Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: LLVMpipe Performance On AMD Bulldozer, Intel Sandy Bridge

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    15,685

    Default LLVMpipe Performance On AMD Bulldozer, Intel Sandy Bridge

    Phoronix: LLVMpipe Performance On AMD Bulldozer, Intel Sandy Bridge

    With the renewed interest in the Gallium3D LLVMpipe driver now that this software-based acceleration method is working with GNOME Shell, here are some benchmarks of this LLVM-based software driver when running some OpenGL tests on Intel Sandy Bridge and AMD Bulldozer hardware.

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=16654

  2. #2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Michael Larabel
    Seriously... Is it really that impossible for you to standardize the graphs like every other site on the entire internet at 30, 60 and truncate them past say 85 since no general use display was ever really able to physically display more then that anyways? My old IBM flat tube CRT was capable of 85Hz @1024x768.

    For slow action below 30fps high action video is too jerky(I don't care that film is 24fps) and 60fps is the physical cap of almost every general market display.

    High refresh rate screens are as rare as screens with a res above 2560x1600 these days.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    79

    Default

    This is pretty much amazing isn't it? Real 3D performance with a non-dedicated unit?

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    416

    Default What is interesting here is that Bulldozer does well.

    All the negativity associated with Bulldozer just doesn't seem to be based in fact. For a first generation processor the unit is not really that bad. If AMD can up the number of instructions per cycle even a little bit it will be a strng performer moving forward.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Third Rock from the Sun
    Posts
    6,587

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post
    If AMD can up the number of instructions per cycle even a little bit it will be a strng performer moving forward.
    That is no small task by any means.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    416

    Default I would think AMD has it in them.

    Quote Originally Posted by deanjo View Post
    That is no small task by any means.
    It shouldn't be a problem, remember when AMD actually lead Intel.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Third Rock from the Sun
    Posts
    6,587

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post
    It shouldn't be a problem, remember when AMD actually lead Intel.
    Yup way back in 2003-2005. AMD however is not even close to being the same company it once was. Improving IPC isn't a "tweak".

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    352

    Default

    Was this test comparing a desktop CPU against a mobile one? Or is the system information wrong? Also, about the system information table, does the bulldozer system realy use a Intel network card?

Posting Permissions

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