Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

RadeonSI With OpenGL 4 Showing Nice Performance Against Catalyst

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

  • RadeonSI With OpenGL 4 Showing Nice Performance Against Catalyst

    Phoronix: RadeonSI With OpenGL 4 Showing Nice Performance Against Catalyst

    Phoronix reader and forum contributor "Darkbasic" has shared some benchmarks with us that he's done atop the bleeding-edge AMD RadeonSI Gallium3D stack...

    http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...eonSI-Dark-GL4

  • #2
    *LLVM 3.8
    ## VGA ##
    AMD: X1950XTX, HD3870, HD5870
    Intel: GMA45, HD3000 (Core i5 2500K)

    Comment


    • #3
      That's kind of the point. While it's brand new git code right now, it won't be forever. That's why if people would just buy supported hardware, the OSS drivers are better.

      Comment


      • #4
        I updated the results to add Unigine Heaven benchmarks: http://www.linuxsystems.it/2015/08/r...gl4-workloads/
        With Heaven on Ultra I had *the very same* performance of Windows 8.1 with tassellation off.
        Too bad that phoronix-test-suite doesn't allow to select the graphic preset on Heaven, especially if you want tass on or off.
        ## VGA ##
        AMD: X1950XTX, HD3870, HD5870
        Intel: GMA45, HD3000 (Core i5 2500K)

        Comment


        • #5
          Is it possible to test api overhead of drivers like 3dmark on windows?

          Comment


          • #6
            I'm not sure what's the point of comparing a set of results and another one which both have a different X version, kernel version, different distro, etc. Seem like comparing numbers that have nothing to do with each other.
            It would have been more interesting to compare RadeonSI vs Catalyst on the same system.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by AnAkIn View Post
              It would have been more interesting to compare RadeonSI vs Catalyst on the same system.
              Which would mean comparing against different versions of X, kernel, etc.. because Catalyst is incompatible with the vast majority of my graphic stack.
              ## VGA ##
              AMD: X1950XTX, HD3870, HD5870
              Intel: GMA45, HD3000 (Core i5 2500K)

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by darkbasic View Post
                With Heaven on Ultra I had *the very same* performance of Windows 8.1 with tassellation off.
                If you run the Windows Benchmarks with a renamed EXE it should be even closer.
                https://imgur.com/a/f0LZf
                Last edited by ObiWan; 08-23-2015, 10:04 AM.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by darkbasic View Post

                  Which would mean comparing against different versions of X, kernel, etc.. because Catalyst is incompatible with the vast majority of my graphic stack.
                  yeap, i certify this on arch too. Install catalyst is a huge pain in the ass and require to downgrade several packages of the stack including the kernel.

                  for me to get an stable"ish" catalyst system i need to revert to 3.19 kernel and Xorg 7.15 (7.16 gets crashy after few hours for me[if you have this issue this should help]) and either way wine gets really really mad (at least it was in catalyst 15.x, after that i just gave up for good)

                  but even when i get a catalyst stable system i still prefer radeonsi because catalyst shows lots of FPS in benchs but the stuttering and frame rate craziness is too damn annoying(ultra low to ultrahigh fps randomly) and wine fails a lot whereas with radeonsi i get less fps but more stable and wine + nine works really really good for the games i play.

                  Before some asshole come, some disclosure

                  1.) I don't give a flying F*** if you need 30000FPS in a FPS game to win, i don't so deal with it
                  2.) I don't care if you got catalyst to work perfectly in your system because i won't believe you anyway so save your time because in mine is next to impossible and that is all i care
                  3.) My system is good enough to play all my games in ultra at 1080p with radeonsi and i don't need more than that for now
                  4.) Sure nVidia make good drivers but i like to put my money in a opensource development friendly company even if i won't get to use my card at 100% for some time, for me is fine i don't care if you don't, is a free world
                  5.) I enjoy the games i have and those play fine with radeonsi, sure i guess there will be games that won't work but i don't care about it because i don't play them, use catalyst if it work better for you, is a free world so whatever you do and play is your problem not mine

                  About the results,
                  i can confirm too in arch i get results pretty close to yours (my card is a faster 7950, so i get couple FPS more here and there) and llvm 3.8 improve my tess result a bit in unigine heaven. Btw the only big difference is metro 2033 redux, i never seen less than 45 fps in gameplay all option maxed except SSAA since it won't activate for some reason, maybe your llvm ebuild need some 3.8 love? or maybe my card got some hidden optimization since is a refresh?
                  EDIT: you have 3.8, missed that post, maybe in benchmark mode is more stressing that gameplay(missed that one too) my bad
                  My System:
                  AMD FX 6100 @4.2gz
                  RADEON R9-280 OC 3GB TAHITI
                  990FX board
                  16 GB 1866
                  Raid 1 SSD 256 for my games and steam
                  Last edited by jrch2k8; 08-22-2015, 01:03 PM.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by jrch2k8 View Post

                    Btw the only big difference is metro 2033 redux, i never seen less than 45 fps in gameplay all option maxed except SSAA since it won't activate for some reason, maybe your llvm ebuild need some 3.8 love? or maybe my card got some hidden optimization since is a refresh?

                    RADEON R9-280 OC 3GB TAHITI
                    Or it's because of a performance problem in pitcairn and some (but not all) tahiti gpus with the open source drivers. E.g. in counter strike global offensive benchmarks, HD 7950 (tahiti), r7 370 (pitcairn) do very badly. My HD 7970M (pitcairn) does very badly too. But from what I heard 280 (different tahiti version) doesn't have that problem.

                    @darkbasic How does csgo run for you? Stable 60+ fps? (I always test arms race and it drops to 40 fps all the time)

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X