AMD Catalyst vs. Linux 3.7 + Mesa 9.1-devel Gallium3D Performance

[phoronix]

Phoronix: AMD Catalyst vs. Linux 3.7 + Mesa 9.1-devel Gallium3D Performance

In this article is a large OpenGL performance comparison looking at the frame-rates in different Linux games for different AMD Radeon Linux graphics cards when running the stock Ubuntu 12.10 operating system (Mesa 9.0 + Linux 3.5), the Catalyst Linux driver (fglrx 9.0.2) as found in the Ubuntu Quantal archive, and then when running the very latest Radeon Git code: The Linux 3.7 kernel, Mesa 9.1-devel, and xf86-video-ati 7.0.99 Git.

http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=18184

[bachinchi]

Huge improvements all around, although still far from fglrx.

[F i L]

Awesome! It's great to see xf86-video-ati make significant improvements in most tests. It's ~half as good as Catalyst in ~half the tests, which is great news indeed. Nice work, AMD devs. I'm eagerly awaiting the day the OSS drivers come within 80-90% performance of Catalyst on most cases and I can switch away from Catalyst 12.6 legacy.

[mark45]

4+ years later, the open source driver still isn't mature.

[marek]

The worst benchmark results (Reaction Quake and Xonotic) are caused by inefficiency in TTM. 90% of all time is spent in TTM, which moves buffers between VRAM and RAM all the time like crazy, and 10% of time is spent on the rendering. At least we know where the problem is.

[przemoli]

The worst benchmark results (Reaction Quake and Xonotic) are caused by inefficiency in TTM. 90% of all time is spent in TTM, which moves buffers between VRAM and RAM all the time like crazy, and 10% of time is spent on the rendering. At least we know where the problem is.

So you have some defined test suite for performance? Can you recommend some PTS test ? Are such perf benchmarks beneficial for you? If not those what else can be tested?

[przemoli]

4+ years later, the open source driver still isn't mature.

Maturity can not be simplified only to performance.

And other features *WOULD* be there if only *legal* department of AMD gave green light. AMD devs had (have?) all necessary patches.

And 4y is too little to get serious performance (on pair with production that was tweaked and developed x0 of years).

[liam]

So you have some defined test suite for performance? Can you recommend some PTS test ? Are such perf benchmarks beneficial for you? If not those what else can be tested?

I'd imagine he's tracing.

[mark45]

Maturity can not be simplified only to performance.

And other features *WOULD* be there if only *legal* department of AMD gave green light. AMD devs had (have?) all necessary patches.

And 4y is too little to get serious performance (on pair with production that was tweaked and developed x0 of years).

bla-bla-bla. legal bla bla...

Marek said it's TTM.

[bulletxt]

Awesome! It's great to see xf86-video-ati make significant improvements in most tests. It's ~half as good as Catalyst in ~half the tests, which is great news indeed. Nice work, AMD devs. I'm eagerly awaiting the day the OSS drivers come within 80-90% performance of Catalyst on most cases and I can switch away from Catalyst 12.6 legacy.

How sad.

AMD WAKE UP, OR YOU'LL DIE IN THE NEXT 2 YEARS CRUSHED BY NVIDIA AND INTEL. YOU KNOW WAY BETTER THAN ME HOW MUCH TRUTH THERE IS IN WHAT I JUST SAID.