Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

AMD Athlon's R3 Graphics: RadeonSI Gallium3D vs. Catalyst

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

  • AMD Athlon's R3 Graphics: RadeonSI Gallium3D vs. Catalyst

    Phoronix: AMD Athlon's R3 Graphics: RadeonSI Gallium3D vs. Catalyst

    For the past week now we have been extensively benchmarking AMD's new AM1 APUs with all the current models available to the public: the Sempron 2650 / 3850 and Athlon 5150 / 5350. All of our testing up to this point has been using an updated Linux kernel and Mesa for the open-source Linux graphics driver experience with these APU Radeon R3 Graphics. Today, we're looking at the performance of the open-source RadeonSI Gallium3D driver in multiple configurations compared to the proprietary Catalyst Linux driver.

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=20178

  • dungeon
    replied
    Originally posted by przemoli View Post
    Why not Mesa devel?
    Because if i tested that yesterday, then you will probably ask why not with Marek's commits of today .

    I am interested into looking if i can reproduce hyperz artifacts and lockups... but i can't found that yet .
    Last edited by dungeon; 04-16-2014, 12:29 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • przemoli
    replied
    Originally posted by dungeon View Post
    It is one frame worse in openarena . This is with Debian Sid, kernel 3.13, mesa 10.1, etc. hyperz enabled = 32 fps .

    http://openbenchmarking.org/result/1...PL-OPENARENA67

    With 3.15-rcs i have 31 fps, but missed to upload it



    Hyperz is always good to have, even in 1280x1024 it goes from 25 fps to 32 fps .

    Why not Mesa devel?

    Leave a comment:


  • dungeon
    replied
    Originally posted by agd5f View Post
    It would be interesting to see how 3.15 compares as well since that contains a number of memory management optimizations.
    It is one frame worse in openarena . This is with Debian Sid, kernel 3.13, mesa 10.1, etc. hyperz enabled = 32 fps .

    http://openbenchmarking.org/result/1...PL-OPENARENA67

    With 3.15-rcs i have 31 fps, but missed to upload it

    Originally posted by liam View Post
    Isn't 1080p high enough resolution where hyperz we would make a difference?
    Hyperz is always good to have, even in 1280x1024 it goes from 25 fps to 32 fps .
    Last edited by dungeon; 04-15-2014, 03:58 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • smitty3268
    replied
    Originally posted by liam View Post
    Isn't 1080p high enough resolution where hyperz we would make a difference?

    Also, does anyone know what the gpumark tests triangles and pixbuf piano actually do?
    The former sounds like it is just creating a bunch of triangles, which, if done in the worst way, would seem to be a good indicator of how fast each driver can issue instructions. That might provide some kind of useful info into driver efficiency?
    Dungeon showed massive performance boosts for hyperz at 1080p resolution. It makes a big difference on bandwidth limited platforms like this. Even at the lower resolutions i think it was 5-10%, which is a decent chunk of some of these results. Some of the memory optimizations in 3.15 and that curaga looked at could make a big difference on those tests that show 3 fps instead of 5 fps.

    I believe triangle ends up the same as glxgears, which last i heard is basically limited by the latency rate of X commands in the DRI2 drivers, because it has a synchronous X command that blocks everything until it returns each time. DRI3 makes the call async which should speed it way up, comparable to the proprietary drivers. But i haven't actually seen any test results to confirm that.

    Leave a comment:


  • curaga
    replied
    The triangle test is basically glxgears, it measures swap speed/cpu overhead/memcpy speed.

    Leave a comment:


  • liam
    replied
    Isn't 1080p high enough resolution where hyperz we would make a difference?

    Also, does anyone know what the gpumark tests triangles and pixbuf piano actually do?
    The former sounds like it is just creating a bunch of triangles, which, if done in the worst way, would seem to be a good indicator of how fast each driver can issue instructions. That might provide some kind of useful info into driver efficiency?

    Leave a comment:


  • agd5f
    replied
    It would be interesting to see how 3.15 compares as well since that contains a number of memory management optimizations.

    Leave a comment:


  • AJSB
    replied
    Nice results, can't wait to see dGPU results in special with GTX750(Ti) with NVIDIA blob

    Leave a comment:


  • mannerov
    replied
    Do you have a clue why you had a DRI3 XCB error?

    DRI3 support isn't enabled for these cards both in Mesa and in the radeon DDX, so that's strange.


    I've made myself some benchmarks with my radeonsi card (hd7730m), and for unigine heave 4.0,
    I got last year a score of 234 (9.3 fps) with Catalyst.
    Now with recent Mesa and kernel 3.13, I get a score of 200, which is very close.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X