Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

AMD's A-Sync DMA Code Makes For Fast Performance

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

  • phoronix
    started a topic AMD's A-Sync DMA Code Makes For Fast Performance

    AMD's A-Sync DMA Code Makes For Fast Performance

    Phoronix: AMD's A-Sync DMA Code Makes For Fast Performance

    After the benchmarks of the Radeon Gallium3D sub-allocator that in some tests yields more than a 25% performance boost, initial testing was done of the new AMD a-sync DMA engine support for the open-source Radeon driver...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTI1MDE

  • crazycheese
    replied
    I have tested GTX260SP216, using both nvidia proprietary and Kernel3.7+MESA9.1 (using Oibaf PPA).
    The results were not very favoring the radeon...

    The interesting thing, is that we have very similar machines (Athlon II x4 vs Phenom II x6 both 2.8 Ghz), same amount of RAM etc.

    Results: http://openbenchmarking.org/result/1...CRAZ-121221723

    Leave a comment:


  • crazycheese
    replied
    Originally posted by Hamish Wilson View Post
    Where are you getting your Catalyst data?
    lastest "vs" benchmarks, click on link in previous post. Catalyst still has big advantage when using OpenGL3+ with shading, but in other cases its average 60%, even up to 90% recently.

    Leave a comment:


  • Hamish Wilson
    replied
    Originally posted by crazycheese View Post
    Baseline is ....catalyst in high resolutions. Baseline is practical maximum, as achieved by catalyst.
    Where are you getting your Catalyst data?

    Leave a comment:


  • Veerappan
    replied
    ET:XReal wouldn't run on this machine, so I'm calling it quits for now with this latest upload:

    http://openbenchmarking.org/result/1...SU-ASYNCDMAT52

    If I feel really ambitious over the weekend, I'll install catalyst and get some comparative numbers.

    Leave a comment:


  • crazycheese
    replied
    Originally posted by Veerappan View Post
    OpenArena 0.8.5 actually regressed slightly (from 154 to 147 fps, not enough to worry too much about)
    Is within acceptable fault rate. Yes, we have 24 fps for 0.8.8 and 150 fps for 0.8.5. Its ~84% speed loss. This would prove my point that OpenArena 0.8.8 relies on features that on MESA side cry for improvement.
    Compared to Catalyst ratings as baseline, if we watch 6950 fps drop, the ideal performance loss is only 75%(instead of 84%). Thats the amount of deficiency in MESA.

    This would mean, if GLSL and various other adjustments in MESA are done, your GPU would theoretically top at 37 fps for OA 0.8.8 profile.
    Of course, this is projected from current baseline OpenGL2.0 performance - if that improves too, fps would climb at same rate.
    For example, in link above, watch a fps "show" with Warsow 1.0. This game heavily uses shaders and they are bottlenecking to such a great degree, that under opensource 6570 (50% to catalyst) runs same to 6950 (15% to catalyst)!

    But hey, only 3 years ago, I had 5 fps in 0.8.5 using 4670...

    Originally posted by Hamish Wilson View Post
    60% of what? What baseline are you using?
    Baseline is ....catalyst in high resolutions. Baseline is practical maximum, as achieved by catalyst.
    Last edited by crazycheese; 12-13-2012, 03:32 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • F i L
    replied
    Nice! Thanks for the benchmarks!

    Leave a comment:


  • Veerappan
    replied
    Originally posted by crazycheese View Post
    http://openbenchmarking.org/result/1...SU-ASYNCDMAT84
    I assume Xonotic uses more modern OpenGL features, that are done in software or ignored now - hence low fps.
    You can prove me right or wrong, if you test OpenArena 0.8.5 (old GL) and compare how it scales to 0.8.8 (more modern GL).
    OpenArena 0.8.5 actually regressed slightly (from 154 to 147 fps, not enough to worry too much about).

    I'm downloading pts/etxreal at the moment, and we'll see how that works out. once that's done running and I've gotten some sleep, I'll upload an updated result set.

    Leave a comment:


  • Veerappan
    replied
    Originally posted by crazycheese View Post
    Correct URL: http://openbenchmarking.org/result/1...SU-ASYNCDMAT84
    It seems opensource has ~60% performance already.
    Does your driver already have Marek HyperZ patches?
    No, this doesn't have the HyperZ patches applied. This was as of the following commit (http://cgit.freedesktop.org/mesa/mes...it/?id=3392f2f)

    I honestly don't remember if this had the suballocator patches hand-applied before I started, but I think it did. I can check again by re-running the reaction quake tests on the old kernel and checking the performance against my original reaction quake 3 tests.

    Originally posted by crazycheese View Post
    I assume Xonotic uses more modern OpenGL features, that are done in software or ignored now - hence low fps.
    You can prove me right or wrong, if you test OpenArena 0.8.5 (old GL) and compare how it scales to 0.8.8 (more modern GL).
    Running that currently. Probably won't have the results posted until morning.

    Originally posted by crazycheese View Post
    PPS
    I wonder how it scales on 5850/70 // 6950/70 hardware...
    Thanks again!
    Couldn't tell you. The only other radeon hardware I've got is the HD4200 IGP built into my motherboard, and the Llano chip in my HTPC (which I'm not especially thrilled about messing with the software installation on).

    Leave a comment:


  • Hamish Wilson
    replied
    Originally posted by crazycheese View Post
    It seems opensource has ~60% performance already.
    60% of what? What baseline are you using?

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X