Valve Engineer Fixes Massive Performance Issue For RADV Driver With AMD FSR2

[Anon'ym']

You buy their hardware. And I have to use the software that they offer. Everything else is your dreams and wet fantasies.

If you paid for their equipment, then this does not mean that they should gallop and hire engineers who will simultaneously develop (as you say, duplicate) another Vulkan driver.


You definitely lost touch with reality. No one will waste time and pay a lot of money to engineers to maintain a piece of driver code. If you like it, support it. When it is profitable or when the rest of the actors (Valve, Google, etc.) come to an agreement with AMD, then there will be official support for RADV (or vice versa - AMDVLK)

Now that's what I call incoherent rambling.
Do not forget to take your pill folks ❤️.

[skeevy420]

You buy their hardware. And I have to use the software that they offer. Everything else is your dreams and wet fantasies.

If you paid for their equipment, then this does not mean that they should gallop and hire engineers who will simultaneously develop (as you say, duplicate) another Vulkan driver.


You definitely lost touch with reality. No one will waste time and pay a lot of money to engineers to maintain a piece of driver code. If you like it, support it. When it is profitable or when the rest of the actors (Valve, Google, etc.) come to an agreement with AMD, then there will be official support for RADV (or vice versa - AMDVLK)

What point are you trying to make?

If someone buys AMD hardware then they'll expect AMD to provide software for it.

AMD also recommends people to use RADV in their AMDGPU-Pro documentation as well as AMD pays some of their developers to work on RADV. AMD also doesn't list differences between operating systems and features on their website. They have one section that lists supported operating systems and then a separate location that says what all features the GPU supports.

If you don't know any better then it isn't hard to jump to the conclusion that Linux will have a GUI for their GPU because AMD says they support all their features on all their supported operating systems when the reality is that they don't. The very first feature listed is Adrenaline Software and there is no asterisk anywhere to tell a person differently.

AMD themselves say they support both Linux and a GUI on the same product page for every single one of their GPUs. Linked is the page for my GPU. Expand the "General" and "Features" sections and tell me you don't come to the conclusion that AMD supports a GUI on Linux.

Even worse, when you go to the Adrenaline part of their site, the AMD GUI software, there's a "Download Software" button with links to both Windows and Linux drivers.

[mphuZ]

What point are you trying to make?
If someone buys AMD hardware then they'll expect AMD to provide software for it.

I'm saying that AMD gives you a full-fledged guarantee only for a bunch of Hardware + AMDGPU + AMDVLK.
Everything else is fiction. No "recommendations" will help. The recommendation to use an open stack does not mean that AMD fully supports and cares about it. They certainly do a great job in this direction and even made sure that it was possible to safely switch between AMDVLK and RADV. But to fully support RADV and pour resources into it...? They support Mesa OpenGL because more than ten years ago (as time flies fast..) they made such a decision. Today, circumstances have changed and they only want to support cross-platform AMDVLK.

AMD also doesn't list differences between operating systems and features on their website. They have one section that lists supported operating systems and then a separate location that says what all features the GPU supports.

There is a footnote for this at the bottom: Certain AMD technologies may require third-party enablement or activation. Supported features may vary by operating system. Please confirm with system manufacturer for specific features. No technology or product can be completely secure.

And a disclaimer: https://amdgpu-install.readthedocs.i.../preamble.html

In short, you need to read not only the advertising page, but also carefully study the system requirements. This should have been clarified a long time ago.

If you don't know any better then it isn't hard to jump to the conclusion that Linux will have a GUI for their GPU because AMD says they support all their features on all their supported operating systems when the reality is that they don't. The very first feature listed is Adrenaline Software and there is no asterisk anywhere to tell a person differently.

Carefully study the system requirements: https://www.amd.com/en/resources/sup...2-INSTALL.html

Expand the "General" and "Features" sections and tell me you don't come to the conclusion that AMD supports a GUI on Linux.

I can read the system requirements. Therefore, it did not come as a surprise to me.

Even worse, when you go to the Adrenaline part of their site, the AMD GUI software, there's a "Download Software" button with links to both Windows and Linux drivers.[/URL]

Are you really that naive? You get to the most common driver download page. No Adrenaline Rush! And then you need to go to the Linux drivers page and carefully study the Release Notes that are included in this package.


Listen, I also want Linux to develop rapidly and AMD to port all its software as quickly as possible. But there are no miracles. Software development is a long process and priorities can change, especially for giants like AMD.

We are now in a position when the AMD goes a little by its own way, and Valve is stomping in place and does not know how to attract developers and players to Linux. To indicate AMD that it should fulfill all the desires of the 2% gamers market is definitely not the right path. You don’t even need to talk about Nvidia ..

[NotMine999]

Yup. Another Moronix thread. Happy I am not a gamerz that has an endless compulsion to whine about anything related to gamez.

[omer666]

I don't have a single game that uses FSR 2 (in Linux), just v1. But I am seeing rather dramatic improvement in performance in Fedora 41 across the board versus MXLinux & Fedora 40. I've yet to try out some of my more demanding games, but I'm already impressed with the more up-to-date stack in general. Remains to be seen how many papercuts I encounter however. Especially when it comes to other X.org dependent programs which is most of the programs and games I use.

Ryzen 5 5600X
AMD RX 6650 XT
F2FS for root & home on an Intel NVMe SSD (yes, a real one from before Intel sold the product line off)

Haven't tried Blender/HIP yet, but I'm not hopeful since it didn't work on Fedora 40 and there's nothing that's changed to give me any reason to believe it works in 41 on unofficial GPUs.

Thank you for bringing this up, I updated Fedora on release day but I didn't actually get to fire up some of the hungrier games in my library.
Trying Hogwarts Legacy, which had the most framedrops before, there is a dramatic improvement going from mesa 24.1 to 24.2
There is hardly any framedrop now!

My rig:
Ryzen 7 7700
Radeon RX 6600
32Gb Crucial RAM kit 6000MT/s 36-38-38-80
Crucial P5 Plus 2To using Btrfs

Running 1080p Freesync on GNOME Wayland.

For Blender/HIP, did you try running the Steam/Appimage version? It does work for me.

[Anon'ym']

I'm saying that AMD gives you a full-fledged guarantee only for a bunch of Hardware + AMDGPU + AMDVLK

You can count this bunch of hardware by fingers of one hand.
Also, only for specific OSes of specific versions with specific drivers versions.

And actually they DONT give any guarantees.

And this is actually called bad support.

You don’t even need to talk about Nvidia ..

Let's talk about Nvidia. Nvidia provides drivers basically for any Linux OS out there that works with any relevant NVIDIA GPU.

So users do not need to use 3rd party drivers at all.

AMD support is SO BAD that you need to use reverse engendered 3rd party drivers.
And some random companies fixing this driver's because AMD do not bother to support their hardware.

[mphuZ]

1. And actually they DONT give any guarantees.

2. And this is actually called bad support. AMD support is SO BAD that you need to use reverse engendered 3rd party drivers.

1. There are guarantees. A guarantee that I can contact the graphics card manufacturer directly and get support. What should I do with RADV? Who should I write to and where if I use this driver? Valve/Google/Github/Mesa...? The average user will not engage in this nonsense. He wants to launch the game and play with one button. And if an error occurs in the driver, he wants to open the AMD Bug Report Tool, fill in several fields and send a report with one button. The situation will not improve until there is something similar on Linux, some kind of agreement between Open Source and OEM.

2. Oh. is that so.. AMD has been praised for so many years, and now it turns out that they have "bad support." Guys, you're not going to please.

Let's talk about Nvidia. Nvidia provides drivers basically for any Linux OS out there that works with any relevant NVIDIA GPU.
So users do not need to use 3rd party drivers at all.

Are you talking about a closed driver? Why did you suddenly start praising closed drivers?

Of course, you do not need to use a driver from the 3rd party.. Because it doesn't exist!

As soon as such an open source driver appears and it will be possible to run all games with good performance without problems, then the official Nvidia driver will abruptly become unnecessary and it will be called "bad support". AMD has already gone this way: if the driver does not enter the Mesa and does not meet all the wishes of Linux users, then they immediately begin to stigmatize the company and belittle the merits of the developers.

[mbriar]

Do you think the optimization would be likely to be more noticeable outside that demo? Such as in videogames? Just curious

It could affect real games if they are running into the same bottleneck and render lots of vertices with 0 or NaN w component, although I would suspect that it's quite rare. Disclaimer: not a graphics programmer.

[Daktyl198]

Y'all, the valve developer literally stated in his patch that this only affected the FSR2 demo due to a niche set of circumstances. I doubt this will have much impact in the real world. If it does, it means the game developer implementing FSR2 has done so wrongly.

[skeevy420]

I'm saying that AMD gives you a full-fledged guarantee only for a bunch of Hardware + AMDGPU + AMDVLK.
Everything else is fiction. No "recommendations" will help. The recommendation to use an open stack does not mean that AMD fully supports and cares about it. They certainly do a great job in this direction and even made sure that it was possible to safely switch between AMDVLK and RADV. But to fully support RADV and pour resources into it...? They support Mesa OpenGL because more than ten years ago (as time flies fast..) they made such a decision. Today, circumstances have changed and they only want to support cross-platform AMDVLK.



There is a footnote for this at the bottom: Certain AMD technologies may require third-party enablement or activation. Supported features may vary by operating system. Please confirm with system manufacturer for specific features. No technology or product can be completely secure.

And a disclaimer: https://amdgpu-install.readthedocs.i.../preamble.html

In short, you need to read not only the advertising page, but also carefully study the system requirements. This should have been clarified a long time ago.



Carefully study the system requirements: https://www.amd.com/en/resources/sup...2-INSTALL.html



I can read the system requirements. Therefore, it did not come as a surprise to me.



Are you really that naive? You get to the most common driver download page. No Adrenaline Rush! And then you need to go to the Linux drivers page and carefully study the Release Notes that are included in this package.


Listen, I also want Linux to develop rapidly and AMD to port all its software as quickly as possible. But there are no miracles. Software development is a long process and priorities can change, especially for giants like AMD.

We are now in a position when the AMD goes a little by its own way, and Valve is stomping in place and does not know how to attract developers and players to Linux. To indicate AMD that it should fulfill all the desires of the 2% gamers market is definitely not the right path. You don’t even need to talk about Nvidia ..

It's not just about gamers. It's about anyone buying any AMD graphics card, desktop or workstation, and getting the features that AMD implies the consumer will get where AMD implies the user will get them. It's about AMD fulfilling their end of the consumer deal.

This is the exact quote in the AMD footnotes:

Certain AMD technologies may require third-party enablement or activation. Supported features may vary by operating system. Please confirm with system manufacturer for specific features. No technology or product can be completely secure.

The problem is that, depending on one's perspective, the system manufacturer can be considered to be either AMD or MSI/Asus/Asrock/etc when a person buys a CPU or GPU to put in their self-built system or as an upgrade to their pre-built. AMD doesn't clearly and succinctly specify which of their specific features are the ones that vary. And if someone does add a GPU to their prebuilt, is it really on Dell or System76 to provide support for a GPU they didn't intend on their system to have installed or should it be on AMD?

MSI does specify in their footnotes on their page for my GPU:

• Radeon™ Anti-Lag is compatible with DirectX 9 and DirectX 11 APIs, Windows 7 and 10. Hardware compatibility includes GCN and newer consumer dGPUs Ryzen 2000 and newer APUs, including hybrid and detachable graphics configurations. No mGPU support. GD-157
• Radeon™ Boost is compatible with Windows 7 and 10 in select titles only. Hardware compatibility includes RX 400 and and newer consumer dGPUs, Ryzen 2000 and newer APUs, including hybrid and detachable graphics configurations. No mGPU support. For a list of compatible titles see https://www.amd.com/en/technologies/radeon-boost. GD-158
• AMD FreeSync™ technology requires AMD Radeon™ graphics and a display that supports FreeSync technology as certified by AMD. AMD FreeSync™ Premium technology adds requirements of mandatory low framerate compensation and at least 120 Hz refresh rate at minimum FHD. AMD FreeSync™ Premium Pro technology adds requirements for the display to meet AMD FreeSync Premium Pro compliance tests. See www.amd.com/freesync for complete details. Confirm capability with your system manufacturer before purchase. GD-127

That doesn't cover everything, but what it does cover is more clearly defined than what AMD offers on their site. Adding in some things like that in the footnotes shouldn't be too hard for AMD to do. Over the past 8 years I've suggested to some AMD employees who post here that they should add in some asterisks on these pages so people would be more likely to check the footnotes. Instead, AMD revamped their site in a manner that took away informative footnotes.