Be Quiet! Pure Power 12 M - 850W ATX 3.0 PSU review
Corsair H170i Elite Capellix XT review
Forspoken: PC performance graphics benchmarks
ASRock Z790 Taichi review
The Callisto Protocol: PC graphics benchmarks
G.Skill TridentZ 5 RGB 6800 MHz CL34 DDR5 review
Be Quiet! Dark Power 13 - 1000W PSU Review
Palit GeForce RTX 4080 GamingPRO OC review
Core i9 13900K DDR5 7200 MHz (+memory scaling) review
Seasonic Prime Titanium TX-1300 (1300W PSU) review
Quick test: Futuremark 3DMark v2.3.3663 Vulkan API Overhead Benchmarks
Futuremark just released 3DMark v2.3.3663 with support for Vulkan in their API overhead test, we ran some quick tests to see what is happeing.
This means you can now compare the API performance of Vulkan, DirectX 12, and DirectX 11 with one easy-to-use test. Vulkan is a new graphics API that provides high-efficiency, low-level access to modern GPUs in a wide variety of devices from PCs to smartphones. APIs like Vulkan and DirectX 12 make better use of multi-core CPUs to streamline code execution and eliminate software bottlenecks, particularly for draw calls. Games typically make thousands of draw calls per frame, but each one creates performance-limiting overhead for the CPU. Vulkan and DirectX 12 reduce that overhead, which means more objects, textures and effects can be drawn to the screen. The 3DMark API Overhead feature test measures API performance by making a steadily increasing number of draw calls. The result of the test is the number of draw calls per second achieved by each API before the frame rate drops below 30 FPS. The Vulkan test replaces the Mantle test found in previous versions. Now I did chart up some results, see below:
The purpose of the test is to compare the relative performance of different APIs on a single system. The API Overhead feature test is not a general-purpose GPU benchmark, and it should not be used to compare graphics cards from different vendors. It more for you to see how much faster or slower DX12 is compared to Vulkan. You'll notice that the AMD Radeon card scores are way off. Again, this is not a graphics GPU test, but a test that shows your system API renderer performance in relation towards your setup. I have no clue about the AMD results as they are, I did run them three times and even re-installed drivers and re-seated the cards into another slot. I also have to mention that in the past we stepped away from the API test as the results back then also showed a lot of platform inconsistency.
Though overall Vulkan might be a notch slower compared to D3D12, it certainly is shaping up to become a very fast API. Talking about platforms, I figured why not quickly compare Ryzen 7 1700 versus Core i7 5960X (both 8-cores / 16-threads).
You will notice that Core i7 5960X is clocked at 4.3 GHz. The Ryzen 7 1700 is clocked at 4.1 GHz, it is the highest frequency we can obtain stable. Not bad really, the 1200 USD Intel processor is faster, especially combined with quad-channel and a 200 MHz x8 cores advantage. That 329 USD Ryzen 7 is holding up nicely.
Now I also ran the Ryzen Platform with the Fury X to be certain there isn't a bug on the X99 platform causing this behaviour:
So moving the Radeon Fury X towards a completely different system did not change the performance bracket at all. There might be a bug in the current AMD drivers, Futuremark still has some fixing to do or it just is what it is.
Quick Test: 3DMark TimeSpy DirectX 12 Benchmarks - 07/15/2016 11:29 AM
For those that missed the news. it seems that Time Spy, the new DirectX 12 benchmark test from Futuremark is available as DLC right now on Steam, coming soon to all Windows editions of 3DMark. With i...
Quick test: DirectX 12 API Overhead Benchmark results - 03/26/2015 08:09 PM
As you guys know, DirectX 12 is going to greatly free up processor utilization, and thus your games can make more draw-calls with your processor. More efficient usage of CPUs with multiple cores is tr...
NVIDIA PhysX Quick Test - 06/20/2008 01:47 PM
As you guys likely know NVIDIA issued a new PhysX supporting driver to the press, which (driver) actually already got leaked. This driver will enable and allow a significant set of Physics functions t...
Agonist
Senior Member
Posts: 4035
Joined: 2008-10-13
Senior Member
Posts: 4035
Joined: 2008-10-13
#5411430 Posted on: 03/23/2017 04:51 PM
For some reason, without touching anything, it says cancelled by user after DX11 ST runs.
For some reason, without touching anything, it says cancelled by user after DX11 ST runs.
Kaarme
Senior Member
Posts: 3311
Joined: 2013-03-10
Senior Member
Posts: 3311
Joined: 2013-03-10
#5411437 Posted on: 03/23/2017 05:02 PM
I guess AMD forgot to send the technology consultation payment to Futuremark.
I guess AMD forgot to send the technology consultation payment to Futuremark.
PrMinisterGR
Senior Member
Posts: 8093
Joined: 2014-09-27
Senior Member
Posts: 8093
Joined: 2014-09-27
#5411449 Posted on: 03/23/2017 05:30 PM
Futuremark just released 3DMark v2.3.3663 with support for Vulkan in their API overhead test, we ran some quick tests to see what is happeing....
Quick test: Futuremark 3DMark v2.3.3663 Vulkan API Overhead Benchmarks
Thanks for the tests man. Any chance to put dots or commas to indicate thousands/millions etc? It's a bit hard to read.
Futuremark just released 3DMark v2.3.3663 with support for Vulkan in their API overhead test, we ran some quick tests to see what is happeing....
Quick test: Futuremark 3DMark v2.3.3663 Vulkan API Overhead Benchmarks
Thanks for the tests man. Any chance to put dots or commas to indicate thousands/millions etc? It's a bit hard to read.
PrMinisterGR
Senior Member
Posts: 8093
Joined: 2014-09-27
Senior Member
Posts: 8093
Joined: 2014-09-27
#5411453 Posted on: 03/23/2017 05:34 PM
No. It's more like GCN is less efficient, although it's being corrected more or less. The only "modern" AMD card on this chart is the 480 and it's faster than its equivalent (the 1060), in modern APIs. Under DX11 you can see that NVIDIA is still almost +80% more draw call efficient, but AMD was starting from something like 600k draw calls and we're currently hovering at around 1.3 million. Still a long way to go, and I'm not sure that it can be done.
A friend with an untouched 6700k and 3200 RAM is telling me he's getting 2.2 million draw calls for his 280x (he had to get a CPU and he's still waiting to check Vega or drops to the 1080Ti price).
EDIT: NVIDIA's Vulkan performance is impressive, their DX12 one not as much. Since both APIs are quite similar, it's probably an indication of driver states.
I guess AMD forgot to send the technology consultation payment to Futuremark.
No. It's more like GCN is less efficient, although it's being corrected more or less. The only "modern" AMD card on this chart is the 480 and it's faster than its equivalent (the 1060), in modern APIs. Under DX11 you can see that NVIDIA is still almost +80% more draw call efficient, but AMD was starting from something like 600k draw calls and we're currently hovering at around 1.3 million. Still a long way to go, and I'm not sure that it can be done.
A friend with an untouched 6700k and 3200 RAM is telling me he's getting 2.2 million draw calls for his 280x (he had to get a CPU and he's still waiting to check Vega or drops to the 1080Ti price).
EDIT: NVIDIA's Vulkan performance is impressive, their DX12 one not as much. Since both APIs are quite similar, it's probably an indication of driver states.
Click here to post a comment for this news story on the message forum.
Senior Member
Posts: 2466
Joined: 2009-04-27
Thanks for this Hilbert!