Today Basemark released a new cross-platform benchmark, aptly named Basemark GPU. The new benchmark is a result of what is claimed to be two and a half years of development. The key characteristic of Basemark GPU is that it's aiming for all platforms and graphics APIs. By default it uses different workload complexities on desktop and mobile in order to match the expected performance of the platform. However the desktop client can also be set to the mobile profile to allow for more apples-to-apples testing with mobile devices.

Today's launch includes Windows, Linux and Android releases, supporting OpenGL and Vulkan graphics APIs. In the coming months it's said that we'll see DirectX 12 and Metal (iOS) added to the mix. The benchmark also supports selectable texture compression formats with a choice between ETC2, ASTC and EC7.

The benchmark is also designed to give the most amount of information on performance possible, and the regular score reporting includes average, minimum, and maximum FPS. The benchmark is also able to output frame-time data, which for mobile devices is a first for a free benchmarking applicaiton. 

We've been in contact with Basemark over the last couple of weeks in terms of providing feedback and evaluations of the new test in regards to our mobile testing suite. Having a new mobile benchmark in particular is of great value as the ecosystem is severely lacking good and reliable benchmarking tools.

Gallery: Basemark GPU

The new test can be downloaded on the Play Store for Android, and on the Basemark website for Windows and Linux platforms. 

POST A COMMENT

32 Comments

View All Comments

  • Alexvrb - Thursday, June 21, 2018 - link

    No they're not... though to be fair that's mostly an indication of how bad Intel's iGPUs are for the die space they consume. That may change though in a year or two if they're serious about uh, getting serious. Reply
  • mode_13h - Friday, June 22, 2018 - link

    I maintain that they are - you just haven't been following recent smartphone GPU developments. There's little daylight in the specs of the latest Mali or Adreno and that of Intel's UHD 630.

    The irony of having this debate in this very thread is that Basemark GPU *should* make it very easy to settle. Unfortunately, their results browser doesn't let you see results for the same settings between PC and Phone. Maybe Tero @ Basemark can fix this?

    https://powerboard.basemark.com/home
    Reply
  • Alexvrb - Monday, June 25, 2018 - link

    You said "They are actually not so far apart"

    I said "No, they're not."

    As in, I agree with you. They're NOT (so far apart).
    Reply
  • mode_13h - Tuesday, June 26, 2018 - link

    Cool, thanks.

    I *do* hope we see improvements to their comparison tool, soon.
    Reply
  • FreckledTrout - Wednesday, June 20, 2018 - link

    I could see a place for both but really if you are going to deviate by platform you must keep a common benchmark that runs across platforms. Reply
  • HStewart - Wednesday, June 20, 2018 - link

    I don't believe we can ever have a bench mark that can truly for all device. It hard enough on the PC include PC Mobile platforms - but to include smart phones with smaller screens and ARM processors.

    Just take x86 CPU's alone
    1. Core difference between vendors and versions can be huge - especially with advance operations like AVX2 and AVX512
    2. Differences of how chip is designed - does not mean that same chip frequency equals same power
    3. Number of cores - does not always means it faster - it depends on how the core performs.

    GPU's have similar types of difference - but a big concern - because the architecture is not base on the same common base as with x86 based cpus.

    Then throwing ARM based smartphones and tablets in mix - with totally different designed and purpose messes up tests a lot.

    Then there the human factor of the developer writing the tests - are they possibly bias toward a product and not completely taking advantage of a certain product. For example this can be done just by mere factor of trying to make a test so generic across platforms that it does not take full advantage of specific platform.

    I see two types of tests out there

    1. tests based on generic applications, games and such - which subject to speculation based on each implementation. For example, it will be extremely hard for some one tell me that ARM based CPU can run 3DMax faster than x86 workstation CPU or even x86 Tablet.

    2. Test base on sheer computer power of machine. Test like Spec are the close as we get to this - tests using .net or Java are subject to speculation depending on the runtime used. I believe the ideal performance benchmark - would be done in assembly from the manufacture and all designed to specific process as fast as possible.

    3. having multiple cores in the mix - actually complicates things a lot - as a software developer for many years - multi-core performance can be difficult thing to measure and implemented because in essence the screen is still single threaded.
    Reply
  • Tero @ Basemark - Wednesday, June 20, 2018 - link

    Hi, it's Tero @ Basemark. One can run the benchmark with identical complexities and workloads in both desktops and smartphones. The higher complexity is meant to adequately stress a desktop but you can also run the less complex workload with a desktop. Reply
  • Alexvrb - Wednesday, June 20, 2018 - link

    I hope you guys are planning on eventually compiling the Windows version for ARM64. Maybe when you release the DX12 update. It would be nice to make a native DX12-to-DX12 comparison on the same OS, but it only makes sense if you've got native versions for both platforms. Even better if they used the same compiler. Reply
  • Tero @ Basemark - Thursday, June 21, 2018 - link

    Thanks, that's a good idea, our product team is now reviewing it for next release Reply
  • Alexvrb - Thursday, June 21, 2018 - link

    …I accept cash, paypal, and graphics cards. :D Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now