Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Intel Skylake Graphics: Windows 10 vs. Ubuntu Linux Performance

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

  • #11
    Originally posted by zanny View Post

    The Intel drivers have been in development for ten years. You are not allowed to claim heavy development just because you understaff your dev team and thus they are always behind on features and device support.
    Regardless of your feelings it doesn't change the fact that mesa is still heavy development. You can say that it should have been done however long ago, but the fact is it wasn't.

    Comment


    • #12
      In cases like this it would be interesting to see where in the code most of the time is spent (profiling) and compare them against each other in the open source benchmarks. (probably very time consuming though)

      Comment


      • #13
        Originally posted by humbug View Post
        Is it just the weakness of the Linux driver or something to do with the OS?
        Probably both, but game might behave differently too. Intel Windows drivers are not the same as opensource Intel drivers, it is like comparing AMD Catalyst on Windows vs opensource AMD drivers on Linux.

        I don't use Win 10 but reading that interesting things happens there recently ... it seems those special Windows 10 drivers help AMD beating nVidia on everything.

        More recently, an example of such a leap frog occurred, not with a new product introduction as is usually the case but through driver updates. In a very interesting turn of events, not only did AMD’s Radeon R9 Fury X find itself surpassing the performance of Nvidia’s GTX 980 Ti, but all GPUs in AMD’s line-up saw a sizable performance boost thanks to new drivers.
        http://wccftech.com/amd-r9-fury-x-pe...atest-drivers/

        At 1440p and after the update we see the 980 ti?s 8% lead shrink to 0% putting it in a dead heat with AMD?s R9 Fury X. We also see the R9 390X now ahead of the GTX 980 by 3% (68/66 x 100) prior to it being 2% behind. We also see AMD?s R9 290X leading Nvidia?s GTX 970 by nearly 9% (62/57 x100), a 9% improvement over the previous standing in which both cards were tied.
        More fascinating is how the R9 290X now compares to the GTX 780 Ti. The R9 290X was the flagship from AMD back when it launched in late 2013 for $550 and Nvidia answered back with the $700 GTX 780 Ti which was regarded as the faster card at the time. Today the R9 290X is leading the GTX 780 Ti by 5%, a card which debuted for a 27% price premium. The difference is even more shocking when we look at the R9 290 and the GTX 780. Cards which sold for $400 and $500 respectively for the majority of their lifetimes. The R9 290 now leads the more expensive GTX 780 by 16% (57/49 x100).
        With the latest Windows 10 drivers at 4K, the R9 Fury X jumps ahead of the GTX 980 ti by 5% (84/80 x100). The R9 390X secures its position ahead of the GTX 980 as well. And we see the R9 290X as well as the R9 290 this time surpassing the GTX 970 and the GTX 780 Ti. In fact the performance of all AMD graphics cards improves significantly from the previous drivers, including the mid range and even the entry level offerings.
        So maybe something like this happen for Intel, who knows - i don't
        Last edited by dungeon; 11-08-2015, 05:26 PM.

        Comment


        • #14
          Its nothing special, its just that Intel and AMD respectively throw at most a fifth the number of devs on their Linux drivers, so of course they will have worse optimization and feature support.

          Comment


          • #15
            Originally posted by duby229 View Post

            Yep, that's probably it. The Xonotic profile only launches the game at whatever the monitors highest resolution is. And PTS doesn't indicate that at all.
            PTS does indicate it and sets it to what is specified on the graph, 4K.
            Michael Larabel
            http://www.michaellarabel.com/

            Comment


            • #16
              Intel is just reserving some of that GPU power on Linux so they can tap your mics and whatever else via their sound firmware blob, and obviously Microsoft already has that baked into Windows 10

              /s

              Comment


              • #17
                wccftech is comparing two benchmark sets. The list of games in the 1st benchmark set is different from the list of games in the 2nd benchmark set.

                Comment


                • #18
                  Originally posted by duby229 View Post


                  I don't have a problem with that myself. The OSS drivers are still in heavy development and to get the latest developments you have to use the latest code.
                  so there is not point in using the stable mesa drivers? haswell is out for long time i'm using it with mesa 11.0.4

                  Comment


                  • #19
                    Originally posted by << ⚛ >> View Post
                    wccftech is comparing two benchmark sets. The list of games in the 1st benchmark set is different from the list of games in the 2nd benchmark set.
                    Ah

                    Originally posted by Michael View Post
                    PTS does indicate it and sets it to what is specified on the graph, 4K.
                    Try forcing Desktop FullHD before launching benchmark Xonotic in FullHD, something like:

                    xrandr --output DFP1 --mode 1920x1080 --panning 1920x1080
                    Last edited by dungeon; 11-08-2015, 07:18 PM.

                    Comment


                    • #20
                      Originally posted by andre30correia View Post

                      so there is not point in using the stable mesa drivers? haswell is out for long time i'm using it with mesa 11.0.4
                      Skylake hasn't been well supported for very long at all, though, and that's what is being tested here.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X