VCS Performance Benchmarks

[mogul345]

I'm mildly interested in it as a media/streaming/emulation box, using the OtherOS capability. But I can't find any information on actual benchmarks. Has anyone loaded another OS on this thing yet and run 3dMark/Passmark/etc?

The closest thing I can find is this but this is another SBC using the same APU.

[Atarick]

43 minutes ago, mogul345 said:

I'm mildly interested in it as a media/streaming/emulation box, using the OtherOS capability. But I can't find any information on actual benchmarks. Has anyone loaded another OS on this thing yet and run 3dMark/Passmark/etc?

The closest thing I can find is this but this is another SBC using the same APU.

There are a number of comments and videos on the r/VCS subreddit of people doing just this. Sounds like a few people have had no problem loading Windows onto it and running Steam through it. Someone also commented on installing a different version of Linux but I wasn't following their logic on that one.

[mogul345]

6 hours ago, Atarick said:

There are a number of comments and videos on the r/VCS subreddit of people doing just this. Sounds like a few people have had no problem loading Windows onto it and running Steam through it. Someone also commented on installing a different version of Linux but I wasn't following their logic on that one.

Figures, forgot to search reddit (assumed Google would index it better than Reddit's search).

[justclaws]

Yes, I previously posted this in another thread. I see you found one link already.
As that SBC is specs wise, very very close to the VCS, performance I saw is very similar.
It basically outperforms the best of the Intel NUCS tested. The GPU speed is far better.

Also this guy also did some game performance testing.

> If you're interested in judging what the R1606g chip can do with another operating system, see:
> https://www.cnx-software.com/2020/08/10/amd-ryzen-embedded-sbc-review-with-ubuntu-20-04/
> and
> https://www.cnx-software.com/2020/06/11/dfi-ryzen-embedded-r1606g-sbc-review-part-2-windows-10-enterprise-ltsc/
> 
> This even smaller boards shown here also has the Ryzen R1606g like the VCS.  An option...
> There are some very interesting benchmarks shown on the written review, above, for the chip.
> There's also a related video.

 

[Wizzard]

I have not checked that video, but is there any link where we can buy that development board?

[OldSchoolRetroGamer]

47 minutes ago, Wizzard said:

I have not checked that video, but is there any link where we can buy that development board?

https://www.dfi.com/product/index/1455

[Matt_B]

Here's a benchmark for the Vega 3 GPU:

 

https://gpu.userbenchmark.com/SpeedTest/511366/AMD-RadeonTM-Vega-3-Mobile-Graphics

 

Note the 2% 'Tree Trunk' rating for gaming.

 

Sure, it's better than most of Intel's iGPUs (hence outperforming some models of NUC) but all you're really getting is a slightly more upmarket potato.

[youxia]

The problem for me would be more its price than performance itself. This board is quite interesting and seems to have enough juice to run most of the 8-32 bit emus properly, plus do streaming and some desktop tasks. But so does RPi4, and for 400 USD being asked for VCS I could most likely get an used PC which vastly outperforms it. Plus, I have no interest in low-end PC gaming and the logo representing modern Atari is actually detrimental for me, so I'm definitely not a target demographic.

 

I can see how it could be of interest for people who just want to buy a small, ready to go box. Still, 400 seems a bit dear for something like that.

[Mockduck]

I don't really understand why people are using $400 as the price benchmark for equivalent DIY PC builds. First, none of the 11,000 or so people getting this console paid $400 for it; we paid $300 max, and it included a $60 controller supplied by PowerA. So, equivalent price point for spec comparison is approximately $240-250, not $400. Even the alleged current sale price of $380 isn't $400. Atari may theoretically charge $400 in the future (although I think that is a big mistake), but they have not so far. And if they do, that $400 price point includes both a classic and modern controller made by PowerA that is selling for $60 each at retail, so even that overly-high $400 price point is only $280ish for the actual "console" part of the console. Seems like people should be basing comparison specs on $250ish PCs/laptops for equivalents. 

[Atarick]

2 minutes ago, Mockduck said:

I don't really understand why people are using $400 as the price benchmark for equivalent DIY PC builds. First, none of the 11,000 or so people getting this console paid $400 for it; we paid $300 max, and it included a $60 controller supplied by PowerA. So, equivalent price point for spec comparison is approximately $240-250, not $400. Even the alleged current sale price of $380 isn't $400. Atari may theoretically charge $400 in the future (although I think that is a big mistake), but they have not so far. And if they do, that $400 price point includes both a classic and modern controller made by PowerA that is selling for $60 each at retail, so even that overly-high $400 price point is only $280ish for the actual "console" part of the console. Seems like people should be basing comparison specs on $250ish PCs/laptops for equivalents. 

Precisely. And this has been a major misstep in nearly all of the gaming pundit reviews so far. The "Atari's VCS is a big $400 joke of a PC!" line is both completely inaccurate and grossly misinformed. Having owned a number of $250-$300 PCs over the years, most are duds unless I have gone in and essentially reformatted and spec'd them up myself....which is what the VCS precisely allows. The Ryzen chip on Linux is the baseline capability; there are numerous other avenues to get more out of it, no different than any other PC in that price range. And $380 for a console/PC hybrid with two controllers that appear to work for most games you could find is a decent deal. I still think that Atari should charge no more than $279.99 with one modern controller included for the 800 if this thing goes to broader retail, as that would be a really solid test for any broader market appeal (include a coupon for a set of classic controllers at around $99.99). At that price point (which is basically right below or at the XBox Series S price), I think a few more people would be willing to bite if more games are available and the OS is updated to fix the various quirks that have appeared. 

[Angrymoleratsbaggle]

After installing Windows 10 on it I ran some benchmarks last night with 3DMark.

I posted them in the AtariVCS subreddit last well I waited for my account to be allowed to post here.

Here are the numbers I got for the benchmarks I have.

 

Time Spy

*3DMark Score - 492

*GPU - 435

*CPU - 1920

*Graphics Test 1 - 2.95fps

*Graphics Test 2 - 2.41fps

*CPU Test - 6.45fps

Night Raid

*3DMark Score - 5355

*Graphics Score - 6282

*CPU Score - 2918

*Graphics Test 1 - 27.02 fps

*Graphics Test 2 - 34.12 fps

*Night Raid Cpu P- 197.0 ms

API Overhead

*DirectX 11 Multi-threaded draw calls per second - 781041

*DirectX 11 Single-threaded draw calls per second - 948397

*DirectX 12 draw calls per second - 5872305

*Vulkan draw calls per second - 5121717

*DirectX 11 Multi-threaded draw calls per frame - 26112

*DirectX 11 Single-threaded draw calls per frame - 30720

*DirectX 12 draw calls per frame - 196608

*Vulkan draw calls per frame - 172032

Skydiver

*3DMark Score - 4803

*Graphics Score - 4718

*Physics Score - 5222

*Combined Score - 4876

*Graphics Test 1 - 22.4 fps

*Graphics Test 2 - 20.75 fps

*8 threads - 87.72 fps

*24 threads - 51.86 fps

*48 threads - 30.52 fps

*96 threads - 17.68 fps

*Combined Test - 20.07 fps

Fire Strike

*3DMark Score - 1322

*Graphics Score - 1482

*Physics Score - 6135

*Combined Score - 443

*Graphics Test 1 - 6.86 fps

*Graphics Test 2 - 6.07 fps

*Physics Test - 19.48 fps

*Combined Test - 2.06 fps

 

[Matt_B]

So, 2.06 fps combined on Fire Strike; that's what you can expect from a demanding modern game at top settings. For comparison, a typical entry level graphics card like the GTX 1650 - maybe $160 if you shop around - will give you over 30.

 

The only benchmark where you'd be getting playable frame rates is Night Raid and that's aimed at tablets and laptops. That's OK if you're only interested in indie games and emulators, but promising it as 'blending the best of consoles and PCs' is somewhat overselling it.

 

Regarding the pricing, people are reviewing this as a $400 machine because that's what you get if you round up the $389 is what Atari are charging for it right now. At least that's still the only pre-order bundle listed on their site. The prices charged during the crowdfunding period were indeed lower, but they're immaterial to anyone considering getting one in the future.

 

As for what it's worth, I'd think that around $240 with a controller would be about right.

[Atarick]

15 minutes ago, Matt_B said:

Regarding the pricing, people are reviewing this as a $400 machine because that's what you get if you round up the $389 is what Atari are charging for it right now. At least that's still the only pre-order bundle listed on their site. The prices charged during the crowdfunding period were indeed lower, but they're immaterial to anyone considering getting one in the future.

 

As for what it's worth, I'd think that around $240 with a controller would be about right.

To me it has always been a $199 machine (the original backer price sans controllers, if I recall right) or a $269 machine (the current preorder price sans controllers). The specs fit that price point. As above, with a controller and a other game on it at launch I would bring this thing to retail in 5-7 months at around $249.99-$270. I think that's both competitive and realistic with the price of similar machines at similar specs. 

[justclaws]

On 12/28/2020 at 6:15 PM, Angrymoleratsbaggle said:

After installing Windows 10 on it I ran some benchmarks last night with 3DMark.

I posted them in the AtariVCS subreddit last well I waited for my account to be allowed to post here.

Interesting comparisins to other figures.

What screen resolution are you using incidentally, as VCS also uses unified memory. 

Also can you confirm that those are with the AMD driver over the generic ones too.

[Angrymoleratsbaggle]

3 minutes ago, justclaws said:

Interesting comparisins to other figures.

What screen resolution are you using incidentally, as VCS also uses unified memory. 

Also can you confirm that those are with the AMD driver over the generic ones too.

I ran them at 1080p, because that's what my monitor I'm using runs at.

 

It is with just the drivers through Windows Update.

Lists as AMD as provider and version as 26.20.12028.2

I haven't made any tweaks or optimizations to anything.

I wanted to see how it ran as vanilla as possible.

 

No Man's Sky complained when I tested it on there because the shared memory dropped available system ram below their 8GB recommended minimum.

 

[Angrymoleratsbaggle]

I just updated the driver software with the Adrenalin installer.

Now running the latest recommended version, which has graphics driver version 27.20.14501.18003

 

I reran the DirectX 12 tests Time Spy and Night Raid.

It didn't make much of a difference from the previous version through Windows Update.

 

Time Spy

*3DMark Score - 507

*Graphics Score - 450

*CPU Score - 1877

*Graphics Test 1 - 3.04 fps

*Graphics Test 2 - 2.51 fps

*CPU Test - 6.31fps

 

Night Raid

*3DMark Score - 5484

*Graphics Score - 6565

*CPU Score - 2837

*Graphics Test 1 - 27.87 fps

*Graphics Test 2 - 36.27 fps

*Night Raid CPU P - 202.6 ms

[youxia]

 

On 12/28/2020 at 5:03 PM, Atarick said:

Precisely. And this has been a major misstep in nearly all of the gaming pundit reviews so far. The "Atari's VCS is a big $400 joke of a PC!" line is both completely inaccurate and grossly misinformed.

No, it isn't, because 389.99 USD is the price which you will see when you go to the official site and click on Preorder Now. If you got it for ~250USD then that's indeed not a bad price, but what matters for prospective buyers now is the price from now, and that's what it should be compared to and reviewed as.

 

 

[+LS650]

On 12/28/2020 at 7:49 AM, Mockduck said:

I don't really understand why people are using $400 as the price benchmark for equivalent DIY PC builds.

Because that's the price shown now in their online store.  The VCS caught my eye only recently, with all of the hubbub around folks finally getting one.  I might be persuaded to buy one - but not at $400 (or $380 as you say).

Edited December 31, 2020 by ls650

[Mockduck]

I get that today orders are too expensive, but if 99.99% of all object owners paid X for it, maybe that should be the number used. 

[Atarick]

4 hours ago, youxia said:

 

No, it isn't, because 389.99 USD is the price which you will see when you go to the official site and click on Preorder Now. If you got it for ~250USD then that's indeed not a bad price, but what matters for prospective buyers now is the price from now, and that's what it should be compared to and reviewed as.

 

 

I haven't seen a single review that leads with the price then dissects it accordingly. Whatever. It's a package price. The price is slightly higher than it should be but not absurdly so. It should come down, and I bet it will. It still shouldn't excuse some of the laughably uninformed "hot takes" I've seen in pundit world these past few months. 

[zzip]

On 12/28/2020 at 2:56 AM, mogul345 said:

Figures, forgot to search reddit (assumed Google would index it better than Reddit's search).

reddit doesn't turn up in that many searches unless you add reddit as a search term.

 

The search engines changed over the years, and not for the better.   They seem to favor certain sites like Wikipedia, Quora, and StackExchange while downplaying a lot else.   You don't get the interesting and relevant results that you used to get very easily anymore.

[CPUWIZ]

2 hours ago, zzip said:

The search engines changed over the years, and not for the better.

 

Depends on how you use it.

[orange808]

Okay.

 

Well... the cheapeat Wintel core i3 Alienware Alpha "r1" was originally planned to be a Steam machine.

 

These are the Time Spy scores from the 3dmark website:

3DMark Score

1307

Graphics Score

1265

CPU Score

1616

Graphics Test 1

8.21 fps

Graphics Test 2

7.29 fps

CPU Test

5.43 fps

 

If you want to play fairly recent games on Steam at 720p with high settings, the very dated seven year old "Steam machine" should have a significant edge.  Granted it cost $549 to buy one at launch (in 2014), but it also came with Windows installed.

 

The VCS should have an edge with emulation.  The Alpha is also handicapped by its physical hard drive (way back in 2014, hdd was still acceptable).  VCS file operations should be faster.

 

If a used Alpha was available in good condition, it might be a better buy for some users.  I was hoping for a little more performance from the VCS.

[zzip]

23 hours ago, CPUWIZ said:

 

Depends on how you use it.

Yes, you can always throw the site you want to search in the query,   but the search engines used to give better, more relevant results from a wider variety of sites without having to do that.

[CPUWIZ]

1 hour ago, zzip said:

Yes, you can always throw the site you want to search in the query,   but the search engines used to give better, more relevant results from a wider variety of sites without having to do that.

 

Results are favored by revenue, so you need to know what you are looking for, it's been changing for a long time.