Company of Heroes 2 Is The Latest Linux Game Showcasing AMD's Performance Wreck With Catalyst

[phoronix]

Phoronix: Company of Heroes 2 Is The Latest Linux Game Showcasing AMD's Performance Wreck With Catalyst

While Company of Heroes 2 was released for Windows two years ago, this game that's now available on Linux as of earlier today is a disaster if trying to use the AMD Catalyst Linux driver... The performance means an unplayable game. A low-cost GeForce GTX 950 offers much better results.

http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=22083

[liamdawe]

Something you didn't mention, that the game even tells you: The benchmark is not a normal benchmark, it's a stress test of the worst possible scenario.
Edit: Okay it's in there, did you edit it Michael? As I'm sure it didn't say it when I first read it. Either way, I would put that fact in bold if I were you.

I had the chance to do a video, and some tests on the Nvidia 970 FYI: https://www.gamingonlinux.com/articl...-included.5871

Hope it helps.

[Svartalf]

The question I have is one of whether the GAME is following the OpenGL spec properly or not- NVidia's known to up-front smooth over many of the obvious, known sins on that regard for a slight perf hit. AMD codes SPECIFICALLY to the spec and many titles may have sins (It should be noted that AMD's driver had to have workaround code put into it for a BAD practice a dev had in a MAJOR LucasArts title of the past... It would take the then most powerful, fastest GPU (Radeon 2900XT) and go from 100+ fps to 10 seconds per frame- and it wasn't the driver's fault...)

[Svartalf]

(As an aside, you really, really should map VBO's to host memory inter-frame, not intra-frame, as the OpenGL spec specifically tells you that this may stall the pipeline as the driver/state machine/etc. waits to ensure that the VBO is guaranteed to NOT be in-flight on a rendering pass. Any time you see something like that, you should really treat it as a "shall" instead of blithely doing something stupid...)

[Spazturtle]

Do we really need an article every other day reporting on how bad AMD GPU performance is on Linux? It is no longer news and hasn't been for quite a few years. I don't see what the purpose having articles like this so often serve. Everyone knows that if you want to game exclusively on Linux you need a NVIDIA GPU.

[LinAGKar]

Something you didn't mention, that the game even tells you: The benchmark is not a normal benchmark, it's a stress test of the worst possible scenario.
Edit: Okay it's in there, did you edit it Michael? As I'm sure it didn't say it when I first read it. Either way, I would put that fact in bold if I were you.

I don't see that mentioned anywhere in the article.

[liamdawe]

I don't see that mentioned anywhere in the article.

Well he mentions it here "performance/stress test", so it's easy to overlook it. It's an important fact that should be highlighted though.

[stefansaraev]

Do we really need an article every other day reporting on how bad AMD GPU performance is on Linux? It is no longer news and hasn't been for quite a few years. I don't see what the purpose having articles like this so often serve. Everyone knows that if you want to game exclusively on Linux you need a NVIDIA GPU.

if it's reporting how fucked up catalyst is - yes.

[chimpy]

If you can use Intel, then doesn't that mean you can use radeonsi driver for AMD cards?

[pete910]

The question I have is one of whether the GAME is following the OpenGL spec properly or not- NVidia's known to up-front smooth over many of the obvious, known sins on that regard for a slight perf hit. AMD codes SPECIFICALLY to the spec and many titles may have sins (It should be noted that AMD's driver had to have workaround code put into it for a BAD practice a dev had in a MAJOR LucasArts title of the past... It would take the then most powerful, fastest GPU (Radeon 2900XT) and go from 100+ fps to 10 seconds per frame- and it wasn't the driver's fault...)

Which I have a feeling is going to happen with vulkan

On a side note, not seen you post here in a while .