AMD Radeon RX 5700 / RX 5700XT Linux Gaming Benchmarks

[pal666]

radv already has hardware support today, amdvlk is absent and we don't even have a date when it might become available.

first, authoritative source says radv doesn't have hardware support and will not have it for some weeks. second, how does it answer question about supporting 99% of windows userbase?

[pal666]

What is your deal with 4:4:4, anyway? It's typically only used for pro/video-editing use cases, where people care about pulling color keys and stuff. If you're not post-processing your videos, then you don't need it.

what is your deal with 1080p anyway? you'll be perfectly fine with 720p

[tildearrow]

what is your deal with 1080p anyway? you'll be perfectly fine with 720p

More like 540p.

[smitty3268]

first, authoritative source says radv doesn't have hardware support and will not have it for some weeks.

And will that be before or after amdvlk gains support? I don't know, but the very fact that we don't know the answer to that shows what a giant cluster this is for AMD.

second, how does it answer question about supporting 99% of windows userbase?

It doesn't, because first that's meaningless and users don't care. Second, amdvlk doesn't run on windows. It's a linux driver. And thirdly, and most importantly, the whole reason we're having this conversation is precisely because amdvlk doesn't run navi hardware, unlike AMD's actual windows driver. That's the whole point. If it wasn't such a failure, then just maybe other points would matter.

[smitty3268]

OK, so this is my deal.
I do care about preserving exact colors. 4:2:0 is detrimental to screen recording because it blurs red/magenta text and desaturates some areas. I do need it.

When you have an unusual use-case like that it's on you to buy hardware that actually supports your needs. It's not like AMD has been marketing the fact that they provide that and then chosen not to put it in their linux drivers, you just chose to buy hardware that doesn't do what you wish it did.

Whining on Phoronix isn't going to achieve anything, I guarantee you no one from AMD cares.

[coder]

Video cards and cpus disappoint me. They should be getting faster, smaller and more energy efficient and they are not.

They are getting faster, smaller, and more energy efficient!

Navi is faster than Vega, overall, and certainly faster than Polaris.

Navi is smaller, both because it has fewer shaders than Vega and it packs 10.3 Billion transistors into 251 mm^2, whereas Vega fit 12.5 Billion transistors into 486 mm^2. In comparison, Polaris 20 had 5.7 Billion transistors on a 232 mm^2 die (although the XT has 11% more shaders than it).

Finally, Navi is more efficient, providing more fps / W. In fact, Michael graphed this for you, so it's easy to see. Just search the article for "Frames Per Second Per Watt" and you can see how it ranks on various games.

I'm guessing your real complaints are that you want absolute power consumption to drop and graphics card size to decrease. However, the race for more performance means that the density and efficiency gains are being plowed right back into more performance, which generates heat that has to be dissipated with a cooler about the same size as before.

If you're willing to trade performance for energy savings and physical size, then you can simply buy an entry-level card, which range anywhere from about 35 W to 75 W and are (mostly) available in a half-height, half-length form factor. You'll find that these cards are on roughly the same generational performance & efficiency curve as the higher-end cards, but obviously at a lower absolute level. AMD has yet to release a new entry-level card, in this generation. Don't hold your breath, as they might simply rebrand a Polaris GPU to fit the bill. They don't usually replace their entire range, every generation. Typically, the lower-end cards are only redesigned every 2 or 3 generations.

For more information, give this a close read: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...RX_5000_Series

[coder]

what is your deal with 1080p anyway? you'll be perfectly fine with 720p

I don't have any deal with 1080p. Putting this on par with luma resolution betrays an uncharacteristic degree of ignorance, for you.

I was just curious why tildearrow seems to be so obsessed with 4:4:4, which isn't even well-supported among player software/hardware. It's intended as a pro format, for the reasons I mentioned. So, I wondered if he fits that userbase, or else why he is so obsessed with it.

In my experience, it's much more important to get the correct Y/C phase and use quality chroma decimation and reconstruction. If you get those things right, you won't notice the lower bandwidth of chroma, which is why chroma sub-sampling is nearly universal among video codecs.

[pal666]

I don't have any deal with 1080p.

so you are using 720p, or obsessed with higher resolutions?

Putting this on par with luma resolution betrays an uncharacteristic degree of ignorance, for you.

thinking that factor of 4 is on par with factor of 9/4 shows that you have issues with numbers

I was just curious why tildearrow seems to be so obsessed with 4:4:4, which isn't even well-supported among player software/hardware.

i'm pretty sure you can find hardware which doesn't support 1080p

It's intended as a pro format, for the reasons I mentioned.

you've mentioned only your misconceptions

[pal666]

And will that be before or after amdvlk gains support?

i have no idea, it's not me demanding that amd must stop any work on amdvlk right now because i hear voices in my head

I don't know, but the very fact that we don't know the answer to that shows what a giant cluster this is for AMD.

no, giant cluster is for example when dxvk apps are randomly crashing on failed allocation, but that's not amd

It doesn't, because first that's meaningless and users don't care.

windows support is surely meaningful for amd and 99% of their users do care about it

Second, amdvlk doesn't run on windows. It's a linux driver.

it's a linux binary. source code runs on windows and is developed by windows devs. though not compiler yet, but they are aiming to use it too eventually

And thirdly, and most importantly, the whole reason we're having this conversation is precisely because amdvlk doesn't run navi hardware

who told you this bullshit? of course it does run navi hardware, they just can't show you its sources yet

, unlike AMD's actual windows driver.

which comes without source code, tadam

[coder]

so you are using 720p, or obsessed with higher resolutions?
thinking that factor of 4 is on par with factor of 9/4 shows that you have issues with numbers

The analogy is fundamentally flawed. You seemed to miss that, or possibly you just cannot allow sound logic to get in the way of your lulz.

you've mentioned only your misconceptions

If they are misconceptions, you've shown no evidence to support that view.

Just answer this: are you trolling me because you actually care about 4:4:4 support, or just for your usual reasons?