Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

For Those Interested In GPGPU Compute, Here Are Many Radeon RX 480 OpenCL Tests

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

  • #21
    Originally posted by starshipeleven View Post
    The Pcie slot can provide up to 75 watts, the card has a TDP of 150 watts. Out of specification confirmed, not a rumor.
    Are you trying to belittle me or what? I found my source: tomshardware.com reports that RX 480 can draw as much as 90W through PCIe slot.

    Comment


    • #22
      Not just AMD then?


      Comment


      • #23
        Originally posted by flecht View Post
        Are you trying to belittle me or what? I found my source: tomshardware.com reports that RX 480 can draw as much as 90W through PCIe slot.
        I was trying to get you to cough up the source.

        Comment


        • #24
          I was very tempted to get a 480, but then I read about that power draw issue yesterday, saw that the Australian prices for the 8Gb version are $449 AUD ($334.25 USD) which isn't anything special at all... and changed my mind.

          At this point I also noticed the Fury X is down to $749 AUD ($557.59 USD) - was well over $1K last I checked some months back (and some stores still list $1K+ prices) - which now finally looks to be much more in alignment with US pricing. It's about a year past launch, so presumably current stock won't have the early reported noise issues with the pump. It's also supported by both amdgpu-based drivers (which I've experienced issues with on my R9 285, mostly under Wine) as well as fglrx - so if amdgpu bugs out on the Fury X as well (and I expect it will), I can still fall back to fglrx in the meantime.

          So yeah, I just brought a Fury X. Quite happy about that.

          One odd thing I noticed on the AMD website; go to Drivers+Support -> Latest AMD Radeon Drivers (other) which takes you to this page (why don't they also list GNU/Linux instead of "other"? The website could definitely be better designed.). From there, I guess I click on the "RHEL / Ubuntu / Linux" link under "Radeon™ R9 Fury, R9 300, and R7 300 Series". Fair enough. This takes me to the old fglrx download links.

          But! If I click on the "Ubuntu 16.04" link under the "Radeon™ RX 480" section, it takes me to the AMDGPU-Pro driver. Scrolling down, the page clearly indicates compatibility with the Fury X, and all the other relatively recent GCN cards. Why wouldn't the AMDGPU-Pro driver be listed when clicking on any of the other supported cards? Is this just a matter of AMD forgetting to update the other pages? Or is fglrx going to continue to be recommended by AMD until all known regressions in amdgpu (in terms of both bugs and features) are resolved?

          The AMD website driver download section is really quite bad.

          Comment


          • #25
            Excellent! Many thanks for the tests!

            Comment


            • #26
              Nice find on the Fury.

              Originally posted by boltronics View Post
              But! If I click on the "Ubuntu 16.04" link under the "Radeon™ RX 480" section, it takes me to the AMDGPU-Pro driver. Scrolling down, the page clearly indicates compatibility with the Fury X, and all the other relatively recent GCN cards. Why wouldn't the AMDGPU-Pro driver be listed when clicking on any of the other supported cards? Is this just a matter of AMD forgetting to update the other pages?
              The most recent AMDGPU PRO release was totally focused on 480 launch AFAIK (ie not much testing on other hardware) so wiring it in to just the 480 probably makes sense at least for now.

              Originally posted by boltronics View Post
              Or is fglrx going to continue to be recommended by AMD until all known regressions in amdgpu (in terms of both bugs and features) are resolved?
              Somewhere in between... when we get to a production AMDGPU PRO driver I expect the rest of the HW links will start switching over.

              Comment


              • #27
                Originally posted by Michael View Post

                I will have some side-by-side CL results for this whole data set probably in a few days.
                Thanks! Please do post comparisons, they'd really help.

                Have you considered including hashchat and F@H in the benchmarks. They're real-world, useful, fully OpenCL codes that support multiple platforms (especially the former).

                [I'd also suggest our code which is OSS and has tons of users, but it's a heterogeneous CPU+GPU code with load balancing, so performance can depend a lot on the CPU.]

                Comment

                Working...
                X