why do the nativ linux clind of Heroes of Newearth not work with the radeon driver?

[Qaridarium]

Hi Q, you drinking too much of those Monster drinks lmao

my health status do not allow me to drink stuff like that.

[Qaridarium]

pentium g620
opensuse + my repo with git mesa, kernel, xf86-drivers, etc.
Shader caching and llvm shader compiler are enabled.
I use old( 5-6 months) non updated verson of HoN.

this is broken on hd4000 cards: "Shader caching and llvm shader compiler are enabled."

yes maybe they fix this in the future.

[bridgman]

pentium g620
opensuse + my repo with git mesa, kernel, xf86-drivers, etc.
Shader caching and llvm shader compiler are enabled.
I use old( 5-6 months) non updated verson of HoN.

Pontostroy, did you see much performance difference from enabling the LLVM shader compiler (not the shader cacheing) ?

[Pontostroy]

Pontostroy, did you see much performance difference from enabling the LLVM shader compiler (not the shader cacheing) ?

In HoN at start position - 31-32 fps, with R600_LLVM=0 - 27 fps. (mesa without shader caching patch )
But all other games shows difference about 1-2% not in favor of LLVM shader compiler.
http://openbenchmarking.org/result/1...BY-R600LLVM811

[bridgman]

In HoN at start position - 31-32 fps, with R600_LLVM=0 - 27 fps. (mesa without shader caching patch )
But all other games shows difference about 1-2% not in favor of LLVM shader compiler.
http://openbenchmarking.org/result/1...BY-R600LLVM811

Thanks. The PTS numbers were more in line with what I had been expecting, but it's nice to find at least one app that runs faster with LLVM.

Is the table below correct ?

- without LLVM, without shader cache : 27 fps

- without LLVM, with shader cache : ???

- with LLVM, without shader cache : 31-32 fps

- with LLVM, with shader cache : 38-45 fps (from your earlier post)

[Qaridarium]

Thanks. The PTS numbers were more in line with what I had been expecting, but it's nice to find at least one app that runs faster with LLVM.

Is the table below correct ?

- without LLVM, without shader cache : 27 fps

- without LLVM, with shader cache : ???

- with LLVM, without shader cache : 31-32 fps

- with LLVM, with shader cache : 38-45 fps (from your earlier post)

he speaks logically your question show you don't understand i help you:

- without LLVM, without shader cache : 27 fps

- without LLVM, with shader cache : 31-32 fps

- with LLVM, without shader cache : ??? (there is no benchmark result for this case)

- with LLVM, with shader cache : 38-45 fps (from your earlier post)

more advance explanation :

Question:Pontostroy, did you see much performance difference from enabling the LLVM shader compiler? (not the shader cacheing) ?
Logic analyses result- (FPS without LLVM )and (without shader caching)

answer to this part: (did you see much performance difference from enabling the LLVM shader compiler?) In HoN at start position - 31-32 fps, with R600_LLVM=0 -
and then the logical part for " (without shader caching)" 27 fps. (mesa without shader caching patch )

[Pontostroy]

Thanks. The PTS numbers were more in line with what I had been expecting, but it's nice to find at least one app that runs faster with LLVM.

Is the table below correct ?

- without LLVM, without shader cache : 27 fps

- without LLVM, with shader cache : ???

- with LLVM, without shader cache : 31-32 fps

- with LLVM, with shader cache : 38-45 fps (from your earlier post)

The HoN hard to benchmark, at the starting point:

- without LLVM, without shader cache : 27 fps

- without LLVM, with shader cache : 32-33 fps

- with LLVM, without shader cache : 31-32 fps

- with LLVM, with shader cache : 31-32 fps

38-45 fps the average values in different places.

[Qaridarium]

The HoN hard to benchmark, at the starting point:

- without LLVM, without shader cache : 27 fps

- without LLVM, with shader cache : 32-33 fps

- with LLVM, without shader cache : 31-32 fps

- with LLVM, with shader cache : 31-32 fps

38-45 fps the average values in different places.

now your numbers only say that LLVM is only faster without shader cache
and the expected fps for my card with your driver in use should be 25,6fps.

something is wrong in my system

[bridgman]

Q, are you still running at 1920x1200 vs Pontostroy's 1600x900 ? If so that's almost 1.6x the pixel count right there. Factor in 1.25x for shader differences and 1.06x for clock differences and you're at maybe a 2.1x difference, so your frame rates would be sub-15 fps if everything scaled linearly (which doesn't actually happen but it's a start).

Maybe match resolution then match HON version as a next step ?

[agd5f]

Also note, as I mentioned in another thread, that the llvm backend doesn't support indirect addressing yet. If the shader uses indirect addressing, the driver will use the non-llvm backend. A lot of games use indirect addressing.