Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Vulkan vs. OpenGL Performance For Linux Games

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

  • Vulkan vs. OpenGL Performance For Linux Games

    Phoronix: Vulkan vs. OpenGL Performance For Linux Games

    It has been a while since last publishing some Linux GPU driver benchmarks focused explicitly on the OpenGL vs. Vulkan performance, but that changed today with a fresh look at the performance between these two Khronos graphics APIs when tested with AMD and NVIDIA hardware on the latest RadeonSI/RADV and NVIDIA Linux graphics drivers.

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=26577

  • #2
    Typos:

    Originally posted by phoronix View Post
    was running on this system with the GNOME SHell 3.29.2 and
    (wrong version)

    Originally posted by phoronix View Post
    similar betwen the graphics rendering APIs.

    Comment


    • #3
      Mad Max at 1440p with high quality settings is no longer a really playable experience for the Ryzen 5 1400 and the RX 560 / GTX 1050 Ti but there are the results for those curious about this demanding scenario.
      Dawn of War III at high quality settings really wouldn't be a playable experience with this hardware
      Curious how times have changed.. it seems like nowdays ~40FPS is not considered a playable experience anymore.. I remember the times when I was more than happy with my 25FPS gaming experience

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by xxmitsu View Post


        Curious how times have changed.. it seems like nowdays ~40FPS is not considered a playable experience anymore.. I remember the times when I was more than happy with my 25FPS gaming experience
        I guess it comes naturally with graphics getting more realistic. It pains you less if cartoon-like graphics roll at 25fps

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by phoronix View Post
          Phoronix: Vulkan vs. OpenGL Performance For Linux Games

          It has been a while since last publishing some Linux GPU driver benchmarks focused explicitly on the OpenGL vs. Vulkan performance, but that changed today with a fresh look at the performance between these two Khronos graphics APIs when tested with AMD and NVIDIA hardware on the latest RadeonSI/RADV and NVIDIA Linux graphics drivers.

          http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=26577
          Just a note: There exist Radeon RX 560 4GB cards with 896 stream processors and with 1024 stream processors. The latter has higher performance.

          Comment


          • #6
            I've always had a affinity with 60+ FPS (some games glitch out past 60fps with the physics engine btw). But some people consider even 90-100fps unplayable, those spoiled 144fps brats who won't move to 4k until a videocard can do 144fps at 4k... lol

            Comment


            • #7
              I have one of the first high refresh rate monitors, a Benq with 120HZ only... Real fast paced games will benefit from above 60 fps, but a lot of games wont, like 3 person games (Tomb Rider, Witcher), puzzles, RPGs, etc.

              Race games, I don't know. They start to appear unrealistic. FPS games, if fast paced, sure. Twin stick shooters, yes, since they will look cool and you will need all the help you can get, to avoid the simultaneous million bullets coming for you.

              Michael, I really appreciate those low power hardware benchmarks. Not everybody have top of the line machines and I even have to game from time to time in low powered machines.

              I have a ITX system that I regularly take to some friends reunion, it is always a blast to play indie games local multiplayer.

              Comment


              • #8
                xxmitsu nanonyme theriddick

                Kind of pointless to discuss what's an acceptable FPS without mentioning the type of game we're talking about because truth is that the answer will vary wildly not only by personal preference but also depending on the type of game. I refuse to play CS:GO or Doom 2016 and such below 144fps, but I was fine playing Dark Souls locked at 30fps. It was almost strange when the remaster came out and it ran at 60fps, but it was nice once I got used to it. For racing games I feel like 60-85fps or so is good. Adventure games and platformers? 60fps is fine. Strategy games? Mostly don't care what my frame-rate is when I'm playing those. What about GNOME Chess? Who am I kidding...

                Comment


                • #9
                  RADV does have less overhead than Nvvidia blob.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    I can understand needing really high frame rate for competitive FPS games like CS:GO and such, but almost all the games I ever play are not those.

                    So I guess that's the point, I play sometimes SkyrimSE/Fallout4/Witcher3/Warthunder/KCD and other games that are not built around extreme competitive gameplay.

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X