Page 1 of 7 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 69

Thread: AMD Radeon HD 6000 Gallium3D Attempts To Compete With Catalyst

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    15,108

    Default AMD Radeon HD 6000 Gallium3D Attempts To Compete With Catalyst

    Phoronix: AMD Radeon HD 6000 Gallium3D Attempts To Compete With Catalyst

    Open-source code supporting the AMD Radeon HD 6000 "Northern Islands" GPU hardware has been available since January, but only in the past few days has this Linux code matured to the point of being stable and useful for testing. In this article are our first benchmarks of the AMD Northern Islands and Cayman graphics processors using the open-source Mesa Gallium3D driver and comparing its performance to AMD's proprietary Catalyst driver.

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=16220

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Europe
    Posts
    401

    Default

    Couldn't these new Gallium3D drivers have been compiled with the new Pathscale compiler (Dirndl)?

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Portugal
    Posts
    536

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sabriah View Post
    Couldn't these new Gallium3D drivers have been compiled with the new Pathscale compiler (Dirndl)?
    I'd say that if your graphics driver gets much faster with the Pathscape compiler, you're doing it wrong.

    If it gets (much) faster, the bottleneck is the CPU, whereas it should be on the GPU.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    ฿ 16LDJ6Hrd1oN3nCoFL7BypHSEYL84ca1JR
    Posts
    1,052

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sabriah View Post
    Couldn't these new Gallium3D drivers have been compiled with the new Pathscale compiler (Dirndl)?
    Someone did it here some time ago and it didn't make that much of a difference:
    http://phoronix.com/forums/showthrea...d-with-ekopath

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    2,264

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by [Knuckles] View Post
    I'd say that if your graphics driver gets much faster with the Pathscape compiler, you're doing it wrong.

    If it gets (much) faster, the bottleneck is the CPU, whereas it should be on the GPU.
    No shit, Sherlock...

    The CPU actualy is the bottleneck and it will stay to be a big part of the driver unless those cocks at HTC/SGi release some stupid patent licenses....

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    332

    Default

    WOW!
    im impressed.
    didnt think the drivers would be around 50% in pretty much every benchmark (even faster in urban terror).
    Last edited by Pfanne; 07-14-2011 at 03:41 AM.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    159

    Default

    50% of performance is the difference between lower midrage and absolute high end .... so it's wasting half of your money.

    But the real Problem here is missing powermanagement! Thats so waaaaay more important! It makes your Card more silent and it will soothe your Battery as well as your electricity bill!

    For me, looking at the Open Source Drivers, missing Powermanagement is the biggest Problem since 2 Jears.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Berlin, Germany
    Posts
    833

    Default

    I too think that the games may be CPU limited. A testing at Eyefinity resolutions (5760x1080) could have given more meaningful results.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    3,173

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by V!NCENT View Post
    No shit, Sherlock...

    The CPU actualy is the bottleneck and it will stay to be a big part of the driver unless those cocks at HTC/SGi release some stupid patent licenses....
    The CPU bottleneck is less code that's running in the driver, and more making unnecessary kernel calls resulting in slow context switches, unnecessary flushes of data between the GPU/CPU, passing huge structures of data around that aren't very cache friendly, etc.

    None of those things are likely to be affected very much by a change to the compiler - they need to be fixed algorithmically.

    A software rasterizer, on the other hand, could see benefits. As could something like the old hardware that does vertex shaders in software and the rest on the GPU. Then again, these days that's mostly done by LLVM anyways so that generated code probably wouldn't be much different either.

    Oh, and what patents are you referring to? The only two i know about are the floating-textures one (which is a feature, not anything performance related) and the S3TC one (again, just a new feature, and not anything that would impact performance one way or the other).
    Last edited by smitty3268; 07-14-2011 at 04:00 AM.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    319

    Default

    would be interesting to see what perf would be like at high power levels, it might make the numbers a lot closer.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •