Steam Client Stable vs. Beta Tests With Vulkan On AMDGPU-PRO

[DonQ]

I haven't used the pro drivers, but I own an R9 290, used in Debian sid for a while, and it performed just fine. If you think it's lower than the 380X, you probably did something wrong.

What driver did you use? I'm open to the idea I did something wrong but I would like to know what so I can fix it. I am using Sid. I don't remember what the deal was with the Radeon driver but it didn't help. amdgpu works but the card is rather slow. I tried both and without xorg.conf.

[DonQ]

Just checking, you mean amdgpu-pro 16.20, right ? The 16.30 beta is just for SteamOS and Bonaire - you'll probably have more luck with the more broadly tested 16.20.

I mean 16.30. The previous SteamOS drivers were only for Bonaire, 16.30 are also for Hawaii, maybe all GCN 1.1 cards. They work great with my 380x card in Ubuntu. The dkms driver doesn't compile in Debian. If I can get the 390 to work well, I will be a happy camper until Vega in Oct, otherwise I will only be a somewhat happy camper with the 380x, I think it works great but I want MORE fps at high settings!

[schmidtbag]

What driver did you use? I'm open to the idea I did something wrong but I would like to know what so I can fix it. I am using Sid. I don't remember what the deal was with the Radeon driver but it didn't help. amdgpu works but the card is rather slow. I tried both and without xorg.conf.

To my knowledge, GCN 1.1 performs best on radeonSI (as of right now). From what I recall, it was only just recently added to amdgpu, let alone amdgpu-pro. So there is a lot of room for improvement. Generally, it will perform fine in radeonsi. I'd suggest you try taking a look at this too:

https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/ATI#Performance_tuning

(doesn't matter if you're using debian)

[rabcor]

Looks like Dota 2 has some serious bottlenecking issues (guess their code isn't very cpu efficient...). This benchmark tells us that in the case where dota 2 bottlenecking happens, Nvidia takes the cake on 15% more efficient drivers (since they average 15fps higher than the radeon cards. very weird to see even the 960 and 950 outperforming fury and 290)

Maybe AMD should look into why the cpu bottleneck hits their cards about 15% harder than Nvidias cards...

[sireangelus]

It's a matter of setting up and maintaining Windows installations takes lots of time, routinely needing to reinstall if not activating them, etc.

And most of my test systems have only 120GB SSDs, which get rather filled up just having Linux plus a few Steam games.

you could use a 500gb ssd, put 1 windows image on it and you just swap images. 1 license for OEM and you're good to go. You could also use this method to provide oem-ready to install images of ubuntu to make the installation process way faster.

[bridgman]

Maybe AMD should look into why the cpu bottleneck hits their cards about 15% harder than Nvidias cards...

That one is easy - brand new stack (at least the low level bits), still in beta, very little performance tuning so far.

[LinuxID10T]

That one is easy - brand new stack (at least the low level bits), still in beta, very little performance tuning so far.

Just curious, but is there and ETA on when performance will start being looked into? I'm guessing it will be after you guys are feature complete, but I guess I don't know when that will be. I'm thinking my next build will be with the RX 480 or whatever the hell Vega ends up being, and it would be nice if it were performing up to snuff.

[liam]

Michael,

Pardon me if you addressed this already but is your fury X still in an pretty unusable state?
I ask, perhaps obviously, because you've been performing a decent number of benchmarks lately with the fury standing in as the top of the line amd chip.

Best,
Liam

[oooverclocker]

Thanks for the clarification Michael.
The benchmark shows that the performances behave relatively the same like they do on Windows no matter which brand when Vulkan is used. So this means that the RX 480 looks like a nice card for Ubuntu 16.10.

[smitty3268]

Michael,

Pardon me if you addressed this already but is your fury X still in an pretty unusable state?
I ask, perhaps obviously, because you've been performing a decent number of benchmarks lately with the fury standing in as the top of the line amd chip.

Best,
Liam

Did he ever have a Fury X? I thought he just bought the non-X because it was cheaper and he didn't get any free samples.