Michael I assume you've tried the Fury in a Windows configuration recently just to make sure it's not a hardware issue?
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Linux 4.5 AMDGPU/Radeon vs. Catalyst OpenGL Performance
Collapse
X
-
It would be a bit unlogical if TF2 is limited with OSS drivers by the CPU, but with fglrx you clearly see the hard limit of on the fly conversation. Full power you only see with engines optimized for OpenGL like Unigine or 4A (Metro Last Light Redux) which are not CPU limited. Btw. the extra thread needed for Linux games is the reason why a dual core showns much higher speeds with Windows. For Linux it depends if you own a very fast or just a midrange card if you see that limit, if it is over 60 fps well it would not matter that much, but you could save money and use a cheaper GTX 960 instead of a R9 Fury.
- Likes 1
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by jf33 View PostWhat AMD should do is send Michael a new Fury card which is known to work correctly and let Michael send in the bad performing Fury. This is probably the easiest way for AMD to debug the performance issue.
If AMD should replace it or send it back doesn't really matter.
If i got sent back then we can all see if it actually made any difference.
Comment
-
Michael, do you see mclk changing in amdgpu_pm_info in debugfs when there is GPU load? Additionally, can you try forcing the clocks high via power_dpm_force_performance_level in sysfs? Do you see the mclk stay high? Does forcing it improve performance?
- Likes 1
Comment
Comment