Maybe I’m missing something, but it didn’t look like the GPU was engaging at all. 15fps? That doesn’t seem right. Given that the overlay had a battery percentage reading, and the GPU readings were all zero, I’m guessing this was on a laptop, and it didn’t switch from using the iGPU to using the GPU.
Either that, or NVK has a lot of work to do, and that doesn’t track with recent news about its progress.
OP, is this your test? Can you shed light on the results?
It is with a heavy heart that I have to tell you that NVK’s latest progress has little to do with performance, and that it will take years to achieve performance parity or even remotely near the proprietary drivers.
One thing that should raise morale for us all, is that Nvidia is now actively contributing to the respective FOSS drivers.
Oh really? I thought I saw elsewhere that it had achieved and even exceeded performance of the proprietary driver in another test. Maybe it was just that specific case.
It can be fast in one test and slow in 49 on one generation and on another generation it could be faster on 10 and slower 40. Just the nature of complex software supporting various generation of hardware.
Maybe I’m missing something, but it didn’t look like the GPU was engaging at all. 15fps? That doesn’t seem right. Given that the overlay had a battery percentage reading, and the GPU readings were all zero, I’m guessing this was on a laptop, and it didn’t switch from using the iGPU to using the GPU.
Either that, or NVK has a lot of work to do, and that doesn’t track with recent news about its progress.
OP, is this your test? Can you shed light on the results?
It is with a heavy heart that I have to tell you that NVK’s latest progress has little to do with performance, and that it will take years to achieve performance parity or even remotely near the proprietary drivers.
One thing that should raise morale for us all, is that Nvidia is now actively contributing to the respective FOSS drivers.
NVK is slow at the moment, yes. DX12 just started working as well and is not in mainline yet. This is with a particular PR merged.
Oh really? I thought I saw elsewhere that it had achieved and even exceeded performance of the proprietary driver in another test. Maybe it was just that specific case.
It can be fast in one test and slow in 49 on one generation and on another generation it could be faster on 10 and slower 40. Just the nature of complex software supporting various generation of hardware.