Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

New AMD GPU Performance To Be Boosted By Linux 4.5; How It Compares To The Binary Blob

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

  • FireBurn
    replied
    Originally posted by Adriannho View Post

    What exactly is that? Does it work on AMD+AMD scenarios?

    There's work going into the Xserver but it'll need to be sorted at the DRM level and ddx too - I think radeon & amdgpu already support fencing and I'm not sure yet if it'll work when using the modesetting driver - I'll comment once things have been merged upstream

    Leave a comment:


  • FireBurn
    replied
    Originally posted by Nille_kungen View Post
    Looked at M395X at AMD and the thing that catched my eye was "Vulkan API Support No" i think it might be that vulkan isn't really released yet since i thought every GCN would support vulkan.
    http://products.amd.com/en-us/search...A2-R9-M395X/56
    Is that an laptop?
    If so which one? (i only seen it in alienware laptops).
    Did BioShock Infinite work good with open source drivers and did it render as it should?

    It's in an Alienware 15 here, I think it works well on a 4K screen - it appears to render well but I've not played it on windows so can't directly compare. I think it looks great if that counts

    Like I said theres still a few bugs but it's much better supported than my Intel Sandybridge/Radeon Barts system was a few years ago out of the box

    Leave a comment:


  • Nille_kungen
    replied
    Originally posted by FireBurn View Post
    I've been really impressed with my Tonga based M395X with the Powerplay branch
    Looked at M395X at AMD and the thing that catched my eye was "Vulkan API Support No" i think it might be that vulkan isn't really released yet since i thought every GCN would support vulkan.
    http://products.amd.com/en-us/search...A2-R9-M395X/56
    Is that an laptop?
    If so which one? (i only seen it in alienware laptops).
    Did BioShock Infinite work good with open source drivers and did it render as it should?

    Leave a comment:


  • profoundWHALE
    replied
    Originally posted by magika View Post
    fury almost got 60 fps in xonotic.
    W o w
    o
    w

    w o w
    o w o
    w o w
    Last edited by profoundWHALE; 23 December 2015, 04:45 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Creak
    replied
    I hope that during 2016 we'll see the open source AMD drivers surpass Catalyst, so we won't have to compare free and proprietary benchmarks anymore.

    Leave a comment:


  • Adriannho
    replied
    Originally posted by FireBurn View Post

    The last piece of the puzzle will be the new double buffering for DRI_PRIME which is being worked on for Intel/Nvidia setups and I'm hoping won't take too much effort for Intel/AMD setups
    What exactly is that? Does it work on AMD+AMD scenarios?

    Leave a comment:


  • FireBurn
    replied
    I've been really impressed with my Tonga based M395X with the Powerplay branch - I've nearly completed BioShock Infinite running at 4k resolutions

    The only things not working for me now is the DPM auto changing of PCIe lanes and runpm - the later of which works without powerplay

    I've got bugs open for both and Alex (agd5f) has been helping me debug the issues

    The last piece of the puzzle will be the new double buffering for DRI_PRIME which is being worked on for Intel/Nvidia setups and I'm hoping won't take too much effort for Intel/AMD setups

    Leave a comment:


  • magika
    replied
    Fury almost got 60 fps in Xonotic.
    W O W
    O
    W

    Leave a comment:


  • rabcor
    replied
    Not too bad, but... Don't we need this driver to actually surpass catalyst so that it can amount to anything? (Considering how catalyst is lagging pretty far behind Nvidia's drivers)

    Leave a comment:


  • BenPope
    replied
    Originally posted by xxmitsu View Post
    Looking for fury tests, I've also found this result file on openbenchmarking http://openbenchmarking.org/result/1...HA-BPPADOKAN90 that shows a beautiful 221.97 fps on 3440 x 1440 with DRI3. What's the explanation between those differences with Michael's result (on a lower 1920 x 1080), then ? could there be a regression somewhere in between ?
    I have no idea why my results are so much better than Michaels. I'll spin a 4.5 DRM-Next in a couple of days and give it another go.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X