Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

AMDGPU/RadeonSI Linux 4.10 + Mesa 17.1-dev vs. NVIDIA 378.09 Performance

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

  • AMDGPU/RadeonSI Linux 4.10 + Mesa 17.1-dev vs. NVIDIA 378.09 Performance

    Phoronix: AMDGPU/RadeonSI Linux 4.10 + Mesa 17.1-dev vs. NVIDIA 378.09 Performance

    For those curious about the latest Linux gaming performance numbers for the latest Linux 4.10 Git kernel plus Mesa 17.1-devel on Git master for Radeon GPUs compared to the latest NVIDIA Linux driver release (378.09 beta), here are some fresh benchmarks. A range of OpenGL and Vulkan performance tests showing the latest NVIDIA and AMD Linux graphics performance with the newest drivers as of this week.

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=24067

  • #2
    At least for me my whole Linux Game Library is playable at decent framerates at 1080p. Thank you very much RadeonSI devs!

    Still there's much room for performance improvements. Nevertheless we shouldn't forget that we're comparing a FOSS driver to a closed one.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by cRaZy-bisCuiT View Post
      At least for me my whole Linux Game Library is playable at decent framerates at 1080p. Thank you very much RadeonSI devs!

      Still there's much room for performance improvements. Nevertheless we shouldn't forget that we're comparing a FOSS driver to a closed one.
      Indeed, RadeonSI and mesa has done so much progress in the last couple of years. Linux is now my primary OS for playing CSGO. I haven't really tested other games I have. But since they aren't very fast on windows, I don't think it's time to fully switch over yet. But I'm looking forward to doing so, maybe with Vega and AMDGPU.

      Comment


      • #4
        So the only AMD card that beats my 1060 is the Fury. And only in two tests. Not a bad buying decision, I reckon.

        Comment


        • #5
          Great to see that a comparison like this actually starts to make sense! The AMD FOSS team really goes for the NVIDIA driver.Great to see that a comparison like this actually starts to make sense! The AMD FOSS team really goes for the NVIDIA driver.

          Comment


          • #6
            I've run several benchmarks on my own RX 480; it seems something, somewhere, is capping performance in the radeonsi driver - in Deus EX:Mankind Divided for example, places where the framerate is painfully slow don't see a big fps improvement when switching to a lower quality setting - in Pragua, where it's most visible, I get 7 fps in Ultra @ 1440p (VRAM allocation is 8 GB); reducing it to Low will up the fps to... 11. Same card same settings in another map will have 20-23fps in Ultra on complex outdoor scenes, reducing to Low will get silky smooth rendering. I tried disabling most settings one after the other, even disabling hair rendering in the preferences setting file, to no big improvement. As I said in another thread, fps may actually get so low as to cause a temporary hang that then "unlocks" resulting in a temporary increase of the frame rate (7=>12 fps in Pragua, looking at the place in front of the church - heavy tessellation, many NPCs, lots of particles and objects), slowing back down over time after that. In Low details, I'll get a jump from 11 to 17 fps at the same place.

            I also ran the Phoronix benchmark suite on DE:MD, and depending on the resolution and graphics settings I'd get lower results than a Geforce 1060 (low res and/or low details) or higher (higher res/higher settings). It might be because of the extra 2 Gb of VRAM on my card or my OC'd i5@4.2 GHz, but looking at today's results I do think there's a big limiter somewhere in the driver.

            I'm glad that pretty much all my games are very playable with high settings (Tomb Raider 2013 on my hardware runs beautifully at Ultra settings + Ultra shadows @1440p, Bioshock Infinite is superb except some models seem to retain their low details for too long when close up, Borderlands 2 is teh lulz), though.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by bug77 View Post
              So the only AMD card that beats my 1060 is the Fury. And only in two tests. Not a bad buying decision, I reckon.
              Yes, once again Nvidia crushes the competition. There is only one good choice.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by efikkan View Post
                There is only one good choice.
                ...Unless you support Open Source =p

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Mike Frett View Post
                  ...Unless you support Open Source =p
                  Which still rely on proprietary firmware…
                  Nvidia has much better support for open standards, which actually count.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Mike Frett View Post

                    ...Unless you support Open Source =p
                    I'd rather have high performance. And as someone else mentioned, deblob your drivers and you'll see how open your stuff really is.

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X