AMD RadeonSI Gallium3D Begins Simple CL Demos

[smitty3268]

Most of the time when I try running Unigine on the open drivers usually results with incorrect rendering.

Ahh, that's interesting to hear. Have you reported any of these bugs? I'm not aware of any bugs that the developers are working on, and it won't get fixed if no one knows about it.

I have half-working benchmarks for a few Valve games but there still seems to be a bug with Steam where the games aren't exiting gracefully automatically after completing the tests but the process is still active.

Yeah, i know. It's steam's fault, but the bottom line is that your priority #1, #2, #3, and #4 should be getting Steam working, whether it's buggy or not, even if you have to add ugly hacks to PTS. Think of all the page hits you got on those articles talking about rumors Steam was coming to linux. I don't understand why this doesn't seem to be a priority for you. You'd be doing yourself a favor with all the extra attention you'd get.

There's also FurMark and other PTS tests too, except that they don't work cleanly with GL3 Mesa yet.

Right. Those tests seem disappointingly synthetic, but i have to imagine they'd be a lot better than another Quake 3 test. Hopefully the drivers add support soon, when Mesa gets GL3.2 support added and working.

Beyond that, unfortunately there's not many more free as in beer quality OpenGL games (I don't mind paying for benchmarks, but hampers the ability of others then to reproduce the results and compare them to my data, etc).

Free as in beer benchmarks are nice, but when you don't have anything available that can stress the cards then being able to reproduce results is of limited usefulness. I don't think anyone would care if you started posting benchmarks of proprietary games that require buying them, as long as they are actually useful - as in, they are popular apps that many people actually use (like Valve games) or apps that stress the GPU in a particular way that the free benchmarks do not - such as being modern engines not based off of Quake 3.

[twriter]

@Michael care to elaborate on your issues with RadeonSI? Your experiences seem inconsistent with our own and the many positive comments in this forum. We're putting a lot of effort into improving RadeonSI so now is a good time for constructive feedback.

[jrch2k8]

well i can say my radeon 7770 has gotten really fast lately even in low profile[my msi 7770 seem to hate reclock and crash the kernel]<-- eye measure, but for all my uses is so far way ahead of fglrx[i bet fglrx is faster in FPS for games but with this thing latency is almost 0, glitches is almost 0, responsiveness is outstanding, UVD is working like a boss, opencl is getting there, chrome fly with this card, webgl examples hit 60 cap always without glitch]

great job the FOSS driver team

[Michael]

There are already Unigine tests in PTS, but Michael never seems to use them for some reason. And then there's a lot of possible games he could test through Steam now, but he doesn't seem interested in adding any of those, either.

Most of the time when I try running Unigine on the open drivers usually results with incorrect rendering. I have half-working benchmarks for a few Valve games but there still seems to be a bug with Steam where the games aren't exiting gracefully automatically after completing the tests but the process is still active.

There's also FurMark and other PTS tests too, except that they don't work cleanly with GL3 Mesa yet.

Beyond that, unfortunately there's not many more free as in beer quality OpenGL games (I don't mind paying for benchmarks, but hampers the ability of others then to reproduce the results and compare them to my data, etc).

[smitty3268]

EDIT: Reach out to game developers and let them know that you need a solid stress test. PTS would be a kick ass way of showing off their stuff. It really is cool software. It just needs benchmarks that can stress modern GPU's. Talk to developers (or publishers) and let them know. Voice your need.

There are already Unigine tests in PTS, but Michael never seems to use them for some reason. And then there's a lot of possible games he could test through Steam now, but he doesn't seem interested in adding any of those, either.

What he's doing now isn't quite as bad as just running glxgears, but it's not much better.

I still don't think we've gotten a single article about how RadeonSI performs. It's enough to make me think Michael doesn't know how to compile all the different pieces to get it working. It's already up to basically GL3 support, now (through patches on the mailing list). Or maybe Michael just doesn't have any hardware?

[duby229]

But nobody ever said that the OSS drivers would. It's been said repeatedly on these very forums that 70% of catalyst is about as close to the ideal as could be achieved. I'm certain that the open drivers have already passed that. The performance expectations were made perfectly clear from the beginning years ago. And it surpassed them. I don't understand where this nonsense about poor performance is coming from. Your very own benchmarks proved multiple times that the open drivers perform damn good.

I understand that many people play the open source shooters you like to use as benchmarks, but they don't stress modern hardware, therefore they -can't- represent what the hardware can do. It's just not possible with the games that you benchmark to represent performance on modern cards. You really -need- to update the game benchmarks to include modern day games that can stress modern day cards.

EDIT: Reach out to game developers and let them know that you need a solid stress test. PTS would be a kick ass way of showing off their stuff. It really is cool software. It just needs benchmarks that can stress modern GPU's. Talk to developers (or publishers) and let them know. Voice your need.

[Michael]

"In even worse shape than the lacking and not-always-fast OpenGL support" sounds really bad, as if nothing can be worse than OpenGL support in r600g. Really, Michael, are you trying to say that OpenGL support in r600g is the worst of all open-source drivers?

No, not at all, it was in reference to performance against the proprietary drivers.

[tstellar]

Fyi with run_tests.sh from git://people.freedesktop.org/~tstellar/opencl-example

6 passes, 65 fails

And these seem to be rather trivial tests like

Running ./math-int add 1 2 3
Failed

LLVM 3.3 svn, mesa git master.

These all work for me on Evergreen, what GPU are you using?

[ChrisXY]

Fyi with run_tests.sh from git://people.freedesktop.org/~tstellar/opencl-example

6 passes, 65 fails

And these seem to be rather trivial tests like

Running ./math-int add 1 2 3
Failed

LLVM 3.3 svn, mesa git master.

[r1348]

EDIT: Can someone explain the context in which r600g was mentioned? My understanding is that radeonsi and r600g are both mesa drivers one for HD2000 thru HD6000 and the other for GCN class HD7000 and up. The article is titled about radeonsi, but it seems that r600g was mentioned only to make fun of it.

Nah, it was to shoehorn in a cross-reference to another article to potentially increase AD revenue. Phoronix always does that.