The Most Power Efficient & Best Value Of AMD GPUs For Linux Gamers

[phoronix]

Phoronix: The Most Power Efficient & Best Value Of AMD GPUs For Linux Gamers

Earlier this week I published some performance-per-watt and performance-per-dollar NVIDIA Linux benchmarks while in this article today are similar tests done on the AMD Radeon front with the Catalyst proprietary driver on Ubuntu Linux.

http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=22075

[GraysonPeddie]

It will take years for low-end video cards to play games at UHD (3840x2160) resolution. Next year's Zen processor from AMD will probably need to be Hybrid Crossfire'd with R7 4xx series GPUs. I don't want to game with power-hungry video cards, despite R9 Nano being in the right direction for power efficiency and size.

[Klassic Six]

Can't say which gpu is the best??

[Mike Frett]

Somebody here told me a R7 360. Of course I was asking for a replacement for a 6670. Finding a replacement in the same price range but with better performance can get quite difficult.

[schmidtbag]

Can't say which gpu is the best??

That's for you to decide. Some people care about power consumption, others care about achieving the highest FPS, while others remain on a budget.

[dungeon]

Somebody here told me a R7 360. Of course I was asking for a replacement for a 6670. Finding a replacement in the same price range but with better performance can get quite difficult.

That was probably I Because in around or bellow $100 range, that Bonaire or earlier one works the best with opensource driver. With the best i mean, it is more stable and there was much less bugs if compared with the others (Tahiti i am looking mainly at you )

With Catalyst situation is more stable across asics and more scalable, but that claim depends on running apps which are scalable in perfromance and do it properly (if i can say that for eONs ). As both Dirt and Bioshock tested here tell the different story if you enable game engine switch --eon_disable_catalyst_workarounds

Without that switch Bioshock missrender and Dirt does not have all options available/enabled... and also runs slower.

[Klassic Six]

That's for you to decide. Some people care about power consumption, others care about achieving the highest FPS, while others remain on a budget.

You're right but still if someone just care about performance it's hard to decide.

[dungeon]

You're right but still if someone just care about performance it's hard to decide.

Who care only about performance fastest is Fury X obviously, but that one is not tested here. And if you look what benchmarks said on power/watt average that R7 370 eldest gen is the best... then

Regardless what some benchmarks said people interested in performance should buy whatever AMD official price range said, as those are scaled fine by performance. Obviously not all benchmark situations show the difference, but some will.

[schmidtbag]

You're right but still if someone just care about performance it's hard to decide.

No it isn't - if you care strictly about performance, go for the Fury. If you care about performance but you're on a budget, go for the 290. The Fury might not be too impressive at the moment, but most distros don't even have drivers that support it yet, so give it some time and it'll always outperform the others. Generally speaking, if you have a 1080p screen, the 290 is good enough for almost anything.

[Klassic Six]

No it isn't - if you care strictly about performance, go for the Fury. If you care about performance but you're on a budget, go for the 290. The Fury might not be too impressive at the moment, but most distros don't even have drivers that support it yet, so give it some time and it'll always outperform the others. Generally speaking, if you have a 1080p screen, the 290 is good enough for almost anything.

Have you seen the benchmark results?