Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Polaris Open-Source Radeon Performance Has Evolved Much Over The Past Year

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

  • Polaris Open-Source Radeon Performance Has Evolved Much Over The Past Year

    Phoronix: Polaris Open-Source Radeon Performance Has Evolved Much Over The Past Year

    This month will mark one year since the release of the Radeon 400 "Polaris" graphics cards. With the one year anniversary and also celebrating the 13th birthday of Phoronix, I ran some comparison tests showing the progress of the AMDGPU+RadeonSI driver stack over the better part of the past year using a Radeon RX 470 Polaris graphics card.

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=24740

  • #2
    Its great news. i can imagine amd opensource drivers getting on par or better than windows drivers bufore 2018 end in both opengl and vulkan front.

    Comment


    • #3
      It's probably fair to say that they are better than our Windows drivers already in terms of OpenGL.

      Not 100% sure but I think that is the case based on Michael's earlier tests of radeonsi vs AMDGPU-PRO and AMDGPU-PRO vs Windows.

      Comment


      • #4
        I have 280x and im bit dissapointed that Vulkan is not working. I only get black screen. I have tried everything i can. Just can't get it to work. It's just annoying to go buy another gpu because of that or swap it for Nvidia counterpart, just because AMD don't support it on Linux. Im just dissapointed in AMD. It's just stupid that it works with Windows, but not on Linux.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by bridgman View Post
          It's probably fair to say that they are better than our Windows drivers already in terms of OpenGL.

          Not 100% sure but I think that is the case based on Michael's earlier tests of radeonsi vs AMDGPU-PRO and AMDGPU-PRO vs Windows.
          That's a very impressive statement! Congratulation to all the developers

          It looks like the CPU overhead is a bit higher with Mesa, but in most cases it's not that important (if the framerate is CPU-limited at 150FPS, it might look worse on benchmarks, but who cares, when it comes to gaming).

          Michael, I would be curious to see at least 1 R600 card in your upcoming comparison, if possible (I would give you a small tip)

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by ZiisusChrist View Post
            I have 280x and im bit dissapointed that Vulkan is not working. I only get black screen. I have tried everything i can. Just can't get it to work. It's just annoying to go buy another gpu because of that or swap it for Nvidia counterpart, just because AMD don't support it on Linux. Im just dissapointed in AMD. It's just stupid that it works with Windows, but not on Linux.
            Are you using AMDGPU Pro? If on the opensource drivers, then the vulkan driver then it is an independent project and not all cards may be supported.

            I am very impressed with the performance of mesa, having just recently beat Deus Ex: Mankind Divided which played exceptionally well. Now that Ding Light is working on mesa I am hoping they can improve the performance.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by monte84 View Post

              Are you using AMDGPU Pro? If on the opensource drivers, then the vulkan driver then it is an independent project and not all cards may be supported.

              I am very impressed with the performance of mesa, having just recently beat Deus Ex: Mankind Divided which played exceptionally well. Now that Ding Light is working on mesa I am hoping they can improve the performance.
              I at least think that AMDGPU-PRO is not supported with 280x? AMD supports 7700 onwards on Windows, but on Linux it's just 285 onwards.

              If AMDGPU-PRO drivers can be used i would like to get help how.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by bridgman View Post
                It's probably fair to say that they are better than our Windows drivers already in terms of OpenGL.
                Generalisation is never fair See for example what happen in reality, even FreeBSD with much slower card beats Linux with much faster card

                https://forum.lazarus.freepascal.org...?topic=35738.0

                Not 100% sure but I think that is the case based on Michael's earlier tests of radeonsi vs AMDGPU-PRO and AMDGPU-PRO vs Windows.
                You see now you are not 100% sure, because generalisation statements are usually invalid
                Last edited by dungeon; 06-05-2017, 06:50 PM.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by bridgman View Post
                  It's probably fair to say that they are better than our Windows drivers already in terms of OpenGL.

                  Not 100% sure but I think that is the case based on Michael's earlier tests of radeonsi vs AMDGPU-PRO and AMDGPU-PRO vs Windows.
                  I'll have some fresh tests in a week or so.
                  Michael Larabel
                  http://www.michaellarabel.com/

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Yep, if you are running one of the few remaining applications which actually require compatibility profiles then the open source drivers are not better than the Windows drivers yet.

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X