AMD hardware

I've known for some time now that AMD has a serious lack of effort on their native implementation of OpenGL on Linux, especially when used for gaming. Not to mention their proprietary (binary) graphics-driver: "AMD Catalyst", which is a story all on it's own...

They JUST RECENTLY aqcuired OpenGL v4.5-compatibility, which by now is over 1 year old! In technology-tems, that's just sad.

They released ('2013 for the wider public) an in-house developed perf-tool (GPUPerfServer2), for optimizing Linux games using OpenGL. Though they did *NOT* release a linux client for this client/server framework; only a linux-based server for running local OpenGL-games, of which they could then connect to via the OSX- / Windows-client (figures...).


A couple of days ago, I stumbled upon this picture in a Google+ post with the following title "Feral Interactive Buys AMD Hardware To Optimize Linux Games":

http://news.softpedia.com/news/feral-interactive-buys-more-amd-hardware-to-optimized-linux-games-490006.shtml?utm_content=buffer4c869&utm_medium=social&utm_source=plus.google.com&utm_campaign=buffer

Are developer-companies actually taking their own steps towards Linux-specific hardware opimization?

It would seem so :) and I hope this could start as a trend for similar game development companies in the coming future.

AMD Catalyst VS Gallium3D

Ok, I'll admit to fronting AMD's graphic-cards the past few years... but, that ain't happening anymore. After struggling with *broken* driver-updates the past 2, I'm getting quite fed up.

Purging FGLRX and all it's components EVERY TIME THEY GET UPDATED is seriously testing my patience. Not to mention the piss-poor OpenGL performance in heavy-3d-engine games (especially games that feature NVIDIAs PhysX).

The bugs, video-artifacts and crashes eventually got so bad that I actually had to revert to the open-sauce driver (Gallium3D / MESA), just to play my Steam-games... not that video-acceleration worked flawlessly either (VLC / XBMC).

And I have to say; with the right config Gallium3D can deliver as good, if not even better 3D-performance than the binary proprietary driver ever could. Gallium3D/MESA works, but not perfectly. If you plan on gaming with an AMD-card on Linux, their binary driver (FGLRX) is the safer bet.

Researching AMD / NVIDIA lately got me angry on both holds, but for different reasons.

AMD for being (completely) incompetent (Linux-)driver-wise. I kind of suspect they're trying the old "your shit is unsupported, buy new shit!"-routine to pressure new sales. Well, good luck with that AMD... you'll need it. Especially with that crappy driver.

NVIDIA for dropping more lock-in effects (like: PhysX / GameWorks / HairWorks) than actual bug-fixes and/or updates to their driver(s). But at least their driver works!

So, next time I'm thinking of upgrading my graphics, the choice will be fairly easy... NVIDIA.

AMD; seriously... get your shit together!

AMD Radeon HD 6xxx / 7xxx / GCN

I must admit,. still being able to run newer 3D-accelerated games (2014+) on Linux, at acceptable resolutions (720p/1080p), on a rather outdated (but not deprecated) AMD Radeon HD 66xx-series discrete GPU ('2012) is quite amazing.

Sure, there are hiccups with certain games (mostly b/c of the cross-platform game-engine selected for development), but they'll get ironed out (eventually...) I'm not worried ;)

And, yes... I realize certain games are optimized for Nvidia-cards, but AMD is finally catching up on driver-compatibility / -support and -optimization.

The open-source Linux-driver (Radeon Gallium3D) and the proprietary Linux-driver (Catalyst / "Omega") both showed amazing feature-progress and bug-fixing in 2014, and the Catalyst-driver even benchmarked better than the Windows-version: http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=amd_cat_winlin2014&num=1.

Performance and feature additions for 2014:

• OpenMAX / AMD video encode, UVD for older AMD GPUs.
• various new OpenGL extensions.
• continued work on OpenCL.
• power management improvements.
• ...and the start of open-source HSA.

The benefits are mostly for the newer HD 7xxx / GCN(GraphicsCoreNext)-series of GPU's, but, the driver-tests also showed the HD 6xxx-series (3+ years old) was still improving on both performance and bug-fixes.

From personal experience, gaming on the HD 6xxx-series is adequate for newer games (2013-2014+). But, if you want awesomesauce eyecandy graphics, tip: go for a higher series-range card.

I currently have a Sapphire Radeon HD 6670 1GB 64-bit GDDR5 PCIe-2.1 discrete graphics-card in my h3x4c0m box, and the card sports a GPU with a total of 480 stream-processors. I got the card b/c my deprecated Nvidia-card sported a whopping 48(!) CUDA-cores (lol), suffice to say; it should have been binned a long time ago, or at least moved over to a crap-box to act as a PVR or TV-tuner or something.

---

If you are a hardcore ultra-gamer, stick with Nvidia. But, AMD is still catching up, so keep an eye out for them as they have proven (2014) their game on Linux, and maybe even accelerating even newer methods of both integrated graphics (APU+GPU) and discrete graphics (GPU) in the near future ;)

Phoronix article-links:
http://hardware.slashdot.org/story/14/12/27/2234222/phoronix-lauds-amds-open-source-radeon-driver-progress-for-2014?sdsrc=rel
http://linux.slashdot.org/story/15/01/03/1426208/amd-catalyst-linux-driver-catching-up-to-and-beating-windows?utm_source=rss1.0mainlinkanon&utm_medium=feed

Powered by Linux :)

AMD FGLRX + Steam for Linux

During these past 2 years of testing Steam-for-Linux betas and various Linux-based/-ported games I have been using a mid-range nvidia graphics-accelerator. Which has been fine. But I wanted a little more kick from the GPU.

DOOM 3: BFG Edition (non-steam version) - running natively on Linux.

After visiting a gamer-friend with years of bleeding-edge hardware experience, especially related to full HD 3D-rendering, I decided to go over to AMD-based stream-processor gfx-cards. My friend really recommended AMD due to their aqcuirement of the graphics-company ATi in 2006. Having both CPU-production and GPU-production under the same company really put them ahead of other CPU-vendors in terms of graphics-performance, both in integrated and discrete graphics-solutions.

I have to note that laptops sporting AMD GPU's (integrated graphics-cards) don't work so well with the proprietary Catalyst-driver, I have tried to make it work on several occasions, but the driver (Catalyst) always seems to crap out. Unless you REALLY know what you are doing (manually tuning the Catalyst-driver), I would not recommend using Catalyst on laptops or notebooks.

ONLY use the Catalyst-driver if you are using a gaming-rig (desktop PC) with a discrete (separate component) graphics-card installed.

Space Hulk - running natively on Linux.

AMDs Catalyst graphics-driver had quite a few improvements the last few years as well, so I was eager to test it out on Linux and see for myself.

Left 4 Dead 2 - running natively on Linux.

The proprietary driver worked rather well (for the most part), but it still suffers from a set of annoying bugs (window-manager artifacts, exiting fullscreen HD video won't reset to default resolution, etc.), but not as annoying as they used to be in the start... believe me (video-tearing, 3D-tearing, kernel panics, etc.).

Trine 2 - running natively on Linux.

For 3D-accelerated games, it works really good. Impressively good. The lower high-end card I decided to opt for raised my rigs eyecandy-potential at least tenfold(!). After realizing this, I would really recommend AMD's graphics to any serious gaming-enthusiast looking for OP graphics that does not compromise the gaming-experience.

Darwinia - running natively on Linux.

To put it rather simply: it just works, better than I expected, but not without the odd bug or two...

DOTA 2 - running natively on Linux.

My final verdict: I would recommend AMD graphics-cards to hardcore gaming-enthusiasts who doesn't get shocked by an odd bug or two (at least, not serious bugs anyway), however, I would NOT recommend it to average-joe.

FEZ - running natively on Linux.

---

ACCELERATOR-TIP:
To enable video-accelerator (VA-)chips on discrete AMD-based (Radeon/HD) graphics-cards (on Linux), run the following command in a terminal on Ubuntu Desktop or Linux Mint:

sudo apt-get install xvba-va-driver libva-glx1 libva-egl1 vainfo

These libraries and drivers prevents video-artifacts/-tearing, stabilizes video-movement, de-processes video-interlacing and similar video-issues.

---

I will be testing and experimenting with the open-source 3D/video driver for AMD-based cards at a later date, namely the Gallium3D-driver. And I'll be posting about it too, so stay tuned...

AMD + SoC + ARM

The previous post was about AMDs current bugdet-line mobile processors. Before that, I posted (in Norwegian) about their plans for future mobile solutions.

They are basing their new budget-line / mobile processors on the "Jaguar" microarchitecture (the pre-decessing C- and E-series are "Brazos" based), and will sport 64-bit dual- or quad-core ("Bobcat" x86-cores) with integrated Radeon 8000 graphics (80-core GPU), significantly outperforming any "Atom"-chips with integrated graphics from Intel.

The new "AMD Embedded G-series System-on-Chip" sets will be made in two versions (or architectures): x86 and ARM. Determining which architecture a chip is based on, is as easy as looking at the CPU-logo; the ARM-version will have an "A" in the lower right corner of the logo and the x86-version will have an "X" (as shown in the picture below).

AMDs "Embedded G-series SoC" seems to be direct competition against Intels "Atom" budget-line. CPU-vendor competitiveness is, as we all know (at least the one's paying attention), a good thing :-P

It will be exciting to see how the combination ARM+Radeon will operate and behave performance-wise :-) since I've been an avid embedded (ARM ) fan for years, it'll also be quite interesting to see AMD play with both CISC- and RISC-based designs in the same series.

AMD press-release:
http://www.amd.com/us/press-releases/Pages/amd-embedded-gseries-2013apr23.aspx

Ultrabook for my sister

I was recently asked by a family-member to look for a decent study-laptop for my sister. I'll admit I was kind of thrilled. I was playing around with the idea of finding a low-budget laptop, with decent specifications. Having done a machine-architecture report for school (x86/x64) last year, I had become thoroughly aware of what AMD has been doing lately.

I have always been a fan of AMD. Mainly because of their support for hardware-hacking (NOTE: this voids any warranty) and / or chip overclocking (in many cases also voids any warranty), and their clever innovation of techniques (amd64/APUs). And last but not least, their open and full support of FOSS.

In my report, I wrote about AMDs budget-line processors; the "Fusion" C-series and E-series, direct competitors to Intels "Atom" budget-line processors. In fact, the C-chips match similar Atom-chips in both TDP (Thermal Design Power) and clock-frequency (GHz). Whereas the E-series is higher clocked, resulting in a higher TDP, but also making it more similar to an Atom-chip system paired with a dedicated GPU (e.g. ION2).

My sisters computing-needs do not require massive number-crunching abilities, but it shouldn't be sluggish in operation either, so I went for the high-end mobile-solution: AMD E-450 (codename: Zacate) APU (Accelerated Processing Unit) used in a 13,3" LED-screen Asus model U32U laptop with 4GB DDR3 RAM.

The AMD E-450 is a 64-bit dual-core ("Bobcat" low-power x86-cores @ 1,65GHz) processor with an integrated Radeon HD 6320 GPU on the same die (which AMD markets as a so-called APU-chip), with a total TDP of 18 watts.

(The basic idea behind this type of system, is that: the stripped, low-power x86-cores (x2) does most of the general-purpose processing, but, hands over floating-point unit calulations to the GPU-cores on the same die, thereby eliminating both process load-balancing and CPU-GPU inter-communication delays.)

Asus product-link:
https://www.asus.com/Notebooks_Ultrabooks/U32U/

When unboxing the machine, I was pleasantly surprised :-) with the battery firmly locked-in the thing didn't weigh more than 1,55 kg! Didn't take up much space when closed either so it was a perfect carry-on companion and study-tool.

First boot took a few minutes, Windows always does at "first-boot".

Running Windows Update took around 4,5 hours to complete from a fresh install, after downloading everything that is (on a 2Mbps cable-DSL connection no less :-P *shrug*).

Installing Microsoft Office 2010 (with the help of an external USB 2.0 CD-ROM drive) actually didn't take all that long, and it ran like a dream.

Overall the CPU-response was acceptable when installing and pretty good in operation. It won't blow away anything with 4GB of RAM, but in combination with AMDs Fusion (referred to as a: Heterogeneous System Architecture by AMD) chipset and APU-chip, it didn't do half bad for an ultrabook-like laptop.

This was my first ultrabook-like experience, and I must say, I am impressed :-) I want one! Strictly speaking, the U32U does not fit the ultrabook-specification (being an Intel-trademark, and the U32U being AMD-based).

Personally (speaking as a poweruser), I would probably cram at least 8GB of RAM into the machine afterwards. And replace the 320GB HDD with an SSD for both system-speed and machine-weight. But for my sister, it was perfect! :-)

I might also add that I actually own two machines with Atom-processors, and the E-450 blew them both away on graphics and processing-power.

Edit:
I had to add a total of 8GB DDR3 RAM modules to the machine. She complained that it was getting sluggsish after a period of time. I had apparently not anticipated her usage-patterns good enough. 4GB of RAM was a little weak, especially if you want to run office-suites and similar resource-hogging software.

AMD, SoC og ARM.

AMDs nye satsing på bærbare enheter heter "AMD Embedded G-series System-on-Chip" (kort: SoC), basert på AMDs nye Jaguar mikroarkitektur.

AMDs pressemelding:
http://www.amd.com/us/press-releases/Pages/amd-embedded-gseries-2013apr23.aspx

Det er nok den nye strømgjerrige serien som skal konkurrere direkte med Intels "Atom"-serie (benyttet i NAS-bokser, nettbrett, mini-laptoper, osv.).

Brikkene skal lages i to arkitekturer: ARM og x86. Om brikken er ARM- eller x86-basert ses nede i høyre hjørne av logoen hvor det blir trykt en "A" for ARM, og en "X" for x86 (bildet ovenfor viser en x86-basert brikke). De vil også komme med to eller fire kjerner som vil kjøre på en klokkefrekvens mellom 1 til 2 GHz. Grafikkmessig stiller AMD seg bedre enn Intel. Disse brikkene har integrert GPU basert på Radeon 8000 som i følge AMD gir opptil 5 ganger bedre grafikkytelse enn tilsvarende "Atom"-prosessorer fra Intel.

Personlig liker jeg veldig at AMD leker med å blande CISC / RISC i en brikke-serie, og det vil bli voldsomt spennende å se hvordan brikke-kombinasjonen ARM / Radeon vil oppføre seg i bruk.

Hardware.no-artikkel:
http://www.hardware.no/artikler/dette-er-amds-nye-atom-konkurrent/132867

Oppgradering?

Blir nok heller satsning på Vishera mikro-arkitekturen hvis jeg skal oppgradere kjerne-systemet :-) FX-8350s etterkommer :-) ekte "octa-core" 5GHz ulåst FX-prosessor :-p

Link:
http://www.hardware.no/artikler/amd-planlegger-trolig-ny-raskinn-prosessor/132573

AMD (Jaguar?) x8 x86_64 chips? :P

Are these AMDs new "Jaguar" x8 x86_64 custom prototype chips destined for PS4/Xbox720? :P Could be... :)

Upgrade?

At the moment, I usually sit on an AMD Phenom II X6 workstation/server/gaming-rig. But I'm thinking of upgrading to AMDs Bulldozer Vishera "true" octa-core micro-architecture.

With an octa-core based CPU running under the hood, I'll be able to compute data-loads / -streams that will be more common in the time coming.

Not that more cores are absolutely necessary, nor instantly, but with coming gaming-consoles sporting custom octa-core chips, homebrew and the like will demand (more powerful, and in some cases, distributed) computing-power.

6 cores (hexa-core) running @ 3GHz is plenty enough for most tasks today, from mundane (simple 3D) flash-games to more comprehensive high-definition 3D gaming. But 2 extra cores and an extra GHz of clock-frequency will definitely raise the bar enough to postpone sluggishness and lag.

AMD vs. Intel = historie?

Det kan bli ganske sørgelig utvalg av entusiast-komponenter med høy ytelse dersom prosessor-konkurransen til Intel og AMD nå tar helt slutt.

Ref:
http://www.hardware.no/artikler/slik-skal-amd-komme-tilbake/115184

Men det kan også tenkes at AMD verrasker oss alle med nye typer mobil-prosessorer, eller nye måter å sette sammen teknologier for å oppnå bedre tekniske resultater.

Det spekuleres rundt om på nettet for tiden om mobil-prosessorer (Reduced Instruction Set Computing) faktisk kan klare å oppnå like gode hastigheter som desktop-prosessorer (Complex Instruction Set Computing). De siste årene har jo vist at gigahertz-hastigheter i mobile enheter definitivt er mulig, så dette kan ikke avvises helt.

Som ivrig AMD-fan i mange år blir det spennende for meg å se hva de finner på.

De har i alle fall ikke tenkt å bare gi opp med det første :)

Litt bakgrunnshistorie om AMD (engelsk wikipedia):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanced_Micro_Devices

h3x4c0m

OK. Computer-building has always been a hobby of mine. Later years have shown that high-end components don't always have to cost an arm and a leg. So I figured I'd do a build-project where I would build a hybrid workstation / VM-lab / gaming-rig, with as much computing-power as my limited budget would allow.

The following became my project-goals:

• Build an HTPC (Home Theatre PC) with std.-dimensions for rack/stack placement.
• Get the most powerful and technically up-to-date cpu for as little as possible, most likely an alternative to Intel (AMD).
• Shove in, at a very minimum, at least 8GB of RAM with decent heat spreading.
• Make due with the stock cpu-fan and add cabinet fans accordingly.
• Use a customizable O.C.(overclocking)-motherboard for tweaking-purposes.

I figured I'd base the machine on an AMD chipset and processor because they've always been more on the cheaper end, compared to Intel, without losing too much of the competing processing-power (allthough AMD chips generate quite a lot of heat in contrast to Intel's).

The basic assembly was quite easy. Every screw and spacer needed was included with the cabinet to ensure a good fit for the MicroATX motherboard.

Installation of the components on the motherboard was also pretty straightforward. Although I forgot to lock the cpu-chip into the cradle before I fastened the cpu-fan over it :s doh!

Silverstone's starter-level cabinet "Milo" did the job I wanted it to. It was slimline and spec-standard so it fit nicely on my Denon receiver with a Pioneer DVD player and a Canal Digital PVR on top of it, all without over-heating any metal-surfaces.

System-disk. Period ;)

Only annoying thing I didn't think about was if I wanted to add a PCIx graphics card, it has to be a "low-profile" spec-card to fit in the low cabinet. But for now the embedded HDMI port on the M/B will do (I eventually added a low-end GeForce GT520 1GB GDDR3).

I could fit up to 3 hard-drives total, but I only used a 250GB Western Digital hard-drive for personal files (/home Linux partition) and a 60GB ForceGT Corsair SSD for the OS (Linux). The SSD was a definite improvement both on heavy word-load effectiveness and boot-up (it boots Debian GNU/Linux / Ubuntu Desktop / Linux Mint in less than a few seconds!)

A metal bar is used to keep the cabinet sturdy, and does an excellent job.

One thing I noticed when installing the OS after first bootup, was that all the six cores (yes ;) that's SIX cpu-cores :p) reported an individual total processing-power of a mere 800MHz! WTF!?

This couldn't be! 800MHz x 6!? At first I figured it was the Cool'n'Quiet-feature of AMDs processor-lines that throttled everything down to save power and/or cool the cpu. This was not the case.

As I read the motherboard webpage, I realized the cpu was released after the motherboard. And even though it listed the cpu as compatible, it also said it required an EFI-update to be able to take full advantage of a hexa-core processor.
Well, that figures... So, I aggravatingly downloaded the mentioned EFI binary-blob on a USB-stick, and proceeded to flash the motherboard.

After booting up the newly upgraded firmware, it listed the cpu with the correct specifications :) YAY-HOORAY! ;D

Without discrete graphics card.

With discrete graphics-card.
* Asus GeForce GT520 2GB 64-bit GDDR3 PCie-2.

I haven't really had the time to properly benchmark the performance yet. And I think I'll postpone it until I have a proper cpu cooling-system (preferably liquid-cooling, but I haven't been able to find a low-profile cooling-system that will fit the SilverStone Milo HTPC-cabinet yet).

For now, it has shown exceptional potential as a file-/web-server, daily mailer/browser, HD multimedia powerhouse and compilation workstation :] so I'm really looking forward to pushing it to the edge :D

Next project is setting up an advanced NAS box, preferrably with iSCSI-support for Virtual Machine network-storage :]

---

NAS-project update: http://blog.pizslacker.org/2012/02/nas-for-vmwaremediafiles.html

---

Discrete graphics upgrade (Sep'2014):

New (as of Sept'2014) Sapphire Radeon HD 6670 1GB 64-bit GDDR5 PCIe-2.1 discrete graphics-card
+
Supplementary (for separate iSCSI-subnet) MiniPCIe Gigabit Ethernet card

With new Sapphire Radeon HD 6670 1GB 64-bit GDDR5 PCIe-2.1 discrete graphics-card.