Check out our Monthly Survey Page to see what our users are running.
We do often include affiliate links to earn us some pennies. See more here.
In an effort to make things as clear as possible, I decided to do some additional testing with Mad Max [Steam, Feral Store]. More specifically, in OpenGL for Mad Max at release vs the beta.

This is important, since our previous benchmarks (and every other website and person who ran benchmarks) will be affected by this.

Why was this not tested before? Well, we weren't made aware of any changes to the OpenGL renderer in Mad Max. There should have been no need to do tests like this since the whole idea behind the Beta was to test Vulkan specifically, but hopefully this will help clear things up a bit.

I ran some of my own tests using GLXOSD's benchmarking tool coupled with my speedy SSD on the Very High preset (with no extra game adjustments) and here's what I found. The results, sadly, speak for themselves. Done in two completely different areas to be sure it wasn't a fluke.

OpenGL 1.0 OpenGL Beta Vulkan Mad Max Stable vs Beta - Outer GravesAntergos Linux, 1080p, i7 5960x, 980ti Very High Vulkan 126OpenGL 1.0 110OpenGL Beta 49 12611049 0265278104130 Average FPS

OpenGL 1.0 OpenGL Beta Vulkan Mad Max Stable vs Beta - The Big NothingAntergos Linux, 1080p, i7 5960x, 980ti Very High Vulkan 145OpenGL 1.0 129OpenGL Beta 68 14512968 0295887116145 Average FPS


As always, benchmarks should always be taken with a grain of salt. It will depend heavily on your system setup. Not just hardware, but the exact distro and libs you have too all affect the numbers.

This was tricky to do, since the Beta version does have other issues with OpenGL, which is in the form of crash bugs. I've had a few crashes I've reported to Feral in the beta version when using OpenGL, so hopefully those can also get fixed. It's also tricky since the original release didn't feature a benchmark mode, so it had to all be done manually.

The good news is that Feral Interactive are aware of it, so they can look to fix it. The other good news, is that Vulkan is still performing better than both versions of the game when using OpenGL.

This regression might also be affecting the Vulkan renderer, so it's possible when fixed both the OpenGL and Vulkan versions could see a boost, although the OpenGL boost would likely only be putting it back to normal levels.

Finally, something to remember: This is exactly what a Beta test is for. Article taken from GamingOnLinux.com.
15 Likes
About the author -
author picture
I am the owner of GamingOnLinux. After discovering Linux back in the days of Mandrake in 2003, I constantly came back to check on the progress of Linux until Ubuntu appeared on the scene and it helped me to really love it. You can reach me easily by emailing GamingOnLinux directly. Find me on Mastodon.
See more from me
The comments on this article are closed.
25 comments
Page: «2/3»
  Go to:

Liam Dawe Mar 31, 2017
Quoting: aFoxNamedMorrisI think it's worth mentioning that Mad Max's Vulkan backend is in beta.
Quoting: liamdawe, in the articleFinally, something to remember: This is exactly what a Beta test is for.
natewardawg Mar 31, 2017
Quoting: Adam_eMOh by the way, do you know any applications that can show FPS'es and stuff while running a game? I know of GLXOSD but it doesn't show any output when running the Vulkan beta. And also, it seems to stuck on 60fpses in any game.

Steam has a basic FPS counter you can turn on under Steam > Settings > In Game > In-game FPS counter

Obviously it's quite basic. I would also like to know if there's something available that overlays other thing too like CPU usage. :)
tripy Mar 31, 2017
Quoting: natewardawg1920x1080
Normal quality
i7-4810MQ Quad Core @ 2.8 GHz
GTX 860M 4GB

I concluded my results by staring at Steam's FPS counter, haha :D

Stable branch:
~20-22 FPS OpenGL

Beta branch:
~15-17 FPS OpenGL
~25-30 FPS Vulkan

So on this particular machine, regardless of this regression, it changed Mad Max from being a noticeably unplayable experience under OpenGL to being a noticeably playable one under Vulkan.

I run a (very) old AMD FX 8120 Bulldozer with a gtx 970 and for me Vulkan gave a few fps more, but nothing tremendous.
It's still pretty choppy overall in the normal preset at 720P, with some regions with the frame rate boosting to the hundreds fps.

"benchmark 2" gave me an average of 32 fps in Vulkan and 28 fps in OGL.
I was a bit underwhelmed, I admit...
Probably time to jump on the Ryzen train.
sarmad Mar 31, 2017
These results are more realistic. 2.5x performance boost is just too much for just an API switch.
natewardawg Mar 31, 2017
Quoting: tripyI run a (very) old AMD FX 8120 Bulldozer with a gtx 970 and for me Vulkan gave a few fps more, but nothing tremendous.
It's still pretty choppy overall in the normal preset at 720P, with some regions with the frame rate boosting to the hundreds fps.

"benchmark 2" gave me an average of 32 fps in Vulkan and 28 fps in OGL.
I was a bit underwhelmed, I admit...
Probably time to jump on the Ryzen train.

I ran my benchmarks in 720p also and got 33.5 fps under Vulkan for benchmark #2, but on an 860M which is far inferior to your GTX 970. I do have a GTX 960 with an i7-6700K, it just hasn't downloaded Mad Max yet on that system for me to benchmark it :)

So, I agree, it's probably CPU bound, because I got better results and according to http://cpubenchmark.net/ your CPU scores in the 6000's and mine scores in the 8000's, which would explain why I got a better framerate on a significantly inferior GPU :)

If I remember, I will post my stats when I get it running on my other machine. I may do it at 1920x1080 though.


Last edited by natewardawg on 31 March 2017 at 10:16 pm UTC
tripy Mar 31, 2017
Quoting: natewardawgIf I remember, I will post my stats when I get it running on my other machine. I may do it at 1920x1080 though.

Thanks. Much appreciated.

Edit: wups.. It was wishful thinking, but I've got a GTX 960, not 970.
Damn, time to get some Z I guess too.


Last edited by tripy on 31 March 2017 at 10:27 pm UTC
melkemind Mar 31, 2017
Quoting: Adam_eMI am generally experiencing some significant frame skips in Mad Max just recently, but it was ok earlier. It's worth to mention however, but the game performance seems far better when using Vulkan. Oh by the way, do you know any applications that can show FPS'es and stuff while running a game? I know of GLXOSD but it doesn't show any output when running the Vulkan beta. And also, it seems to stuck on 60fpses in any game.

It's definitely faster for me, but I've noticed the skipping/stuttering as well, even when it's above 60 fps. Hopefully, they can iron that out. I didn't try it with the framerate smoothing enabled. Would that help?
Koopacabras Mar 31, 2017
I have a very old hardware with a weak cpu fx6300, and a rx460. Didn't try the benchmarking tool. But with steam in game tool at 1080p I'm getting around 60fps most of the time some scenes will peak to 75fps and some will go to 20fps or 45fps but most of the time is around 60ish fps. Settings are normal latest mesa git from today. But yes as mentioned I'm also experiencing some stuttering skipping. Radv/mesa driver.


Last edited by Koopacabras on 31 March 2017 at 11:32 pm UTC
Ehvis Mar 31, 2017
View PC info
  • Supporter Plus
I've tested the old version against the new Vulkan in a couple (non benchmark) camps that gave me very low frames before. The bad one increased from 22 to 35, which is a big difference. Note that this is at very high settings and on 3440x1440. That changes the game from stuttery to perfectly playable. I just wish that NVidia would get G-SYNC working on Vulkan.

I have noticed a couple of graphical artefacts though. At one point the canteen flashed before filling it up. Another one was that I saw some flashing white lines that looked like they could have been ground mesh edges. Haven't been able to screenshot them, so I may have to try and screen capture a video.
natewardawg Apr 1, 2017
Quoting: tripy
Quoting: natewardawgIf I remember, I will post my stats when I get it running on my other machine. I may do it at 1920x1080 though.

Thanks. Much appreciated.

Edit: wups.. It was wishful thinking, but I've got a GTX 960, not 970.
Damn, time to get some Z I guess too.

Here it is... I actually did the benchmark at both 720p and 1080p with normal quality.

Specs:
i7-6700K
GTX 960
32 GB RAM

720p:
avg: 80.905754
min: 57.537403
max: 87.573341


1080p:
avg: 81.353348
min: 64.316956
max: 86.662621


Yep, almost exactly the same... so this scene is definitely CPU bound. So, I'm pretty sure upgrading your system with a Ryzen chip would cause this scene to outperform my system even with the same GPU. I'm going to do some more tests for the other two quality levels, at some point :)


Last edited by natewardawg on 1 April 2017 at 12:42 am UTC
While you're here, please consider supporting GamingOnLinux on:

Reward Tiers: Patreon. Plain Donations: PayPal.

This ensures all of our main content remains totally free for everyone! Patreon supporters can also remove all adverts and sponsors! Supporting us helps bring good, fresh content. Without your continued support, we simply could not continue!

You can find even more ways to support us on this dedicated page any time. If you already are, thank you!
The comments on this article are closed.