Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 23

Thread: 25-Way Open-Source Linux Graphics Card Comparison

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    13,430

    Default 25-Way Open-Source Linux Graphics Card Comparison

    Phoronix: 25-Way Open-Source Linux Graphics Card Comparison

    As alluded to in days earlier after finding major open-source Radeon driver improvements -- including the newer RadeonSI Gallium3D driver -- I've been conducting a fresh graphics card comparison spanning many graphics processors and looking at the latest open-source driver performance on the Intel, NVIDIA, and Radeon fronts under Ubuntu Linux. In this article is a 25-way Intel Haswell HD Graphics vs. AMD Radeon vs. NVIDIA GeForce graphics comparison from Ubuntu 13.10 with the upgraded Linux 3.13 kernel and Mesa 10.1 development driver code to provide a very bleeding edge look at what the open-source drivers have to offer the Linux desktop users.

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=19761

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    51

    Default Time to update

    At this point, I'd like to see 4K performance comparisons and sound level dBm measurements added to the benchmarks for video cards.

  3. #3

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by macemoneta View Post
    At this point, I'd like to see 4K performance comparisons and sound level dBm measurements added to the benchmarks for video cards.
    4K Testing is only done on occasion (e.g. http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=19416) since it's still not relevant to most Linux users, I only have one 4K TV, and the 4K TV doesn't play too well with all drivers.

    Sound level testing won't happen due to lack of equipment / not worthwhile investment.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    319

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by macemoneta View Post
    At this point, I'd like to see 4K performance comparisons and sound level dBm measurements added to the benchmarks for video cards.
    Sound is irrelevant since it merely depends on the kind of heatsink and fan your specific model was sold with.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    53

    Default

    Finally !

    I am experiencing ridiculously good FOSS performance with the new driver+kernal for my Trinity Based A10-5800k APU.

    Vsync is working amazing on everything so smooth on FOSS = not working on catalyst properly
    FPS is VERY smooth and no dips = Higher overal on catalyst but not as smooth
    Anti Aliasing is actually working on FOSS = Not working properly or at all on catalyst
    Anti Aliasing is hardly effecting performance, feels faster than on windows.
    No Mouse lag !
    No Mouse lag even with vsync, AA.
    Tripple buffer working properly.

    Overal VERY happy with this

    Games tested

    L4D2 / TF2 / CS:source / Garrys Mod / Portal ... all working without a hitch @ 1080p
    Killing floor is less performance by about 20% than catalyst but the frame rate is more consistent.

    vsync is nice on the desktop too and everything is rapid on KDE.

    cheers to all the devs and keep it up, i want another 20 - 30% out of this APU and for it to beat catalyst in outright terms, but right now the FOSS is better overal than the catalyst imo.

    If AMD wont fix their offical's fast enough then its upto the community.
    Last edited by phill1978; 01-25-2014 at 02:02 PM.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    51

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Michael View Post
    4K Testing is only done on occasion (e.g. http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=19416) since it's still not relevant to most Linux users, I only have one 4K TV, and the 4K TV doesn't play too well with all drivers.

    Sound level testing won't happen due to lack of equipment / not worthwhile investment.
    Do you have a smartphone?

    https://play.google.com/store/apps/d...=kr.sira.sound

    4K TVs are starting to be used as monitors, and with 39" 4K TVs available as low as $400, they are relevant.

    http://dissociatedpress.net/brief-re...-39-tvmonitor/

  7. #7

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by macemoneta View Post
    Hardly accurate or suitable for my purposes... Too much ambient noise, would need to isolate the system, and would need something accurate that can easily interface with the PC for communicating data with PTS

    As other already pointed out, it also largely just depends upon the heatsink/fan used which varies with AIB partner and with not generally reviewing many GPUs of the same SKU it doesn't make much sense.

    Quote Originally Posted by macemoneta View Post
    4K TVs are starting to be used as monitors, and with 39" 4K TVs available as low as $400, they are relevant.

    http://dissociatedpress.net/brief-re...-39-tvmonitor/
    It's the same 4K TV I use for testing and it still doesn't play nicely with most Linux drivers and still months away before 4K TVs become more common for Linux users.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    155

    Default

    Great benchmark, thank you Michael!

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    259

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by macemoneta View Post
    At this point, I'd like to see 4K performance comparisons and sound level dBm measurements added to the benchmarks for video cards.
    Am I the only one who doesn't see value of resolutions past 720P, let alone 1080P? What I really don't understand is 1600P, which is just barely above 1080P. Graphic cards have gotten so powerful that the only way to stress them is to just turn up the resolutions. My monitor maxes out at 1680X1050 resolution, but most games I run at 1368X768. My 5-6 year old monitor that still works just fine today.

    As for dBm of video cards, that's really stupid. If the noise is an issue you would have just replaced the cooler yourself. None of my graphic cards keep their original coolers for too long, because the card usually runs too hot and loud from the factory anyway. I got a water block on my HD 6850, and that makes no noise.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    367

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by phill1978 View Post
    Finally ! If AMD wont fix their offical's fast enough then its upto the community.
    I just recently ordered a 7870 just because radeonSI is finnally getting up to snuff. I'm still curious why the 7950 is losing to the rebranded 7870 (270x) but that just makes me happy I got a card that runs better for half the price =P

    I also have a 5800k build, but mine doesn't properly resume the hdmi port after standby, so while it has a second output onto a tv I can only use it after the system is rebooted. Works wonderfully otherwise.

    But I don't agree that it is the communities job. If I wasn't sick of C (in college I worked on SoC boards and can't stand non-smart pointers anymore) I'd definitely contribute, but only because AMD is putting in an effort. I love the guys who develop nouveau for making any Nvidia graphics card I somehow end up with (I do occasionally get one in a junk machine, and in my primitive years I had dual 8800s I can still use for crap machines) workable, but I would sooner damn Nvidia for their super-hostile FOSS stance than invest my time or money into their products anymore.

    I hope I'm helping to send a message that investment in Mesa gets AMD returns - I only built that 5800k system, and I'm only getting that 7870 now, because of the Mesa driver. The former for my relatives because Mesa integration is so much more stable than binary blobs (I inherited a gtx 285 that wouldn't resume displays after suspending under the Nvidia blob, but worked fine with nouveau - it even worked with reclocking! I gave it to my mother). But now that radeonSI is starting to work well, I'll only be buying Intel and AMD graphics cardware going forward if I can help it. Hell, I'll buy an Intel or AMD tablet in a heartbeat if I could put plasma active (or even Android) on it with Mesa drivers.

    Am I the only one who doesn't see value of resolutions past 720P, let alone 1080P? What I really don't understand is 1600P, which is just barely above 1080P. Graphic cards have gotten so powerful that the only way to stress them is to just turn up the resolutions. My monitor maxes out at 1680X1050 resolution, but most games I run at 1368X768. My 5-6 year old monitor that still works just fine today.
    A 1600p monitor has 4 million pixels, which is effectively double a 1080p monitors. That is a huge difference in pixel density. I mean, use whatever you are fine with - but I like me my higher pixel density a lot.

    Higher pixel density actually has an added bonus not many people consider - once the pixels are small enough, you don't have to perform expensive font antialiasing or alignment to subpixels, and your games don't need AA either. Having to output to much larger screens has more performance overhead than AA on its own, but you get all the benefits of higher clarity and resolution and also get to reduce your AA effects. I think it is almost always a win - 4k is probably the first time you could use no AA in most games given good pixel density (25 - 30" panels) and not see any jagged edges.
    Last edited by zanny; 01-25-2014 at 03:28 PM.

Posting Permissions

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