Home / Adreno (TM) 725 / Compare

WN-Turnip-1.08-p_Axxx vs turnip_v24.3.0-R12

On Adreno (TM) 725 (OnePlus 15, POCO F5, Samsung Galaxy Z Fold4, Vivo iQOO Neo7 Pro, Xiaomi 12T Pro, Xiaomi 23013PC75G, Xiaomi 23049PCD8I). The first driver named is compared against the second, which is the baseline.

Stockturnip_v24.3.0-R12Mesa 24.3.0-devel (git-be81c8b8db)

CustomWN-Turnip-1.08-p_AxxxMesa 26.3.0-devel (git-83b2b1c2e9)

Graphics system version (Vulkan)? to ?

Optional features (extensions)? to ?not checked on both

Features that pass their check (validated)not tested on bothturnip_v24.3.0-R12 and WN-Turnip-1.08-p_Axxx: no driver check yet

Speed test scenes (benchmark)1 faster 0 slower38% faster overall (geometric mean)

oit_linked_lists38% faster

Custom driver against stock, per scene. Bars to the right are faster, to the left slower.

Did not start every time: hdr_2160p (stock 0 of 3, custom 3 of 3), oit_linked_lists (stock 2 of 3, custom 3 of 3), pipeline_barriers (stock 0 of 3, custom 3 of 3).

turnip_v24.3.0-R12 details WN-Turnip-1.08-p_Axxx details

Feature checks that differ

turnip_v24.3.0-R12 and WN-Turnip-1.08-p_Axxx: no driver check (validation report) yet. Both drivers need a driver check before their feature checks can be compared.

Speed test scenes (benchmark)

The two drivers were not measured on the same set of device models. Frame times from different devices do not compare drivers, so read these numbers with that in mind.

Scene	turnip_v24.3.0-R12 ms	WN-Turnip-1.08-p_Axxx ms	Difference	Starts	GPU clock, MHz	Picture vs stock
hdr_2160p	n/a	n/a	only one side	0 of 3 vs 3 of 3	? vs 900 clock unknown	not checked
oit_linked_lists	31.92 typical 31.75	23.12 typical 22.97	38% faster	2 of 3 vs 3 of 3	? vs 900 clock unknown	no large difference 0.0 no small difference worst 0.0 64x36
pipeline_barriers	n/a	n/a	only one side	0 of 3 vs 3 of 3	? vs 900 clock unknown	not checked
pipeline_barriers_2160p	n/a	n/a	only one side	? vs 3 of 3	? vs 900 clock unknown	not checked
subpasses	11.23	n/a	only one side	3 of 3 vs 3 of 3	? vs 900 clock unknown	not checked
subpasses_2160p	n/a	n/a	only one side	3 of 3 vs 3 of 3	? vs 900 clock unknown	not checked

Time to draw one frame, per scene: the average (mean) frame time of the scene's best round, which is how many frames the driver delivered; lower is faster. "Typical" beside it is the median frame, which can sit well under the average when a driver's frames come in two speeds. A pair of reports made before per-round averages were recorded is compared on the median. A scene whose rounds disagree by more than 15% is left out. A scene marked "paced" was held at that mean frame time by the driver or the display queue, together with at least one other scene of the same run; its time says how the frames were spaced, not how fast the driver rendered, so it is not compared. A scene marked "too light" took under 8 ms at the standard size (1920 by 1080) on both drivers, where the screen's frame queue spaces the frames more than the chip does; its heavier run is the one compared: the row ending in _2160p is the scene drawn at 3840 by 2160, and compute_nbody_2x is that scene with twice the particles. "Faster" and "slower" describe WN-Turnip-1.08-p_Axxx against turnip_v24.3.0-R12. "Picture vs stock" compares one fixed frame per scene as a coarse colour grid (0 is identical, above 40 is a different picture); it finds a scene that was not drawn. Where both reports carry the finer 64x36 grid, the second figure is how many of its 2,304 cells differ by more than 4 of 255, and "worst" is the largest single cell; this is what finds a small rendering error in a picture that otherwise matches. A row marked 16x9 comes from a report made before the finer grid existed. "Starts" is how many of a scene's process starts reached a measured round. A GPU clock marked "not comparable" differed by more than 5% of the device's maximum between the two timings.

Technical differences (Vulkan)

Both drivers need a driver check (validation report) before their technical details (Vulkan) can be compared.