I’d better move my attention from the equipment to the technology, and when the technology arrives to focus on better equipment. 
1 Like
As far as I’m aware of, HIP performance in its current state is to be compared to NVidia-CUDA, since it is not RT-accelerated. Then, from the only benchmark available the RX7900XT seems about on par with the RTX3090.
Possibly the dual-issue SIMD units need driver work or software enablement to be actually used?
1 Like
No, don’t do that. That’s a really terrible and completely awful way to try and bridge a performance gap. You’re taking away way more than just RT from the lime flavoured GPU and if it has to lose core functionality so the AMD counterpart can be on par then that’s regression for the entire industry. If Michael Phelps swims faster than you because he’s got those genetic webbed toes you can’t chop his feet off before a swim just to even things out.
Doing what you are doing is working on the assumption that the strawberry team will pull a rabbit out of their hat that equals a mature API that’s bordering on 12 years of development.
I’m sorry but I need to keep going back to the fact that you feel that crippling one card to try and achieve some sort of performance parity makes any sense. Are ARC cards using RT? No they are not.
So why is a $289 video card, the A750 hanging out in between $2k+ workstation cards
Intels first real foray into dgpu territory and they stand up and surpass 90% of the hardware from a company that’s been at this for longer than I can remember? It’s not raytracing right now.
I am going to get my hand smacked but performance parity was sold as a “Team green being greedy with the CUDA” narrative for a very long time. It was the greenie meanies that made life miserable, that doesn’t really hold any water beyond the fact that development wise there is disparity, I will give the strawberry lads that.
Look, I am trying to be supportive because nobody wants one dominant flavour in the mix, things will become stagnate in a hurry. HIP Cycles existing is why the older dorks like myself can’t use raytracing and why the newer cards can’t either. OpenCL raytracing works just fine in Luxcore, not that I blame Cycles devs for throwing it in the trash but 3.0 is allegedly retconning the 2nd act of the film, Prorender looks great these days and throws down with ML and raytracing, With Cycles? Nobody gets any pie because of HIP. It shoulda been left in the waffle iron a little longer.
The most frustrating part of it all is those two raytracing platforms I just chooched about?
Blender headhunted the main dev of Luxcore, Blender has AMD devs, or maybe it’s just Brian left but either way, he devs the heck out of Prorender. So I can imagine Luxcore fella and Brian work on Cycles a lot, Luxcore development has stopped for the most part and I assume that Prorender could be even more amazeballs (sorta) if time didn’t have to get siphoned off for non-Prorender things…
So, Cycles HIP existing.
Ate OpenCL for aged AMD devices
Doesn’t provide RT for modern AMD devices.
Kneecapped dev for an engine that did use OpenCL and did RT
Slows down development on a HIP engine that does use RT
I still believe in the red barons which is why I am dicking around with Orochi in the hopes to do something cool but going back to my card being from 200 AD getting anything to work on it over in Archland is a wacky-hacky adventure. Not segfaulting is progress.
3 Likes
There is no Luxcore developer working on Cycles, not sure where that idea came from.
And for AMD, just like other companies they have developers working on their own renderers, working on compilers and drivers, working together with developers of various applications. Your description makes it seems as if it’s a one man operation or something.
Cycles in various cases is being used by hardware vendors to test new APIs and compilers which can then stabilize and get used by other renderers.
3 Likes
Oh my mistake, language barrier. The person in question left a project that was for Blender. So the statement sounded like he left the project for Blender. Left for greener pastures phrasing.
Oh? You got more than one AMD developer? Right on, bsavery is usually the name/speaker I see the most. RT coming soon then?
That’s good, for cycles in that it’s involved in various cases being used by hardware vendors to test new APIS and compilers which can then stabilize and get used by other renderers. I’m happy for cycles for being such a renaissance renderer.
Do you think after those hardware vendors are done testing new APIS and compilers which can then stabilize and get used by other renders that it will be less of a Paradigm Shifting Synergistic Agile Application for Out of the Box Value Added Alignment Leveraging Platform™ and more of a user focused open source tool to foster creative individuals without locking them out due to their socioeconomic status?
FOSS is boss but if you want honest feedback on Cycles AMD HIP, it’s not. HIP created an economic barrier for users that discriminates against those who cannot meet the requirement set out by AMD for HIP after removing their alternative. The lesser option which would have been the OpenCL implementation was then axed. It’s like kicking a person out into the cold, but then knocking them down and stealing their shoes just for good measure.
I know I’m singing the same tune to the same deaf ears, so I’ll try not to take further time away from your fostering of your product and any networking with studios and such you do and I’ll go back to banging stones together in the mud hoping to appease clang,
1 Like
We don’t have N dedicated developers from hardware vendors like that. These developers typically support multiple applications. So they might spend some weeks helping with Cycles integration of a feature, or fix a bug or make an improvement in the compiler or driver, and then move onto something else.
See the last meeting notes for updates on HIP-RT, an initial implementation is being reviewed by me. And the goal is of course for that to be an API other renderers use as well.
We decided to drop OpenCL because it was holding back Cycles development, driver issues and other limitations were making it very hard to add new features. If we were still using OpenCL we’d struggle to support these older architectures as well when there is no official AMD support for them anymore.
Already now when adding for example many lights sampling I’ve had to spend time doing workarounds. But at least with HIP we can ensure that the one compiler version we use works, rather than dealing with a range of OpenCL driver versions and implementations that each have their own bugs and limitations.
4 Likes
The Blender Benchmark is Blender 3.3 based, it needs to be updated to Blender 3.4 to support 7900XT. So that “benchmark result” is using CPU.
@brecht when can this be updated?
I think it was updated? It’s showing results from 3.4.0:
Ah ok great. Thanks…
(it wasn’t in the update log on the page)
Ah yes, I think those are updates for the benchmark launcher, which are usually not needed for new Blender releases.
No, it’s the GPU. I double checked versions.
Unless those NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 users have some real firepower processors, in the 3.4 grouping.
I had to double check, then triple check because there was no way that made any sense but it does, sort of. Compared to a 6900 XT it’s a great gain.
For 3.4
AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT 1183 @ 5 bench
AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT 1646 @ 3 *
AMD Radeon RX 6750 XT 1615.@ 1 *
AMD Radeon RX 6900 XT 2142.@ 1 *
AMD Radeon RX 7900 XT 3461 @ 1 *
Assmathing it on a napkin, that score makes sense. 7900 doubles the transistor count and the compute follows. The score, roughly falls within that. In terms of other hardware it’s a bump in shading units, tmus, rops, rt cores, but just a bump… IE 5376 shading units to the 6900 5120 count. 4 extra c/u,
So my disbelief aside, it not being a CPU aside, that score does make sense and given where it’s predecessors are I don’t think arguments that drivers or anything are holding it back. Always room for more but it’s right in line with what’s been on the table already.
It probably games like a son of a gun but that doesn’t help in this arena. It’s sitting beside a 3070, which can be bought new for $500~
It’s more powerful than the 3070 in a world where it’s doing the raytracing and all the other fancy algorithm-wrapped-in-a-flour-tortilla stuff that is OptiX, but it ain’t.
Prorender does baller stuff with ML, the denoise float16 is your money melon right there. 5x the jambalaya in a 7900 XT, and yeah this stuff is halfarse accurate but close enough.
7900 XT - FP16 (half) performance 103.0 TFLOPS (2:1)
3070 RTX -FP16 (half) performance 20.31 TFLOPS (1:1)
denoise_c3_ldr.pb
denoise_c3_ldr_float16.onnx
denoise_c9_ldr.pb
denoise_c9_ldr_f16.onnx
srgan-03x2x32-273866.pb
esrgan-05x3x32-278391.pb
taau_low_res.pb
taa_upscale_2x_part.pb
upscale2x_c3_rt_f16.onnx
upscale2x_fast.pb
It goes vroom vroom because of this sort of NOTPtiX method.
A second benchmark has hit the 3.4 list.
7900 XTX now.
|AMD Radeon RX 7900 XTX 3783.31
|NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 3748.7914
|NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Ti 3649.66|5|
|AMD Radeon RX 7900 XT 3461.95.1
Is the news speaking the truth about RT in 3.5 for HIP?
When hiprt out in addition to rdan1/vega, no one should use hip, so I think it is better not to interfere with the amd side of the hiprt development progress, including the mood at work，rt is still the main character。
1 Like
You made your point. Now I would appreciate if this thread could go back to constructive feedback on Blender Cycles HIP.
7 Likes
Is there a set of instruction set and API that needs to be called for dual-launch SIMD?
Hi,
I’ve been trying out rocm/HIP the last couple of days mostly on Linux. Except the crashes with viewport rendering on mesa (see Cycles AMD HIP device feedback - #390 by joni999, has a bug report) it’s working quite well for me and the crashes are harder to trigger in 3.4 than in 3.3, it still happens sub 1 minute, always when moving in viewport and not just looking around. It’s avoidable, but still very annoying.
A new issue with 3.4 is that performance got around 8% worse on most devices compared to 3.3 on Linux:
| Device Name | 3.3 | 3.4 | Difference absolute | Relative Score loss in % |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| AMD Radeon RX 6800 XT | 2.268 | 2.127 | 140.36 | 6.19 |
| AMD Radeon RX 6800 | 1.909 | 1.749 | 160.42 | 8.40 |
| AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT | 1.468 | 1.408 | 60.09 | 4.09 |
| AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT | 1.111 | 1.017 | 93.43 | 8.41 |
(data from blender open data with very small sample size, did test 6800 myself though)
While this isn’t massive, considering on windows people got quite a performance uplift even beating former 3.3 Linux scores by quite a bit there has to be some kind of regression here.
5 Likes
I noticed the same, It was independent of ROCM / Mesa on my test so this one appears a Blender 3.4 issue. @TurtleDev you will probably have to start a new bug report. Pretty funny Windows and Linux almost swapped exactly.
| GPU | OS | 3.3 Score | 3.4 Score |
|---|---|---|---|
| 6800 | Windows | 1560.17 | 1972.5 |
| 6800 | Linux | 1909.4 | 1677.88 |
The Linux crash T100353 is possibly drm/amd related however I don’t think anyone is actively investigating it. We may not know what causes this issue for the foreseeable future let alone have a solution.
3 Likes
The 7900xt xfx version runs at a default frequency of 2650mhz with a rendering speed of 20s, which is an improvement in performance.
(96/72)* 2650/2560 is approximately equal to 1.38x , the performance gain of dual-issue SIMD = 1.5/1.38 is approximately equal to 1.087x ,Only an 8.7% performance improvement
| AMD Radeon RX Vega 10 Graphics | HIP | Windows | 3.4.0 | 272392.41 | 1 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AMD Radeon RX Vega 10 Graphics | HIP | Windows | 3.4.0 | 268402.8 | 1 |
Something broke in the HIP benchmarks
1 Like
Some good news. @flavonol @Tpal
ROCm packaged in Debian (unstable) reached usability level for Blender 3.4 / 3.5. These drivers do not need dkms nor any external repositories/packages to work.
I have two Vega II GPUs detected and working. And from my first benchmarks it looks that multi-GPU rendering performance scales almost perfectly.
I plan to do more testing in coming days.
5 Likes