Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 22

Thread: AMD's RadeonSI Gallium3D Is Improving, But Catalyst Is Much Better

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    14,539

    Default AMD's RadeonSI Gallium3D Is Improving, But Catalyst Is Much Better

    Phoronix: AMD's RadeonSI Gallium3D Is Improving, But Catalyst Is Much Better

    After last week delivering a Linux hardware review of the AMD Radeon R9 270X graphics card with the binary Catalyst driver on Ubuntu, and then yesterday looking at the Radeon Gallium3D driver posing a threat to Catalyst when using the mature "R600g" driver on HD 5000/600 series hardware, up today are new open vs. closed-source benchmarks. In this article we're looking at the performance of the Radeon R9 270X GPU when using the Ubuntu 13.10 open-source graphics stack, then when upgrading to Mesa 10.0 with Linux 3.12 DPM, and then comparing those numbers to the proprietary Catalyst Linux graphics driver.

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=19301

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Italy
    Posts
    911

    Default

    Xonotic Ultra doesn't even work with 7950.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    100

    Default

    I have the impression there are some fundamental architectural flaws in radeonsi.
    Why is fglrx so much faster?

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    764

    Default

    The R9 290X has one of the new Hawaii chips, not a rebranding of a known chip. And it's already supported out-of-the-box in ubuntu 13.10. Launch-Day-OSS support for a new-generation chip, horray! \o/

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    2,927

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Wilfred View Post
    I have the impression there are some fundamental architectural flaws in radeonsi.
    Why is fglrx so much faster?
    Because they had a head start of several years and their team is many times larger than the FLOSS driver team.

    RadeonSI driver was written essentially from scratch very recently. It's still missing stuff like tiling, GL functionality, HyperZ and many optimisations. r600g has had many years of performance tuning and has all the bells and whistles.

    It wasn't long ago that r600 performed very poorly. It will just take some time.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Madison, WI, USA
    Posts
    862

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Wilfred View Post
    I have the impression there are some fundamental architectural flaws in radeonsi.
    Why is fglrx so much faster?
    Nah, it's probably more due to the fact that HyperZ and color tiling aren't yet enabled by default in RadeonSI, not to mention that there hasn't been much/any work put into optimizing it yet. The guys working on radeonsi and the LLVM back-end are still working on making it work, then making it work fast... with emphasis on the first part.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    45

    Thumbs up

    I'm actually positively surprised by the open source frame-rates. Thank you developers, you rock
    Guess it's time to compile from git again and see if Dota 2 with fully maxed out settings runs with at least 30 frames with my 7850.
    Still, I would like to see more improvements to the radeonsi driver now that the r600 driver is in pretty good shape

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    111

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Veerappan View Post
    Nah, it's probably more due to the fact that HyperZ and color tiling aren't yet enabled by default in RadeonSI
    Does this mean that there's a way to enable these things? I read that they were just going to port over the r600g work on HyperZ.

  9. #9

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Veerappan View Post
    Nah, it's probably more due to the fact that HyperZ and color tiling aren't yet enabled by default in RadeonSI, not to mention that there hasn't been much/any work put into optimizing it yet. The guys working on radeonsi and the LLVM back-end are still working on making it work, then making it work fast... with emphasis on the first part.
    Is there any HyperZ support at all yet for RadeonSI, I thought they hadn't completed it yet?

    There's also no support for the SB backend yet which will account for some of the performance difference, especially with shader-heavy games.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    90

    Default

    Benchmarks with llvm 3.4 would have been nice.

Posting Permissions

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