3d Mark - do NVidia shift more load onto the CPU?

Discussion in 'Graphics and Semiconductor Industry' started by g__day, Nov 18, 2003.

  1. Doomtrooper

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2002
    Messages:
    3,328
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Ontario, Canada
    Very Interesting Baron...thanks :idea:
     
  2. Tim Murray

    Tim Murray the Windom Earle of mobile SOCs
    Veteran

    Joined:
    May 25, 2003
    Messages:
    3,278
    Likes Received:
    66
    Location:
    Mountain View, CA
    For someone who knows--does the vertex shader test in 3DMark03 only use VS2.0?
     
  3. dan2097

    Regular

    Joined:
    May 23, 2003
    Messages:
    323
    Likes Received:
    0
    <deleted>
     
  4. Tim

    Tim
    Regular

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2003
    Messages:
    875
    Likes Received:
    5
    Location:
    Denmark
    Wrong all the game test are using VS2.0 the your quote was talking about pixel shaders.
     
  5. dan2097

    Regular

    Joined:
    May 23, 2003
    Messages:
    323
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hehe yeah what I said was completly irrelevant.

    Can you run v2.0 on the cpu? as dx8 class hardware can run the vertex shader test
     
  6. Neeyik

    Neeyik Homo ergaster
    Veteran

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2002
    Messages:
    1,231
    Likes Received:
    45
    Location:
    Cumbria, UK
    No; the only test in 3DMark03 to use VS2.0 vertex shaders is Mother Nature (Game Test 4), everything else is done using VS1.1 routines.
     
  7. Tim Murray

    Tim Murray the Windom Earle of mobile SOCs
    Veteran

    Joined:
    May 25, 2003
    Messages:
    3,278
    Likes Received:
    66
    Location:
    Mountain View, CA
    ah-HA! I figured it was something like that.

    I'll run RightMark again with VS1.1 later... have to jam more painkillers directly into my skull first :)
     
  8. Neeyik

    Neeyik Homo ergaster
    Veteran

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2002
    Messages:
    1,231
    Likes Received:
    45
    Location:
    Cumbria, UK
    This post has piqued my interest a little, so in amongst trying to finish an already late preview, writing 128 reports and proof-reading another 320, I've mucked about with RightMark and a 5900U using 52.16 drivers:

    Low geometry - ambient lighting

    Software vertex processing (via an Athlon 3200)
    FF = 19,536,302 polys/sec
    VS1.1 = 22,315,022 polys/sec
    VS2.0 = 21,005,782 polys/sec

    Pure Hardware vertex processing
    FF = 84,657,312 polys/sec
    VS1.1 = 71,320,248 polys/sec
    VS2.0 = 79,396,648 polys/sec


    High geometry - diffuse & specular (3 point lights) lighting

    Software vertex processing
    FF = 10,119,550 polys/sec
    VS1.1 = 9,688,040 polys/sec
    VS2.0 = 8,650,271 polys/sec

    Pure Hardware vertex processing
    FF = 54,331,712 polys/sec
    VS1.1 = 27,678,146 polys/sec
    VS2.0 = 12,670,155 polys/sec

    From this, you'd have to say that for simple vertex processing, you'd be a bit of a muppet to offload it to the CPU but there's not much between the software processing and the 5900U when it's VS2.0 shaders doing lots of vertex lighting.
     
  9. Doomtrooper

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2002
    Messages:
    3,328
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Ontario, Canada
    3Dmark 03 reacts differently though... your results match other rightmark numbers put up earlier. So is this a application detected optimization or 3Dmark 03 issue.
     
  10. Neeyik

    Neeyik Homo ergaster
    Veteran

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2002
    Messages:
    1,231
    Likes Received:
    45
    Location:
    Cumbria, UK
    Hmm, I don't think picture is quite so clear now. I've run 3DMark03 over a range of resolutions and two CPU speeds (altered only via the multiplier, so everything else is the same); plus I've done same with RightMark - the settings for which are high geometry, diffuse and specular (3 point lights), rendered with VS1.1 and PS1.1, and again with VS1.1 and PS1.4 (to be more like 3DMark03 basically).

    [​IMG]

    This time you can see that there is a performance drop between the CPU speeds in RightMark (unlike with The Baron's tests). In terms of percentage, the difference between the RM scores is very similar to the difference in the VS test with 3DMark03.
     
  11. Tim Murray

    Tim Murray the Windom Earle of mobile SOCs
    Veteran

    Joined:
    May 25, 2003
    Messages:
    3,278
    Likes Received:
    66
    Location:
    Mountain View, CA
    I guess some VS1.x functions are being offloaded to the CPU... but then again, wouldn't VS2.0 functions include VS1.x features, so those should be offloaded to the CPU to some degree as well?
     
  12. Neeyik

    Neeyik Homo ergaster
    Veteran

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2002
    Messages:
    1,231
    Likes Received:
    45
    Location:
    Cumbria, UK
    But why do that when there is such a difference between the VS1.1 caps of the 5900U and the Athlon 3200+ (see further above in this thread for the original RightMark tests that I did)? This is just pure guess-the-reason-why stuff but does the compiler work for PS1.1 shaders? The NVIDIA docs seemed to suggest that this isn't the case but if it was, and the drivers are doing the examining-reordering, could the performance difference be down to the slower compiling? Any other spurious and random guesswork?
     
  13. Tim Murray

    Tim Murray the Windom Earle of mobile SOCs
    Veteran

    Joined:
    May 25, 2003
    Messages:
    3,278
    Likes Received:
    66
    Location:
    Mountain View, CA
    I thought the compiler wasn't running in real-time--so basically, it would run while the shaders are being loaded and all. But, if it was in real-time, you would have low FPS in the beginning that would quickly increase to a much higher FPS. Can Rightmark make charts?
     
  14. Doomtrooper

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2002
    Messages:
    3,328
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Ontario, Canada
    Pretty sure it exports to excel only.
     
  15. digitalwanderer

    digitalwanderer Dangerously Mirthful
    Legend

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2002
    Messages:
    18,992
    Likes Received:
    3,533
    Location:
    Winfield, IN USA
    Excel makes nice charts though. :)
     
  16. Patric Ojala

    Newcomer

    Joined:
    May 12, 2003
    Messages:
    31
    Likes Received:
    0
    There is one type of GPU tasks you can shovel to the CPU if that is otherwise a bottleneck for your GPU - all (or some) vertex shaders.

    Unlike most games that still use legacy fixed function for all vertex processing, 3DMark03 uses vertex shaders exclusively. Games will get there too, but when is a good question. Vertex shaders can be executed on the CPU too, and at decent speeds if the CPU is a fast one. DirectX offers a flag to execute all vertex shaders either on the GPU or the CPU, and there is a switch for this in the 3DMark03 settings you can play with. The drivers however can be implemented to identify that 3DMark03 is running, and since we all know the default game tests above all measure the GPU performance, additional performance can be gained by pushing all or some vertex shaders up to the CPU.

    This was (and maybe still is) extensively done by the drivers when running the nature scene of 3DMark2001. GPUs back then were not so fast executing vertex shaders, and pushing those up to the CPU in secrecy usually gave quite a performance boost.

    Then again, our driver optimization guidelines forbid detecting that 3DMark is running, meaning that this kind of benchmark specific vertex shader execution on the CPU is forbidden. You can't push all vertex shaders in all applications to the CPU, since most games keep the CPU busy doing other things.

    You can use a feature tests in 3DMark03 to investigate this issue further. The Ragtroll test is heavy on the vertex shaders, but also has quite an amount of physics for keeping the CPU busy. If some driver gets a high 3DMark score due to a fast CPU, but the Ragtroll score does not compare similarly, that driver may, against our guidelines, push vertex shaders to the CPU.
     
  17. Neeyik

    Neeyik Homo ergaster
    Veteran

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2002
    Messages:
    1,231
    Likes Received:
    45
    Location:
    Cumbria, UK
    Sorry to bring this thread back up but I've done a more complete RightMark testing:

    [​IMG]

    Low = low geometry, ambient lighting, 640 x 480
    High = high geometry, diffuse & specular, 3 point lights, 640 x 480

    Busy finishing a now VERY late preview - make of those figures what you will.
     
  18. Tim Murray

    Tim Murray the Windom Earle of mobile SOCs
    Veteran

    Joined:
    May 25, 2003
    Messages:
    3,278
    Likes Received:
    66
    Location:
    Mountain View, CA
    Intriguing. I'll try to corroborate later.

    Uttar, do you have any enlightening commentary here? :p
     
  19. g__day

    Regular

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2002
    Messages:
    580
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    Sydney Australia
    Patric, Baron, Neeyik and everyone else

    Thanks for taking this so diligently forward!
     
Loading...

Share This Page

  • About Us

    Beyond3D has been around for over a decade and prides itself on being the best place on the web for in-depth, technically-driven discussion and analysis of 3D graphics hardware. If you love pixels and transistors, you've come to the right place!

    Beyond3D is proudly published by GPU Tools Ltd.
Loading...