Problems with PUBG: Not All GPUs Render Equally

In part of our testing with PUBG, we did stumble across a particularly alarming scenario which we never really see with standardized testing. When comparing Snapdragon to Kirin, trying to observe Huawei's quoted performance differences, there appears to be a major difference between what Adreno phones were rendering, and what Mali powered phones were rendering and displaying.

Looking into more detail, it’s very obvious that the OnePlus 6 tested here (a Snapdragon/Adreno phone) resulted in far better image quality compared to the other phones.

 

      

There are two notable characteristics. First of all, the Adreno render is simply a lot sharper. It looks like the game uses a very different image scaling algorithm. For equality testing, we set the rendering resolution to 720p and upscaled to 1080p on all of the phones. While the Adreno shows up as relatively sharp, the Mali phones are seemingly quite blurry, and this is actually also noticeable on the phone when playing.

The second noticeable element, and arguably more important, is that the Adreno phone actually has anisotropic texture filtering enabled, while the Mali devices are seemingly ignoring it and falling back to bilinear filtering. In a game like PUBG, this is also very noticeable when playing and creates quite big picture quality differences. This also puts quite a differential load on the graphics, resulting in an apples-to-oranges comparison.

Consequently, Huawei’s GPU Turbo marketing comparisons to the competition also are questionable: the anisotropic filtering performance issue can impact framerates by much as 16-18% on its own. Because the Mali GPU devices have this issue, it creates a very unequal comparison when diagnosing performance to such detail. It means that out of the gate, the performance of the Mali phones is already up 16-18%, but at the expense of quality. (Ed: We used to see this a lot in the PC space over 10 years ago, where different GPUs would render different paths or have ‘tricks’ to reduce the workload. They don’t anymore.)

It’s also to be noted that while the Mali devices actually should have a workload advantage given that they’re not doing nearly as much texture filtering work as the Adreno, the performance and efficiency of the Adreno smartphones is still better. Although admittedly the differences are minor given that the game caps out at a maximum of 40fps at maximum quality. That only leaves power efficiency as the metric.

For power efficiency, even with the difference in rendering paths and quality, here Snapdragon 845 phones have a massive advantage, playing the game at 2.5-3W with AF enabled, while the Kirin 970 phones routinely average at 4-4.5W. The higher power consumption and efficiency means that the battery life on those devices will have a deficit.

Real World vs. Synthetic Testing

While I fully understand Huawei’s focus on real-world performance comparison in PUBG rather than synthetic benchmarks, we use synthetic benchmarks to determine the varacity of new features for a good reason – they are industry standards and well understood. Honor’s and Huawei’s marketing focus on PUBG seems a bit poorly thought out when it comes to actual technical comparisons in that regard, which we address on the next page.

There is the added aspect of different GPUs not even rendering the same graphics path, as described below: the fact that Adreno GPUs add anisotropic filtering and have higher quality image scaling effectively means they’re running at a noticeably higher image quality level. This is not taken into account in the performance and efficiency comparisons in Huawei’s materials, lending the materials to be a lot less credible. 

The Bottom Line

Still, GPU Turbo is a promising new technology that will give Huawei a competitive edge, all other things being equal. The sad fact here is that for the Kirin 960 and Kirin 970, things are not equal. The competitive landscape will change a lot with the Kirin 980, but until then, current generation device users need have a clear understanding and realistic expectations to what GPU Turbo can actually bring to the table.

The Difficulty in Analyzing GPU Turbo The Minor Issue of Overzealous Marketing
POST A COMMENT

64 Comments

View All Comments

  • GreenReaper - Wednesday, September 5, 2018 - link

    > all members of the invited press to the show, typically around 500-2000, are sampled

    Curious.... so, what you're saying is that a Chinese company is going all-out to provide devices designed to monitor personal data to every possible tech journalist - and they can now coincidentally no longer become root to investigate them...?
    Reply
  • Smell This - Wednesday, September 5, 2018 - link

    Creative Engineering

    (i.e., imaginative and innovative marketing ___ to cheat)

    ;-)
    Reply
  • yhselp - Wednesday, September 5, 2018 - link

    If GPU Turbo is actually capable of smoothing out frame-time, it might be a huge win for consumers. It doesn't matter how pretty a game looks, or how fast it renders, if it has an inconsistent frame-time, making the controls sluggish. Any person who cares about gaming on a smartphone, especially something like PUBG and MOBAs, should find responsive controls preferable over higher image quality and sheer framerate. If Huawei manages to deliver smoother gameplay on its devices, it would be a huge win, despite the lower image quality.

    Hopefully they make tools to test frame-time easily available. We can't expect Digital Foundry to manually test every supported Kirin device and game.
    Reply
  • s.yu - Friday, September 7, 2018 - link

    It's a huge loss for consumers in the long term if they get away time and again with their deception. Reply
  • Achtung_BG - Wednesday, September 5, 2018 - link

    I love anandtech, good job! Reply
  • Flunk - Wednesday, September 5, 2018 - link

    "Up To" always makes me suspicious, always. I could claim that adding my sticker to your phone could offer up to a 200% frame rate increase and still not technically be incorrect. Reply
  • s.yu - Friday, September 7, 2018 - link

    I agree, how about citing the 1st percentage of performance numbers, read a spike for a second and stick it on the ad. Reply
  • mazz7 - Thursday, September 6, 2018 - link

    Huawei is surely moving fast in this mobile arena :) look forward into the new device that use Kirin 980 Reply
  • abufrejoval - Thursday, September 6, 2018 - link

    Can't say that I care that much about mobile gaming any more, did some on the tablets but since those only receive left-over hardware these days, I'll just stick to the desktop for gaming.

    I could be attracted to buy a Kirin 980 device, simply to play with the NN accellerator, but with a locked down bootloader, they locked themselves out of my MVP.

    Hopefully a HiKey980 model will be available shortly, that doesn't have this crazy limitation, I was getting very close to buying the HiKey970, when the Kirin 980 appeared.

    I still fail to see the rationale behind the lock-down decision and I wish you could have drilled a bit into the engineers in Berlin to find out why they changed their policy. If it's all about hiding the architectural weaknesses you so regularly expose, it doesn't really seem to be working.

    It's a little irritating that HMD/Nokia is following the same path and it's easy to see why phone for the Chinese domestic market would be locked down by order of the government to ensure any government trojan is properly protected from removal.

    But EU/free world imports without unlockable bootloader should really be banned.

    If it's all about compensating for the lack of a secure element or HSM on the phone e.g. for payment, it's just a very bad design choice. I understand why Google didn't want the Telcos charge rent on SIM cards, but an approach like the L4 kernel on a dedicated CPU chosen by Apple seems a better alternative.
    Reply
  • s.yu - Friday, September 7, 2018 - link

    So it's settled then, by Anandtech as always. Great work! Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now