I feel like a broken record at this point, but these benchmarks show exactly what I see when profiling my own Intel GPUs on Linux: OpenGL greatly out performs Vulkan (I also have multiple cases where this is true for AMD's RDNA 3). The MESA Vulkan driver used for Intel GPUs is disappointing while the OpenGL driver is surprisingly in very good shape (so good, in fact, that it outperforms Intel's Win11 driver). I keep reading about people saying Vulkan is "superior" and "performs better", but the benchmarks speak for themselves.
Vulkan takes more power and produces less FPS. This is a sad reality for every benchmark/game/wrapper combo I've thrown at an Intel Xe GPU. How the hell is OpenGL outperforming it? Decades of driver optimizations and vendor extensions? Or did Intel half-ass the hardware and only support the bare minimum spec to claim "compliance"? I honestly question if the MESA Vulkan driver is still learning to walk, or if Intel's HW is the real problem...
Vulkan takes more power and produces less FPS. This is a sad reality for every benchmark/game/wrapper combo I've thrown at an Intel Xe GPU. How the hell is OpenGL outperforming it? Decades of driver optimizations and vendor extensions? Or did Intel half-ass the hardware and only support the bare minimum spec to claim "compliance"? I honestly question if the MESA Vulkan driver is still learning to walk, or if Intel's HW is the real problem...
Comment