Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 32

Thread: AMD's Catalyst Evolution For The Radeon HD 7000 Series

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    14,629

    Default AMD's Catalyst Evolution For The Radeon HD 7000 Series

    Phoronix: AMD's Catalyst Evolution For The Radeon HD 7000 Series

    It used to be -- at least when using the Windows Catalyst drivers -- that within the first few months of AMD releasing new Radeon graphics hardware that Catalyst driver optimizations would deliver measurable improvements in this short span. For the Radeon HD 7000 series, which is built upon an entirely new GCN architecture, is this still the case? Here are benchmarks of all the AMD Catalyst Linux drivers that have been released this year and then benchmarked on an AMD Radeon HD 7950 graphics card.

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=17592

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    492

    Default

    This is why I hate those "the drivers are not mature yet" guys. You can actually judge a card based on its initial showing: that's pretty much the performance you'll get. If there are serious bugs (like in this review), they stand out by themselves.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    2

    Default

    Where can we find fglrx 9.0.0 ?

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Old Europe
    Posts
    910

    Default

    I might be completely wrong here; but wasn't it said GCN is much easier to program for in
    terms of shader compiler optimizations than previous architectures?
    If so, that may explain why performance figures do not differ significantly between driver revisions.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    19

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by entropy View Post
    I might be completely wrong here; but wasn't it said GCN is much easier to program for in
    terms of shader compiler optimizations than previous architectures?
    If so, that may explain why performance figures do not differ significantly between driver revisions.
    Maybe because the tested games are faaaar from demanding for this graphics card.



    I would highly suggest to rethink this kind of tests. >400 fps what in hell tells us such a result? Nothing! I know there not many demanding current games out there. So at least quality enhancing features should be activated by default for such tests. I mean super sampling anti-aliasing and such stuff. The cards must be used to their capacity! In general it should be investigated if there are more demanding OpenGL benchmarks out there available for Linux. WINE is not an option because of the fast development of this project which also my encompass performance changes due to optimizations regarding WINE and not the display driver. Overall its not easy but testing an 8 years old game like Doom 3 doesn't tell us anything. At least there are very demanding graphics mods out there for Doom 3 which may be compatible with the Linux version. Then this would be an option.

    Here is a link to an interesting Doom 3 Mod which enhances the graphics: http://www.moddb.com/mods/cverdzislav

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Vilnius, Lithuania
    Posts
    2,538

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nasenbaer View Post
    WINE is not an option because of the fast development of this project which also my encompass performance changes due to optimizations regarding WINE and not the display driver.
    That is hardly relevant. All the benchmarking would be done with a single Wine version, so any optimisations don't matter - they are either there or not there, the relative performance is the same.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    19

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GreatEmerald View Post
    That is hardly relevant. All the benchmarking would be done with a single Wine version, so any optimisations don't matter - they are either there or not there, the relative performance is the same.
    Theoretically this would be possible, of course. But long time comparions would still be hard, because distributions switch over to new versions. So you would have to compile it on your own. Compiling it with the same version would mean, that even ever dependency should be built with allways the same gcc version and so on. Ok u could compile a binary version and statically compile all other dependencies in that executable but would be a quite high effort.
    And then the performance between two companies could be affected by bugs in the D3D<->OpenGL translations which one company can handle better than the other etc.

    Native benchmarks would be better in my opinion. But a benchmark like this one, were u want to see the differences between dirver revision would still be possible when u use a single WINE version. But for long termn comparions its not so good I think.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    40N 105W
    Posts
    45

    Default Well Said

    [QUOTE=Nasenbaer;273888]Maybe because the tested games are faaaar from demanding for this graphics card.



    I would highly suggest to rethink this kind of tests. >400 fps what in hell tells us such a result? Nothing! /QUOTE]

    Well said, lol..

    Thanks for the post.

    Be real, be sober.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    3,099

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bug77 View Post
    This is why I hate those "the drivers are not mature yet" guys. You can actually judge a card based on its initial showing: that's pretty much the performance you'll get. If there are serious bugs (like in this review), they stand out by themselves.
    It's probably much more true on Windows for this card. They have all those per-application optimizations built into their drivers, catalyst A.I. swapping out shaders with more optimized versions, etc. there, which aren't necessary or present for the simple OSS games Michael tests on Linux. Although they might have some of that for Unigine.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Toronto-ish
    Posts
    7,434

    Default

    Maybe Unigine Heaven would be a good test ?

Posting Permissions

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