@ZedDB
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...re_linux&num=1
One option that is not mention in the old article is:
aticonfig --cfl on
to enable a crossfire logo, but i never saw this. Usually i don't like logos, but to verify i would like to see that. I could only "verify" with 12-3 driver that with enabled cf it showed wrong colors, but no speed diff.
But did YOU really read your mentioned website correctly? There are only SLI results for OpenGL (which are pointless for Linux as SLI is not supported on Fermi there). There is NO OpenGL CF result just because there is no CF OpenGL profile. Everything is optimized for DX11 on AMD - absolutely nothing for OpenGL. So lets compare the speed differences of the single gpu cards @ 1080p (i would prefer fps, but hopefully the points do scale in a similar way, somebody from u should talk about that) - what you still miss is the Win -> Linux fps drop which are also a few fps for amd, for nvidia this is only a slight difference.
If you would have looked correctly then you should have seen that you lose about 14 to 30% depending on the AMD card used only by switching from DX11 to OpenGL (my HD5670 is more the 30% type). You lose a few % extra on ATI when you do you benchmarks on Linux. Lets look at Nvidia: you lose about 4 to 16% but you don't lose much when you switch from Win to Linux. That means switching to Linux costs you about 1/3 of the speed for AMD but only 1/6 with a SINGLE Nvidia card. As you can see that even if CF is officially supported on Linux by AMD you lose not only 1/3 of the speed, you loose MUCH more. If you are lucky your speed drops only by 2/3 from a DX11 CF solution to OpenGL Linux...Code:Card DX11 OpenGL (OpenGL/DX11) HD 7970 1467 1236 84,25% HD 7950 1300 1057 81,31% GTX 580 1105 1030 93,21% HD 7870 1059 906 85,55% HD 6970 973 688 70,71% GTX 570 943 881 93,43% HD 7850 940 790 84,04% GTX 480 918 886 96,51% HD 6950 877 610 69,56% GTX 560 Ti 811 742 91,49% HD 6870 785 564 71,85% HD 7770 774 627 81,01% HD 5870 773 577 74,64% GTX 560 764 645 84,42% HD 6850 669 477 71,30% HD 7750 508 429 84,45% GTX 550 Ti 489 421 86,09%
@binstream
The one and only way why Oilrush is seen as "fast" by some ppl is that absolutely no tessellation is used. Also you should release performance counts like number of objects/scene or whatever was reduced to improve speed. If the engine would be used the same way it would be slow as hell for most users without highend cards.


Reply With Quote
If you want to see crossplattform games using OpenGL 4/DX 11 features this should not result in such a performance penalty that even their own game does not use em. It is hard to believe that they can not reproduce the same results at their own office. Maybe Unigine could get some hints from AMD how to optimize the code in a way those cards work faster. Most likely AMD does that on the fly for DX11, maybe just rename the binary and try to bench again. This could be a bit tricky however because the "real" binary is executed by a launcher with the selected settings. I really want to see Linux games that use the latest OpenGL 4 features but i doubt that a bit even when a game will use this engine. A first step could be working together with AMD to get an OpenGL profile for CF - Nvidia has got SLI for that as well - sometimes it would be cheaper to add the same card again instead of buying a new one, but thats pretty useless currently for OpenGL - especially on Linux. All you can do is to get a fast card directly even when your board would support more cards.

