Post Your OpenGL Linux Benchmarks

Holy balls! That titan X build :O

I know he did, but much easier to summarize with the exact same test. From http://unigine.com/

800x600 Fullscreen? Cmon. Who needs to know that :)

No need to make it harder then it is.

Made this thread for comparison in mind, (Specially vs Windows)

I know, but can you do the same test, like we did?

Non Phoronix, from http://unigine.com/

I will be making open source comparisons aswell :))

It is the same test you ran. And the drivers are the latest AMD proprietary ones.

The results are just put out in a different manner. they say the same thing yours do. Just yours looks prettier.

Low settings:

Ultra settings:

1 Like

See, everyone?

Like this. Easy to see, compare and everything else!

Thanks for your input. But try to make it in 1080p..

You will not get such high scores then and we cant compare to well, when everyone lists different resolutions

Thank you for creating this thread, it was fun to benchmark my system and share the results first time.

1 Like

Sorry, but I cant make it 1080p since my monitor is only 1280x1024.

i don't know, that resolution is maxed out at 1280x1024. Not 1080p.. What would the results look like at 1920x1080?

If you want to keep it easy to compare, you need to include the same resolution across the board. At least mine showed all the resolutions my system could output. That way you can compare apples to apples.

the settings need to be identical across the board in order to properly compare. Or, you can run the benchmark with the Phoronix Test Suite located in the stock Apt Repos. they will show everything from FPS to frametimes etc.

In the case of the results I posted, those are the Average FPS. The results you are most likely to care about. Further analysis can be found on the OpenBenchmarking website.

Thread only said post your opengl Linux benchmarks and OP had 1080p there was nothing informing me that 1080p was requirement.

Exactly! I can compare my results to yours because PTS ran ALL the available resolutions my system could output.

Try these other Gaming tests. It shows that the Proprietary AMD drivers make a big difference:

http://openbenchmarking.org/result/1503310-BE-AMDOPENSO56

Okay np,

We could compare at 1280x1024 also but that would not make much sense in most other comparisons, which is why 1080p was picked

ill rerun the tests when I get home. Im currently at work.

1 Like

Yes i agree, but the Phonorix Test Suite is just too comprehensive.

Then we all needed to do that test, which would make things to complicated imo

But i will thank you for your efforts and your time!

Fedora 22, open source drivers, AMD Radeon 280X.

Never mind the incorrect GPU model string.

1 Like

@Zippy_Parmesian it doesnt detect the card properly but seems to run fine, its just because its the open drivers.

@phoenix323 I was just going to suggest people say what drivers there using :D

Your results are interesting, what version of the drviers are you using?

Heres mine.

AMD 270x
open radeonsi drivers, using the latest mesa git.

glxinfo | grep OpenGL

OpenGL vendor string: X.Org
OpenGL renderer string: Gallium 0.4 on AMD PITCAIRN (DRM 2.42.0, LLVM 3.8.0)
OpenGL core profile version string: 4.1 (Core Profile) Mesa 11.0.0-devel (git-a90aa54)
OpenGL core profile shading language version string: 4.10
OpenGL core profile context flags: (none)
OpenGL core profile profile mask: core profile
OpenGL core profile extensions:
OpenGL version string: 3.0 Mesa 11.0.0-devel (git-a90aa54)
OpenGL shading language version string: 1.30
OpenGL context flags: (none)
OpenGL extensions:
OpenGL ES profile version string: OpenGL ES 3.0 Mesa 11.0.0-devel (git-a90aa54)
OpenGL ES profile shading language version string: OpenGL ES GLSL ES 3.00
OpenGL ES profile extensions:

Compared to phoronix's benchmarks of the 270x on the catalyst drivers, its 9 fps slower on average (im assuming they use averages) which isnt bad at all.

Now who says the open drivers are crap :p

1 Like

I'm using the Fedora 22 stable repository. Works relatively nicely overall.

OpenGL vendor string: X.Org
OpenGL renderer string: Gallium 0.4 on AMD TAHITI
OpenGL core profile version string: 3.3 (Core Profile) Mesa 10.6.3 (git-ccef890)
OpenGL core profile shading language version string: 3.30
OpenGL core profile context flags: (none)
OpenGL core profile profile mask: core profile
OpenGL core profile extensions:
OpenGL version string: 3.0 Mesa 10.6.3 (git-ccef890)
OpenGL shading language version string: 1.30
OpenGL context flags: (none)
OpenGL extensions:
OpenGL ES profile version string: OpenGL ES 3.0 Mesa 10.6.3 (git-ccef890)
OpenGL ES profile shading language version string: OpenGL ES GLSL ES 3.00

Very nice with some open source Benchmarks

Thanks

My CPU isn't running at 3.3, it's 3.8 (x38 multiplier, 1.344V).
I also really should look into the graphics setup because I have the distinct impression that it only benched on one card instead of both.

Linux has support for SLI ?