Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Windows 10 Radeon Software vs. AMDGPU On Ubuntu Linux

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
    pete910
    Senior Member

  • pete910
    replied
    Could be dx , Would be nice to know if this was the extreme preset with 8xAA too

    Leave a comment:

  • Nille
    Senior Member

  • Nille
    replied
    Originally posted by jf33 View Post
    Were the Unigine benchmarks on Windows done with OpenGL?
    I guess they are with OGL, because AMDs OpenGL Implementation is much slower that the D3D one.

    Leave a comment:

  • jf33
    Senior Member

  • jf33
    replied
    Were the Unigine benchmarks on Windows done with OpenGL?

    Leave a comment:

  • humbug
    Senior Member

  • humbug
    replied
    To add to this article; based on my testing AMDGPU Ubuntu Vulkan performance is better than the current Windows 10 Vulkan performance.

    Although still lagging behind Nvidia (according to Michael's benchmarks).

    Leave a comment:

  • tomtomme
    Senior Member

  • tomtomme
    replied
    Originally posted by duby229 View Post
    Only 2 actual games benched and of them only the Xonotic runs are meaningful. All the rest of them are synthetic results with no other actual gameplay results to prove or disprove them. Synthetics are meant to measure known bottlenecks, but without actual gameplay results there is no possible way to verify whether those bottlenecks are being suffered from. It starts with understanding the bottlenecks you want to measure, then benching synthetics that actually measure them, and finally benching games that prove or disprove them in real world loads.

    I'm pretty certain that disparity in performance btween real world games will be greater than this, but according to these results you can't see that.
    someone really needs to make those pts-profiles work on win10. thats the whole reason michael did only benchmark xonotic etc. sadly I am no programmer nor do I know how to use git etc.

    Leave a comment:

  • juno
    Senior Member

  • juno
    replied
    duby229
    Senior Member
    duby229: phoronix tests have always been like this. There is obviously not much real-world value in these benchmarks, especially when it comes to Linux vs Windows gaming. But it is still enough to indicate trends or reveal bigger problems.
    But this is still the #1 place to go for linux benchmark results and therefore influential. When people consider Linux and read about drawbacks like poor gaming capabilities, they search the web for confirmation. They lose their interest and developers/publishers don't get interested at all. So imho, good results are important to see here

    Leave a comment:

  • Xaero_Vincent
    Senior Member

  • Xaero_Vincent
    replied
    It would be interesting to see benchmarks of games that had driver bottlenecks with past Catalyst releases, such as Bioshock Infinite, to see if such bottlenecks still exist and how things might be running under RadeonSI.

    Leave a comment:

  • bug77
    Senior Member

  • bug77
    replied
    Originally posted by duby229 View Post
    Only 2 actual games benched and of them only the Xonotic runs are meaningful. All the rest of them are synthetic results with no other actual gameplay results to prove or disprove them. Synthetics are meant to measure known bottlenecks, but without actual gameplay results there is no possible way to verify whether those bottlenecks are being suffered from. It starts with understanding the bottlenecks you want to measure, then benching synthetics that actually measure them, and finally benching games that prove or disprove them in real world loads.

    I'm pretty certain that disparity in performance btween real world games will be greater than this, but according to these results you can't see that.
    Well, there's the Unigine benchmarks. Synthetics, bit they do stress the GPU a lot. A nice showing and a marked improvement over what we've come to expect from Catalyst.

    Leave a comment:

  • duby229
    Senior Member

  • duby229
    replied
    Only 2 actual games benched and of them only the Xonotic runs are meaningful. All the rest of them are synthetic results with no other actual gameplay results to prove or disprove them. Synthetics are meant to measure known bottlenecks, but without actual gameplay results there is no possible way to verify whether those bottlenecks are being suffered from. It starts with understanding the bottlenecks you want to measure, then benching synthetics that actually measure them, and finally benching games that prove or disprove them in real world loads.

    I'm pretty certain that disparity in performance between real world games will be greater than this, but according to these results you can't see that.
    duby229
    Senior Member
    Last edited by duby229; 18 April 2016, 02:31 PM.

    Leave a comment:

  • juno
    Senior Member

  • juno
    replied
    Parity!
    Looks good

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X