Label | OS | GPU | CPU | RAM | OS specific |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
TheGreatCircle_FSYNC_MESA | CachyOS | AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT (RADV NAVI23) | AMD Ryzen 7 3700X 8-Core Processor | 34 GB | 6.12.6-2-cachyos performance |
TheGreatCircle_NTSYNC_MESA | CachyOS | AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT (RADV NAVI23) | AMD Ryzen 7 3700X 8-Core Processor | 34 GB | 6.12.6-2-cachyos performance |
TheGreatCircle_FSYNC_AMDVLK | CachyOS | AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT | AMD Ryzen 7 3700X 8-Core Processor | 34 GB | 6.12.6-2-cachyos performance |
TheGreatCircle_NTSYNC_AMDVLK | CachyOS | AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT | AMD Ryzen 7 3700X 8-Core Processor | 34 GB | 6.12.6-2-cachyos performance |
TheGreatCircle_NTSYNC_MESA
with approximately 1% higher average FPS than the next best run.TheGreatCircle_NTSYNC_AMDVLK
with the lowest standard deviation and variance in FPS, indicating high stability.TheGreatCircle_NTSYNC_AMDVLK
as it provides solid FPS along with the smoothest performance.AMDVLK
drivers have lower average FPS by about 7% compared to those using MESA
drivers.FSYNC
setting with AMDVLK
shows about 8% more variance in FPS compared to its NTSYNC
counterpart, indicating less stable performance.The benchmark compared both synchronization methods, FSYNC
and NTSYNC
, across two different driver implementations, MESA
and AMDVLK
, on a consistent hardware and software setup. The results highlight that while NTSYNC
generally offers a slightly higher average FPS across the board, the AMDVLK
drivers struggle to match the performance and consistency offered by MESA
. Specifically, when using NTSYNC
paired with AMDVLK
, the combination resulted in the smoothest overall gameplay experience, albeit with slightly lower FPS compared to MESA
. Therefore, choosing the right synchronization method and driver stack can significantly impact both the frame stability and performance of a system.