Polaris 10 & 11 Benchmarks Leaked

[Fulgrim]

Take this with a pinch of salt, as the benchmarks are mainly OpenGL results.

 

 

 

Quote

 

With less than a month to go till the launch, all eyes are peeled for leaks about AMD’s upcoming graphics cards. Kicking off the latest generation of 14nm FinFET GPUs are the Polaris 10 and 11, each set to target a different market. Even though we have a rough idea of the performance of the two different GPUs, nothing concrete has leaked out yet. Today, we get a bit more of a clearer picture with some leaked benchmarks.

The benchmarks leaked this time around are from GFXBench. We got the Polaris 11 (67FF), Polaris 11 (67E8) and Polaris 10 (67DF) SKUs all tested so far. The Polaris 11 (67FF) was leaked earlier which is why we know Polaris 11 will have at least 1024 steam processors. Given that no information was revealed if the GPUs were running at full speed, the memory used, power configuration and if these are even full chips, we can’t glean too much information from the tests. 

 

 

 

 

Quote

 

The big take away is that the 67E8 SKU is more powerful than the 67FF SKU. Some of the results are a bit wonky, with inconsistent results between the different tests. This leaves me to suggest that the drivers aren’t quite ready yet. The Polaris 10 (67DF) does perform about twice as fast as the 67FF which suggests it has at least 1024 cores as expected. Other than that, it’s only more waiting in store for us till AMD releases the cards.

 

 

Source

 

 

[Shoob]

Ergh, why are they comparing different APIs.

[Notional]

This is very odd as they are comparing the Polaris chips running the obsolete OpenGL clusterfrack with a 380 running DirectX (11?). So you can't compare the results to begin with. Second problem is that a 380 is more powerful than a Polaris 10. No way in hell that is a thing.

[CostcoSamples]

Well it's fun that benchmarks are being leaked as it means launch is approaching!  But these results are completely useless...

[Fulgrim]

4 minutes ago, Notional said:

This is very odd as they are comparing the Polaris chips running the obsolete OpenGL clusterfrack with a 380 running DirectX (11?). So you can't compare the results to begin with. Second problem is that a 380 is more powerful than a Polaris 10. No way in hell that is a thing.

OpenGL is not obsolete. Support for it has picked up big time in the past couple years, thanks to AMD, and Valve. It's now been dubbed Vulkan, as it now features elements of AMD's Mantle technology.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jsxn93Wb7vk

[Notional]

Just now, Fulgrim said:

OpenGL is not obsolete. Support for it has picked up big time in the past couple years, thanks to AMD, and Valve. It's now been dubbed Vulkan, as it now features elements of AMD's Mantle technology.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jsxn93Wb7vk

OpenGL is a mish mash of obsolete and redundant code. It's dead in the water. Vulkan is a completely new API built from the ground up with mantle and Kronos own SPIR-V concept. It doesn't use any legacy code from OpenGL at all.

 

Either way, both OpenGL and Vulkan are underperforming compared to DX. Hopefully Vulkan will be equal in time, but OpenGL won't. So the comparison in this benchmark is odd.

[Sakkura]

16 minutes ago, Notional said:

This is very odd as they are comparing the Polaris chips running the obsolete OpenGL clusterfrack with a 380 running DirectX (11?). So you can't compare the results to begin with. Second problem is that a 380 is more powerful than a Polaris 10. No way in hell that is a thing.

If the Polaris drivers aren't ready yet, it's not unreasonable for a 380 to beat Polaris 10. It just means nothing for final performance when it launches. 

[Fulgrim]

7 minutes ago, Notional said:

OpenGL is a mish mash of obsolete and redundant code. It's dead in the water. Vulkan is a completely new API built from the ground up with mantle and Kronos own SPIR-V concept. It doesn't use any legacy code from OpenGL at all.

 

Either way, both OpenGL and Vulkan are underperforming compared to DX. Hopefully Vulkan will be equal in time, but OpenGL won't. So the comparison in this benchmark is odd.

OpenGL isn't quite dead in the water, as Vulkan is basically a grounds-up redesign of OpenGL and OpenGL ES, with Mantle tech. So technically it still lives on.

And yes, Vulkan/OpenGL is currently under performing. But considering that support for it was minuscule compared to DirectX for the past few years, it's kinda obvious as to why it's not working as well at the moment.

[Notional]

This is very odd. They use a benchmarking suite called GFXBench 4.0.12. I've tested it on my 290 GPU and I get the following:

 

OpenGL 4.1/ ES 3.0:

 

Manhatttan

• 3696.87 Frames
• 59.6269 FPS

Manhattan Offscreen

• 12812.1 Frames
• 206.68 FPS

Second run was a tiny bit higher, but within margin.

The DirectX version is no longer a part of this benchmark. Only a version 3 DX compatible bench exists, and only on windows store. It no longer works and yields no results.

 

ADDENDUM: This bench is odd. It runs the full screen test first with a GPU utilization around 15-25%. Then it does a bunch of tiny images in a matrix where it jumps to about 100% utilization. My results might be completely off or the other results online are Crossfire.

 

This is an old bench only for OpenGL (NOT VULKAN) and is primarily made for portable units it seems.

 

Either way, AMD's OpenGL performance has always been poor, as devs tends to use a semi NVidia proprietary implementation of OGL.

 

27 minutes ago, Fulgrim said:

OpenGL isn't quite dead in the water, as Vulkan is basically a grounds-up redesign of OpenGL and OpenGL ES, with Mantle tech. So technically it still lives on.

And yes, Vulkan/OpenGL is currently under performing. But considering that support for it was minuscule compared to DirectX for the past few years, it's kinda obvious as to why it's not working as well at the moment.

How can it be OpenGL when you say it's a ground-up redesign? The only thing Vulkan has in common with OGL is that both are made by Kronos. I don't think any game has done a proper implementation of Vulkan yet (The Talos Principle is not yet).

[Fulgrim]

1 minute ago, Notional said:

How can it be OpenGL when you say it's a ground-up redesign? The only thing Vulkan has in common with OGL is that both are made by Kronos. I don't think any game has done a proper implementation of Vulkan yet (The Talos Principle is not yet).

Did you not read my comment? "So technically it still lives on". It's based on OpenGL still, or at least has some elements of it.

[Notional]

14 minutes ago, Fulgrim said:

Did you not read my comment? "So technically it still lives on". It's based on OpenGL still, or at least has some elements of it.

I did read it, but you are incorrect. It's not based on OpenGL, but SPIR-V and Mantle. none of those two code bases are in OpenGL.

 

What Khronos says:

Quote

Vulkan 1.0 provides access to  OpenGL ES 3.1 / OpenGL 4.X-class GPU functionality but with increased performance and flexibility

https://www.khronos.org/assets/uploads/developers/library/overview/vulkan-overview.pdf

[Fulgrim]

"Vulkan, formerly named the "Next Generation OpenGL Initiative" (glNext),[38][39] is a grounds-up redesign effort to unify OpenGL and OpenGL ES into one common API that will not be backwards compatible with existing OpenGL versions.[40][41][42] The initial version of the API was released on 16 February 2016"

 

-Wikipedia

@Notional

 

Redesign. So it's got elements of it's predecessor - OpenGL.

[Trixanity]

1 minute ago, Fulgrim said:

"Vulkan, formerly named the "Next Generation OpenGL Initiative" (glNext),[38][39] is a grounds-up redesign effort to unify OpenGL and OpenGL ES into one common API that will not be backwards compatible with existing OpenGL versions.[40][41][42] The initial version of the API was released on 16 February 2016"

 

-Wikipedia

@Notional

Just stop. 

 

OpenGL and Vulkan are not the same. It's a new product entirely. Calling Vulkan by the name 'OpenGL' would both be wrong and would lead to confusion. When referring to either API you need to specify. 

[Notional]

2 minutes ago, Fulgrim said:

"Vulkan, formerly named the "Next Generation OpenGL Initiative" (glNext),[38][39] is a grounds-up redesign effort to unify OpenGL and OpenGL ES into one common API that will not be backwards compatible with existing OpenGL versions.[40][41][42] The initial version of the API was released on 16 February 2016"

 

-Wikipedia

@Notional

 

Redesign. So it's got elements of it's predecessor - OpenGL.

You are misunderstanding the wiki article. OpenGL and ES are desktop and mobile versions of OpenGL. Vulkan replaces both as a single API. You cannot redesign something and call it the same. You can see what Vulkan really is in the official Khronos slideshow pdf I mentioned in the post before. It's Spir-V and a modified version of Mantle (to rid it of AMD proprietary tech/functions).

Just because it started out as OpenGL Next does not mean it has code from older versions of OpenGL. Same with DirectX for that matter. They even changed the name because it's so heavily based on mantle.

[Fulgrim]

1 minute ago, Trixanity said:

Just stop. 

 

OpenGL and Vulkan are not the same. It's a new product entirely. Calling Vulkan by the name 'OpenGL' would both be wrong and would lead to confusion. When referring to either API you need to specify. 

I never said they were the SAME. I said that Vulkan at least is based off of, or at least contains elements of OpenGL.

So, suck me toes lad.

[Fulgrim]

Just now, Notional said:

You are misunderstanding the wiki article. OpenGL and ES are desktop and mobile versions of OpenGL. Vulkan replaces both as a single API. You cannot redesign something and call it the same. You can see what Vulkan really is in the official Khronos slideshow pdf I mentioned in the post before. It's Spir-V and a modified version of Mantle (to rid it of AMD proprietary tech/functions).

Just because it started out as OpenGL Next does not mean it has code from older versions of OpenGL. Same with DirectX for that matter. They even changed the name because it's so heavily based on mantle.

Again, i DID NOT say it is the same as OpenGL. Can't you fucking read? I said it is based off, or at least contains elements of OpenGL.

[Master Disaster]

1 minute ago, Fulgrim said:

Again, i DID NOT say it is the same as OpenGL. Can't you fucking read? I said it is based off, or at least contains elements of OpenGL.

Wow much salt?

 

Anyway you've been told twice that its not based off and contains no code from OpenGL, it was a ground up rewrite, as in all existing code was scrapped and the entire project is brand new code.

 

It derived from OpenGL but its not based on it in any way.

[Fulgrim]

1 minute ago, Master Disaster said:

Wow much salt?

 

Anyway you've been told twice that its not based off and contains no code from OpenGL, it was a ground up rewrite, as in all existing code was scrapped and the entire project is brand new code.

 

It derived from OpenGL but its not based on it in any way.

Derived =/= based off of

[Master Disaster]

1 minute ago, Fulgrim said:

Derived =/= based off of

Wow, OK then, INSPIRED BY.

[Trixanity]

2 minutes ago, Fulgrim said:

I never said they were the SAME. I said that Vulkan at least is based off of, or at least contains elements of OpenGL.

So, suck me toes lad.

The problem is you're still wrong, so throwing yourself to the floor whilst kicking and screaming that you want to have it your way doesn't justify it. 

 

OpenGL has been trashed in favor of starting over.

 

Let's just play along and say it contains OpenGL elements, it's still not OpenGL and should not be referred to as such. 

 

The original post was you saying OpenGL is still relevant because Vulkan exists. That would make no sense. They are still different as you now concur with. So again: stop. 

[Sauron]

1 hour ago, Fulgrim said:

OpenGL is not obsolete. Support for it has picked up big time in the past couple years, thanks to AMD, and Valve. It's now been dubbed Vulkan, as it now features elements of AMD's Mantle technology.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jsxn93Wb7vk

 

10 minutes ago, Fulgrim said:

I never said they were the SAME. I said that Vulkan at least is based off of, or at least contains elements of OpenGL.

So, suck me toes lad.

5 minutes ago, Fulgrim said:

Again, i DID NOT say it is the same as OpenGL. Can't you fucking read? I said it is based off, or at least contains elements of OpenGL.

 

Vulkan is NOT OpenGL and contains NO parts of it. It is new technology written from the ground up bu the same producers of OpenGL (the Khronos group), and that's about all they have in common aside from being open source.

 

OpenGL, in its current form, is outdated and will fade out as soon as vulkan is fully released. Regardless, it makes no sense to compare graphics cards using different APIs, as they may inherently be better or worse in certain stress scenarios.

[Fulgrim]

3 minutes ago, Trixanity said:

The problem is you're still wrong, so throwing yourself to the floor whilst kicking and screaming that you want to have it your way doesn't justify it. 

 

OpenGL has been trashed in favor of starting over.

 

Let's just play along and say it contains OpenGL elements, it's still not OpenGL and should not be referred to as such. 

 

The original post was you saying OpenGL is still relevant because Vulkan exists. That would make no sense. They are still different as you now concur with. So again: stop. 

I'm not stating that OpenGL = Vulkan though. So your comments are irrelevant.

[Fulgrim]

2 minutes ago, Sauron said:

 

 

Vulkan is NOT OpenGL and contains NO parts of it. It is new technology written from the ground up bu the same producers of OpenGL (the Khronos group), and that's about all they have in common aside from being open source.

 

OpenGL, in its current form, is outdated and will fade out as soon as vulkan is fully released. Regardless, it makes no sense to compare graphics cards using different APIs, as they may inherently be better or worse in certain stress scenarios.

Again, read ya dopey git. I have not once said OpenGL = Vulkan.

[Humbug]

There's a reason they called it vulkan. And not openGL 5. OpenGL development carries on separately. Even if you look at it from a technical point of view vulkan is more similar to DX12 and mantle. The fact that it works on Linux

 

Does not make it openGL.

 

[Fulgrim]

Just now, Humbug said:

There's a reason they called it vulkan. And not openGL 5. OpenGL development carries on separately. Even if you look at it from a technical point of view vulkan is more similar to DX12 and mantle. The fact that it works on Linux

 

Does not make it openGL.

 

Again, you didn't read my comments. I did NOT say Vulkan is OpenGL. It's derived from it.