• Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

QA Consultants Determines AMD's Most Stable Graphics Drivers in the Industry

Joined
Sep 3, 2017
Messages
239 (0.09/day)
Location
Russia
Processor FX 8320 @4.2 | i7 2600 @3.8 | Xeon W3670 @ 3.6
Motherboard Asus Sabertooth R2.0 | Asus P8Z77-V Deluxe | Gigabyte X58-UD7
Cooling Zalman Performa 10+ | Zalman Performa 11+ | Zalman Performa 10+
Memory Crucial Ballistix Sport XT 32GB @ 1866 | Corsair Vengeance 32GB @1866 | Samsung 24GB @ 1600
Video Card(s) XFX Radeon 390x | Zotac GTX 1070 AMP Extreme | Zotac GTX 980 AMP Extreme
Storage Intel SSD / SAS 15k Fujitsu | Intel SSD / Velociraptors / Hitachi 2TB | Intel SSD / Samsung 1TB
Display(s) Samsung 245T | HP ZR30w | IBM 20" 4x3
Case Chieftec | Corsair Graphite 600T | Thermaltake Xaser IV
Audio Device(s) SB Titanium HD | SB Titanium HD | SB X-fi Elite Pro
Power Supply Thermaltake 875W | Corsair 850W | Thermaltake 1500W
Mouse Logitech | Logitech | Logitech
Keyboard Mitsumi Classic | Microsoft |Microsoft
Software W7 x64 | W7 x64 |W7 x64 / XP x32
So, thanks to mining, i finally bought some Radeon cards since good ol times of AGP era. Now i have 290/390 cards and must say 15.x and 16.x drivers pretty stable and compared to multiple versions of nVidia ones for 980/1070. I also have some old Quadro 2000 cards, they rock stable in any scenarios i put them. And that stability of Radeons and Quadros is memory management inside drivers especialy then your physical VRAM eaten by applications or can't be used due to stupid limitations like DX9 restriction to only use 4GB.

The good:
Radeons and Quadro can split workload and VRAM consumption correctly if multiple applications try to use GPU (multiple browsers + YT video + video encoding + online gaming + mining isn't problem, just slow), GeForces can't handle that

Radeons and Quadros have fair rendering in games, GeForces often cheats (even in simpliest games...)

The bad:
During good ol days of AGP and early PCI-E cards Radeons had so much issues with modeling and video editing software so i strictly decided to switch to green. Despite drivers quality and changes to software, that made both AMD and nVidia products equal in general usage, Radeons still ill suitable for the most prosumer tasks: OpenCL is just a word, while CUDA is used almost everywhere.
 
Joined
Feb 11, 2009
Messages
5,540 (0.96/day)
System Name Cyberline
Processor Intel Core i7 2600k -> 12600k
Motherboard Asus P8P67 LE Rev 3.0 -> Gigabyte Z690 Auros Elite DDR4
Cooling Tuniq Tower 120 -> Custom Watercoolingloop
Memory Corsair (4x2) 8gb 1600mhz -> Crucial (8x2) 16gb 3600mhz
Video Card(s) AMD RX480 -> RX7800XT
Storage Samsung 750 Evo 250gb SSD + WD 1tb x 2 + WD 2tb -> 2tb MVMe SSD
Display(s) Philips 32inch LPF5605H (television) -> Dell S3220DGF
Case antec 600 -> Thermaltake Tenor HTCP case
Audio Device(s) Focusrite 2i4 (USB)
Power Supply Seasonic 620watt 80+ Platinum
Mouse Elecom EX-G
Keyboard Rapoo V700
Software Windows 10 Pro 64bit
great, too bad "Radeon Software" is one of the worst GUI's I ever have worked with
 
Joined
Feb 3, 2017
Messages
3,728 (1.32/day)
Processor Ryzen 7800X3D
Motherboard ROG STRIX B650E-F GAMING WIFI
Memory 2x16GB G.Skill Flare X5 DDR5-6000 CL36 (F5-6000J3636F16GX2-FX5)
Video Card(s) INNO3D GeForce RTX™ 4070 Ti SUPER TWIN X2
Storage 2TB Samsung 980 PRO, 4TB WD Black SN850X
Display(s) 42" LG C2 OLED, 27" ASUS PG279Q
Case Thermaltake Core P5
Power Supply Fractal Design Ion+ Platinum 760W
Mouse Corsair Dark Core RGB Pro SE
Keyboard Corsair K100 RGB
VR HMD HTC Vive Cosmos
Should not the fails be 21 vs 36?

There are a lot of fails that are not fails but runs 'Not attempted (due to hang)'. It just so happens that AMD cards have 10 of these and Nvidia cards 40. These do not represent the quality but luck - better if driver hangs later in the automated test run.

I would be much more interested in why the drivers failed.
 

bug

Joined
May 22, 2015
Messages
13,718 (3.97/day)
Processor Intel i5-12600k
Motherboard Asus H670 TUF
Cooling Arctic Freezer 34
Memory 2x16GB DDR4 3600 G.Skill Ripjaws V
Video Card(s) EVGA GTX 1060 SC
Storage 500GB Samsung 970 EVO, 500GB Samsung 850 EVO, 1TB Crucial MX300 and 2TB Crucial MX500
Display(s) Dell U3219Q + HP ZR24w
Case Raijintek Thetis
Audio Device(s) Audioquest Dragonfly Red :D
Power Supply Seasonic 620W M12
Mouse Logitech G502 Proteus Core
Keyboard G.Skill KM780R
Software Arch Linux + Win10
I know I shouldn't be so skeptical. I am sure this is probably on the, up and up'. But, Amd paid for this research. What would the outcome be if Nvidea paid for it?
As if we don't know...

Still, wth am I reading here? The tests are not described at all. We pass/fail per day? What is this? Were some tests passing one day only to fail the day after that? The whole report is mostly 100 pages of listing configurations :wtf:

Edit: I see now, they cherry-picked the stress test out of the whole suite. Well, if that's what floats AMD's boat...
 
Joined
Jun 12, 2017
Messages
136 (0.05/day)
Seems like bullshit to me
"Mission-critical test", so you just (randomly) grab newest drivers from both side? You'd be fired if you do such bullshit on a corporate server.
The configuration of a production environment is strictly controlled in every corporation. Configurations must be intensely tested prior to installation, and tweaked, if necessary. After a configuration passed such tests, this is where "stability" kicks in -- is such success steadily reproducible in the following runs?

What these researchers did, IMHO, is that they identified 6 erroneous configurations, and superior out-of-box usability of AMD cards. Not a single shit to do with "mission-critical" stability.
 
Joined
Jan 2, 2012
Messages
1,079 (0.23/day)
Location
Indonesia
Processor AMD Ryzen 7 5700X
Motherboard ASUS STRIX X570-E
Cooling NOCTUA NH-U12A
Memory G.Skill FlareX 32 GB (4 x 8 GB) DDR4-3200
Video Card(s) ASUS RTX 4070 DUAL
Storage 1 TB WD Black SN850X | 2 TB WD Blue SN570 | 10 TB WD Purple Pro
Display(s) LG 32QP880N 32"
Case Fractal Design Define R5 Black
Power Supply Seasonic Focus Gold 750W
Mouse Pulsar X2
Keyboard KIRA EXS
Well, they used Gigabyte's NVIDIA cards, that explains a lot :roll::roll: : SOURCE
lol_giga.png

On the other hand they used MSI RX580 GAMING and ASUS STRIX RX560.

Also LegitReviews asked to QA Consultants if their samples were supplied by AMD and the answer is YES : http://www.legitreviews.com/amd-cla...but-supplied-all-graphics-cards-tested_206705
 
Last edited:
Joined
Oct 26, 2008
Messages
2,258 (0.39/day)
System Name Budget AMD System
Processor Threadripper 1900X @ 4.1Ghz (100x41 @ 1.3250V)
Motherboard Gigabyte X399 Aorus Gaming 7
Cooling EKWB X399 Monoblock
Memory 4x8GB GSkill TridentZ RGB 14-14-14-32 CR1 @ 3266
Video Card(s) XFX Radeon RX Vega₆⁴ Liquid @ 1,800Mhz Core, 1025Mhz HBM2
Storage 1x ADATA SX8200 NVMe, 1x Segate 2.5" FireCuda 2TB SATA, 1x 500GB HGST SATA
Display(s) Vizio 22" 1080p 60hz TV (Samsung Panel)
Case Corsair 570X
Audio Device(s) Onboard
Power Supply Seasonic X Series 850W KM3
Software Windows 10 Pro x64
Kinda strange since the 18.7.1 drivers are broken for my system. HDMI driver is corrupted or something. Tried re-downloading, tried clean uninstalls... reboots and re-installs. Then I just on a whim downloaded 18.5.1 and ran that installer... So far, 100% fine.
 

eidairaman1

The Exiled Airman
Joined
Jul 2, 2007
Messages
41,887 (6.61/day)
Location
Republic of Texas (True Patriot)
System Name PCGOD
Processor AMD FX 8350@ 5.0GHz
Motherboard Asus TUF 990FX Sabertooth R2 2901 Bios
Cooling Scythe Ashura, 2×BitFenix 230mm Spectre Pro LED (Blue,Green), 2x BitFenix 140mm Spectre Pro LED
Memory 16 GB Gskill Ripjaws X 2133 (2400 OC, 10-10-12-20-20, 1T, 1.65V)
Video Card(s) AMD Radeon 290 Sapphire Vapor-X
Storage Samsung 840 Pro 256GB, WD Velociraptor 1TB
Display(s) NEC Multisync LCD 1700V (Display Port Adapter)
Case AeroCool Xpredator Evil Blue Edition
Audio Device(s) Creative Labs Sound Blaster ZxR
Power Supply Seasonic 1250 XM2 Series (XP3)
Mouse Roccat Kone XTD
Keyboard Roccat Ryos MK Pro
Software Windows 7 Pro 64
I’ve been saying this about Nvidia’s driver team for awhile. Thank goodness we have @qubit to beta test them for us before I try them! :laugh:

Last year I made another foray into AMD land and had a 480. My experience was AMD has problems with drivers too. Their driver would frequently crash, and basically carry on if I was lucky with the basic Windows version.

So, they both need work, in my experience.

Edit: yes, I know my experience is anecdotal, not scientific.

Ask Vanguard dude.
 
Joined
Sep 15, 2011
Messages
6,689 (1.39/day)
Processor Intel® Core™ i7-13700K
Motherboard Gigabyte Z790 Aorus Elite AX
Cooling Noctua NH-D15
Memory 32GB(2x16) DDR5@6600MHz G-Skill Trident Z5
Video Card(s) ZOTAC GAMING GeForce RTX 3080 AMP Holo
Storage 2TB SK Platinum P41 SSD + 4TB SanDisk Ultra SSD + 500GB Samsung 840 EVO SSD
Display(s) Acer Predator X34 3440x1440@100Hz G-Sync
Case NZXT PHANTOM410-BK
Audio Device(s) Creative X-Fi Titanium PCIe
Power Supply Corsair 850W
Mouse Logitech Hero G502 SE
Software Windows 11 Pro - 64bit
Benchmark Scores 30FPS in NFS:Rivals
No wonder since nVidia is releasing a driver fix after EACH release...
 
Joined
Feb 19, 2009
Messages
1,161 (0.20/day)
Location
I live in Norway
Processor R9 5800x3d | R7 3900X | 4800H | 2x Xeon gold 6142
Motherboard Asrock X570M | AB350M Pro 4 | Asus Tuf A15
Cooling Air | Air | duh laptop
Memory 64gb G.skill SniperX @3600 CL16 | 128gb | 32GB | 192gb
Video Card(s) RTX 4080 |Quadro P5000 | RTX2060M
Storage Many drives
Display(s) AW3423dwf.
Case Jonsbo D41
Power Supply Corsair RM850x
Mouse g502 Lightspeed
Keyboard G913 tkl
Software win11, proxmox
Kinda strange since the 18.7.1 drivers are broken for my system. HDMI driver is corrupted or something. Tried re-downloading, tried clean uninstalls... reboots and re-installs. Then I just on a whim downloaded 18.5.1 and ran that installer... So far, 100% fine.

18.7.1 is beta driver, don't download beta drivers unless you already have issues >_<
 
Joined
Jun 13, 2012
Messages
1,383 (0.31/day)
Processor i7-13700k
Motherboard Asus Tuf Gaming z790-plus
Cooling Coolermaster Hyper 212 RGB
Memory Corsair Vengeance RGB 32GB DDR5 7000mhz
Video Card(s) Asus Dual Geforce RTX 4070 Super ( 2800mhz @ 1.0volt, ~60mhz overlock -.1volts)
Storage 1x Samsung 980 Pro PCIe4 NVme, 2x Samsung 1tb 850evo SSD, 3x WD drives, 2 seagate
Display(s) Acer Predator XB273u 27inch IPS G-Sync 165hz
Power Supply Corsair RMx Series RM850x (OCZ Z series PSU retired after 13 years of service)
Mouse Logitech G502 hero
Keyboard Logitech G710+
My question about this all since its not said in story, is what kinda software were they running for these test's? Did amd have a say in what software was used during the test's? That 2nd question's answer would tell a lot about the results if that is the case.

It was never proven that CTS was paid by Intel , stop making shit up just to spite people. Also , FCAT is just a tool, I literally never heard any complaint about it.
FCAT only did what all other FPS counters did and that was put an overlay on video frames that came outta the game engine before they are sent to the gpu. Reality of that tool it helped AMD solve the crossfire stuttering issue that plagued them for many years with out any sign of being fixed.

AMD came out on top on an AMD funded test ... as Joe Pesci said in "My Cousin Vinny" ... "Oh there's a $#*&^%$ Surprise"
Its like being shocked that xxx sponsored game perform's better on xxx cards.
Also LegitReviews asked to QA Consultants if their samples were supplied by AMD and the answer is YES : http://www.legitreviews.com/amd-cla...but-supplied-all-graphics-cards-tested_206705
Part that does jump out about that story is (quoted below). Did they just click uninstall on drivers and then install the nvidia drivers? That could cause in the off chance issues of of crashing. Besides that the fact that AMD supplied the cards def puts the test in doubt as they could do what both sides do when it comes to sending cards to reviewers and cherry pick the best of the bunch. Most failures came outta 1 card for nvidia which could just mean the card was defective to start with. Without a wide range of testing say 100 cards of each model this whole thing test should be taken with a grain of salt.

The tests were done on twelve machines over a 12-day period with the graphics cards in the AMD systems being switched to the NVIDIA systems at the half way point. At the end of the testing AMD products passed 93% of scheduled tests whereas the aggregate of NVIDIA products passed 82% of scheduled tests.
 
Last edited:

bug

Joined
May 22, 2015
Messages
13,718 (3.97/day)
Processor Intel i5-12600k
Motherboard Asus H670 TUF
Cooling Arctic Freezer 34
Memory 2x16GB DDR4 3600 G.Skill Ripjaws V
Video Card(s) EVGA GTX 1060 SC
Storage 500GB Samsung 970 EVO, 500GB Samsung 850 EVO, 1TB Crucial MX300 and 2TB Crucial MX500
Display(s) Dell U3219Q + HP ZR24w
Case Raijintek Thetis
Audio Device(s) Audioquest Dragonfly Red :D
Power Supply Seasonic 620W M12
Mouse Logitech G502 Proteus Core
Keyboard G.Skill KM780R
Software Arch Linux + Win10
Joined
Oct 26, 2008
Messages
2,258 (0.39/day)
System Name Budget AMD System
Processor Threadripper 1900X @ 4.1Ghz (100x41 @ 1.3250V)
Motherboard Gigabyte X399 Aorus Gaming 7
Cooling EKWB X399 Monoblock
Memory 4x8GB GSkill TridentZ RGB 14-14-14-32 CR1 @ 3266
Video Card(s) XFX Radeon RX Vega₆⁴ Liquid @ 1,800Mhz Core, 1025Mhz HBM2
Storage 1x ADATA SX8200 NVMe, 1x Segate 2.5" FireCuda 2TB SATA, 1x 500GB HGST SATA
Display(s) Vizio 22" 1080p 60hz TV (Samsung Panel)
Case Corsair 570X
Audio Device(s) Onboard
Power Supply Seasonic X Series 850W KM3
Software Windows 10 Pro x64
18.7.1 is beta driver, don't download beta drivers unless you already have issues >_<

Well, The whole point of downloading a beta driver is to test for bugs. lol. I was being slightly sarcastic though. Kinda left me stumped though. Will try a 2nd version of the 7.1 drivers in a week or so. (AMD has a habit of updating their driver packages on the site without changing the version #)

Not that it bothers me. Although, I am glad they are going to keep Vega around for a bit longer on the AI/Compute side of things. Us Vega adopters might get some of that R&D thrown our way.
 
Joined
Apr 30, 2012
Messages
3,881 (0.85/day)
Part that does jump out about that story is (quoted below). Did they just click uninstall on drivers and then install the nvidia drivers? That could cause in the off chance issues of of crashing. Besides that the fact that AMD supplied the cards def puts the test in doubt as they could do what both sides do when it comes to sending cards to reviewers and cherry pick the best of the bunch. Most failures came outta 1 card for nvidia which could just mean the card was defective to start with. Without a wide range of testing say 100 cards of each model this whole thing test should be taken with a grain of salt.

Read the PDF.

They had 12 systems. 1-6 runs were done. GPU swap (AMD/Nvidia) to eliminate system bias. Then 7-12 runs.

If your alluding to driver overlap issues it would affect both. If there was any.

Most of the GeForce issues happened before the swap on runs 1-6. Funny enough after the swap the 1060 only had 1 fail.
 

FordGT90Concept

"I go fast!1!11!1!"
Joined
Oct 13, 2008
Messages
26,259 (4.47/day)
Location
IA, USA
System Name BY-2021
Processor AMD Ryzen 7 5800X (65w eco profile)
Motherboard MSI B550 Gaming Plus
Cooling Scythe Mugen (rev 5)
Memory 2 x Kingston HyperX DDR4-3200 32 GiB
Video Card(s) AMD Radeon RX 7900 XT
Storage Samsung 980 Pro, Seagate Exos X20 TB 7200 RPM
Display(s) Nixeus NX-EDG274K (3840x2160@144 DP) + Samsung SyncMaster 906BW (1440x900@60 HDMI-DVI)
Case Coolermaster HAF 932 w/ USB 3.0 5.25" bay + USB 3.2 (A+C) 3.5" bay
Audio Device(s) Realtek ALC1150, Micca OriGen+
Power Supply Enermax Platimax 850w
Mouse Nixeus REVEL-X
Keyboard Tesoro Excalibur
Software Windows 10 Home 64-bit
Benchmark Scores Faster than the tortoise; slower than the hare.
Based on these results, both companies should fire their professional driver teams. Makes it even more funny the report is being shared by AMD.
Fire, no, but they need to take a second look at the lower end cards to see why they have a ridiculously high failure rate.

OpenCL is just a word, while CUDA is used almost everywhere.
Because NVIDIA decided not to implement any more than OpenCL 1.2 to force developers to use CUDA on their hardware; meanwhile, AMD supports OpenCL 2.0.

There are a lot of fails that are not fails but runs 'Not attempted (due to hang)'. It just so happens that AMD cards have 10 of these and Nvidia cards 40. These do not represent the quality but luck - better if driver hangs later in the automated test run.
Drivers should never hang. It's just a different kind of failure.
 
Last edited:

bug

Joined
May 22, 2015
Messages
13,718 (3.97/day)
Processor Intel i5-12600k
Motherboard Asus H670 TUF
Cooling Arctic Freezer 34
Memory 2x16GB DDR4 3600 G.Skill Ripjaws V
Video Card(s) EVGA GTX 1060 SC
Storage 500GB Samsung 970 EVO, 500GB Samsung 850 EVO, 1TB Crucial MX300 and 2TB Crucial MX500
Display(s) Dell U3219Q + HP ZR24w
Case Raijintek Thetis
Audio Device(s) Audioquest Dragonfly Red :D
Power Supply Seasonic 620W M12
Mouse Logitech G502 Proteus Core
Keyboard G.Skill KM780R
Software Arch Linux + Win10
Because NVIDIA decided not to implement any more than OpenCL 1.2 to force developers to use CUDA on their hardware; meanwhile, AMD supports OpenCL 2.0.
The problem doesn't seem to be who implements it, but rather OpenCL itself. I have seen tests where Nvidia's OpenCL 1.2 beats AMD's OpenCL 2.0. Maybe the whole thing is hard to implement correctly (something along Vulkan/DX12 lines)?
 

FordGT90Concept

"I go fast!1!11!1!"
Joined
Oct 13, 2008
Messages
26,259 (4.47/day)
Location
IA, USA
System Name BY-2021
Processor AMD Ryzen 7 5800X (65w eco profile)
Motherboard MSI B550 Gaming Plus
Cooling Scythe Mugen (rev 5)
Memory 2 x Kingston HyperX DDR4-3200 32 GiB
Video Card(s) AMD Radeon RX 7900 XT
Storage Samsung 980 Pro, Seagate Exos X20 TB 7200 RPM
Display(s) Nixeus NX-EDG274K (3840x2160@144 DP) + Samsung SyncMaster 906BW (1440x900@60 HDMI-DVI)
Case Coolermaster HAF 932 w/ USB 3.0 5.25" bay + USB 3.2 (A+C) 3.5" bay
Audio Device(s) Realtek ALC1150, Micca OriGen+
Power Supply Enermax Platimax 850w
Mouse Nixeus REVEL-X
Keyboard Tesoro Excalibur
Software Windows 10 Home 64-bit
Benchmark Scores Faster than the tortoise; slower than the hare.
I can't find any recent, neutral benchmark results for OpenCL.

OpenCL isn't particularly hard to implement. It's more that with CPUs having so many idle cores these days, it makes more sense to multithread the code on the CPU.
 

bug

Joined
May 22, 2015
Messages
13,718 (3.97/day)
Processor Intel i5-12600k
Motherboard Asus H670 TUF
Cooling Arctic Freezer 34
Memory 2x16GB DDR4 3600 G.Skill Ripjaws V
Video Card(s) EVGA GTX 1060 SC
Storage 500GB Samsung 970 EVO, 500GB Samsung 850 EVO, 1TB Crucial MX300 and 2TB Crucial MX500
Display(s) Dell U3219Q + HP ZR24w
Case Raijintek Thetis
Audio Device(s) Audioquest Dragonfly Red :D
Power Supply Seasonic 620W M12
Mouse Logitech G502 Proteus Core
Keyboard G.Skill KM780R
Software Arch Linux + Win10
Joined
Jan 8, 2017
Messages
9,391 (3.29/day)
System Name Good enough
Processor AMD Ryzen R9 7900 - Alphacool Eisblock XPX Aurora Edge
Motherboard ASRock B650 Pro RS
Cooling 2x 360mm NexXxoS ST30 X-Flow, 1x 360mm NexXxoS ST30, 1x 240mm NexXxoS ST30
Memory 32GB - FURY Beast RGB 5600 Mhz
Video Card(s) Sapphire RX 7900 XT - Alphacool Eisblock Aurora
Storage 1x Kingston KC3000 1TB 1x Kingston A2000 1TB, 1x Samsung 850 EVO 250GB , 1x Samsung 860 EVO 500GB
Display(s) LG UltraGear 32GN650-B + 4K Samsung TV
Case Phanteks NV7
Power Supply GPS-750C
OpenCL and CUDA performance is dependent on the hardware configuration. The same code can run worse on more powerful hardware simply because things such as the number of ALUs per CU or the register file/cache size had not been taken into account properly. And there are many other architectural differences that complicate matters such as the fact that GCN has additional scalar ALUs that can't be explicitly used through OpenCl.

I can't find any recent, neutral benchmark results for OpenCL.

Well , what I wrote above is the reason why.

it makes more sense to multithread the code on the CPU.

What you do on a CPU isn't really the same kind of multithreading you typically try to implement on a GPU. It makes sense to implement tasks that fit one or the other very well.
 

FordGT90Concept

"I go fast!1!11!1!"
Joined
Oct 13, 2008
Messages
26,259 (4.47/day)
Location
IA, USA
System Name BY-2021
Processor AMD Ryzen 7 5800X (65w eco profile)
Motherboard MSI B550 Gaming Plus
Cooling Scythe Mugen (rev 5)
Memory 2 x Kingston HyperX DDR4-3200 32 GiB
Video Card(s) AMD Radeon RX 7900 XT
Storage Samsung 980 Pro, Seagate Exos X20 TB 7200 RPM
Display(s) Nixeus NX-EDG274K (3840x2160@144 DP) + Samsung SyncMaster 906BW (1440x900@60 HDMI-DVI)
Case Coolermaster HAF 932 w/ USB 3.0 5.25" bay + USB 3.2 (A+C) 3.5" bay
Audio Device(s) Realtek ALC1150, Micca OriGen+
Power Supply Enermax Platimax 850w
Mouse Nixeus REVEL-X
Keyboard Tesoro Excalibur
Software Windows 10 Home 64-bit
Benchmark Scores Faster than the tortoise; slower than the hare.
This picture is pretty telling:

The Radeon cards are being held back by the memory subsystem. In tests where memory performance isn't the bottleneck, the Radeon cards do well. In instances where it is, they perform poorly.

Still, this isn't my point. There's an open standard out there for compute and NVIDIA deliberately doesn't update it because they would rather promote their proprietary solution (just like G-SYNC).


OpenCL 2.0 features a new shared memory subsystem that vastly accelerates memory accesses:
https://www.anandtech.com/show/7161...pengl-44-opencl-20-opencl-12-spir-announced/3
I wouldn't be surprised if AMD jumped on OpenCL 2.0 for that reason and NVIDIA are dragging their heels because it makes CUDA look bad.

Not seeing any benchmarks that compare OpenCL 1.2 and OpenCL 2.0 performance.
 
Last edited:

bug

Joined
May 22, 2015
Messages
13,718 (3.97/day)
Processor Intel i5-12600k
Motherboard Asus H670 TUF
Cooling Arctic Freezer 34
Memory 2x16GB DDR4 3600 G.Skill Ripjaws V
Video Card(s) EVGA GTX 1060 SC
Storage 500GB Samsung 970 EVO, 500GB Samsung 850 EVO, 1TB Crucial MX300 and 2TB Crucial MX500
Display(s) Dell U3219Q + HP ZR24w
Case Raijintek Thetis
Audio Device(s) Audioquest Dragonfly Red :D
Power Supply Seasonic 620W M12
Mouse Logitech G502 Proteus Core
Keyboard G.Skill KM780R
Software Arch Linux + Win10
This picture is pretty telling:

The Radeon cards are being held back by the memory subsystem. In tests where memory performance isn't the bottleneck, the Radeon cards do well. In instances where it is, they perform poorly.

Still, this isn't my point. There's an open standard out there for compute and NVIDIA deliberately doesn't update it because they would rather promote their proprietary solution (just like G-SYNC).


OpenCL 2.0 features a new shared memory subsystem that vastly accelerates memory accesses:
https://www.anandtech.com/show/7161...pengl-44-opencl-20-opencl-12-spir-announced/3
I wouldn't be surprised if AMD jumped on OpenCL 2.0 for that reason and NVIDIA are dragging their heels because it makes CUDA look bad.

Not seeing any benchmarks that compare OpenCL 1.2 and OpenCL 2.0 performance.
These very benchmarks use OpenCL 2.0 on AMD hardware. It says so on the first page (with tiny text, of course). They don't compare OpenCL 1.2 to 2.0 on the same card, but it compares OpenCL 2.0 on AMD with OpenCL 1.2 on Nvidia.
 

FordGT90Concept

"I go fast!1!11!1!"
Joined
Oct 13, 2008
Messages
26,259 (4.47/day)
Location
IA, USA
System Name BY-2021
Processor AMD Ryzen 7 5800X (65w eco profile)
Motherboard MSI B550 Gaming Plus
Cooling Scythe Mugen (rev 5)
Memory 2 x Kingston HyperX DDR4-3200 32 GiB
Video Card(s) AMD Radeon RX 7900 XT
Storage Samsung 980 Pro, Seagate Exos X20 TB 7200 RPM
Display(s) Nixeus NX-EDG274K (3840x2160@144 DP) + Samsung SyncMaster 906BW (1440x900@60 HDMI-DVI)
Case Coolermaster HAF 932 w/ USB 3.0 5.25" bay + USB 3.2 (A+C) 3.5" bay
Audio Device(s) Realtek ALC1150, Micca OriGen+
Power Supply Enermax Platimax 850w
Mouse Nixeus REVEL-X
Keyboard Tesoro Excalibur
Software Windows 10 Home 64-bit
Benchmark Scores Faster than the tortoise; slower than the hare.
Talking the picture? What a terrible test. All cards should have been tested on 1.2. The bad memory performance could easily be because of 2.0 but code that isn't optimized for it.
 

bug

Joined
May 22, 2015
Messages
13,718 (3.97/day)
Processor Intel i5-12600k
Motherboard Asus H670 TUF
Cooling Arctic Freezer 34
Memory 2x16GB DDR4 3600 G.Skill Ripjaws V
Video Card(s) EVGA GTX 1060 SC
Storage 500GB Samsung 970 EVO, 500GB Samsung 850 EVO, 1TB Crucial MX300 and 2TB Crucial MX500
Display(s) Dell U3219Q + HP ZR24w
Case Raijintek Thetis
Audio Device(s) Audioquest Dragonfly Red :D
Power Supply Seasonic 620W M12
Mouse Logitech G502 Proteus Core
Keyboard G.Skill KM780R
Software Arch Linux + Win10
Talking the picture? What a terrible test. All cards should have been tested on 1.2. The bad memory performance could easily be because of 2.0 but code that isn't optimized for it.
All I'm saying is, that's all AMD can squeeze out of OpenCL 2.0.
Feel free to browse that website, the guy did tons of OpenCL tests over time. I'm at work now, I posted the first thing I could find, I can't look more closely.
 

newtekie1

Semi-Retired Folder
Joined
Nov 22, 2005
Messages
28,473 (4.11/day)
Location
Indiana, USA
Processor Intel Core i7 10850K@5.2GHz
Motherboard AsRock Z470 Taichi
Cooling Corsair H115i Pro w/ Noctua NF-A14 Fans
Memory 32GB DDR4-3600
Video Card(s) RTX 2070 Super
Storage 500GB SX8200 Pro + 8TB with 1TB SSD Cache
Display(s) Acer Nitro VG280K 4K 28"
Case Fractal Design Define S
Audio Device(s) Onboard is good enough for me
Power Supply eVGA SuperNOVA 1000w G3
Software Windows 10 Pro x64
If you read these results, you'd think driver stability was actually a big problem, and it really isn't. It makes you think crashes are happening constantly, and I can say, using cards from both camps on a daily basis, that the reality is crashing is really uncommon. I can't even remember the last crash I had, that's how long ago it happened.

And stability is only part of the picture of a good driver, annoying bugs and how quickly they are fixed, how often they are updated(it can be too often as well as not often enough), etc. And again, as someone that uses drivers from both sides daily, I'm going to say right now they are both about even. I can not honestly say I prefer one over the other as they are today.
 
Top