• Thanks: 1

Topic: Performance in SVP 4

Hi guys, first off I just want to say that I absolutely love SVP and can't imagine watching movies without it.

Now I'm wondering if there are any plans on moving more of the processing to the gpu. The main menu, while somewhat confusing, only needs setting up once with a few and far updates to settings. My biggest suggestion for improvement would be having my GPU (780ti) putting in some actual horsepower to get that silky smooth 60 fps.

I did see the potential 40% improvement in FRC performance which is great. However I'm curious as to what you guys think about this. Also I really hope that your campaign succeeds, I pitched in as soon as I found out.

Re: Performance in SVP 4

badhomaks
Now I'm wondering if there are any plans on moving more of the processing to the gpu.

No. Not now.
Right now we'd like to do what needs to be done before anything else.

Re: Performance in SVP 4

Also consider that it's much more difficult (at least currently) to deal with a GPU-bottleneck in SVP than a CPU-bottleneck.

4 Reply by Mystery (edited by Mystery 27-06-2015 04:07:10)

  • Thanks: 33

Re: Performance in SVP 4

Part of the issue with CPU-bottleneck is that CPU technology has been totally stagnant for the past 2 years! It should have doubled during that period, but it turns out the laptop I bought 2 years ago has a CPU twice stronger than a brand new laptop at the same price today.

If you made SVP for Mobile, then CPU performance would have doubled.

5 Reply by Nintendo Maniac 64 (edited by Nintendo Maniac 64 27-06-2015 03:58:35)

Re: Performance in SVP 4

Not entirely - CPU tech has mostly stagnated except in core-count (and power consumption), and SVP is one of the few things that actually likes as many cores as you can throw at it.

Though one could argue that it's because AMD had a turd with Bulldozer which caused Intel to be lazy, but let's not turn this into an AMD vs Intel flamewar...

  • Thanks: 33

Re: Performance in SVP 4

It's not an AMD vs Intel thing. It's about Mobile vs Desktop.

7 Reply by Nintendo Maniac 64 (edited by Nintendo Maniac 64 27-06-2015 04:24:29)

Re: Performance in SVP 4

Well for one thing, before smart phones, raw CPU performance was hardly an issue and the main concern was purely battery life, so there was considerably less R&D on ARM CPUs and similar.  Therefore, we should not be surprised that once smartphones came onto the scene that ARM CPUs started being developed and invested into on a much greater scale.

In other words, it's more like the rapid development of ARM CPUs is making up for all the years before hand - the performance increase of ARM CPUs in the last 8 years or so is very comparable to the performance increase in desktop CPUs from the mid 90s to the mid 2000s, at which point one could argue that all the low-hanging fruit architecturally were taken care of.

  • Thanks: 33

Re: Performance in SVP 4

Yeah. And even for laptop and desktops, the investments are being made to reduce power consumption and heat. It's considered "strong enough" and they're investing to make it more mobile.

Re: Performance in SVP 4

Nintendo Maniac 64
turd with Bulldozer

My FX @4300 is exactly as fast as i7 @4000 in SVP wink

10 Reply by Nintendo Maniac 64 (edited by Nintendo Maniac 64 27-06-2015 09:34:12)

Re: Performance in SVP 4

FX _3__ CPUs are Piledriver, not Bulldozer.

Ok, technically Bulldozer can refer to its refined versions as well (like Steamroller and Excavator) but in this case I meant Zambezi.


Also, just saying i7 could mean anything from a 2-core/4-thread Westmere to an 8-core/16-thread Haswell-E.

Re: Performance in SVP 4

core-per-core FX-x3xx has the same performance in SVP as IvyBridge and ~10% lower than Haswell
for the half of Haswell's price wink

12 Reply by Nintendo Maniac 64 (edited by Nintendo Maniac 64 27-06-2015 09:41:32)

Re: Performance in SVP 4

8xxx?  That's impossible - that'd mean the 8120 would have identical performance to the 8350.

Re: Performance in SVP 4

ok, FX-x3xx  big_smile

14 Reply by Nintendo Maniac 64 (edited by Nintendo Maniac 64 27-06-2015 09:48:09)

Re: Performance in SVP 4

Chainik wrote:

ok, FX-x3xx  big_smile

But that would mean the 3.3GHz 8300 would perform identically to the 4.4GHz 9370. tongue

Also, if you're saying per-core, then technically an 83xx would be almost twice as fast because an Ivy Bridge i7 is a 4core/8thread CPU.

Re: Performance in SVP 4

Man, you're killing me  lol

XXXX MHz Piledriver having Y*2 "cores" is as fast as XXXX Mhz IvyBrigde having Y cores with HT

  • Thanks: 97

Re: Performance in SVP 4

8 semi cores versus 4 real/8 pseudo cores.

  • Thanks: 33

Re: Performance in SVP 4

The real values are in this list
https://www.cpubenchmark.net/laptop.html

I got a Intel quad-core i7 3630QM purchased 2 years ago. It ranks 7643.

Meanwhile, if you purchase today a laptop at a similar price, such as the Dell Inspiron 7000, you'll get a Intel Core i7-4510U which ranks 4960.

Chainik, what is your CPU model and where does it rank?

Re: Performance in SVP 4

Mystery
The real values are in this list

It's not a "real values" but just some scores in one particular synthetic benchmark.
I'm not playing in "CPU mark". Do you?  hmm

Instead I'm using SVP every day. And in SVP scores can be different.

BUT, even in that bench FX-7600P = i5-4210m:
4 "cores" at 2.7 (up to 3.7) = 2 cores + HT at 2.6 GHz (up to 3.2)