Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Radeon RX Vega Performance With Mesa 17.3-dev + LLVM 6 + drm-next-4.15-dc

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

  • #21
    Originally posted by humbug View Post
    I never expected that AMD will trail Nvidia so badly in Vulkan performance on Linux. Especially when it is just the opposite on windows.

    Yes I know RadV is slower than AMDGPU pro, but even the pro driver is not doing well in Vulkan.

    Phoronix, Linux Hardware Reviews, Linux hardware benchmarks, Linux server benchmarks, Linux benchmarking, Desktop Linux, Linux performance, Open Source graphics, Linux How To, Ubuntu benchmarks, Ubuntu hardware, Phoronix Test Suite

    Phoronix, Linux Hardware Reviews, Linux hardware benchmarks, Linux server benchmarks, Linux benchmarking, Desktop Linux, Linux performance, Open Source graphics, Linux How To, Ubuntu benchmarks, Ubuntu hardware, Phoronix Test Suite


    I thought that for a brand new modern API the drivers and performance would be upto snuff with Vega56 beating the GTX 1070 and Vega64 beating the GTX 1080.

    With openGL we know that AMD has been playing catch up for years and doing a great job of that on the open source side with results really showing now. But I didn't expect them to drop behind on Vulkan right from the get go... Thinner drivers, API more suitable for their architecture etc...
    It's the difference between Nvidia proprietary Vulkan and non-AMD developed Vulkan.

    Comment


    • #22
      Originally posted by Marc Driftmeyer View Post

      It's the difference between Nvidia proprietary Vulkan and non-AMD developed Vulkan.
      No. The links I posted are amdgpu-pro. Which is AMD's own official Vulkan driver, soon to be open-sourced.

      Comment


      • #23
        To be frank r

        Comment


        • #24
          To be frank those results are not unanticipated. Sadly the pattern that started on Windows testing in mid August continues ...Amd vega cannot hold a candle to nvidia cards on 3d rendering... compute performance is another story altogether though.Rx vega is set to take the crown back from nvidia, or at least already is on paper...

          I am keeping my eyes peeled, for weeks now for a proper review of RX vega using proper open CL drivers. I know you had one such review in mid august but since many things have happened and hopefully open CL is better supported by now. So yeah, I am looking forward for an update compute review. Sooner or later these cards ought to give nvidia's offerings a run for their money...

          Comment


          • #25
            To be frank those results are not unanticipated. Sadly the pattern that started on Windows testing in mid August continues ...Amd vega cannot hold a candle to nvidia cards on 3d rendering... compute performance is another story altogether though.Rx vega is set to take the crown back from nvidia, or at least already is on paper...

            I am keeping my eyes peeled, for weeks now for a proper review of RX vega using proper open CL drivers. I know you had one such review in mid august but since many things have happened and hopefully open CL is better supported by now. So yeah, I am looking forward for an update compute review. Sooner or later these cards ought to give nvidia's offerings a run for their money...

            Comment


            • #26
              Originally posted by haagch View Post
              So... can we assume the new games are not using source 2? Then it's probably unity since that seems their preferred alternative. Still no linux support for SteamVR in Unity though,
              It's already confirmed Valve are working on new Source 2 games that use Vulkan. Dota 2 just hasn't been the focus of optimizations, as optimizing the Vulkan render for VR has become more important.

              Comment


              • #27
                Well, Dota 2 VR Hub is presumably using the same VR support of the source 2 engine. But yes, it doesn't look like it's being touched by developers, e.g. https://github.com/ValveSoftware/Ste...inux/issues/50 was still a thing last time I started it.

                So I guess they're still doing the thing where they make a branch of the engine and then make a game on top of it and then eventually try to merge all changes after months or years?

                I mean I would naturally have one repository with one main branch containing all games for that engine and every change would need to go through CI for all games.

                Comment


                • #28
                  Originally posted by microcode View Post

                  What do you mean by "almost-OSS"? Talking about the card firmware?
                  Yes, the firmware blob.

                  Originally posted by pal666
                  you seem to have strange definitions of "oss" and "enthusiast"
                  I suppose a 20% performance less for 10-15% more cost is just not good enough for me to support this.
                  Oh and don't forget about:
                  1. Missing freesync support
                  2. Missing HDMI audio

                  So it's not just getting less for more cost, it's getting less for more cost with missing features.
                  I might consider supporting something like that if it was 100% OSS/free software, but not "semi-open".
                  Who's to say all 3 main vendors aren't sending every Nth frame somewhere behind your back? If so then I want at least the best price option.

                  Originally posted by debianxfce
                  As you see, gaming benchmarks depends on what you are playing. The RX580 is faster hardware than the GTX1060 and you are buying hardware. It is easier to sell a virus hoover pc than a Linux pc. And you can live without 4K gaming, so the Rx560 is a good choice for a Ryzen 5 1600.
                  That argument only holds if the performance catches up or surpasses with updates in the foreseeable future. Given AMD's track record I don't expect that to happen.

                  Comment


                  • #29
                    Originally posted by debianxfce View Post

                    You have used Linux since 2008 and do not know that a custom kernel is the best. So it does matter where you get your kernel source when it works. This kernel supports OpenCL, freesync and hdmi audio:
                    https://cgit.freedesktop.org/~agd5f/...ne-hybrid-4.12





                    If you had own a recent Amd GPU, you would know that drivers gets better very fast. Or if could read phoronix tests.
                    I use linux since 2000 or so. I rarely used custom kernels if I could avoid it because I USE linux, I don't debug it. Upgrading things with a custom kernel is a major PITA.
                    This is exactly the typical linux hipster reply to everything when people talk about usability. "Doh, I compile my own LibreOffice. Only takes the time a new version comes out to do it!"
                    I used to be a big tinker but that was in my teens. I have no time to fiddle with compile time options and retest stuff for hours at an end to get that basic feature to work.

                    Admittedly my last AMD was when it was still ATI so yeah. But watching the progress here for some time and it's not so fast on the uptake. I do have to agree it's picking up lately which is great.

                    It seems maybe 2018 might be "the year of the AMD linux graphics". Too bad it wasn't before steam machines went plonk.

                    Comment


                    • #30
                      Originally posted by Almindor View Post
                      Given AMD's track record I don't expect that to happen.
                      As of recent, their tlack record defies your expectations. Also, proper Wayland support.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X