Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

AMD GPU-PRO Hybrid Linux OpenGL Performance vs. RadeonSI Gallium3D

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

  • AMD GPU-PRO Hybrid Linux OpenGL Performance vs. RadeonSI Gallium3D

    Phoronix: AMD GPU-PRO Hybrid Linux OpenGL Performance vs. RadeonSI Gallium3D

    While still working on some AMD vs. NVIDIA Vulkan Linux driver benchmarks using AMD's new hybrid driver with Vulkan support, for your viewing pleasure this morning are some benchmarks comparing the new AMD GPU-PRO driver with its binary OpenGL driver against the pure open-source driver stack with the Ubuntu 16.04 AMDGPU driver and RadeonSI Gallium3D from Mesa 11.2 + LLVM 3.8.

    Phoronix, Linux Hardware Reviews, Linux hardware benchmarks, Linux server benchmarks, Linux benchmarking, Desktop Linux, Linux performance, Open Source graphics, Linux How To, Ubuntu benchmarks, Ubuntu hardware, Phoronix Test Suite

  • #2
    It would be interesting to see also Catalyst in the mix. Also another article could be about Vulkan performance.
    ## VGA ##
    AMD: X1950XTX, HD3870, HD5870
    Intel: GMA45, HD3000 (Core i5 2500K)

    Comment


    • #3
      I cant opinate about this article.

      Comment


      • #4
        Cool. the OSS stack looks decent to me. It's not a 100% in every benchmark, but it's nice very nice indeed.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by darkbasic View Post
          It would be interesting to see also Catalyst in the mix. Also another article could be about Vulkan performance.
          Yes, I'd like to know about Vulkan performance, too.
          But I guess before Michael can go there we need some, I don't know, working titles to benchmark? And not just 1 or 2. My guess is it will take a bout a year before we get there.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by darkbasic View Post
            It would be interesting to see also Catalyst in the mix.
            It's Ubuntu 16.04, no catalyst...

            Originally posted by darkbasic View Post
            Also another article could be about Vulkan performance.
            One game is already running on Vulkan. Talos Principle. However their vulkan renderer seems to be in a sorta alpha stage and they have a lot of work left to do. The below post was made by the dev. They have completed steps 1 out of 3 mentioned below.

            engine design for Vulkan is basically consited of three major parts:\

            1) Port. Make it work as fast as possible just by wrapping current engine design around Vulkan. Avoid all pitfalls and bottlenecks. This is what we did by now and released as patch for Talos.

            2) Use Vulkan for multi-threaded rendering. Our engine is designed really well for multi-threaded rendering, but we have only our wrapper for it - calls to graphics API (like Vulkan) are not multi-threaded. Yet.
            That being said, this is the next step what we'll do. And probably release that also as patch for Talos. I tried to do that with Direct3D 11 long time ago (support for its deffered contexts), but it was too much pain and too little or even no gain. That's just one of reasons why we decided to stick with our own approach for MT renderer for that long.

            3) Redesign engine for Vulkan. This is the biggest step and can be split in two:

            3a) Precache all rendering states (which mostly mean materials in game) up front. This will make rendering calls much simplier and faster. So, instead of deciding at rendering time what is needed for a material to be rendered via Vulkan, do this at loading time and then when material needs to be rendered just give it to Vulkan, via one or two simple function calls.

            3b) Precache all geometry, material, textures, everything that is needed for rendering an object up front. This basically creates so called command buffer ready for Vulkan, and nothing extra needs to be set or created at render time.

            3rd part of port is, obviously, the most complex one, and it'll take time to change engine design for it, step-by-step.
            https://steamcommunity.com/app/25751...1651559970/#p2

            Comment


            • #7
              Wow, I must confess I am pretty impressed by some of these improvements. And all this without any profile support; very promising start for a preview release with a reportedly underoptimized GL codebase.

              Would be nice to see a 3-way comparison between this and fglrx, and then again some when it is no longer a preview release

              Comment


              • #8
                Without Catalyst 15.12 in comparison this benchmark results worth nothing...
                You still can benchmark Catalyst in Ubuntu 14.04 (instead of using unreleased 16.04).

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by leonmaxx View Post
                  Without Catalyst 15.12 in comparison this benchmark results worth nothing...
                  You still can benchmark Catalyst in Ubuntu 14.04 (instead of using unreleased 16.04).
                  Why does that matter? Nobody should be using Catalyst.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by leonmaxx View Post
                    Without Catalyst 15.12 in comparison this benchmark results worth nothing...
                    You still can benchmark Catalyst in Ubuntu 14.04 (instead of using unreleased 16.04).
                    Such tests will come in time. This article was just about how it compares to open source so is perfectly valid.
                    Michael Larabel
                    https://www.michaellarabel.com/

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X