Doom @ Vulkan

[Loeschzwerg]

Hi everyone,

since the latest v4474/v4475 drivers it's possible to play Doom (2016) on OpenGL using Intel HD / Iris Graphics. Big THX to the driver team!!!

Today ID Software released a patch to add Vulkan support for Doom

But here is the problem:

The latest Intel Vulkan Beta drivers are https://software.intel.com/en-us/blogs/2016/06/29/new-intel-graphics-test-driverdriver-for-windows-10-and-windows-781-15404473 v4473... and with those Doom refuses to start (The known problem before v4474/4475).

May I request a new Beta driver? I want to see how Doom performs when using the Vulkan API.

Thanks an kind regards,

Loeschzwerg

[RRafa]

When will you understand that we pay a lot of extra $$ in their processors just to have a decent video card and play some games? Since after buying their super expensive processors there's no budget left at all to buy a video card.

[Loeschzwerg]

jaffar: Intel HD and Iris/Pro Graphics provide decent performance for many modern 3D games, so I expect support for Vulkan at least when this API is getting used on more and more games. Doom @ Vulkan works on a AMD 7850K APU (Kaveri) with Radeon R7 Graphics, so why not on Intel APUs with latest Iris/Pro Graphics?

[AMüll2]

Any news on this topic? It is really embarrassing for Intel. As far as I know, there are different teams working on the Windows and the Linux driver. Does anyone now how good the Vulkan Support for Linux currently is? Might be a reason to finally switch to Linux (although this is not helping on the Doom front).

[MBana3]

Guys, are you even serious? Because I can't believe, what I'm reading here.

jaffar is absolutely right. Intel never presents their GPU as gamer's one. When you look at their presentations, when they are releasing new architecture, they always mention only media capabilities. And that's, what their GPU are for. So you can watch even 4K stream from web without need for a dedicated GPU. But when you look at Processing Power, you'll find out, that even newest HD GPU for desktop users have only 441.6 GFLOPS. That's less then half of what my 7 years old ( !) dedicated GPU had.

So, D-martins, if you payed extra for Intel GPU in your CPU with some vision of high power GPU, then honestly, you're a bit crazy. If you ever read any review of HD 530 before you buys a CPU, then you have to know, that its results in games are appalling...

Loeschzwerg, I can't agree with you. In my opinion, Intel HD GPU definitely don't have enough power to run modern 3D games with good resolution, good level of details and good frame rate, not even close. In most cases, you are unable to run modern games in FullHD and avg. 60 FPS, regardless of video settings. And you don't have to go far for proof. In that article with Doom on HD 520 (only slightly less powerful then HD 530), which was linked here, they ware able to run it on medium settings, only in 720p with result of 27 FPS, even with Vulkan enabled. Which in my book its unplayable, not even console players are playing on that low FPS, on their low latency TV's.

[Loeschzwerg]

It's ok when you're a "high-fps-gamer", but many users are totally fine with 30fps+. Why do you think Intel set up the Iris/Pro line if not for gaming purpose or to compete against AMD APUs? => http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/nuc/nuc6i7kyk-gaming-usage-guide.html Intel® NUC kit NUC6i7KYK | Stay Cool When Gaming Gets Hot

Doom is playable on latest Iris graphics (Iris 540 / Iris Pro 580; 1280x720 / 1366x768 at medium to high settings) with framerates 30-50. Take a look at this YT channel and you get an idea of what a HD 530 is able to run: https://www.youtube.com/user/r3un1on/videos r3un1on - YouTube

But the point after all is to support new APIs. Intel supports DX12, why not Vulkan too? At least when more games make use of Vulkan (at the moment it's just Doom and The Talos Principle (experimental)), Intel should care about it.

[AMüll2]

Furthermore, it was a Intel HD GPU which was used to show off Vulkan for the first time when it was announced

They also publish papers on graphics programming and papers on optimizing graphics for their range of GPUs, also giving talks at game developer conferences.

So, yes, they are interested in graphics, while not trying to compete with dedicated GPUs, they are still a valid choice for some casual/mid-range gaming.

[BRoon]

I think Intel won't get better performance on Doom with Vulkan. Just pay attention that ID software compiled some specific SPIR-V shaders for AMD, so they gain performance, because they can simply run faster codes with their shader intrinsics extensions, while the other IHVs only able to run the slower standard SPIR-V shaders.

[Loeschzwerg]

Neither do I think that we will see more FPS. May question was more related to "How does it run on Vulkan? Will we see/bet better frametimes?".

[MBana3]

I almost knew, that you will link that YT channel. And I knew it pretty well. And you are just proving my statement. Since most of games there couldn't event run steady 30 FPS, and that's with ultra low settings, and on 720p, it means, that on 1080p (which is most used resolution worldwide), everything modern will be borderline unplayable.

When you look at test not done in a vacuum, you will find out, that even quite old GPU from AMD APU are miles ahead comparing to Intel HD one. I stand behind my statement, that Intel doesn't really care about gamers, nothing in their presentations imply that. And that's also a reason I think, why they are not spending too much resources into developing Vulkan driver.

Btw, as SuperBob mentions, I also don't think, that there will be some magic FPS boost, once functional Vulkan driver will be released. Only AMD are having quite astonishing boost on Vulkan, but that's partly because they implement HW engine for Async compute. Nvidia haven't done that, and results are not even close to AMD one's. And I think, that Intel doesn't implement support for Async compute is HW way into their Intel's GPU. If yes, please, post some evidence here, thanks,

[Loeschzwerg]

HD 530 is absolutely low-end. What do you expect of it? People playing on the HD 530 are fine with lowest settings. BF4 for example: No problem @ 720p and low (reso scale 100%); the FPS are always above 40 and most of the time above 50. Dirt Rally runs well (720p low), MadMax too (720p low)... (on r3un1ion's channel, he tested those with 1366x768 btw.).

So then think about what a more "beefier" Iris 540 can do here 😉 If you want to play competitive or simply enjoy the highest graphics at max possible fps, sure, there is no other way than buy a discrete card.

No matter how: http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/architecture-and-technology/visual-technology/graphics-overview.html Experience Visual Perfection with Intel® Graphics Technology

"Get blazing fast performance with an Intel® Core™ processor equipped with Iris™ and Iris™ Pro graphics—up to 12% better than mobile processors without Iris graphic.2 Experience stunning gameplay in up to 1080p, and enjoy the visual performance you need for a seamless video and photo editing experience. Whether you're a media creator or a gamer, fantastic new experiences await."

---

AC is just one point when it comes to Vulkan/DX12 and it helps the "GCN" architecture a lot, but mainly because AMD never was able to completely utilize all cores on OGL/DX11 (drivers).

NV on the other hand is a total different story. Their drivers are able to utilize nearly all of the GPU resources (OGL/DX11; at least most of the time), so there is no room left for more performance (only when the CPU is the bottleneck). Probably the same thing should happen when it comes to Intel Graphics/APUs, but we might see a little more boost or get at least more stable fps. Why? Due to lower driver overhead we have lower CPU utilization (lower need for power) and so the IGP could be able to clock higher. This could be at least the case when you think about notebooks with power/thermal limitations. It would be fun to test

[MBana3]

Absolute low-end it's HD 510... I get your point however. But HD 530 it's most powerful GPU for their LGA 1151 desktop processors, even with i7-6700. That's what I'm talking about.

Don't get me wrong, I really don't care, what people want to play on. Just in my opinion playing 720p game all on lowest possible setting without even able to achieve steady 60 FPS its not a playing, which I will regarded as enjoyable. And when people here are crying, that bad Intel don't release proper Vulkan driver for customer, and they payed so much for their processor, well, maybe the should buy a cheaper processor and dedicated graphic instead. Because, as you said (and I'm totally agree with you), HD 530 its absolute low-end and in my eyes, not considerable as gaming GPU. Even something like 50$ used card from eBay will absolutely crush it and will give you opportunity to play game much more closely to what developer intend to.

[Loeschzwerg]

Regarding Vulkan support an interesting statement:

https://software.intel.com/en-us/forums/developing-games-and-graphics-on-intel/topic/696380 Vulkan Open Source Device Driver for Windows

[quote]Hi Arthur,

That statement is a bit confusing, Vulkan support right now is for 6th Generation and newer products and we are targeting developers not consumers. Thus why the releases are beta and are listed in the Game Developer Zone and not anywhere else.

-Michael[/quote]

[quote]That's great, thanks for de-confusing the statement. This appeases me.

However, is full Vulkan support planned for consumers in the near future, after the driver passed the beta version?[/quote]

[quote]To my knowledge yes, but I do not know when and would not want to hazard a guess.[/quote]

[Stefan3D]

Heads-up from https://vulkan.lunarg.com/doc/sdk/1.0.30.0/windows/release_notes-1.0.html LunarXchange:

Vulkan SDK 1.0.30.0 Release Notes https://vulkan.lunarg.com/doc/view/1.0.30.0/windows/release_notes-1.0.html# user-content-version-10300-for-windows Version 1.0.30.0 for Windows https://vulkan.lunarg.com/doc/view/1.0.30.0/windows/release_notes-1.0.html# user-content-october-13-2016 October 13, 2016

...

Known Driver Issues

• Intel Windows Vulkan Driver Instability
  • The Intel driver is still in a Beta state and has not yet been officially released.
  • Because of this they are unable to package the Vulkan driver in their graphics driver updates which occur through Windows Update.
  • If Windows Update installs or updates a graphics driver after the user installed the Vulkan Beta drivers, it could cause system instability.
  • We have found that uninstalling the Intel Beta Vulkan driver can still leave the system in an unstable state.
  • If you must use the driver, then either block Windows Update or create a Windows system restore point.

[VMnll]

Vulkan gives me as developer the opportunity to create a cross platform GUI library without using multiple graphic API's. Also performance can be made great for every platform and underlining device limits.

So at all. My interests aren't mainly in gaming.

They're rather in creating great graphical Applications which work with the same graphical stuff on every platform. I do not like how it's done with OpenGL and OpenGL ES.

Vulkan isnt only usefull for gaming. It cross platform hardware acceleration in one pack for the future devices.

[powerarmour]

Loeschzwerg wrote:

Regarding Vulkan support an interesting statement:

https://software.intel.com/en-us/forums/developing-games-and-graphics-on-intel/topic/696380 Vulkan Open Source Device Driver for Windows

[quote]Hi Arthur,

That statement is a bit confusing, Vulkan support right now is for 6th Generation and newer products and we are targeting developers not consumers. Thus why the releases are beta and are listed in the Game Developer Zone and not anywhere else.

-Michael[/quote]

[quote]That's great, thanks for de-confusing the statement. This appeases me.

However, is full Vulkan support planned for consumers in the near future, after the driver passed the beta version?[/quote]

[quote]To my knowledge yes, but I do not know when and would not want to hazard a guess.[/quote]

I don't know why they couldn't say that in the first place, it would clear up a lot of confusion.

In the mean time, Linux looks to be the only platform with workable Intel Vulkan support right now, and not just for >Skylake, it's working on IVB and HSW/BDW too.

[Stefan3D]

Looks like 21.20.16.9999 Alpha comes with Vulkan support.

Thanks to the new branch my BDW is out of the race

[Loeschzwerg]

Thanks Stefan3D GPU Caps Viewer shows Vulkan support, but all 3D Demos crash. Same thing when trying to run Doom on Vulkan. Attached the error log (FATAL ERROR: Could not allocate device memory).

Dota 2 on the other hand is working.

[Stefan3D]

@ Loeschzwerg

regarding GPUCapsViewer:

I'm only a moderator at Geeks3D, you would have to report the issue to JegX himself.

However he is aware of the new alpha driver, i assume he will test it sooner or later.

[Loeschzwerg]

Doom finally running on Vulkan API using the v4565 driver from Dell with modded INF

But the performance is not very satisfying -.-*

Edit: Here is the Vulkan hardware cap report -> http://vulkan.gpuinfo.org/displayreport.php?id=1008 Vulkan Hardware Database - © 2016 by Sascha Willems

[Loeschzwerg]

Stefan3D: I tried the generic v4565 from HP and it works fine for me No modding or deactivation of signature checking is needed. Doom works @ Vulkan (but worse than with OpenGL)

@all: The generic v4565 with Vulkan support can be downloaded from here -> ftp://ftp.hp.com/pub/softpaq/sp78501-79000/sp78828.exe

@Intel: Maybe it's possible to tweak the Vulkan performance from your side?

[Stefan3D]

@ Loeschzwerg

try 21.20.16.4574