Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The Very Latest RadeonSI Git Code Provides Minor Benefits For Total War: WARHAMMER

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

  • The Very Latest RadeonSI Git Code Provides Minor Benefits For Total War: WARHAMMER

    Phoronix: The Very Latest RadeonSI Git Code Provides Minor Benefits For Total War: WARHAMMER

    Feral Interactive released Total War: WARHAMMER for Linux this week. On launch-day we provided NVIDIA Linux benchmarks as well as RadeonSI GPU benchmarks for this game over many different GPUs. Also landing on launch-day in Mesa Git were support for compiling optimized shader variants asynchronously in RadeonSI. So here are some benchmarks with the very newest Git to show the performance difference, which some have claimed is up to 25% faster...

    http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...MMER-Fresh-Git

  • #2
    Zzzzz

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by FireBurn View Post
      Zzzzz
      Related/unreleated... Wake Up, FireBurn

      Comment


      • #4
        I have not seen the numbers, but the difference between the first and second benchmark launch can be 10 fps.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Pontostroy View Post
          I have not seen the numbers, but the difference between the first and second benchmark launch can be 10 fps.
          shader cache?

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by cj.wijtmans View Post

            shader cache?
            in memory shader cache

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Pontostroy View Post
              I have not seen the numbers, but the difference between the first and second benchmark launch can be 10 fps.
              AFAIK pts runs the test multiple times to make sure to compensate such things. IIRC it even makes sure that the standard deviation isn't too large and does additional runs if that's the case.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by droste View Post

                AFAIK pts runs the test multiple times to make sure to compensate such things. IIRC it even makes sure that the standard deviation isn't too large and does additional runs if that's the case.
                yeah right.
                but I think this time Michael did not run multiple times.
                Usually there is a "SE +-Number" below the name of the card. SE would be standard error afaik. This is missing. So maybe Michael did disable the multiple runs this time?
                Michael : could you confirm this and rerun if so?

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by tomtomme View Post

                  yeah right.
                  but I think this time Michael did not run multiple times.
                  Usually there is a "SE +-Number" below the name of the card. SE would be standard error afaik. This is missing. So maybe Michael did disable the multiple runs this time?
                  Michael : could you confirm this and rerun if so?
                  As explained in the original article, this game doesn't have ability for automated benchmarking from the cli or scripted, so no PTS support, just hooked into it for graphing.
                  Michael Larabel
                  https://www.michaellarabel.com/

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Was the test with llvm git ? Some people report lower performance, probably safer to use last llvm stable.

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X