Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Half-Life 2 On Wine Is Faster On AMD R600g Over Catalyst

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

  • Half-Life 2 On Wine Is Faster On AMD R600g Over Catalyst

    Phoronix: Half-Life 2 On Wine Is Faster On AMD R600g Over Catalyst

    Here's an interesting finding: at least when running under Wine, Half-Life 2 is faster on the open-source AMD Radeon Linux driver than when running on the proprietary Catalyst driver. There are also some other similar results where these Windows games have the advantage when running on the Gallium3D open-source driver.

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=17493

  • marek
    replied
    Originally posted by rohcQaH View Post
    So in a CPU limited test, the driver with less CPU intensive shader optimizations wins? Surprise.
    Shader optimizations have nothing to do with this. Shaders are usually NOT compiled in the middle of rendering (if they were, there would be stuttering).

    Leave a comment:


  • marek
    replied
    Originally posted by Drago View Post
    I doubt that. r600g doesn't have a shader optimizer, how possibly it can beat Catalyst?
    Not exactly true. r600g uses the common shader optimizations, which are part of the glsl compiler. Only the hardware-specific optimizations are missing.

    Also, if the bottleneck is on the CPU, the speed of the GPU usually doesn't matter.

    Leave a comment:


  • rohcQaH
    replied
    Then again, it's somewhat understandable that people don't read the text, because it's usually a pageful of filler crap and self-promotion.

    So in a CPU limited test, the driver with less CPU intensive shader optimizations wins? Surprise.

    Leave a comment:


  • AJenbo
    replied
    That would explain a lot of the comments on phoronix in general.

    Leave a comment:


  • smitty3268
    replied
    Originally posted by Gusar View Post
    Which boggles my mind completely. Because I don't see howcould've been written any clearer.
    Ha, yeah, I think what you're seeing here is a bunch of people who glanced through at the charts without reading the text beforehand.

    The charts on their own were a little confusing if you didn't bother reading the explanation.

    Leave a comment:


  • AJenbo
    replied
    Originally posted by crazycheese View Post
    "As far as why the open-source driver is outperforming the highly optimized closed-source driver, Stefan wrote, "I don't have an explanation for this yet, especially considering that fglrx beats r600g by a factor of 5 in most of your Linux-native tests. A possible cause is that my test setup is heavily CPU limited (usually 800x600 resolution, no multisampling). This was a conscious decision when I set up the tests because Wine's main performance issues are on the CPU side, not the GPU side. However, at least r300g's main problems seem to be GPU-related (not sure about r600g).""

    Unless he means, WINE has CPU issues when using AMD drivers, I disagree. WINE had no CPU bottlenecks in all games I played (NOLF2 and stuff).
    Still, even with 800x600 this shows open driver has no resolution-associated CPU issues, which is good.
    Running 1920 parallel would be good though, even if opensource looses.
    I think he might be refereing to that Wine it self dosn't do a lot in GPU space so optimizations are focused on CPU and there for his test is also set to mainly stress CPU bound functions.

    Leave a comment:


  • oliver
    replied
    I'm surprised that blizzard games aren't in there. I do believe all 3 current blizzard games are the most played ones, if not the world, at least under Linux?

    Leave a comment:


  • crazycheese
    replied
    Originally posted by Kano View Post
    800x600 as res used for all tests? Most be a joke or?
    "As far as why the open-source driver is outperforming the highly optimized closed-source driver, Stefan wrote, "I don't have an explanation for this yet, especially considering that fglrx beats r600g by a factor of 5 in most of your Linux-native tests. A possible cause is that my test setup is heavily CPU limited (usually 800x600 resolution, no multisampling). This was a conscious decision when I set up the tests because Wine's main performance issues are on the CPU side, not the GPU side. However, at least r300g's main problems seem to be GPU-related (not sure about r600g).""

    Unless he means, WINE has CPU issues when using AMD drivers, I disagree. WINE had no CPU bottlenecks in all games I played (NOLF2 and stuff).
    Still, even with 800x600 this shows open driver has no resolution-associated CPU issues, which is good.
    Running 1920 parallel would be good though, even if opensource looses.

    Leave a comment:


  • Gusar
    replied
    Originally posted by FireBurn View Post
    So far there have been more comments on the terrible graphs than when they're supposed to be displaying
    Which boggles my mind completely. Because I don't see how
    What we are looking at is the result on the far right side, which is the fglrx/Catalyst performance while the rest of the results are from Wine on the Radeon Gallium3D open-source driver.
    could've been written any clearer.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X