note there are caveats to using an upstream kernel.

            Comment


            • #7
              Michael, could you please add the Blender tests to this run? That's the only actual use I have for ROCm, and the reason I waited patiently and longingly for it.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Azpegath View Post
                Michael, could you please add the Blender tests to this run? That's the only actual use I have for ROCm, and the reason I waited patiently and longingly for it.
                Had tried but currently was falling back to CPU rendering for some reason, didn't have time to explore to see if it was bug in ROCm or a Blender issue.
                Michael Larabel
                http://www.michaellarabel.com/

                Comment


                • #9
                  Since AMD wrote the vast majority of the OpenCL stack in Blender one would think their ``tests'' at conferences would work with ROCm, but my guess is this HSA designed stack for HPC has no future on Blender.

                  If you'll notice Blender is only testing Pro Renderer on the new Vega VII test slides, not Cycles, never mind Evee.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by khnazile View Post
                    Is there a guide how to get ROCm working with mainline kernel without installing whole amdgpu-pro graphics stack? Some people claim it's possible, but I didn't manage to get it working. I tried installing pre-built binaries as https://rocm.github.io/ROCmInstall.html suggests, but it didn't work for me. Also, those binaries come unsigned for some reason...
                    You need 4.18 or newer upstream kernel; 4.19 if you have a Vega. Also need ROCm 1.9 or newer.

                    What hardware do you have ?

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X