Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

OpenCL Benchmarks and Support for Both MacBook Pro GPUs

mmendoza27 said:
AND LOOOK at the score of the 8-core with hyper-threading! Looks like it bests everything so far!
Click to expand...

Yup... Now think about that for a second... OpenCL will use ALL available devices if you tell it to to do a set of calculations....

So, one of the 2009 Pro's along with a GT120 is just about a 2x improvement over just the CPU alone. Not bad!

I'm wondering if the # of cores, and the clockspeed of the GPUs is heavily influencing this benchmark. I think we all would agree that for gaming, the Radeon 4870 blows away a GT120. However, if you look at the specs that the benchmark is reporting:

GT120 - 32 cores @ 1275 MHz
R4870 - 4 cores @ 750 Mhz

And the fact that the GT120 beats the radeon, performing the test in < 1/2 the time, you have to wonder what's going on.

I suspect that the kinds of calculations this benchmark is doing aren't that strenuous, and also probably don't load up the cache or memory or tax the memory bandwidth on the GPUs.
 
Would it be possible to use Open CL on the Intel GMA-equipped Macs? That would really boost the speed of my mid-'07 Mac mini, which isn't really that old.
 
Shake 'n' Bake said:
Would it be possible to use Open CL on the Intel GMA-equipped Macs? That would really boost the speed of my mid-'07 Mac mini, which isn't really that old.
Click to expand...

Here is my '07 macbook with 950GMA, 2GB ram, 2.16Ghz
I think anything would help at this point, but it will never happen, my fellow intel graphics friend.

Number of OpenCL devices found: 1
OpenCL Device # 0 = Intel(R) Core(TM)2 CPU T7400 @ 2.16GHz
Device 0 is an: CPU with max. 2160 MHz and 2 units/cores
Now computing - please be patient....
time used: 16.635 seconds
 
Dimietriev said:
Here is my '07 macbook with 950GMA, 2GB ram, 2.16Ghz

Number of OpenCL devices found: 1
OpenCL Device # 0 = Intel(R) Core(TM)2 CPU T7400 @ 2.16GHz
Device 0 is an: CPU with max. 2160 MHz and 2 units/cores
Now computing - please be patient....
time used: 16.635 seconds

Now checking if results are valid - please be patient....
:) Validate test passed - GPU results=CPU results :)
Click to expand...

Being essentially the same as my Mac mini, that's a no for now. I'll test myself to be sure.
 
Shake 'n' Bake said:
Would it be possible to use Open CL on the Intel GMA-equipped Macs? That would really boost the speed of my mid-'07 Mac mini, which isn't really that old.
Click to expand...

If your Mini is presented with OpenCL code, it will only run it on the CPU since the GMA video cards aren't OpenCL supported.

In short, you won't see any performance increase, but you also won't see the programs crap out and die. They'll just work like they always have, running on your CPU.
 
Shake 'n' Bake said:
Would it be possible to use Open CL on the Intel GMA-equipped Macs? That would really boost the speed of my mid-'07 Mac mini, which isn't really that old.
Click to expand...

Is the Intel GMA-based graphics a separate GPU or something that is used by the main processor? If the memory is shared I'd think it's not but don't exactly know. I do know that GMA graphics aren't very fast/capable or recommended for high end graphics like CAD, etc...

Yep. Others have already said no, it's not...
 
Results for MacPro 2.93 with GTX 285

Here are my results for comparison:

...........................................................
.................. OpenCL Bench V 0.25 by mitch ...........
...... C2D 3GHz = 12 sec vs Nvidia 9600GT = 0,93 sec ......
... time results are not comparable to older version! .....
...........................................................

Number of OpenCL devices found: 2
OpenCL Device # 0 = GeForce GTX 285
Device 0 is an: GPU with max. 1476 MHz and 240 units/cores
Now computing - please be patient....
time used: 0.263 seconds

OpenCL Device # 1 = Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU X5570 @ 2.93GHz
Device 1 is an: CPU with max. 2925 MHz and 16 units/cores
Now computing - please be patient....
time used: 0.861 seconds

Now checking if results are valid - please be patient....
:) Validate test passed - GPU results=CPU results :)
 
mmendoza27 said:
Now that doesn't make too much sense.... the 9600M GT has a better time than the GT120? Is that true? Well I guess it's a rebranded 9xxx series right? So maybe... anyways, does anyone have a ATI 4870 to test?

AND LOOOK at the score of the 8-core with hyper-threading! Looks like it bests everything so far!
Click to expand...

Ran it again, here you go. Getting conflicting results. It's all over the place.

MacPro 2.26 2009

Number of OpenCL devices found: 2
OpenCL Device # 0 = GeForce GT 120
Device 0 is an: GPU with max. 1400 MHz and 32 units/cores
Now computing - please be patient....
time used: 1.589 seconds

OpenCL Device # 1 = Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5520 @ 2.27GHz
Device 1 is an: CPU with max. 2260 MHz and 16 units/cores
Now computing - please be patient....
time used: 1.161 seconds
 
My results:
Code: 
...........................................................
.................. OpenCL Bench V 0.25 by mitch ...........
...... C2D 3GHz = 12 sec vs Nvidia 9600GT = 0,93 sec ......
... time results are not comparable to older version! .....
...........................................................

Number of OpenCL devices found: 1
OpenCL Device # 0 = Intel(R) Core(TM)2 CPU         T7200  @ 2.00GHz
Device 0 is an: CPU with max. 2000 MHz and 2 units/cores 
Now computing - please be patient....
time used: 23.028 seconds

Now checking if results are valid - please be patient....
:) Validate test passed - GPU results=CPU results :) 
logout

[Process completed]

2002cbr600f4i said:
If your Mini is presented with OpenCL code, it will only run it on the CPU since the GMA video cards aren't OpenCL supported.

In short, you won't see any performance increase, but you also won't see the programs crap out and die. They'll just work like they always have, running on your CPU.
Click to expand...

Yes, that's quite obvious. I mean if Apple were to write the necessary stuff, would it work.

PinkyMacGodess said:
Is the Intel GMA-based graphics a separate GPU or something that is used by the main processor? If the memory is shared I'd think it's not but don't exactly know. I do know that GMA graphics aren't very fast/capable or recommended for high end graphics like CAD, etc...

Yep. Others have already said no, it's not...
Click to expand...

The VRAM is shared. I'll have to check Wikipedia for the other info.
 
Well, depending on the chipset, the clock speed can be up to 400 MHz, IMO, enough to make a difference.

I forgot, what chipset is present in the mid-'07 mini?
 
Shake 'n' Bake said:
Well, depending on the chipset, the clock speed can be up to 400 MHz, IMO, enough to make a difference.

I forgot, what chipset is present in the mid-'07 mini?
Click to expand...
GMA950.

Its integrated with the other devices on the motherboard into a single chip but is separate from the CPU. Its not nearly as capable as any of the latest GPUs and lacks many of the hardware features necessary for OpenCL. Never happen.
 
kresh said:
Remember the Turbo.264 USB video encoder?

I wonder if it is possible to have a firewire 800 OpenCL device to plug in for those Macs without a compatible video card?
Click to expand...

Hmmm... Now THAT is an interesting idea, but I don't know how feasible it would be. Maybe as an external box that talked over FW, with it's own memory and power supply and such. I just don't know if even FW800 would have enough bandwidth to support the memory operations. It would suck to have a fast external OpenCL processor, but be crippled by slow interface bottleneck.

Maybe with USB3.0?
 
These integrated graphics products allow a computer to be built without a separate graphics card, which can reduce cost, power consumption and noise. They are commonly found on low-priced notebook and desktop computers as well as business computers, which do not need high levels of graphics capability. 90% of all PCs sold have integrated graphics.[1] They rely on the computer's main memory for storage, which imposes a performance penalty as both the CPU and GPU have to access memory over the same bus.
Click to expand...

And

Mac OS X 10.4 supports the GMA 950, since it was used in previous revisions of the MacBook and 17-inch iMacs. It has been used in all Intel-based Mac minis (until Mac Mini released on March 3, 2009). Mac OS X 10.5 Leopard contains drivers for the GMA X3100, which were used in a recent revision of the MacBook range.

Late-release versions of Mac OS X 10.4 also support the GMA 900 due to its use in the Apple Developer Transition Kit, which was used in the PowerPC-to-Intel transition. However, special modifications to the kext file must be made to enable Core Image and Quartz Extreme.

Although the new MacBook line no longer uses the X3100, Mac OS X 10.5 (Leopard) ships with drivers supporting it that require no modifications to the kext file. Mac OS X 10.6 (Snow Leopard), which includes a new 64-bit kernel in addition to the 32-bit one, has not yet included any 64-bit X3100 drivers (as of beta build 10A394). This means that although the MacBooks with the X3100 have 64-bit capable processors, Mac OS X must load the 32-bit kernel to support the 32-bit X3100 drivers. The 32-bit kernel is loaded in tandem with the 64-bit version.

The newer MacBook and MacBook Pro notebooks instead ship with a far more powerful NVIDIA GeForce 9400M G, and the 15" and 17" MacBook Pro notebooks ship with an additional GeForce 9600M supporting hybrid power to switch between GPUs.
Click to expand...

From Wikipedia.

I doubt that it would be worth it to write OpenCL drivers for the Intel GMA chips as the performance could likely be disappointing...
 
flopticalcube said:
GMA950.

Its integrated with the other devices on the motherboard into a single chip but is separate from the CPU. Its not nearly as capable as any of the latest GPUs and lacks many of the hardware features necessary for OpenCL. Never happen.
Click to expand...

I'm talking about the logic board. If it's 945G, 945GC, or 945GZ, the clock speed is 400 MHz which makes a noticeable difference.

2002cbr600f4i said:
GMA950... AKA- JUNK (I have one of these that I've given to my folks)
Click to expand...

I realize it's crap, but it's all that I could afford at the time. But even if I had gotten an iMac, I still wouldn't have Open CL support.

I'll have to wait for some real-world tests, but this is really making want an iMac even more.
 
2002cbr600f4i said:
Hmmm... Now THAT is an interesting idea, but I don't know how feasible it would be. Maybe as an external box that talked over FW, with it's own memory and power supply and such. I just don't know if even FW800 would have enough bandwidth to support the memory operations. It would suck to have a fast external OpenCL processor, but be crippled by slow interface bottleneck.

Maybe with USB3.0?
Click to expand...

hehe I regretted saying it even as I typed it. I normally hate bolt-on solutions and this would be nothing but a second rate OpenCL experience at best, and probably expensive to boot:)
 
AidenShaw said:
OpenCL will only become interesting when you can actually use it in shipping applications - synthetic benchmarks that show "the potential" of OpenCL are just a tease.

They'll come, but it will take time for vendors to recode their apps to use OpenCL.

It also doesn't help that Apple didn't support OpenCL on more GPUs - with the relatively few OpenCL capable systems, there's less incentive for vendors to port.

Also note that some earlier GPUs didn't do full IEEE floating point support (support for NaNs, ±Infinity) , and didn't do accurate floating point. (A small rounding error would not be noticeable on a pixel in a display, but would kill a compute job.)
Click to expand...

OpenCL has been released as an open standard. Just like OpenAL and OpenGL. Its up to the GPU vendors to provide the libraries for the other OS's. Just like hmm OpenGL/AL. Apple only chose to support a few on Mac OSX for some reason.
 
Number of OpenCL devices found: 2
OpenCL Device # 0 = GeForce GTX 285
Device 0 is an: GPU with max. 1476 MHz and 240 units/cores
Now computing - please be patient....
time used: 0.269 seconds

OpenCL Device # 1 = Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU W3520 @ 2.67GHz
Device 1 is an: CPU with max. 2659 MHz and 8 units/cores
Now computing - please be patient....
time used: 1.899 seconds

Now checking if results are valid - please be patient....
:) Validate test passed - GPU results=CPU results :)
 
ok, I just looked at the readme, and I think this is very telling...

Here's the OpenCL code that is getting sent to the OpenCL devices:

const char * sProgramSource =
__kernel void vectorAdd(
__global const float * a,
__global const float * b,
__global float * c)
{
// Vector element index
int loop;
int nIndex = get_global_id(0);
for (loop=1; loop< 5000; loop++)
{
c[nIndex] = a[nIndex] + b[nIndex];
}

};


ie: It's just doing a simple vector add of 5000 items. This is NOT stressing the memory interfaces or anything like that. These are VERY simple calculations. That would explain why cards with more cores and higher clockspeeds beat out what would normally be considered substantially more capable GPUs.

I wish they had included the full XCode project + source so we could look at it more closely. I'd love to see what sort of performance you could get by telling the code to run on all available OpenCL devices at the same time.
 
Alright, since Apple have screwed me over by not supporting my slightly older than a year MacBook, im going to build a much faster Hackintosh that HAS OpenCL support.

Why should i pay for Apples poor component choice?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back