Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Vulkan vs. OpenGL Performance For Counter-Strike: Global Offensive

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

  • #11
    Originally posted by BNieuwenhuizen View Post
    Michael Are you sure the right resolution is used for dxvk csgo? I hear some people can't even test on lower res and on the lower end cards all your dxvk results look suspiciously like the 4k results.
    Will double check but I believe so, though would explain the sub-4K results if Vulkan is messing up on resolution, just had figured some other bottleneck being hit there.
    Michael Larabel
    https://www.michaellarabel.com/

    Comment


    • #12
      RX 570 Radv here, for me its the opposite for 1440p. Its Cpu bound to 120fps for OGL without the new threading changes of Mesa Git. With both Mesa Git and Vulkan is 160fps again Cpu bound.

      Comment


      • #13
        The vulkan render path is extremely jerky due to the shaders compiling when they're needed. It gets smoother the more you play, just like playing a Frostbite engine game (Battlefield). It's nearly unusable in multiplayer. Frame times seem longer also, at least on my system with a Radeon VII. Launch time is a lot faster.

        The OpenGL render path is now jerky as well, so they must have broken something.

        Edit: Using the AMDGPU-PRO Vulkan ICD results in muuuuuch smoother performance than AMDVLK. Both, however, result in extremely jerky play after 20-30 minutes of continuous playing. The game goes from like 100 to 15 fps multiple times per second.
        Last edited by Particle; 15 December 2021, 10:50 PM.

        Comment


        • #14
          Originally posted by atomsymbol
          If it was CPU bottlenecked then there wouldn't be framerate differences across GPUs.
          Doesn't that depend on the CPU? Which CPUs are above the bottleneck, and which are below the bottleneck?

          Comment


          • #15
            micheal also remember to set console max_fps 0. It's 400fps by default. I got 600-800fps on 1440p (de_mirage) on my machine.

            Comment


            • #16
              Developing for Vulkan is like programming in assembly language. I thought we had evolved past that pain a long time ago.

              Comment


              • #17
                Originally posted by dlq84 View Post
                micheal also remember to set console max_fps 0. It's 400fps by default. I got 600-800fps on 1440p (de_mirage) on my machine.
                You meant Michael ;-)

                Comment


                • #18
                  Originally posted by linner View Post
                  Developing for Vulkan is like programming in assembly language. I thought we had evolved past that pain a long time ago.
                  We didn't. In many cases, assembly language remains the best choice if you want to get the best performance in resource constrained situations. Vulkan is not very dissimilar in approach. It is a low level graphics API.

                  Comment


                  • #19
                    I just tried to run phoronix-test-suite benchmark pts/csgo
                    csgo-pts01.png
                    It seems to not work right.

                    Comment


                    • #20
                      Originally posted by Michael View Post

                      Will double check but I believe so, though would explain the sub-4K results if Vulkan is messing up on resolution, just had figured some other bottleneck being hit there.
                      https://github.com/ValveSoftware/csg...ux/issues/2889 seems like the thing I was suspecting.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X