Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 31

Thread: Radeon R300g Morphological Anti-Aliasing Performance

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    3,096

    Default It's just idiotic to test MSAA when the non-MSAA test is running at 7fps

    Seriously, michael, I don't know what you were thinking.

    Thanks for the tests with some usable info, Marek.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    148

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dungeon View Post
    Your numbers are good, now if Michael could run OpenArena 0.8.8 on those and other resolutions.

    Don't know where is the gap between your and Michael setup, you both run Ubuntu... Maybe Unity do something wrong again.
    Michael did run the tests with FullHD screen (1920x1080), maybe that's it?

  3. #13

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tomato View Post
    Michael did run the tests with FullHD screen (1920x1080), maybe that's it?
    Nah, when benching a GPU you want to run the games at as high a resolution and as high a graphical settings as the game offers so you can fully beat on the GPU and drivers as hard as possible.

    If this where a CPU test you'd do the opposite, you run it at minimum graphical settings at 640x480 or 800x600, whatever the bare minimum the game will allow you to run it at to see how fast the CPU can run the game engine without the GPU being the bottleneck.

    The GPU test is closer to how most people actually play their games though. I.E. as high a detail settings as possible while not falling below the 30FPS threshold where the game will get choppy and laggy.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    316

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kivada View Post
    Nah, when benching a GPU you want to run the games at as high a resolution and as high a graphical settings as the game offers so you can fully beat on the GPU and drivers as hard as possible.
    That's not true at all.. When you're talking 1080p + MSAA on an old card, the only thing you're testing is the memory bandwidth.. The CPU, GPU and GPU drivers are sitting there practically idle waiting for data to flow between the GPU and GPU memory..
    In order for anti-aliasing to work, geometry gets scaled up to double their resolution in GPU memory. An old card, running at 1080p with anti-aliasing is absurd.. It was never done then, and no gamer is going to do it now on an old card because the framerates produced are too low to be playable and it has nothing to do with the GPU chip or the driver.

    IMO, the benchmarks don't seem very useful at all.. He should be comparing low resolution + AA vs. high resolution without AA.. If high resolution looks better and is a lot faster, then you can conclude there is still some optimization work to be done in the AA.. AA has always been used by gamers as a way to get around needing to have a higher resolution display.

    The only thing the benchmark shows, in my opinion, is that old cards were badly memory bandwidth bottlenecked.. Which gamers already know. When those cards were out, nobody had 1080p screens and if they did, they didn't need any AA.
    Last edited by Sidicas; 01-16-2013 at 05:51 AM.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Toronto-ish
    Posts
    7,434

    Default

    The issue is that (a) the same card produced much higher frame rates with the open source driver 18 months ago -- high enough that MSAA would probably have been useful even at 1920x1080 and (b) users are reporting higher frame rates even today which suggests it's not as simple as an across-the-board regression.

    Could be that the older frame rates were wrong, or the new ones, or there's a partial regression, or some setting/configuration-dependent thing.

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    1,946

    Default

    My suggestion is that developers issue a public recommendation/profile for Michael how to test properly and Michael reads own forums
    Result : everyone happy

    P.S.
    AMD should build a statue for Marek so everyone(incl. AMD) can ritually sacrifice him some "beers"

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Toronto-ish
    Posts
    7,434

    Default

    In fairness, we're not aware of anything wrong with the tests. The results just seem odd and we don't know why.

    Agree on the Marek statue. Questions is where it should be built so that everyone could get to it. Maybe we could put a little picture of Marek in the lower right corner of the screen when running open drivers, just like the <testing> icon fglrx displays on untested hardware

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,353

    Default

    Oh shit!! Now we even have Bridgman bowing to the mighty Marek!

    Seriously You guys, both in AMD and independant developers, have been doing a fantastic job. I have a 6850 that I could only be slightly happier with. Keep up the good work guys.

    Power management and video decode is really all thats left. Well at least for my needs anyway.

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    338

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bridgman View Post
    In fairness, we're not aware of anything wrong with the tests. The results just seem odd and we don't know why.

    Agree on the Marek statue. Questions is where it should be built so that everyone could get to it. Maybe we could put a little picture of Marek in the lower right corner of the screen when running open drivers, just like the <testing> icon fglrx displays on untested hardware
    Especially if you're running r300g! You should get like a splash screen at bootup saying: All hail to Marek! when r300g is loaded.
    I would visit a statue, too.

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    9

    Default

    He, he, it is time for Michael to do some bisecting and not benchamarking

Posting Permissions

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