The Open-Source Linux Graphics Card Showdown

[AnonymousCoward]

So my €100 radeon card is more than twice as fast (on the more demanding games) then this €300 Intel thing.

[Kano]

Well all cards are tested with the same cpu if your driver as high cpu usage then a slow cpu will not give you the same result. In most cases the single core speed of a cpu helps to scale with older engines - if you are searching for benchmark records, over 60 fps is usally never needed. doom 3 is certainly a bit slow, should be compared with win maybe to see the raw performance of the chip. If you like you can oc it a bit as well, with simple engines it should scale well, the only "reference" oc test i found was using bf3. Of course for several cards you can install binary drivers and get much more speed, intel has got only one driver - if the performance is not fast enough for you then all you can do is to add an extra card. For desktop systems thats a piece of cake. But laptops the intel hd 4000 seems to be a good choice, no hybrid solutions which only work with weird hacks.

[Qaridarium]

Finally some Doom 3 results and line graphs that don't require a ruler and a calculator to read! So why leave out the HD6550D?

Will we ever see any closed source games being tested? How about Prey?

the engine of prey is also opensource like doom3.. both games do have closed source game content.

[Kano]

I don't think that you can run Prey with iodoom3, most likely not even Quake4. You can play just Doom 3 + Res. of Evil.

[Qaridarium]

I don't think that you can run Prey with iodoom3, most likely not even Quake4. You can play just Doom 3 + Res. of Evil.

he ask about closed source games but Doom3 is closed source except of the "engine"

and the engine is the same like doom3.

[Kano]

Its most likely similar but not the same, best ask icculus.

[Qaridarium]

Its most likely similar but not the same, best ask icculus.

for his question it just doesn't matter.

"similar" means similar but he writes like "there is no similar"

please translate this in your autistic language.

he want closed source games in the benchmark doom3 is one of them!

because the game engine IS NOT THE GAME! and michael benchmark the GAME and not only the engine without game content!

[Drago]

for his question it just doesn't matter.

"similar" means similar but he writes like "there is no similar"

please translate this in your autistic language.

Forum troll strikes again! Prey uses MODIFIED iDTech4. Iodoom3 is not going to work.

[Qaridarium]

Forum troll strikes again! Prey uses MODIFIED iDTech4. Iodoom3 is not going to work.

now we get bullshit Spam. "Modified" means: the doom 3 engine can also be "Modified" to fit in the same role.

[droidhacker]

Well all cards are tested with the same cpu if your driver as high cpu usage then a slow cpu will not give you the same result. In most cases the single core speed of a cpu helps to scale with older engines - if you are searching for benchmark records, over 60 fps is usally never needed. doom 3 is certainly a bit slow, should be compared with win maybe to see the raw performance of the chip. If you like you can oc it a bit as well, with simple engines it should scale well, the only "reference" oc test i found was using bf3. Of course for several cards you can install binary drivers and get much more speed, intel has got only one driver - if the performance is not fast enough for you then all you can do is to add an extra card. For desktop systems thats a piece of cake. But laptops the intel hd 4000 seems to be a good choice, no hybrid solutions which only work with weird hacks.

You bring up an important point. Following that fact, since the INTEL GPU is IGP *in* the CPU, any power consumption comparisons for it are meaningless unless the CPU is swapped over to one withOUT IGP. The thing is going to sit there sucking down at least SOME power, whether you're running it or not.

I also question the performance tests. Intel is known for playing games in order to benchmark higher. It wouldn't surprise me one bit if there was something sneaky in the CPU that knows when someone else's GPU is attached and does something like cutting memory bandwidth. Intel is known for pulling sneaky crap, like designing CPUs FOR the benchmarks, rather than the real workload.

Some people are going to flame me for this, but the reason why Intel beats AMD on benchmarks is because AMD is actually innovative -- reinvent the wheel, then wait for software to catch up, rather than bolting a supercharger onto an '85 Lada and calling it fast.