# Mantle API presentation by AMD, DICE and Oxide - AMD Summit 2013



## RoutedScripter (Nov 14, 2013)

*Mantle API presentation by AMD, DICE and Oxide - AMD Summit 2013 (UPD1: Some Numbers)*

UPD4: _Secret_ Demo Slides FOUND!
UPD6: I've mixed some terms, only the secret demo is Oxide, the presentation and slide I made is from Nixxes.
UPD8: OXIDE Demo Video Now Available!
UPD9: Fixed Wrong Oxide Slides Link


This pertains more to software and more to gaming than any other subforum, so after a thought I think it fits here. However for now it's obviously AMD specific.


*AMD Presentation:*
AMD Mantle Technical Deep Dive - APU13 Event - PC ...   (Without Q&A)

OR

https://t.co/04qQ63XkW8

1. Register
2. Click This Link Again
3. Enter email
4. Top Right Search "mantle"
5. Click: "_BREAKOUT: GS-4112 Mantle: Empowering 3D Graphics Innovation_"



*DICE Presentation:*
https://t.co/04qQ63XkW8

1. Register
2. Click This Link Again
3. Enter email
4. Top Right Search "mantle"
5. Click: "_KEYNOTE: Rendering Battlefield 4 with Mantle_"

*Oxide Nixxes Presentation: (Thief)*
https://t.co/04qQ63XkW8

1. Register
2. Click This Link Again
3. Enter email
4. Top Right Search "mantle"
5. Click: "_BREAKOUT: GS-4151 Developing Thief with new AMD technology_"


For DICE and Oxide Nixxes I haven't found on youtube, but the AMD presentation on youtube is from a differrent source than the official one, however seems like it's better quality but with the guys making noises (the official stream probably doesn't have those noises but i haven't watched it again)

Also, from the AMD presentation, you can see that AMD has the chief architects for Mantle, I saw some noobhats on neogaf talking about how "EA and DICE made Mantle with AMD helping along", total fud.



TLDR;

1. Massive Performance boost for all things GPU over all other PC APIs (we're talking about stuff like 50% - 150% more FPS, it's definitely not only 10FPS, the initial BF4 thing is just the start)
2. No more CPU bottlnecking the GPU.
3. Zero CPU cost and latency for GPU operations.
4. Better visuals possible, techniques, features you never saw on PC before, ever.
5. Optimization possibilities would cut costs of many visual options that simply ate it in DX, no more huge FPS drops because someone threw a smoke grenade(for example)
6: Multi-GPU Scaling working like it should (which means +90% efficiency)




Updates:

UPD: Official DICE Slides http://www.mediafire.com/download/s4h21sjyvotdtd1/APU13_Johan_Andersson_DICE_Keynote_FINAL.pdf
UPD2: Official AMD Slides http://www.mediafire.com/download/756rc480otk58af/GS-4112_Riguer.pdf
UPD3: I made Oxide Nixxes Slides: http://i.imgur.com/nt5217p.png
UPD4: *SOME CPU NUMBERS - SECRET OXIDE NITROUS DEMO:* http://www.hardware.fr/news/13450/apu13-oxide-fait-exploser-limite-cpu-avec-mantle.html   (nobody can find the video, it's not in the official archives on AMD's site)


_Secret_ Demo Slides Preview:

















---------------------------------------------------------
*UPD5: New Q&A Video:* AMD Mantle Q&A with Developers at APU13 - YouTube (not the Oxide one, we're still waiting for it to show up if it will)

--------
UPD6: I've mixed some terms, only the secret demo is Oxide, the presentation and slide I made is from Nixxes.

----------------------------------------------------------
UPD7:

Quote of 8pack from OCUK - someone was at the AMD Summit:


> Guys alot is happening with this!!! The performance is nothing short of amazing. Watch this space!!



UPD8:
"Secret" Oxide Demo Now Available:









UPD9:
Fixed Wrong Oxide "Secret" Slides Link

UPD10:
New Oxide Demo Video (+7000 units)


----------



## RCoon (Nov 14, 2013)

RuskiSnajper said:


> TLDR;
> 1. Massive Performance boost for all things GPU over all other PC APIs (we're talking about stuff like 50% - 150% more FPS, it's definitely not only 10FPS, the initial BF4 thing is just the start)
> 2. No more CPU bottlnecking the GPU.
> 3. Zero CPU cost and latency for GPU operations.
> ...



Those are some very bold claims to make. I doubt they'll make it 100% on any of them, but it's nice to see them trying to make a difference, particularly them claiming that while "other" GPU's could get 60FPS in a game, with mantle they could get 120FPS (from that 50-150% FPS increase you're claiming). That won't happen. I await to see the multi-GPU scaling promises as well, it took them a while to deal with that.


----------



## Sempron Guy (Nov 14, 2013)

This better be true else it would be another claim like  those during bulldozer all over again. Does EA's BF4 Mantle support still on track this december? Can't wait to  see the results but for now I'll take these claims with big bag full of salt.


----------



## RoutedScripter (Nov 14, 2013)

The differences will not be noticable to most, because mantle and support will gradually increase, so will game complexity and vistual effects, which will lower FPS.

These statements probably are too low, the performance increase could probably be even higher, the posibility is there, it just takes programmers to put effort into. The initial BF4 release probably won't show the true power of Mantle at all.

Most of the pessimists around the interwebs are mostly neogaf noobs and other gamer dudes who don't really comprehend what this means, all this hardware is useless without software, and seemingly small changes in software techniques bring big peformance improvements, however not all of that will be noticed in the increased FPS, ofcourse the CPU time and resources will be much lower, and that doesn't directly show up as higher FPS ofcourse.

People who could barely run BF4 would be able to run in good!


----------



## Easy Rhino (Nov 14, 2013)

does this mean with mantle that if i have a top of the line gpu and an old amd x2 3800 that the cpu will not bottleneck????? that would be huge...


----------



## Frick (Nov 14, 2013)

Easy Rhino said:


> does this mean with mantle that if i have a top of the line gpu and an old amd x2 3800 that the cpu will not bottleneck????? that would be huge...



That would be witchcraft.

Seriously thought I want to see it in action and read some proper reviews and stuff!


----------



## HTC (Nov 14, 2013)

Easy Rhino said:


> does this mean with mantle that if i have a top of the line gpu and an old amd x2 3800 that the cpu will not bottleneck????? that would be huge...



This may be their intention but i have serious doubts it will work as they claim: seems over optimistic, IMO, but time will tell.

Still, any benefits it may end up bringing makes the tech worth while, no?


----------



## Xzibit (Nov 14, 2013)

Here is an interesting quote...



> *James Prior*
> 
> "With Mantle, an @AMDFX 8350 underclocked to 2GHZ, the game is still GPU bound on a R9 290X - no loss in frame rate"


----------



## mafia97 (Nov 14, 2013)

will gtx 580 support mantle , kepler supports mantle - read somewhere
EDIT : I know gtx 580 is not kepler


----------



## Mathragh (Nov 14, 2013)

I find it very telling that the guy from dice kept emphasising that he really thinks this is the way forward, and that other vendors should also support this.


----------



## SIGSEGV (Nov 14, 2013)

RCoon said:


> Those are some very bold claims to make. I doubt they'll make it 100% on any of them, but it's nice to see them trying to make a difference, particularly them claiming that while "other" GPU's could get 60FPS in a game, with mantle they could get 120FPS (from that 50-150% FPS increase you're claiming). That won't happen. I await to see the multi-GPU scaling promises as well, it took them a while to deal with that.











mafia97 said:


> will gtx 580 support mantle , kepler supports mantle - read somewhere
> EDIT : I know gtx 580 is not kepler



it because mantle is an Open API 

https://twitter.com/repi/status/400803254147485696/photo/1

huge win for AMD


----------



## RCoon (Nov 14, 2013)

SIGSEGV said:


> http://puu.sh/5i4JW.png



That's all incredibly vague. I'll believe it when I see it, and see it, I do not.

Somebody provide me with hard facts, then I'll become a belieber in Mantle.


----------



## Mathragh (Nov 14, 2013)

RCoon said:


> That's all incredibly vague. I'll believe it when I see it, and see it, I do not.
> 
> Somebody provide me with hard facts, then I'll become a belieber in Mantle.



While ofc they don't prove anything, you should really watch the presentations.

All three are really informative, and all provide a really nice perspective on what this API means for developers.

Its almost shocking how bad the situation apparently sometimes was tbh, although the fact that drivers needed so much tinkering at both sides should've been a major clue(in hindsight).

Also, I find it striking that it is AMD, not Nvidia that came with this. Ofc AMD now has the consoles which make things a lot easier, but Nvidia always likened to profile itself as a software company. I suppose the fact that they would've probably wanted to implement it in a proprietary way would limit its use(see PhysX).


----------



## RCoon (Nov 14, 2013)

Mathragh said:


> While ofc they don't prove anything, you should really watch the presentations.
> 
> All three are really informative, and all provide a really nice perspective on what this API means for developers.
> 
> ...



I hope nobody get's me wrong, I genuinely want AMD to do all this and make everything better in an Open kind of way. Sadly most companies, not just AMD, tend not to deliver on their promises.


----------



## vega22 (Nov 14, 2013)

ati have had the lead in multi gpu scaling for years, this will only help that but also show nv failings more too.

what i find hard to swallow is it removing any cpu bottleneck.


----------



## Easy Rhino (Nov 14, 2013)

i just don't see how this is possible. mantle must completely rewrite the rules for coding 3d games...


----------



## Mathragh (Nov 14, 2013)

RCoon said:


> I hope nobody get's me wrong, I genuinely want AMD to do all this and make everything better in an Open kind of way. Sadly most companies, not just AMD, tend not to deliver on their promises.



Aye, same here. It sure does look like atleast AMD has their side of the story covered, and I suppose that makes sense since they needed to provide something similar for console developers anyway.
Now its up to the developers, and (hopefully?) Nvidia and Intel to provide support for this aswell. If those presenters are to be believed, there isn't really a big downside to using this API, so from a software development point I suppose mantle makes sense. However, I don't see either Nvidia or Intel easily rolling over and provide support for this, even if it was actually quite doable and gave them a decent performance boost.


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Nov 14, 2013)

There is gonna be a lot of butt hurt people when Mantel turns out to be pixie dust.


----------



## RoutedScripter (Nov 14, 2013)

Sempron Guy said:


> This better be true else it would be another claim like  those during bulldozer all over again. Does EA's BF4 Mantle support still on track this december? Can't wait to  see the results but for now I'll take these claims with big bag full of salt.



This is not a claim, this is the API in which AMD only designed the core of it with help from DICE, It's up to BF4 development team to get it up the speed they have time until december deadline, the game it self does most of the things the DX drivers do in DX games, no more reliance on AMD updates to get your game running (Rage), the developer will be able to put out an emergency hotfix in a day or even hours to fix any kind of GPU problems, unless it's an API problem but games won't get released if that would be the case, they can't work with a buggy API. But with Mantle, it will be much easier to make the game stable enough before it even releases, unlike in DX, which in order to get the game running great, 2 companies would have to cooperate on an inefficinet, buggy old API called DirectX, not to mention OS interaction, windows runs on a buggy and crappy code compared to linux.


This thing doesn't have just performance benefits, it's so much all around improvement.

I don't want to speculate in number too much, but if the initial BF4 demo proves to be significant, then you can only guess what comes when a game that has been designed for mantle from ground up will look like, this is the trick, the available resources will simply be taken for more visuals and tasks so it probably won't be that easy to spot the difference, this number are perfectly realistic, I think they might be too low if you ask me honestly, in the long run. 






Easy Rhino said:


> does this mean with mantle that if i have a top of the line gpu and an old amd x2 3800 that the cpu will not bottleneck????? that would be huge...



Indeed, the API works completely differently and is designed to allow multi-threading easily, it will smoke DX in this area, with DX, the CPU had to spoonfeed the GPU, now GPU works almost (im not sure if it's 100%) independently, and the huge driver and API overheads in CPU are gone, you're looking at somewhere from 50% and up less CPU utilization for the same work 

And the quote is


> "_Mantle will just blow the socks off CPU optimization_"






marsey99 said:


> ati have had the lead in multi gpu scaling for years, this will only help that but also show nv failings more too.
> 
> what i find hard to swallow is it removing any cpu bottleneck.



If DICE or Oxide Games quickly focuses on mutli-gpu scaling, then Crossfire will absolutely smoke anything you've seen before, utilitzation is now like 40-15%, the more cards you add the less it scales, this will not be with Mantle.

Well there probably will be some CPU bottleneck, I can't say no because I don't know my self for sure, but it will lower it *significantly*.

Quote: "On PC it's like above 50% but on Consoles is just a little bit, we want to get that down to console levels"

Which means, for example, on PC, if your APP uses 50% CPU resources, 50% of that is wasted on Spoonfeeding, so with Mantle, your CPU would then have ~25%.





Easy Rhino said:


> i just don't see how this is possible. mantle must completely rewrite the rules for coding 3d games...



Indeed



http://techreport.com/news/25651/ma...ite-games-dice-calls-for-multi-vendor-support

Quote:


> Jorjen Katsman of Nixxes, the firm porting Thief to the PC, mentioned a reduction in API overhead from 40% with DirectX 11 to around 8% with Mantle. He added that it's "not unrealistic that you'd get 20% additional GPU performance" with Mantle.



This is just the beginning guys!


----------



## Hilux SSRG (Nov 14, 2013)

Not much was really said and AMD is just playing marketing games to keep people talking about Mantle and its endless world hunger cures.  And Nvidia is touting its CUDA update in a try to stem Mantle talk.  

Has AMD put out the SDK for Mantle yet?


----------



## Easy Rhino (Nov 14, 2013)

TheMailMan78 said:


> There is gonna be a lot of butt hurt people when Mantel turns out to be pixie dust.



this seems a lot like that "unlimited detail technology' snakeoil. promising grand changes to the world of graphics but never ever delivers... sell your AMD stock now.


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Nov 14, 2013)

Easy Rhino said:


> this seems a lot like that "unlimited detail technology' snakeoil. promising grand changes to the world of graphics but never ever delivers... sell your AMD stock now.



The last time RuskiSnajper had a thread like this it was the "MEGA RAGE" thread and how iD software was gonna change the world with the tech5 engine........we all saw how that turned out.

http://www.techpowerup.com/forums/showthread.php?t=150325


----------



## TheGuruStud (Nov 14, 2013)

TheMailMan78 said:


> The last time RuskiSnajper had a thread like this it was the "MEGA RAGE" thread and how iD software was gonna change the world with the tech5 engine........we all saw how that turned out.
> 
> http://www.techpowerup.com/forums/showthread.php?t=150325



The game wasn't very good lol. When was the last time iD made a great game? 

At least mantle is something new. An OK game with a bleh engine isn't exciting.


----------



## Nordic (Nov 14, 2013)

Easy Rhino said:


> this seems a lot like that "unlimited detail technology' snakeoil. promising grand changes to the world of graphics but never ever delivers... sell your AMD stock now.



I remember that unlimited detail technology. The difference between mantle and UDT is that AMD can't hide if it does not pan out.


----------



## MxPhenom 216 (Nov 14, 2013)

james888 said:


> I remember that unlimited detail technology. The difference between mantle and UDT is that AMD can't hide if it does not pan out.



Difference between UDT and anything is the fact, that GPUs today are not exactly made to process graphics the way UDT wants. They can do it technically, but performance would be balls.


----------



## RoutedScripter (Nov 14, 2013)

TheMailMan78 said:


> The last time RuskiSnajper had a thread like this it was the "MEGA RAGE" thread and how iD software was gonna change the world with the tech5 engine........we all saw how that turned out.
> 
> http://www.techpowerup.com/forums/showthread.php?t=150325



1. They didn't focus on PC as they promised but the mod tool still got released, the internal problems were far worse than I've allowed my self to speculate, doom4 debacle, carmack now working for Oculus.
2. This is exactly what Mantle will fix, all the rage problems were because of AMD OGL Drivers. The developers would be able to fix all those problems before the game would ship. The clusterfuck on Rage was supercharged because AMD released the wrong driver initially, it had nothing to do with the game, the game code was the most bugless and clean of any game at the time.

All these things were impossible to predict from outside.


----------



## erocker (Nov 14, 2013)

Unlike UDT, Mantle is real. I managed to watch the entire keynote without falling asleep.... That is all.


----------



## Hilux SSRG (Nov 14, 2013)

erocker said:


> Unlike UDT, Mantle is real. I managed to watch the entire keynote without falling asleep.... That is all.



Did the keynote stop at some point to include any live in-game footage, preferably BF4?


----------



## Frick (Nov 14, 2013)

TheMailMan78 said:


> There is gonna be a lot of butt hurt people when Mantel turns out to be pixie dust.



I'm sure others have pointed out that this is AMD, not some small company in the australian outback. And Dice have said it's cool. It might not be the second (or third) coming of Jeebus, but I'd say it goes a bit beyond pixie dust.

All discussion or sort of moot though until we see it in action.


----------



## RoutedScripter (Nov 14, 2013)

Hilux SSRG said:


> Did the keynote stop at some point to include any live in-game footage, preferably BF4?



No, it's not done yet. I'm not talking about Mantle it self.

Look initial Mantle is already done, but they will keep updating the API ofcourse, DICE is making the render now, it's not just updating the existing engine, they probably started doing it in september or a bit earlier, the 2 months might be total hours summed up so it might mean more practical time, I think you guys should get a bit more patience, the Mantle opens up the possibility, it has no code on it's own for any of the games, the developers have to rewrite the whole graphics engine and then develop optimizations that will further increase peformance beyond DX implementation. And If i remember, DICE guy said somewhere they already have it basically done, but not with all the visual features, most of them, but they need more time to develop optimizations, so if they do a really good job that's how good it will be, right now, they have nothing to show, unless they're lying, but these are developer summits, not PR summits, like E3 or something, why would they make stuff up, unless you're nvidia.

The Mantle is there now, they could show it, they could get out the code right now, the problem is, there's no point, Mantle it self does nothing, it's not a driver like DX drivers are, although it has a thin mantle-specific driver but that's solely hardware operational stuff, no optimizations, no app-specific code, nothing, barebone, only so that the Mantle works and OS can detect the hardware properly. I do not yet know how that will all work in practise, will be able to run both drivers at once, AMD rep said it'll be released in the december Catalyst package, that's only the driver, but since they haven't made it Open yet, this is speculation, I think mantle it self might come with the APP it self in a form of a DLL file or something, the point is, whatever the implementation is around this, there will be no such thing as constant AMD updates needed to run Mantle games, the developers of the game are now the "driver builders" at the same time and they're going to do a much better job, this is the whole point of the existance of this API.

It's also good to note that, it's not just about giving developers control, away from Vendor's, under DX and OGL, all those driver optimizations were hacks, not proper to the metal coding like developer will be able to do now.

OGL and DX drivers contain game-specific optimizations, because the APIs are ridicolous, a ton of things that run in them, and those are all driver hacks, they're not proper optimizations, it's just a pile of junk that is FINALLY GOING TO GO AWAY.

What they mean with Mantle being close to the PS4 engine, it's about low-level, and they mean, they use the way of doing thing, techniques, how the code is structures is more closer to PS4 than to any other device compared with Mantle, this is their app specific stuff, but it also means the PS4 API might be better than Xone's and ofcourse GDDR5 makes all the difference, they have to restructure the engine for ESRAM (if you watched DICE keynote)

I've been waiting for this for the last 3 years, I never believed it would come so soon, this is just amazing. 

Imagine there is a gamebreaking GFX-related crash, or a huge FPS drop, that happens only on X card, on Y OS, with Z CPU, while running some specific program in the background, they don't have to wait for AMD to release the damn driver 3 weeks later, they can fix it them selfs, in a matter of days or hours even (hotfix) don't you get it how huge this is, among other little annoyances PC gamers had, all GONE.

The CPU and Crossfire optimizations will blow your heads off, even if Mantle doesn't make existing games run 50% faster, the Crossfire people will probably start crying or something. Don't you see it, SteamOS (clean, superfast linux code) + Mantle + Oculus Rift = The second PC golden age.

All those console boys who thought they would get 4K with next-gen, they're so going to get their butts smoken dry ...

What you guys need to do is to start pushing other developers to get on Mantle, because it requires developer work; people who don't understand tech need to know that Mantle isn't just an update you'll install and everything will run great. The Catalyst update in december does nothing by it self, only adds support, and you need BF4 and the BF4-Mantle update.

The worst case scenario I can image is, that some just-got-out-of-college trendy "indie" iphone developer (1,2) thinks he knows everything and tries to make a game and doesn't know what he's doing and starts crying to the media how "shit" mantle is, that could make a ton of people taking him seriously, who aren't techincally informed.


----------



## Hilux SSRG (Nov 14, 2013)

Frick's right, all discussion or sort of moot though until we see it in action. 

It's cool that AMD knows how to do PowerPoint slides, but we all want to see the results and bench Mantle vs DirectX.  Too bad Dice is first on bat cause its gonna be a BUGGY mess... ahem... looking right at you BF4!


----------



## Crap Daddy (Nov 14, 2013)

Now come on.  First it sounds too good to be true. Then Microsoft does not enjoy it. Then Intel might not like it at all. I'm sure NVidia downright hates it. These are three much bigger players in the game than AMD. Do you think Mantle will become a standard?


----------



## RoutedScripter (Nov 14, 2013)

Easy Rhino said:


> i just don't see how this is possible. mantle must completely rewrite the rules for coding 3d games...



Here's a little example









TheGuruStud said:


> The game wasn't very good lol. When was the last time iD made a great game?
> 
> At least mantle is something new. An OK game with a bleh engine isn't exciting.



Engine had nothing to do with Rage's problems, it was all the driver's fault. As I said, even AMD Driver teams have a hard time optimizing by hacking drivers, it's not the way to properly optimize and I am so excited this nonsense goes away already.




Frick said:


> I'm sure others have pointed out that this is AMD, not some small company in the australian outback. And Dice have said it's cool. It might not be the second (or third) coming of Jeebus, but I'd say it goes a bit beyond pixie dust.
> 
> All discussion or sort of moot though until we see it in action.



Dice didn't just said, dice among others wanted someone to do this, it was a vision for 5 years. It was co-development, which means continual meetings, and DICE guy visited AMD many times during this.

There's nothing moot about it. There are some details which aren't known yet, how will updating works, if old drivers will have to be uninstalled, etc, but that's a non issue, maybe this will change in future.

http://www.heise.de/newsticker/meld...ber-AMDs-3D-Schnittstelle-Mantle-2045398.html



Hilux SSRG said:


> Frick's right, all discussion or sort of moot though until we see it in action.
> 
> It's cool that AMD knows how to do PowerPoint slides, but we all want to see the results and bench Mantle vs DirectX.  Too bad Dice is first on bat cause its gonna be a BUGGY mess... ahem... looking right at you BF4!



Undoubtedly that battlefields are one of the most buggiest games, but that's more on the balance/functionality/script kind of things, the sycnronicity between animations and geometry is horrible, the weird physics and explosions, vehicle/object contact rubber banding, missing sound effects, missing damage feedback effects, it's not really a game I would give awards to.

BF4 might be better initially, but come on, I already know for a fact there is again the missing sound effect bug, affects footsteps and a few other stuff makes it so weird to play, not to mention recycling of old repetitive sound effects with no variation.


----------



## Frag_Maniac (Nov 14, 2013)

At first read this might sound like AMD vs MS on graphics APIs, but in reality DICE had a lot to do with it's development, and considering that, I'd trust them over MS to make an efficient graphics API.


----------



## Hilux SSRG (Nov 14, 2013)

RuskiSnajper said:


> Here's a little example



Here's another example that's more fitting


----------



## RoutedScripter (Nov 14, 2013)

Here are some of the historical hints to this: I remember 3 years ago I was pumped something was done to get rid of DX, tons of developers pushing AMD to do something about it:

http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/graphics/2011/03/16/farewell-to-directx/
http://www.tomshardware.com/news/API-DirectX-11-Shader-Richard-Huddy-PC-gaming,12418.html
http://www.heise.de/newsticker/meld...h-Es-wird-kein-DirectX-12-kommen-1835338.html
http://news.bigdownload.com/2011/03/18/amd-game-developers-want-directx-to-go-away/
http://techreport.com/news/20628/amd-huddy-developers-want-directx-to-go-away
http://games.slashdot.org/story/11/...tting-in-the-way-of-pc-game-graphics-says-amd

AMD Huddy (2011):


> *On consoles, you can draw maybe 10,000 or 20,000 chunks of geometry in a frame, and you can do that at 30-60fps. On a PC, you can't typically draw more than 2-3,000 without getting into trouble with performance, and that's quite surprising - the PC can actually show you only a tenth of the performance if you need a separate batch for each draw call. *



All this time we were running thermoelectic powerplants in the house.:shadedshu


---------------------------
---------------------------

Throughout the years Carmack in interviews explained how much faster PCs would be with console-like approach of writing to the metal; "significantly more powerful"

But sees like Carmack changed gears toward Oculus and I think I can safely say he's pretty much irrelevant in this talk as others have taken it from the mouth to actual prototypes and I have to personally thank Johan Andersson. And now he seems to be defending Nvidia's OGL approach of first of all number 1. company to be screwing linux around, and even if carmack is correct about OGL extensions, that doesn't make all the other improvements that Mantle will bring, that doesn't make developers in control of the other stuff, that still will be dependant on the GPU vendor for various updates. 

I think some of the people more care about the industry as an investor, kind of looking at it how mcuh money it makes, and some totally non-AAA developers whine about "development costs" like they're some kind of public service for the industry, who cares how much it costs for 1 developer, it's their money and their right to do (almost) whatever they want with it ; I don't really care about the non-high end PC market, they can have how the heck they want, we on the high end want something that works the best without the pettyness and others slowing us down, nobody's dictating they should sell their house to buy a better PC, but they should stop allowing us to have alternative to spinn off the failtrain, and that's what DICE's doing and they deserve a huge thanks.

All this stupid blogger, twitter talkheads you see criticising Mantle, they are so irrelevant, and some of them are stupid "developers" out of college, brainwashed by call of duty and stupid iphone games, who think they know everything about the industry.

It's also known that id Software are almost all Nvidia fanboys and they joked "_we need to make sure next time we have some people with AMD cards in the office_" But I don't know why would he at some point take blame on them selfs but another point saying it's all AMD's fault, because technically it is AMDs fault, I think the "taking the blame" was more for damage control to kind of not make uninformed guys go nuts on "escaping and blaming someone else" ... with Mantle none of that would have happened with Rage.

But it's not really anyone's fault who works there, I don't want to come out hard now, the Doom4 debacle was a management issue, Carmack doesn't know how to manage, they didn't seem to taken it seriously then it got out of hand and the developers who were ofcourse young biased by other games made it into a call of duty clone, that would have been a disaster for id software if that got out, I am so glad it had a restart.

So there you go, those that think I'm too optimistic.


----------



## leeb2013 (Nov 14, 2013)

RuskiSnajper said:


> Here's a little example
> 
> http://i.imgur.com/ET5UsMi.png
> 
> ...


----------



## Easy Rhino (Nov 14, 2013)

either way, i support anything that is "open." we have to move away from the old directx architecture...


----------



## crazyeyesreaper (Nov 14, 2013)

TheMailMan78 said:


> There is gonna be a lot of butt hurt people when Mantel turns out to be pixie dust.



Exactly It all comes down to seeing it in action not just presentations anyone remember the guys at Euclideon who claimed Unlimited Detail? You know with all the interviews and videos and bs yet people still loved every minute of it? Oh yea no one has heard a damn thing from them in nearly 2 years with even their latest stuff still not up to par to regular plain old traditional techniques 

Unlimited Detail Real-Time Rendering Technology Pr...

Until Mantle is actually used and shows this 50-150% increase its pretty much just PR marketing speak and vague promises.


----------



## Easy Rhino (Nov 14, 2013)

crazyeyesreaper said:


> Exactly It all comes down to seeing it in action not just presentations anyone remember the guys at Euclideon who claimed Unlimited Detail? Y



i already mentioned that above. these types of bold claims never pan out. interesting that AMD and some of the dev companies seem to be selling it like the next big thing yet we don't see ANY evidence that is more than just a bunch of slides at a tradeshow.


----------



## crazyeyesreaper (Nov 14, 2013)

Yea you beat me to it Rhino I missed your comment while scrolling through the crap in this thread lol


----------



## Frick (Nov 14, 2013)

crazyeyesreaper said:


> Exactly It all comes down to seeing it in action not just presentations anyone remember the guys at Euclideon who claimed Unlimited Detail? You know with all the interviews and videos and bs yet people still loved every minute of it? Oh yea no one has heard a damn thing from them in nearly 2 years with even their latest stuff still not up to par to regular plain old traditional techniques
> 
> Euclideon Geoverse 2013 - YouTube
> 
> Until Mantle is actually used and shows this 50-150% increase its pretty much just PR marketing speak and vague promises.



And again, this is AMD and Dice making these claims, not just some dude. It could still be pixie dust, but AMD should know what they're doing.

And again, again, all is speculation until we see it in action. But I think it's extremely unfair to compare it with Unlimited Whatever. Completely different leagues.


----------



## natr0n (Nov 14, 2013)

Perhaps we should all wait till December and make judgements based on whats actually released.


----------



## 1Kurgan1 (Nov 15, 2013)

natr0n said:


> Perhaps we should all wait till December and make judgements based on whats actually released.



Agreed. I'm excited to see it, but I'm also not really putting any faith into it till it's there. I just know DirectX is old, and it's just been over a decade of stacking different instructions and crap on top of different ones. At a certain point in time, everything needs a rebuild, can't just keep building off the footing of an old infrastructure.


----------



## Easy Rhino (Nov 15, 2013)

natr0n said:


> Perhaps we should all wait till December and make judgements based on whats actually released.



Or we can talk about because that is what forums are for.


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Nov 15, 2013)

RuskiSnajper said:


> Here's a little example
> 
> http://i.imgur.com/ET5UsMi.png
> 
> ...


I think amd and dice have put a slant on mantle that miss aligns it with amds api reality. 
They wat one api able to optimise the use of cpux86-64 arm Gpu, dsps, possibly fpgas and a whole environment of circuitry busses and interfaces across all there products so it Leverages advantages. 
DICE got pr exclusive feature label they are not the main input to mantle.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Nov 15, 2013)

Easy Rhino said:


> i just don't see how this is possible. mantle must completely rewrite the rules for coding 3d games...


It's AMD applying console techniques to PC.  They're giving a direct path to developers to code for the GPU itself which eliminates a ton of overhead but at the cost of compatibility.  It's the same reason why consoles can achieve so much with so few resources.


----------



## natr0n (Nov 15, 2013)

FordGT90Concept said:


> It's AMD applying console techniques to PC.  They're giving a direct path to developers to code for the GPU itself which eliminates a ton of overhead but at the cost of compatibility.  It's the same reason why consoles can achieve so much with so few resources.


----------



## Frag_Maniac (Nov 15, 2013)

Only watched the developer summit so far. Everything sounded good until the AMD driver dev implied the multi threading part might be a bit of a hurdle for some game devs.

It's already to the point where the chip vendor that gets more consultation time from dev teams that endorse their product have a significant advantage. Reverse that and give the devs more advantage for games endorsing their product, and you only wind up with worse problems as far as games working noticeably better with one chip vendor than another.

At the start of the presentation they briefly implied the possibility of Mantle eventually being used by competitors as well, but it was mentioned rather half heatedly. I think we all know even if they pushed to expedite that, Nvidia would scoff at it.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Nov 15, 2013)

Multithreading is a challenge for all developers, always.  Games are especially difficult to multithread because most of it has to be symmetrical.

NVIDIA has a reputation for half-assing open implementations and pushing their own, proprietary designs.  AMD knows that so they're not going to get all lofty with expectations.  NVIDIA would rather reverse engineer it and sell it as their own product than cooperate with anyone else for an open standard.


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Nov 15, 2013)

FordGT90Concept said:


> Multithreading is a challenge for all developers, always.  Games are especially difficult to multithread because most of it has to be symmetrical.
> 
> NVIDIA has a reputation for half-assing open implementations and pushing their own, proprietary designs.  AMD knows that so they're not going to get all lofty with expectations.  NVIDIA would rather reverse engineer it and sell it as their own product than cooperate with anyone else for an open standard.


I'm not interly convinced of that take unified memory in win 8.1 for eg nvidia intel and the whole hsa foundation are prepping and moving it along and don't think they are all doing it the same way.
It might make sense for nvidia to make there own mantel cutting all but two apis out and limliting other mobile space opportunities for eg


----------



## Frag_Maniac (Nov 15, 2013)

FordGT90Concept said:


> Multithreading is a challenge for all developers, always.  Games are especially difficult to multithread because most of it has to be symmetrical.
> 
> NVIDIA has a reputation for half-assing open implementations and pushing their own, proprietary designs.  AMD knows that so they're not going to get all lofty with expectations.  NVIDIA would rather reverse engineer it and sell it as their own product than cooperate with anyone else for an open standard.



Yes I know MT has always been a challenge, but we HAVE seen more and more devs use at least quad threading, it's getting fairly common. What I mean is I don't think the AMD driver dev would have even mentioned it unless there were yet another level of learning curves involved MTing with Mantle, esp regarding all the bindings and assignments he was referring to. Anytime you have lots of options in an API, the parts that were already tricky are going to get even trickier. In other words Mantle is going to require an extensive guide just to learn everything that's possible with it. It will take yet another level of learning, much of it hands on probably, just for the MT part.

LOL, yeah Nvidia WOULD stoop to covertly reversing it and selling it as their own, but you have to wonder if it has THAT much success to begin with, AMD could do a LOT of damage as far as market share before it even comes to that.

I've yet to watch the DICE and Oxide presentations because I'm not keen on registering on that site just to do so. I might wait and see if someone uploads it to YT. If not I'm not going to worry about it. I already heard pretty much everything I wanted to know anyway. The other presentations are only going to be more game specific.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Nov 15, 2013)

If Mantle optimizations can be used in all titles created on the latest Frostbite engine with little/no work from the title devs, it'll be very popular. That's why DICE is important here: EA is using DICE's Frostbite engine as much as possible.


----------



## RoutedScripter (Nov 15, 2013)

Noteworthy stuff from heise.de interview (found by neogaf user Datschge)



> - Effort to have console-like access and programmability on PC started about 5 years ago. Spoke to different companies including Nvidia and Intel.
> - Respect for AMD being the sole company to realize his suggestions.
> - Yearly meetings, long discussions. Mantle code was started one and a half year ago.
> - Project was internally treated as top secret, similar to Eyefinity.
> ...





Initial quote from Project C.A.R.S programmer:



> “However, there isn’t any doubt in my mind that Mantle will solve the poor implementation of multi-threaded rendering in the PC space, more so for AMD since they don’t even support Driver Command Lists in DirectX! That alone will get them to 70-80% of next-gen console performance in terms of submitting draw calls to the hardware. When DICE reveal their Mantle version in mid November, you’ll see scalability that’s unheard of in the PC space e.g. some 6 or 8 core demo with submission performance many times that of DX, with lots of pretty charts.”


I've said it before, Multi-GPU people will be banging their heads all day long, out of joy.





crazyeyesreaper said:


> Exactly It all comes down to seeing it in action not just presentations anyone remember the guys at Euclideon who claimed Unlimited Detail? You know with all the interviews and videos and bs yet people still loved every minute of it? Oh yea no one has heard a damn thing from them in nearly 2 years with even their latest stuff still not up to par to regular plain old traditional techniques
> 
> Unlimited Detail Real-Time Rendering Technology Pr...
> 
> Until Mantle is actually used and shows this 50-150% increase its pretty much just PR marketing speak and vague promises.




UDT wasn't a proven thing. This is. And it's not even a fair comparison, just something that promised "boost". 


The performance boost for BF4 initial mantle demo release will most likely be at it's lowest, like 50% let's say, maybe higher if they manage to do it by december. But I hope it's a bit better to get the mainstream people talking, if it's not enough then mainstream will jump to conclusions and think that it's all Mantle's and AMD's fault and this thing would be as good as dead.

Next is CPU, significant improvements, and most of all, proper multithreading.

Multi-GPU, those charts can go as high as ~300% faster than DX, for Quadruple setups.


As I said, the problem with these numbers is, there would have to be a demo in same visual spec with DX and with super mantle implementation, but this will evolve over time, so these increases will come gradually and most people won't notice how much it has increased, also, developers using available performance for even more visuals, it won't have such a big apparent impact if you don't pay attention or track these things, I hope some GFX benchmarks out there make a controlled environment for comparison.

This is real deal analysis, this is the kind of info investors pay money for, too bad Pachter doesn't really know much about tech, this thing can take of so big it might cause nividia's profits to get a chainsaw just like another guy said around here.







So, their own words, 300% faster ... I might be totally wrong, I'm just trying to not bee too speculative, but deep down I think it's going to be a ton more than anyone expects.

It's also good to note that the 300% number there is the maximum, not average. The maximums will be higher since with proper control of the hardware the ALUs will utilize them 99%, not 50% of it being idle like it's now.


Also I have a big feeling that G-Sync might be totally obsolete for high-end markets, it already is obvious it's not targeted for high-end, it's for the 60hz monitor people with unstable FPS. I have a 144hz monitor and I have no problems with tearing since the tear probably appears too short of a time for the eyes to detect it, so it has no apparent tearing in practise, but I don't even care about visuals that much anyways.

Because, the high ends will go into multi-gpu setups, which means they definitely have enough money for 120-144hz monitors, even if you have 60FPS, just having a faster monitor practically makes tearing obsolete, but I'm still not an expert on tearing since I don't really care much about it unless it's super noticable, like on a 60hz monitor, I noticed it immediately when I tried it temporairly (not my own monitor), horrible feeling, had to enable Vsync for the first time in my life.

I really have to point out some clash of interests, I think there are some people trying for what-the-fick ever reason downplay Mantle, and even Carmack him self talking that he was pushing for G-Sync for years, it's totally clear he's humped on Nvidia, they're bringing up these "issues" of , I don't care about many APIs on the market, I care about the idea if you buy 2000€ machine it should be 10 times faster than a 300€ (vague but for an example) and whatever people use what they want and they please leave us the heck alone, unity fanboys are the biggest trolls, yes you can have it, make games however you like, just stop bothering us, we're not taking anything away from you.

All the idiots who said that Mantle won't bring advantages to linux, when mantle is the TOP thing that can basically set Linux and the whole PC platform to a giant golden age, this is what Linux needs, Linux doesn't need some company to release montly OGL extensions, it really is a rare occurance I don't agree with carmack and I mean that strongly, Oculus Rift is awesome stuff and I've been excited all the time, but look, OGL extensions don't make it full control, he didn't really explain much what nvidia's OGL extensions did that much good, it's still OGL, same principle and way things are don, still having to be inside the broader paradigm of devices, so Mantle is high-end only and that's how it should be, spin off them, they're too slow, the progress of software catching up hardware has been long too slow because these APIs hold us back, not any more. FFS


----------



## RoutedScripter (Nov 15, 2013)

natr0n said:


> Perhaps we should all wait till December and make judgements based on whats actually released.



Nothing wrong with being informed and closer to everyone else. Similarly how half of the stories on mainstream media has been known in alternative media for weeks, months sometimes a full year.




FordGT90Concept said:


> It's AMD applying console techniques to PC.  They're giving a direct path to developers to code for the GPU itself which eliminates a ton of overhead but at the cost of compatibility.  It's the same reason why consoles can achieve so much with so few resources.



Exactly, it's just a trade off, get rid of some compatability, get rid of some stuff that is acceptable to sacrifice in return for top performance. That's all there is to it. All these people whining about compatibility, don't understand, that I don't really give a damn about it to be honest, I want top peformance, so the Crossfire people can actually use what they paid for, the top PC games will be there, *it's the developers them selfs that wanted Mantle in the first place.
*

So, to make an Mantle engine it will take more time than it takes to build a DX renderer. But, since it's closer to how console renderers are developed, and with the bonus of transferring carefully created optimization code for GCN, the ports will be done so much faster for the time being, this bonus will ofcourse end when PC GPUs moves to new architecture.

AAA studios don't really care about the little bit of more cost and time it will take to build Mantle Renderers.

Once the mantle renderer is complete it can be improved on top, also there is much less time spent on fixing bugs post-release, because these have been eliminated in the first place (fine control).




FordGT90Concept said:


> Multithreading is a challenge for all developers, always.  Games are especially difficult to multithread because most of it has to be symmetrical.
> 
> NVIDIA has a reputation for half-assing open implementations and pushing their own, proprietary designs.  AMD knows that so they're not going to get all lofty with expectations.  NVIDIA would rather reverse engineer it and sell it as their own product than cooperate with anyone else for an open standard.



Providing low level api is nothing of a secret they would have to reverse engineer other's implementation, plus, AMD's initial thing is GCN-only, Nvidia wouldn't benefit that much, they would pretty much save time by doing it from scratch on their own.








This is an interesting one to point out, this approach claims to revolutionize PC scaling!

More slides here:
http://www.mediafire.com/?756rc480otk58af
http://www.mediafire.com/?s4h21sjyvotdtd1
http://i.imgur.com/nt5217p.png

Oxide Slides: (for some reason they're not on official PDF, so i had to screenshot them my self)


Spoiler











Actually, people should see all these slides before they even talk here  (i've watched all 3 presentations before even making this thread)

sorry for double post agian


----------



## Steevo (Nov 15, 2013)

RCoon said:


> That's all incredibly vague. I'll believe it when I see it, and see it, I do not.
> 
> Somebody provide me with hard facts, then I'll become a belieber in Mantle.



They already do this with close to metal applications written in native code for consoles. Add in the fancy tessellation and other new hardware features and 90% of games is just setup calls and re-instancing of objects, T&L is already done at the hardware layer so no penalty for that.


----------



## Frag_Maniac (Nov 15, 2013)

FordGT90Concept said:


> If Mantle optimizations can be used in all titles created on the latest Frostbite engine with little/no work from the title devs, it'll be very popular. That's why DICE is important here: EA is using DICE's Frostbite engine as much as possible.



Oh it will no doubt be used on all Frostbite titles. AMD are deep in bed with DICE now, whom are owned by EA, and literally every Frosbite game thus far and in the foreseeable future is under the umbrella of EA.

@Ruski
"AMD's initial thing is GCN-only, Nvidia wouldn't benefit that much, they would pretty much save time by doing it from scratch on their own..."

I was going to say this, but after I mentioned AMD half heatedly mentioned possible competitor support, I wasn't sure if he meant AFTER Nvidia used it in a build version modified to work with their architecture. I see only 3 scenarios, a version modified to work with Nvidia GPUs, Nvidia changing their architecture somewhat to make use of it, or building their own API, and the 1st two aren't very likely.

The 4th scenario of course is Mantle not catching on and everyone sticking with DirectX, which may be what Nvidia is hoping for. They've got a good thing going with much of their fanbase convinced we need buy expensive GPUs to stay ahead of the curve. Funny how I used to think AMD were the ones lazy (or incompetent) with software, but now it's looking like Nvidia are.


----------



## DannibusX (Nov 15, 2013)

The biggest cockblock to Mantle is Microsoft.  They won't allow it on their console, their console is gonna sell like hotcakes and developers/publishers will target it using DirectX.  If it's going to succeed, they'll need help from Sony, Valve and Nintendo so more developers can target those platforms with lower development costs.  Microsoft may have to change their tune after that or get shitty PC ports.

But they need to prove it works first.  When it comes to BF4 we'll see.  I'd love to see an open API take swings at DirectX, the best part is that AMD made it open and not propietary.


----------



## HTC (Nov 15, 2013)

DannibusX said:


> The biggest cockblock to Mantle is Microsoft.  They won't allow it on their console, their console is gonna sell like hotcakes and developers/publishers will target it using DirectX.  If it's going to succeed, they'll need help from Sony, Valve and Nintendo so more developers can target those platforms with lower development costs.  Microsoft may have to change their tune after that or get shitty PC ports.
> 
> But they need to prove it works first.  When it comes to BF4 we'll see. * I'd love to see an open API take swings at DirectX, the best part is that AMD made it open and not propietary.*



Agree.

As for the open part, it obviously *should* work better on CGN cards then on any other technology's cards so, in a way, it's still proprietary but it seems *not closed* to others like PhysX most definitely is and that, IMO, is *something that just might make it succeed*.


----------



## Frag_Maniac (Nov 15, 2013)

The problem is, when one of the only two chip vendors for GPUs makes something "open", it really means, "OK, would you like to play our way?" The answer of course is typically "No thank you, ours is better", even if said competitor doesn't HAVE a version of their own way yet.

In this kind of scenario it generally takes a war, the likes of which played out between Sony and MS when Blu-ray and HD-DVD were going head to head. As you said that war is only so powerful on AMD's console side when MS wants to block it from being used on Xbox One, which is understandable since they make DirectX.

Valve won't likely participate in Mantle with their Steam Machine either, since Nvidia is strongly winning on Linux compatibility. If the PC platform is a wash being split between AMD and Nvidia users, then it comes down to PS vs Xbox and Steam Machine.


----------



## droopyRO (Nov 15, 2013)

RuskiSnajper said:


> Don't you see it, SteamOS (clean, superfast linux code)   Mantle   Oculus Rift = The second PC golden age.


With the gameplay we get these days no way, where are the flight sims ? where are the oldschool RPGs, tactical shooters, GTR2 and so on games that are dead and buried not by graphics, physics or sound but by actual complex gameplay.


----------



## RoutedScripter (Nov 15, 2013)

*Update: Some numbers - "secret demo"*

I keep seeing another demo around the web, seems like a site called hardware.fr has all the slides that some people were using in their forums, but I can't find the video, I keep searching, it's not in the official AMD Summit page, I searched for all the tags, it's just not there, and it's the presentation with *SOME NUMBERS!*


Seems like it was kind of a semi-secret presentation or what, they have a Benchmark all up and running called Nitrous or Swarm or whatever it is.

Here are the slides:

http://www.hardware.fr/news/13450/apu13-oxide-fait-exploser-limite-cpu-avec-mantle.html


Preview (some of them i choosed):


Spoiler













































DannibusX said:


> The biggest cockblock to Mantle is Microsoft.  They won't allow it on their console, their console is gonna sell like hotcakes and developers/publishers will target it using DirectX.  If it's going to succeed, they'll need help from Sony, Valve and Nintendo so more developers can target those platforms with lower development costs.  Microsoft may have to change their tune after that or get shitty PC ports.
> 
> But they need to prove it works first.  When it comes to BF4 we'll see.  I'd love to see an open API take swings at DirectX, the best part is that AMD made it open and not propietary.



Thankfully, PS4 seems like the favourite around there.



-------------------------------

Browsing through all the webs i keep seeing noobs doubting mantle so much, most of them don't know tech who criticize this, they keep saying "_I don't believe until I see reviews not paid by AMD_" - that's so ridicolous and stupid, Mantle doesn't do anything on it's own, AMD doesn't have games or demos to show this, the demo is called Nitrous I think OXIDE will release in early 2014 for the PC crowd to test and then the benchmarks will come, it has nothing to do with AMD anymore, they will keep updating DX and OGL Drivers in terms of optimizations, not Mantle. Mantle will only get API revisions here and there which wouldn't do anything directly to any game at the time of release, it all has to be supported by developer, and the developers are now assuming position and job of driver developers as well.


----------



## Hilux SSRG (Nov 15, 2013)

DannibusX said:


> The biggest cockblock to Mantle is Microsoft.  They won't allow it on their console, their console is gonna sell like hotcakes and developers/publishers will target it using DirectX.  If it's going to succeed, they'll need help from Sony, Valve and Nintendo so more developers can target those platforms with lower development costs.  Microsoft may have to change their tune after that or get shitty PC ports.
> 
> But they need to prove it works first.  When it comes to BF4 we'll see.  I'd love to see an open API take swings at DirectX, the best part is that AMD made it open and not propietary.



By the same token MS might prevent Mantle running well on Windows period.  I'd rather see innovation from AMD and MS than limitations.


----------



## RejZoR (Nov 15, 2013)

Trust me, MS doens't want to go that way, because someone would notice it and that would be baaaad for MS...


----------



## Crap Daddy (Nov 15, 2013)

DannibusX said:


> The biggest cockblock to Mantle is Microsoft.  They won't allow it on their console, their console is gonna sell like hotcakes and developers/publishers will target it using DirectX.  If it's going to succeed, they'll need help from Sony, Valve and Nintendo so more developers can target those platforms with lower development costs.  Microsoft may have to change their tune after that or get shitty PC ports.
> 
> But they need to prove it works first.  When it comes to BF4 we'll see.  I'd love to see an open API take swings at DirectX, the best part is that AMD made it open and not propietary.



How is it open if it runs only on Radeons? Am I missing something or it works only on GCN arch?


----------



## The Von Matrices (Nov 15, 2013)

Maybe someone can enlighten me, but I am skeptical of how Mantle can make that much performance improvement by reducing the CPU bottleneck.  The original assumption is that GPUs are idle a portion of the time waiting for data from the CPU due to DirectX overhead.  However, current GPUs (I'm looking at the 290/X in particular) are already throttling when handling DirectX code.  If the GPU is sent work more frequently, won't it just throttle more thus reducing the performance gains significantly?


----------



## Frag_Maniac (Nov 15, 2013)

RejZoR said:


> Trust me, MS doens't want to go that way, because someone would notice it and that would be baaaad for MS...



Perhaps even legally bad, it would essentially be corporate sabotage to put a hook in the OS that intentionally cripples Mantle performance, and the creators of Mantle could easily dissect it and prove it's use to be suspect.

We live in a day and age where everything programmed leaves a digital signature, and even average users can spot copy and pasted content in video games (as was shown recently in the CoD Ghosts cutscene).

I don't think we've seen the end of MS' console customers forcing change either. If the PS4 shows to have vastly improved performance with Mantle, LOTS of Xbone customers are going to insist MS allow it on their platform.

If they don't comply, many might jump ship to the PS4, esp when they're already getting 720p in a lot of big titles where the PS4 gets 1080p. In the tech industry nothing speaks louder than a consumer boycott.


----------



## RoutedScripter (Nov 15, 2013)

The Von Matrices said:


> Maybe someone can enlighten me, but I am skeptical of how Mantle can make that much performance improvement by reducing the CPU bottleneck.  The original assumption is that GPUs are idle a portion of the time waiting for data from the CPU due to DirectX overhead.  However, current GPUs (I'm looking at the 290/X in particular) are already throttling when handling DirectX code.  If the GPU is sent work more frequently, won't it just throttle more thus reducing the performance gains significantly?



Without mantle, the driver takes CPU time because the GPU needs to be spoonfeed the commands, it needs the CPU to keep commanding GPU what to do. With this they're able to command the GPU them selfs, making GPU almost independent from CPU stuff, the CPU doesn't have to keep telling the GPU to do draw calls so frequently I think, I got this but I forgot the details my self, I just know the CPU doesn't have to spoonfeed the GPU, and it removes the need for the driver threads to be in the CPU all the time.

Imagine a giant man that is 50 meters tall, this giant man has his arms hurt and cant move them, but he needs to eat, so there's one little man that takes care of him by climbing up a series of ladders to spoonfeed him the food, the little man has to go down for more food from a big big big pile of food, the little man can only carry 20 KG, while the giant man's mouth can hold 200 KG at once, the time it takes for the little man to climb down, grab more food, and climb up, is the API overhead on DX. 

With Mantle, you make the giant mans arms work again, he can carry 190KG of food in one hand, and he's using both to eat all day long, by the time he eats one load, another load is ready, which means a very short delay between. That mans the giant man doesn't need the little man anymore. And then the little man can only focus on farms, has more time to operate even more farms than previously, to keep producing more food (ex. geometry, number of units, AI), the little man doesn't have to directly assist the big man.

The big point is how you'll get this, is that the big guy doesn't have to wait for anyone, and the little guy has way more time for something else that he had to do at the same time. That probably holds but the deeper I go I'm not sure even my self, maybe it's better if I use two, one little guy was working in farm the other was feeding, now both can work on farm with Mantle.


Also what do you mean with throttle ? The GPU isn't sent more work from the CPU, ofcourse it will do more effective of a job, the API overhead doesn't mean it's empty space there, it's still work and calculations that get done, but those are totally wasted into heat. DirectX is basically the home heating software, keeping your legs nice and warm.


----------



## The Von Matrices (Nov 15, 2013)

RuskiSnajper said:


> Without mantle, the driver takes CPU time because the GPU needs to be spoonfeed the commands, it needs the CPU to keep commanding GPU what to do. With this they're able to command the GPU them selfs, making GPU almost independent from CPU stuff, the CPU doesn't have to keep telling the GPU to do draw calls so frequently I think, I got this but I forgot the details my self, I just know the CPU doesn't have to spoonfeed the GPU, and it removes the need for the driver threads to be in the CPU all the time.
> 
> Imagine a giant man that is 50 meters tall, this giant man has his arms hurt and cant move them, but he needs to eat, so there's one little man that takes care of him by climbing up a series of ladders to spoonfeed him the food, the little man has to go down for more food from a big big big pile of food, the little man can only carry 20 KG, while the giant man's mouth can hold 200 KG at once, the time it takes for the little man to climb down, grab more food, and climb up, is the API overhead on DX.
> 
> With Mantle, you make the giant mans arms work again, he can carry 190KG of food in one hand, and he's using both to eat all day long, by the time he eats one load, another load is ready, which means a very short delay between. That mans the giant man doesn't need the little man anymore. And then the little man can only focus on farms, has more time to operate even more farms than previously, to keep producing more food (ex. geometry, number of units, AI), the little man doesn't have to directly assist the big man.



Thanks for the reply, but I don't think you understand my question, unless you are telling me that the DirectX overhead causes the GPU to perform useless calculations while it is waiting for the next command.  My concern is that even when a GPU like the 290/X is bottlenecked by the CPU right now, it is already hitting the power and heat limits of the silicon.  So even if the GPU has as much data as it wants to process, it can do any more because heat and power are constraining it already.  In addition, having reduced CPU load is great, but games still don't use all the cores available on modern CPUs so I don't see as much benefit in reduced CPU load.

To use your metaphor, it would be as if the giant still has a 200kg capacity mouth but can only eat 18kg of food at a time before he gets a stomach ache.  The little man could satisfy him completely in the past.  The only difference is that now, the giant can feed himself even though he can't consume food any faster.  In addition, the little man is free to do whatever he wants; however, the town has more workers than jobs and now the little man is unemployed.

It doesn't fit completely because reduced CPU load means less power usage (which is good) versus unemployment (which is bad), but there still aren't enough jobs (threads) to satisfy the workers (CPU cores).


----------



## RoutedScripter (Nov 15, 2013)

The Von Matrices said:


> Thanks for the reply, but I don't think you understand my question.  My concern is that even when a GPU like the 290/X is bottlenecked by the CPU right now, it is already hitting the power and heat limits of the silicon.  So even if the GPU has as much data as it wants to process, it can do any more because heat and power are constraining it already.  In addition, having reduced CPU load is great, but games still don't use all the cores available on modern CPUs so I don't see as much benefit in reduced CPU load.
> 
> To use your metaphor, it would be as if the giant still has a 200kg capacity mouth but can only eat 18kg of food at a time before he gets a stomach ache.  The little man could satisfy him completely in the past.  The only difference is that now, the giant can feed himself even though he can't consume food any faster.  In addition, the little man is free to do whatever he wants; however, the town has more workers than jobs and now the little man is unemployed.
> 
> It doesn't fit completely because reduced CPU load means less power usage (which is good) versus unemployment (which is bad), but there still aren't enough jobs (threads) to satisfy the workers (CPU cores).




I've answered it in the end I think. I was explaining the difference in beginning. 


1. The API overhead is not "untouched potential", it still is there producing heat and taking power, with mantle that heat won't go to waste and you'll see much better FPS or better visuals, that's it.
2. If the GPU will be pushed to that high limits it wasn't designed for (previously untouched potential by making ALUs not idling), you will have to enable manual fan control, a total non-issue.

You have that "can't consume as fast or anymore" completely wrong, you don't suppose to rely on automatic fan controls to make your GPU cool enough to work. Remember Starcraft 2 frying GPUs, it's not the game's problem, it's the GPU Fan control problem, most of the avreage PC gamers have automatic settings, enthusiasts and experienced users never use automatic anything, I'm using manutal fan control since as far as I know back, in the old days of XP and Radeon 9600XT, I used Rivatuner, but then manual-fan control came with Catalyst control center and been using from there ever since.

If I think this is how it will work, with the idle ALUs issue, this is all speculation, but if I think it works like how I think currently, there could be a dangerous situation of many people trying the new Mantle Benchmarks and frying their GPUs because they had auto-fan settings.

But the only way you can be worried is, if you manage to heat up the card that even 100% constant fan speed won't keep it cool, then that's a problem, would at least create more interesting GPU cooler aftermarket.


----------



## The Von Matrices (Nov 15, 2013)

RuskiSnajper said:


> I've answered it in the end I think. I was explaining the difference in beginning.
> 
> 
> 1. The API overhead is not unsused space, it still is there producing heat and taking power, with mantle that heat won't go to waste and you'll see much better FPS or better visuals, that's it.
> 2. If the GPU will be pushed to that high limits it wasn't designed for (previously untouched potential), you will have to enable manual fan control, a total non-issue.



Okay, thanks for the clarification.  I still am curious if processing frames in Mantle requires more energy than waiting for the next DirectX call.  If so, then the performance improvements might not be as large because the GPU would throttle more.  I also don't agree that enabling manual fan control is a non-issue; from the 290/X reviews it is clear that there are a lot of us (including me) have moderate limits on how much noise we find acceptable.  I'm sure this would still be a net gain in performance and efficiency, but the overall performance gain might be diminished by power and noise constraints.

The question that comes up for me is that if the CPU is such a bottleneck then why does graphics overclocking have any effect today?  Sure, if you want 1000 frames per second the CPU will become a bottleneck preventing any more performance gains, but if you're shooting for something more moderate like 60 or even 120fps, then graphics overclocking can allow you to turn up the detail settings to use that extra performance.  Why is the CPU not a bottleneck there?


----------



## xenocide (Nov 16, 2013)

I don't buy it.  AMD started drumming up the "down to the metal" parade a few years back and several companies immediatly said they were wrong, including Crytek (they know a thing or two about high level PC Graphics).  They have said many times (and many ways) that what AMD was advocating was nice in theory, but wasn't feasible.

I'm also ashamed that not one person while mentioning the bloat of DirectX mentioned that it primarily applies to DirectX 9.0c and earlier--but not DirectX 10/11.  With DirectX 10 they completely gutted the API and reworked it to be more efficient.  But you know what the huge problem was?  Nobody made games for DirectX 11 because the last generation of consoles were DX9 only.  It's like pointing out that games don't optimize for the large amount of RAM these days, when it's mostly due to the fact that despite most people having x86-64 compatible CPU's nobody makes games that support that.  Hell, if game devs were really so hindered by the evils of DirectX, how come nobody is using OpenGL?  Sure Sony does a bit and iD, but what about Crytek, and DICE, and Rockstar?  The reason is because DirectX isn't the huge bucket of crap it's being made out as.

How has nobody pointed out his absurd notion that somehow a software API is converting heat and energy into processing power?  That just doesn't happen (well, in Graphene it apparently does but these are Silicon-based).  If that were the case someone would have already done it back in the 90's or even earlier when they started focusing on things like heat-generation and power usage.  I'll point out that in the world of engineering *nothing is 100% efficient*.  You can get damn close, but there are always inhibiting factors.

Show me a video of side-by-side gameplay with a game running on DirectX and on Mantle, using the same hardware and same settings, and maybe we'll talk.  Otherwise, it's all bullshit.  In case you forgot AMD Marketting is really really good at that.  Remember when Bulldozer was supposed to use less power than anything Intel offered and perform on par or 10-15%+ better than the highest end i7?  I sure do, and I'll let you look up what _actually_ happened because it was nothing of the sort.  I'm not being duped by more marketting crap, and until AMD shows more than slides or some reps for companies they have "reimbursed" handily, I could care less about this tech--which by the way, won't be used for Xbox One or Playstation 4.


----------



## RoutedScripter (Nov 16, 2013)

The Von Matrices said:


> Okay, thanks for the clarification.  I still am curious if processing frames in Mantle requires more energy than waiting for the next DirectX call.  If so, then the performance improvements might not be as large because the GPU would throttle more.  I also don't agree that enabling manual fan control is a non-issue; from the 290/X reviews it is clear that there are a lot of us (including me) have moderate limits on how much noise we find acceptable.  I'm sure this would still be a net gain in performance and efficiency, but the overall performance gain might be diminished by power and noise constraints.



Okay, fair points that technically are correct. But I don't think you understand what enthusiast PC market is, we don't care about little issues such as fan noise, and even if it would be a big issue, it would be a temporary one once GPU vendors would be forced to add better coolers by default,

Nobody cares about this, seriously, I'm sure it won't be as bad as you are afraid, but just please don't make a fool of your self and whine about this to AMD or DICE, it will just create all the other noobs and G-Sync fanboys to join the failtrain about complaining something that is not an issue in the hardcore space, even if it gets super loud, I don't care, I can sacrifice that for the performance glory

As the presentation said, Mantle isn't for everyone, if you are not

These kind of things are petty issues, we call them petty because 

Most PC enthusiasts always disable all throttling and power-saving features anyways because it interfeers with overclocking, so there you go  
But I don't overclock and I have it disabled anyways because it's annoying and sometimes makes stuttering in various games, this is just experience, but I don't have time to test if these things improved in years, I just built a new PC

I can explain more if you really want, although I think there is nothing more to say really, but I just advise you to not start making this into a big deal, you won't be taken seriously with this, I don't know of a PC enthusiasts that would be a noise-freak at the same time, maybe there is someone but they most probably have water cooling in that case if they're so annoyed, but these kind of issues never get discussed, you don't see overclockers talking about oh my "fan noise is loud". It's all a set of tradeoffs, we trade off every other thing for TOP PERFORMANCE, everything else is ACCEPTABLE SACRIFICE. 


Acceptable Sacrifices:

Fan Noise
Compatability
Wide support
A bit longer development time (more code)
Requires more dev skills
etc.


That looks like right doesn't it. No, these are all temporary sacrifices, Mantle is made for AAA market, which means, it only takes a few of those AAA developers to join the wintrain, you don't suppose to look at the gaming as a whole and just compare mantle to all kinds of other markets, because you need to understand we don't really care about them, they're IRRELEVANT, a game that doesn't require much GFX or any kind of hardcore performance doesn't have to use mantle and I don't care if they whine or not, I care about the stuff that would really SHINE with Mantle like the original CRYSIS, that's what I want to see super-optimized and improved. 

This is a very interesting talk here, I need to break all this down, it's important to distinguish groups and interests, all these people's opinions who attack Mantle outright, can have an agenda behind their opinion which isn't compatible with actual consumers in the PC enthusiast space, you need to keep an eye on those and expose them, the biggest of them all are bloggers and twitter junkies who self-proclaim them selfs as market anaylzers to be the policemans that decide what everyone in the market does is right or wrong, they care about stuff like "development costs" - Would would a random stupid casual game programmer care about development costs at DICE or Crytek ? That's not his problem, and not even his job to care about and judge Mantle and it's potential around that silly argument. It's so funny I though back then in the initial release it's going to be like 50% or more, that's the highest I went speculating at the time, no numbers no nothing, just LOGIC and BRAINS.


This is quite deep stuff, it's an attack from the mainstream to the idea of PC enthusiast market spinning off, It is my duty to defend the position! And those people whine because they're either business people who always look to make easy money as fast as possible, OFCOURSE they don't want to have many APIs in the market, but it's not my problem, it's not our problem who want to have a few great games that you can finally use 4 GPUs in and have 4K at 120FPS or something, at this point Carmack's opinion really is irrelevant, he isn't even working on any game at all, I don't know what the hell is going on with Doom4. This is what PC needed all the time, spin off the mainstream, get off that failtrain, why do we have to keep limiting our selfs because 10 million LoL fanboys are okay with DX, finally, I might be strongly yelling here but please this is all with a reason.

What you people should be doing right now is yelling to the game developers to support mantle, benchmark makers, that will fix the compatability and wide support issue faster, that will establish who's on the side of hardcore PC gaming, and de-associate them with the mainstream hopefully, that's all you people out there need to do, no point to keep wasting time attacking mantle and questioning AMD about the numbers, AMD doesn't have anything, unless provided demos provided by the developer, but I already cleared that up it's called Nitrous and it's releasing in Q1 2014, and it's NOT made by AMD.

It's not like the sound is damaging your ears, I would understand if it was some big machine and you wanted to protect your ears.

Also keep in mind I'm generally speaking, I'm not replying to anyone directly in this thread particular when referring to the mantle-attackers, I'm referring to how it is around the webs. So don't take any of this personally.






The Von Matrices said:


> The question that comes up for me is that if the CPU is such a bottleneck then why does graphics overclocking have any effect today?  Sure, if you want 1000 frames per second the CPU will become a bottleneck preventing any more performance gains, but if you're shooting for something more moderate like 60 or even 120fps, then graphics overclocking can allow you to turn up the detail settings to use that extra performance.  Why is the CPU not a bottleneck there?



That's because CPU doesn't have to worry about the GPU, the CPU only focuses on AI, geometry and all the scripts, the application requires besides graphics. And those extra details don't add that much to the CPU that it would cause the same slowdown, with the proper multithreading the CPU utilization goes even higher now. 



Now that I've also seen these numbers, a bit of a sneak peak, I can't stop to think the 50% is the minimal this thing can improve GPU performance initially if they manage to do it good, ofcourse that 50% or more on the CPU side is basically guaranteed.

I don't like to speculate, but this might super-charge the PC industry right in time against the consoles and steambox,  I don't mind steambox being PC hardware and linux, but I don't want steambox to steal PC glory with the living room and controller , basically I don't really know what's the point to play PC games with a controller, I am not fond of multi-platform games that simply throw in whatever controls they can without the actual , and then the whole game has to be designed with the worst I/O in mind, it's basically a clusterfuck and to be honest, I don't really like valve that much, they just keep piling cash and they could have do better, while they keep doing dota games to reap the moneys because they're too lazy to come up with something original.

Even with the visions that take off in the mainstream, it's made for mainstream, it has nothing that enthusiasts can really take, so how does Valve support PCs, yes it did with steam, but are they going to take it away now by making a console that's not really a console, something thrown together.

But I have faith and confidence that the established PC people won't be swayed so by trendy fads so easily, it will mostly catch the LoL noobs, the piles of them which we don't need anyways, they didn't do much of a visible impact for the PC space other than having numbers to offset and make it look like PC has the upper hand, but those aren't permanent numbers, they don't build DIY PCs and buy the hardware, they're just avreage gamers who are easily manipulated, so if LoL ends up on steambox which I don't think it will but let's say Valve goes apeshit and pays them to do it or something, , there are my subjective opinions, since I'm quite strongly anti-Pay2Win and all the other cheap F2P crap.

These large companies don't look for game design consistency, they don't really care about keeping some self-established rules that you can't forcefully port some game to a fucking controller if it wasn't designed, the gaming industry isn't as evolved yet, it behaves like a child, you'd never go tear up a good classic car and just throw something in and call it the best car of the year, that's bullshit, if you find a great old 

Valve has been going down the slippery slope in social degeneracy for years, all their hype now is stupid TF2 hats for zombies and other childish bullshit. Whatever their HL3 is or something, if it doesn't , I'm sure everyone else can then rule Valve out of any relevance to PC gaming and consider them compromised. Absolute power corrupts absolutely, I think the boss is just sitting on his lazy fat ass all day long.

The PC enthusiast market needs new grown-up without PR bullshit business model that wouldnt require millions spent on PR and on screwing people around by witholding information because of their carefully crafted PR plan and using stuff like "FOV slider" as a PR hype material and other kinds of cases that make me absolutely sick, a good example is Star Citizen taking at least some form close to what I have in mind with the kickstarter thing and promising no pay 2 win among other things.

Okay that's enough ...


----------



## xenocide (Nov 16, 2013)

...What on Earth are you even TALKING about at this point?


----------



## RoutedScripter (Nov 16, 2013)

New Video: Q&A with Mantle Developers: AMD Mantle Q&A with Developers at APU13 - YouTube

Summary:


Mantle can reduce memory footprint in some cases by inteligent and efficent use of memory management, but this will not be so noticable in games because the developer will use that extra memory for even more stuff.
Mantle will enable developers to forsee resource constraints (how much a texture takes mem for example) no more guessing.
AMD is taking Mantle debug tools very seriously, profiling, etc, PerfStudio is supported!
The bottleneck with mantle could raise up very close to physical bottlenecks of the hardware, where it should be, but they aren't yet sure them selfs with initial tests to give numbers out.
Optimizations and techniques will vary between developers (they pointed this out!)
AMD Driver Guy admitted the driver team can only optimize "mediocre" they don't really know! (exactly what I was saying all the time, GPU Vendor driver people never worked on games, they don't know, their optimization is only game-specific driver hacks, not how it should be)
Dice: Most consumers who will use Mantle will be GPU bound because they want to run on highest settings with top CPUs. (CPU Bottleneck should we way up there, WAY!)
AMD:For example Extra CPU Peformance could be used for increasing "VIEW DISTANCE" which goes back to better eye-candy. (Crysis, GTA, etc)
Fine grain tuning of Bindless _-_ will allow flexibility at which point to choose GPU or CPU performance priority.
Initial Co-Supporting developers such as dice and oxide were instrumental in Mantle's design and making a proof-point for the industry, they didn't want the pool of initial developers to be too big.
AMD: Other APIs were designed without the counseling and testing of game developers, for Mantle the design was a direct cooperation with many physical meetings and weeks of groundwork. _paradigm shift_
Oxide: Mantle can bring back old game genres from 90' when you could do "_all sorts of things_", the games that didn't survive the 3D transition for example.
Oxide: Some of the services stuff in DX API were never used because of extreme unpredictability the drivers will crash, Mantle should remove the PC customers the need to thinker with driver updates and Catalyst settings to make their game running.
They cannot imagine what small developers are going through when doing PC stuff, all the driver bugs, etc, Mantle will make it easier to develop on PC for everyone.
The whole current idea of driver hacks, new driver for every new game, etc is troublesome for not just the consumers but also developers, drivers are also getting very big because of the app-specific code they have for all kinds of games, getting to ridicolous sizes like 300MB (catalyst)



I hope you all just realize here, this is a big historic moment happening, all those years back AMD was saying to these same developers "it's not our fault - it works fine" - Finally the Driver teams have been awakened they actually don't know how to optimize games and all they were doing was mediocre hacking the driver to try to make something work under DirectX.


----------



## Frag_Maniac (Nov 16, 2013)

RuskiSnajper said:


> New Video: Q&A with Mantle Developers: AMD Mantle Q&A with Developers at APU13 - YouTube



Great Q&A session. One thing I was forgetting in talking earlier about the steep initial learning curve, is that the debugging built into Mantle could be a real time saver. I was eagerly awaiting what was said at the 29:00 mark, but they finally remarked on that aspect, and appropriately to a small developer. I'm sure it will even help the bigger teams with more timely, polished products at launch. They talked about that being the "beefy" part of the API, but if you're going to weigh it down, that's one of the best ways to do it.


----------



## DannibusX (Nov 16, 2013)

Crap Daddy said:


> How is it open if it runs only on Radeons? Am I missing something or it works only on GCN arch?









Maybe wishful thinking on the slide, but even if it's only for GCN cards initially, AMD will be killing the API by making it proprietary.


----------



## HTC (Nov 16, 2013)

DannibusX said:


> http://www.guru3d.com/index.php?ct=news&action=file&id=4807
> 
> Maybe wishful thinking on the slide, but even if it's only for GCN cards initially, AMD will be killing the API by making it proprietary.



Doesn't it state it should work on other graphic API vendors as well? 


Personally, i think this is way over optimistic but i AM convinced this is the way forward because, even if this doesn't end up bringing the *amount extra performance they claim*, i'm sure it will bring some extra performance (10%-15% maybe??) from current graphic cards.

Also, if this new tech does work with other graphic API vendors, then it means it isn't tied to CGN tech, which means that *maybe* previous AMD cards may support this too: explaining which exactly support it and which don't would be helpful, and the same for other graphic API vendors too, IMO. Obviously, it should work best in CGN tech, though.

Will have to see 2 identical systems running identical benches with one using Mantle to see the difference and, until then, i'm quite skeptical.


----------



## RejZoR (Nov 16, 2013)

If all goes well, Mantle could go it's own path next to D3D and OGL. Meaning it will be much higher performance than OGL, just as platform independent as OGL with faster evolving where D3D seems to be stagnating for quite some time now, plus it's limited to PC's and Xbox only.

I sure hope it will be a success, because we could all benefit from it, from developers up to us, the gamers.


----------



## Frick (Nov 16, 2013)

xenocide said:


> I don't buy it.  AMD started drumming up the "down to the metal" parade a few years back and several companies immediatly said they were wrong, including Crytek (they know a thing or two about high level PC Graphics).  They have said many times (and many ways) that what AMD was advocating was nice in theory, but wasn't feasible.



That was then, now is now, and AMD should now _something _about that sort of thing too.


----------



## xenocide (Nov 16, 2013)

Frick said:


> That was then, now is now, and AMD should now _something _about that sort of thing too.



They know Hardware.  They have always been mediocre when it came to software support.  I refuse to believe a company that couldn't get drivers working adequately for the 4-5 years I used their products can all of a sudden release an API that revolutionizes PC Game Development to the extent they are claiming.  We've still heard no specifics other than "removes overhead" and "increases performance astronomical%".  I still haven't seen a single video of the technology in question at work--it's supposed to go live next month and I've seen _nothing_ to back up these claims.  You would think with AMD having released new GPU's they would be showcasing this thing left and right to try and get their products sold going into the holiday season.


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Nov 16, 2013)

Love how people are name dropping DICE as a validation of Mantel when BF4 is a "Gaming Evolved" title.


----------



## Frick (Nov 16, 2013)




----------



## Frag_Maniac (Nov 16, 2013)

Frick said:


> That was then, now is now, and AMD should now _something _about that sort of thing too.



One could also say CryTek themselves have never been that great at optimizing games. Their philosophy is not unlike Nvidias', "Let's make games that melt PCs just to say we care about graphics", while Nvidia facilitates them with GPU features that are high resource.

It's time for some concerned game and driver devs to pull us out of the stone age the MS has kept us in for years.


----------



## RoutedScripter (Nov 16, 2013)

Now I found some developer-esque sites with probably more accurate and well founded opinions, here are some of the notable quites across several sites:



Runtime Compilation:


> The way that it currently works with D3D11 is that you compile your shaders to D3D assembly, which is basically a hardware-agnostic "virtual" ISA. In order to run these shaders on a GPU, the driver needs to compile the D3D assembly into its native ISA. Since developers can't do this conversion ahead time, the driver has to do a JIT compile when the game loads its shaders. This makes the game take longer to load, and the driver doesn't have a lot of time to try aggressive optimizations. With a hardware-specific API you can instead compile your shaders directly into the hardware's ISA, and avoid the JIT compile entirely.
> 
> As for patching, the driver may need to patch shaders in order to support certain functionality available in D3D. As an example, let's say that a hypothetical GPU actually performs its depth test in the pixel shader instead of having extra hardware to do it.. This would mean that the driver would have to look at depth state is currently bound to the context when a draw call is issued, and patch the shader to use the correct depth-testing code. With a hardware-specific shader compiler you can instead just provide the ability to perform the depth test in the pixel shader, and totally remove the concept of depth states.






> As for occlusion queries, the main problem with them in D3D/GL is that the data can only be read by the CPU but the data is actually generated by the GPU. The GPU typically lags behind the CPU by a frame or more so that the CPU has enough time to generate commands for the GPU to consume, which means if the CPU wants to read back GPU results they won't be ready until quite a bit of time after it issued the commands. In practice this generally requires having the CPU wait at least a frame for query results. This means you can't really effectively use it for something like occlusion culling, since by the time the data is usable it's too late.






> what looks terribly interesting is the possibility, with mantle, to have a desktop Kaveri and a 2xx and see your game i.e. benefit from iGPU due to the i.e. GPGPU work executed inside the iGPU...
> Something that would REALLY make gamers prefer AMD CPUs over any Intel one (as long as the CPU will be 'fast enough', but with more gruntwork/sound moved to the front ends, it might).
> On gaming notebook, that would *really* makes the difference.






> > I see two other slides about DX/GL Parallelism and Parallel Dispath with Mantle... but many years NV has this features in DX11 too.
> >
> >
> > > AMD's claim is Mantle's parallel dispatch is better than DX's implementation.
> > ...





> NVAPI is different, it is a driver interface framework. It doesn't replace OpenGL or DX.
> 
> EDIT: I think this is same thing from ATI.
> http://developer.amd.com/tools-and-sdks/graphics-development/amd-gpu-services-ags-library/






> I think the multi-GPU benefits could be astounding for that market. For so long it's always been AFR, doing tricks to smooth timing issues, not able to use shared resources etc. The ability to allocate specific rendering tasks to either GPU or even onboard APU combined with discrete is fantastic.


Exactly .... the people who say that Mantle will have more of an effect on low-end markets but not on High-end markets, are heavily mistaking.





--------------------------------------------

Also, here's a funny exchange between some guys, the first guy is referring to watching this Q&A video:




> > After absorbing all the info I'm quite taken back by the potential for PC gaming that's on offer not just from mantle on a dedicated graphics card but also on a PC based on an APU, but It begs one question. WTF have the MS directX team been doing for the last 10 years?
> 
> 
> 
> ...



---------------


> Next stop is to make it game-agnostic and fully implemented in the API.
> And then world domination with 100% performance boost between all kinds of GCN GPUs: two different discrete cards + iGPU.




At one point, I kind of like the arrogance of Nvidia, which allowed AMD to hop on this and makes AMD rise up, makes a good story, and balancing the industry, not one controlling everything.







Frag Maniac said:


> Great Q&A session. One thing I was forgetting in talking earlier about the steep initial learning curve, is that the debugging built into Mantle could be a real time saver. I was eagerly awaiting what was said at the 29:00 mark, but they finally remarked on that aspect, and appropriately to a small developer. I'm sure it will even help the bigger teams with more timely, polished products at launch. They talked about that being the "beefy" part of the API, but if you're going to weigh it down, that's one of the best ways to do it.



Exactly, the bigger teams will put a lot into perfecting the launch so those first-day techincal difficulties will be practically non-existent or rare. Because they are in control, most of the mistakes and random driver crashes can be avoided completely, not just the ability to fix them if they're found, but with Mantle, you would just AVOID the possibility of them in the first place, and this is big big benefit to development as well as consumers, win win!






HTC said:


> Also, if this new tech does work with other graphic API vendors, then it means it isn't tied to CGN tech, which means that *maybe* previous AMD cards may support this too: explaining which exactly support it and which don't would be helpful, and the same for other graphic API vendors too, IMO. Obviously, it should work best in CGN tech, though.



The API will ofcourse not work on Nvidia out of the box.  Nvidia would have to code support for it, and they can choose to delay this for next generation, AMD could dominate the high-end and potentially all other ends if the laptop-gamers and avreage PC gamers would play those Mantle-supported games in large numbers; for like 2 generations.

They're smart, they know if they would go proprietary, Nvidia could answer with another API, the little boost AMD would get would come down back on them because half of the developers would focus on other API if nvidia made better GPUs physically, it would add mess to the industry, it wouldn't make any financial advantage for AMD in the long run, so they get to have a nice advantage for about 1 or 2 years before nvidia jumps on Mantle. Nvidia may be arrogant and delay this, until Mantle would take steam and suddenly the green team would be in panic mode and ... we could see puppies again.




HTC said:


> Will have to see 2 identical systems running identical benches with one using Mantle to see the difference and, until then, i'm quite skeptical.



But remember, just as Erocker said, Mantle is a proven thing (consoles) unlike UDT which is something on top of existing APIs, this is a paradigm shift at the core, it's not something built ontop of the existing core, I don't know how stupid can someone be to try to compare these 2 things, and I'm not saying BF4 mantle update will make 100% increase, ofcourse not, but with time, this is totally not an unrealistic number, in the Q&A they even talked about numbers like 2-3 times (if you don't change settings, controlled benchmark), but they wanted to stay vague at this point.





RejZoR said:


> If all goes well, Mantle could go it's own path next to D3D and OGL. Meaning it will be much higher performance than OGL, just as platform independent as OGL with faster evolving where D3D seems to be stagnating for quite some time now, plus it's limited to PC's and Xbox only.



DX is also limited to the OS, remember 


Every man on this planet with a few grams of brains can realize DirectX is a joke. This is just amazing to what lengths some people go to defend it.


I'm just sometimes very sick looking at all the webshit around the nets, just right now I've read some absolute asinine garbage, I don't know what's going in people's heads, these probably are some heavily college indoctrinated developers who think that Microsoft is the "governing body" we should all be revolving around - And not even related to any tech talk, Microsoft is a crappy company by it self if you ask me, all the NSA connections, all the capitalist arrogance, classic globalist company connected to shady stuff, who the heck is going to rely on such a trainwreck for innovation in the free markets, give me a god damn break.



-------------------------------
Here is AMD Driver Guy saying "we can do only mediocre solutions" - that's exactly what driver updates always were.
http://youtu.be/sSY2KXBoro0?t=12m30s


----------



## Frag_Maniac (Nov 16, 2013)

RuskiSnajper said:


> Exactly, the bigger teams will put a lot into perfecting the launch so those first-day techincal difficulties will be practically non-existent or rare. Because they are in control, most of the mistakes and random driver crashes can be avoided completely, not just the ability to fix them if they're found, but with Mantle, you would just AVOID the possibility of them in the first place, and this is big big benefit to development as well as consumers, win win!



Yeah it should help avoid the dreaded "surprises" and improve optimization. They'll literally be able to push the envelope within the req spec, while offering a smooth, bug free gameplay experience. It should even help them immediately see problems like performance not scaling with lowered settings, a problem many games have.

 This kind of API has been long overdo. If this goes as well as expected, those getting in the way of it are going to look awfully silly unless they come up with something equal or better.


----------



## Steevo (Nov 16, 2013)

xenocide said:


> I don't buy it.  AMD started drumming up the "down to the metal" parade a few years back and several companies immediatly said they were wrong, including Crytek (they know a thing or two about high level PC Graphics).  They have said many times (and many ways) that what AMD was advocating was nice in theory, but wasn't feasible.
> 
> I'm also ashamed that not one person while mentioning the bloat of DirectX mentioned that it primarily applies to DirectX 9.0c and earlier--but not DirectX 10/11.  With DirectX 10 they completely gutted the API and reworked it to be more efficient.  But you know what the huge problem was?  Nobody made games for DirectX 11 because the last generation of consoles were DX9 only.  It's like pointing out that games don't optimize for the large amount of RAM these days, when it's mostly due to the fact that despite most people having x86-64 compatible CPU's nobody makes games that support that.  Hell, if game devs were really so hindered by the evils of DirectX, how come nobody is using OpenGL?  Sure Sony does a bit and iD, but what about Crytek, and DICE, and Rockstar?  The reason is because DirectX isn't the huge bucket of crap it's being made out as.
> 
> ...





xenocide said:


> They know Hardware.  They have always been mediocre when it came to software support.  I refuse to believe a company that couldn't get drivers working adequately for the 4-5 years I used their products can all of a sudden release an API that revolutionizes PC Game Development to the extent they are claiming.  We've still heard no specifics other than "removes overhead" and "increases performance astronomical%".  I still haven't seen a single video of the technology in question at work--it's supposed to go live next month and I've seen _nothing_ to back up these claims.  You would think with AMD having released new GPU's they would be showcasing this thing left and right to try and get their products sold going into the holiday season.



To understand what Mantle does requires you to understand how anything appears on your screen from the data on the disk and user interaction currently. 

As a 30,000 foot view it works like this.

Game thread spawned, requests OS setup memory pools, and other resource allocation, OS responsible for management of threads, memory paging, dedicated and shared resources. the DX API is responsible for creating specific and generic, hardware and software calls on system resources. 


So a scene where 1000 polygons are needing rendered, and 50 textures are required in memory, our mouse interacts with the DX API which then hands input to the game thread, which then uses CPU resources to determine where and what to do in game, the game engine hands back out the list of polygons and skinning information to the DX API, which then checks with the system to see where these textures or skins are in memory using CPU resources for each polygon call, even if it gets excluded by the Z check, finally it hands the poly over to the graphics driver to render.

Each time a call is made it uses cycles on the CPU, and ties up time the system could be fetching or rendering objects. Currently it uses pipeline rendering, so that the GPU never stalls or stalls are avoided due to the massive overhead, but ever time the pipeline needs flushed or a resource isn't available we get lag spikes (frame render time increases). Driver optimizations sometimes are just forced flushing at specific points when they know the OS/DX API is going to cause a stall and they preemptively dump the pipe to facilitate the loading of the required resource. As of right now neither the driver or system thread can forcibly load resources without causing a BSOD. We are at the mercy of the DX API to behave and load resources, the game thread to request resources paged into RAM from disk, and the driver to keep the GPU busy with other tasks when a pipeline stalls.

New Heterogeneous hardware is DMA (Direct Memory Address) aware and capable, so the GPU could request the item needed directly with mantle replacing DX ans the go between to update the system on the location of resource and memory in use. If they do this on every call, and allow the GPU hardware to perform preemptive Z buffer work it reduces the poly count lets say to 800 and the overhead for fetches from the latency of four CPU cycles and a double read and single write, to a single read direct to L1 cache.


http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/ff476882(v=vs.85).aspx


And a picture for those who cant the wread well.


----------



## xenocide (Nov 17, 2013)

Frag Maniac said:


> One could also say CryTek themselves have never been that great at optimizing games. Their philosophy is not unlike Nvidias', "Let's make games that melt PCs just to say we care about graphics", while Nvidia facilitates them with GPU features that are high resource.



They push hardware 100%, whether or not the average user is at the point where they can run the game at that level is irrelevant.  How many other developers do that with such consistancy?



Frag Maniac said:


> This kind of API has been long overdo.



Glide.

@Steevo

I understand most of that, but that doesn't change the fact that you're then asking way more of your GPU.  You are no longer managing its tasks and are instead forcing it to manage its own tasks, as well as requiring it still talk to the OS continually (that much is unavoidable if you want to get it to play nice with your screen).  If anything I think this is AMD's attempt to take CPU's out of the equation when it comes to gaming performance, they want everything to be GPU bound since they tend to compete infinitely better in the GPU market anyway.

It's hard to compare DirectX since as I said, there are almost 0 games that are built using DirecX 11 properly.  Almost all games from the past 6-7 years were made as DX9 titles for the sake of consoles, then hastily ported to PC's either as is or poorly as DX10/11 ports.  The few games that were built on DX11 run pretty damn well on it--Civ V sees a sizeable performance increase when using DX11 vs. DX9, as does World of Warcraft (not insanely demanding titles, but any performance increase is noteworthy) and at release BF3 was one of the first games to truly run DX11 and it looked and ran exceptionally (still does, although BF4 seems to run noticably worse for me).

We're also avoiding the possibility that AMD is being highly dishonest about how Mantle will work for other hardware vendors (Nvidia that is) in the same way that Nvidia is highly dishonest about how PhysX (which happens to be a low level API as well) works on AMD cards.  If Mantle basically gives GCN-based GPU's a massive performance edge, and Nvidia cannot compete they will have to make their own low level API, which means Developers will have to make versions of their game for both, which is a huge headache for them.  As it is we're looking at a near future where developers have to develop for OpenGL\DX and Mantle anyway.


----------



## Frag_Maniac (Nov 17, 2013)

xenocide said:


> They push hardware 100%, whether or not the average user is at the point where they can run the game at that level is irrelevant.  How many other developers do that with such consistancy?


Quite honestly most anyone can push hardware to 100%. It comes down to whether they CHOOSE to, because most know if you don't do that while optimizing well, you cater to mostly the high end vs mainstream gamer market.





> Glide


You fail to point out the huge and stark difference between Glide and Mantle. Glide was born of ONE company trying to reinvent the API mouse trap, and solely designed and controlled by them. 

Mantle was requested by numerous developers, which in itself substantiates the long overdo comment. Mantle was a collaborative effort and will continue to be. It's the closest thing we'll likely see to an open source API.


----------



## Steevo (Nov 17, 2013)

xenocide said:


> They push hardware 100%, whether or not the average user is at the point where they can run the game at that level is irrelevant.  How many other developers do that with such consistancy?
> 
> 
> 
> ...



First, the percentage of time shaders are running junk code is not currently known, as in Nvidia or AMD do not share how much of the time what work is being performed is being thrown out when the user turns left or right, and most benchmarks are not dynamic enough to determine each plausible outcome, thus causing the lag spikes users experience. 

What Mantle is and does from what I understand is simply remove the extra length of the pipeline that causes the stalls, and the latency introduced by the CPU having to feed each call to the GPU, plus the ability to DMA (hardware so no extra GPU processing load, just like DMA northbridge reduced the CPU load back in the day) to remove the penalty for not having the textures in memory. 

The thing is we aren't dealing with a driver level software, but a API, so as long as Nvidia implements the same basic hardware functions or has implemented them there is no reason they couldn't use it. Unlike the wondrous CUDA/Physx that works on how many GPU accelerated Steam 90% plus metacritic games? Oh right.....there is the idea that nvidia is like the big baby in the sandbox who doesn't want to share, and instead prefers to throw sand and has thus taught all the other babies to do the same.

Plus there are these developers....








And they kinda make all this go for us...........so even if AMD were selling shit to the public, the developers would risk their reputations on what? Its real, and happening, so get used to the idea.


----------



## xenocide (Nov 17, 2013)

Frag Maniac said:


> Quite honestly most anyone can push hardware to 100%. It comes down to whether they CHOOSE to, because most know if you don't do that while optimizing well, you cater to mostly the high end vs mainstream gamer market.



What right do people get to complain about inefficiencies if they cannot be bothered to make optimizations?  I never hear about Crytek or 4A Games complaining about Graphics API's.  I've heard Carmack voice his dislike of DirectX but also crap all over OpenGL for not updating quickly enough.  I like DICE's games, but they are far from perfect, and have really odd priorities if they think their time is best spent working with AMD on Mantle.  How about changing Battlefield's hit detection to serverside and fixing the god damn net code so people stop killing each other at the same time ~50% of the time.



Frag Maniac said:


> You fail to point out the huge and stark difference between Glide and Mantle. Glide was born of ONE company trying to reinvent the API mouse trap, and solely designed and controlled by them.
> 
> Mantle was requested by numerous developers, which in itself substantiates the long overdo comment. Mantle was a collaborative effort and will continue to be. It's the closest thing we'll likely see to an open source API.



Glide was supported by quite a few devs as well.  Hell, looking at the list EA and Interplay appear to have taken quite a liking to Glide.  

A bigger issue I see is that back then there was 3-4 GPU manufacturers (nVidia, ATi, 3dfx, Matrox?) battling it out and now there is a duopoly, and market share is split pretty evenly.  

I would never call this an open source API, looking at the slides AMD says other vendors _can_ get their hardware working with Mantle, but not that it will be easy or cheap, I almost guarantee they intend for Nvidia and Intel to pay them for such a luxury.  I'm not saying this is a bad thing or unethical, if AMD develops the tech they have every right to license it out--just as Nvidia and Intel have every right to laugh at them and release their own Graphics API's which I have no doubt they would try (maybe not Intel, but Nvidia would sooner spend 5x as much on their own solution than pay AMD).


----------



## RoutedScripter (Nov 17, 2013)

xenocide said:


> They push hardware 100%, whether or not the average user is at the point where they can run the game at that level is irrelevant.  How many other developers do that with such consistancy?



That totally doesn't mean all that utilization is used. A considerable amount is only heat.





xenocide said:


> Glide.
> .



What is your point? Almost every other Mantle attacker keeps whining about glide, I don't care really, now is now, I wasn't around at the time, the company went bankrupt and the API was proprietary. I really don't see the point of discussing this, I think it's just a distraction and a very crappy argument.


----------



## xenocide (Nov 17, 2013)

RuskiSnajper said:


> That totally doesn't mean all that utilization is used. A considerable amount is only heat.



And?  Heat and actual performance are not mutually exclusive and have almost no connection--outside of the fact that without keeping mdoern GPU's adequately cooled they tend to throttle.  Heat is generated when current runs through circuits, unless Mantle can physically improve on the hardware (spoiler: it can't) that aspect is completely unavoidable.



RuskiSnajper said:


> What is your point? Almost every other Mantle attacker keeps whining about glide, I don't care really, now is now, I wasn't around at the time, the company went bankrupt and the API was proprietary. I really don't see the point of discussing this, I think it's just a distraction and a very crappy argument.



Because Glide (and PhysX to some extent) was a near identical concept.  A low level API developed by a hardware vendor that offered large performance gains on their own hardware.  Yes Yes I know the slides say other vendors _can_ take advantage of Mantle, but we don't know any specifics.  I guarantee if AMD created such a golden goose they wouldn't just _give_ it away, they are not that benevolent...


----------



## RoutedScripter (Nov 17, 2013)

xenocide said:


> I never hear about Crytek or 4A Games complaining about Graphics API's.



That's absolutely nothing. 90% of what they internally think is not public. And i know about the Crytek's quote, if they can't see benefits, that's their problem, nobody's going to rely on the stallers, that's why I fully support and SALUTE Johan and all the the others for putting down the hammer and make it happen, except just "oh we on PC we
It is totally evident that Carmacks is more personally interested in Oculus Rift than he is for the PC market, it's totally evidence they haven't done anything to support PC, except ofcourse Rift, and all the comments about PC not being the leading platform, yeah that's all a financial perspective, I don't care about financial crap and their long term corporate shit, that's their problem, from a consumer viewpoint, if they put effort and make great games people will buy it whether it's on PC or Wii for that matter (tons of X360 and PS3 people buying wii just for SSBB) 



xenocide said:


> I like DICE's games, but they are far from perfect, and have really odd priorities if they think their time is best spent working with AMD on Mantle.  How about changing Battlefield's hit detection to serverside and fixing the god damn net code so people stop killing each other at the same time ~50% of the time.




Stop mixing things, I've pointed this out, but those are 2 different discussions, graphics programmers don't write netcode and balance. You're making a fool of your self by blaming like that there's only 5 programmers being responsible for every single piece of code in the game.

I've said it my self how much I hate BF for all the bugs and weird geometry-animation just absolute weirdness, that discussion has nothing to do with Mantle, I analyze critically everything, I am not a bozo on the street judging everything about a person based on a first impression, that's what the mantle attackers do, that's what the indoctrinated stupid college trendy developers do, that's what twitter junkines do, that's what blogger yappies do, I don't and I can't connect these 2 things, it has no sense at all, yes I can kick Johan in the ass for all the buggy engine, but I can give him a medal for making Mantle, but what really does it matter the most, one game that EA forced them to do, or the WHOLE damn industry finally moving away from the awful mainstream DX and OGL failtrain. ("mainstream" because it caters to basically everyone, from indue games to AAA games)

All these mainstream developers mingling around the chats and the web (not just the mentioned, all the webz, i have 20 tabs of forums opened), they are all compartmentalized, they focus on their little bubble, they don't see the big picture and just outright assume everything. It makes me sick, and I've just woken up from a yesterdays 4-Freaking-hour of IRC chats is a OGL Chat Room, eventually they learned something, while I liked to chat and I wasn't exactly arguing, it still was hammering on the head. One of the big things is communication, they didn't seem to distinguish from my chatter in stating options (what could happen) to facts, to my own speculation. And I didn't speculate much except the numbers, 30% initially, and 50% for CPU, that's my own speculation, they keept hanging on to it like it was something that can discredit me or what, if I say upfront it is the speculation, it cannot be a point of argument to counter on all the other things I said which definitely aren't speculation.

I didn't mean the whole idea of discussion made me sick, no, I ofcourse expected that, the sick part is, when someone came out to say absolute asinine stuff like *"GPU Vendors do driver hacks because they can't get developers to optimize their games"* .... driver hacks meaning driver updates or "performance optimizations", yes they're all driver hacks, theres no real genuine optimizations in DX, it never was, it's all duct-tape solutions.

And by that point I was banding on my head, it's the other ***** way around! *It's the DEVELOPERS who are bugging the GPU Vendors to Fix their games but GPU Vendors can only do a mediocre job by hacking the driver* .... telling the GPU what to do in a situation by manually flushing buffer for example among all other stuff, because the game developer cannot do that because DirectX and OpenGL don't allow it. And GPU Vendors have to do that for alllllll thooooose games out there, and that's when we get to the realization that most of the code in the drivers is app-specific code, that's why they're so big, thousands of games, thousands of combinations for the GPU families, Operating Systems, not to mention other GFX programs such as photoshop, and movie players, all this code is NOT proper optimization, it's a hack if we get to the bottom of it, it never was genuine fix. They kept saying like this was normal, it always was driver hacking since forever on DX and OGL, they're high-level APIs, and they keep saying if they're going to hammer on it long enough "oh we could implement everything mantle does in OGL too" ... yeah tell that to Khronos, nobody has 20 years to wait for that.


----------



## xenocide (Nov 17, 2013)

RuskiSnajper said:


> You're making a fool of your self



I'm not the one claiming a Graphics API can help cool your overheating computer.



RuskiSnajper said:


> I've said it my self how much I hate BF for all the bugs and weird geometry-animation just absolute weirdness, that discussion has nothing to do with Mantle, I analyze critically everything, I am not a bozo on the street judging everything about a person based on a first impression, that's what the mantle attackers do, that's what the indoctrinated stupid college trendy developers do, that's what twitter junkines do, that's what blogger yappies do, I don't and I can't connect these 2 things, it has no sense at all, yes I can kick Johan in the ass for all the buggy engine, but I can give him a medal for making Mantle, but what really does it matter the most, one game that EA forced them to do, or the WHOLE damn industry finally moving away from the awful mainstream DX and OGL failtrain.



Sooooo DICE makes shit games, but since they helped AMD make Mantle they deserve medals, so they can make _efficient_ shit games?  

I also wouldn't even put OpenGL and DirectX in the same league.  OpenGL is used by a very small portion of game developers where as DirectX is essentially the defacto Graphics API.  Even then almost nobody uses DirectX 11, which allows for many performance gains assuming you batch calls which almost nobody does because they'd rather hack a DX11 version together to say they have one.



RuskiSnajper said:


> I didn't mean the whole idea of discussion made me sick, no, I ofcourse expected that, the sick part is, when someone came out to say absolute asinine stuff like "GPU Vendors do driver hacks because they can't get developers to optimize their games" .... driver hacks meaning driver updates or "performance optimizations", yes they're all driver hacks, theres no real genuine optimizations in DX, it never was, it's all duct-tape solutions.



Curious that you mention driver hacks specifically and also mention RAGE was a well developed game and all the problems were OpenGL's fault and not iD Software or AMD's fault--yet only AMD cards had issues with the game, it ran fine on Nvidia from what I recall.


----------



## mastrdrver (Nov 17, 2013)

xenocide said:


> Because Glide (and PhysX to some extent) was a near identical concept.  A low level API developed by a hardware vendor that offered large performance gains on their own hardware.  Yes Yes I know the slides say other vendors _can_ take advantage of Mantle, but we don't know any specifics.  I guarantee if AMD created such a golden goose they wouldn't just _give_ it away, they are not that benevolent...



Glide came about because there was no Windows API. DX came about because Glide was a proprietary API and there was need for a better open source API other then OpenGL. In fact, when 3Dfx released their first Voodoo card, it supported not only Glide, but also OpenGL.

There was also more then the 4 companies you listed earlier. It was somewhere around 8 with 3Dfx being the dominating one. S3, ATi, nVidia, 3Dfx, Matrox, and a couple others I can't think of off the top of my head.

Glide failed because there were 8 GPU companies and there was an extreme need for an open graphics API then the lack luster support that was received for OpenGL. Also thanks to Glide, it helped push MS to make DX better as Glide supported things long before DX eventually supported them.

If my memory serves me well, it was thanks to 3Dfx and Glide that helped push MS to get DX to version 9 that everyone still thinks was the biggest performance and visual jump from the previous one.

To compare Mantle to Glide, I think, is not only wrong, but also is trying to compare the two APIs in totally different environments that the two APIs addressed two different problems. MS does not seem to be too interested in pushing DX forward too much more, thus why we see the push for Mantle as there's far less of a need for a universal API and need for one that is less hindering to the computational power that we find in today's computers.


----------



## xenocide (Nov 17, 2013)

mastrdrver said:


> Glide came about because there was no Windows API. DX came about because Glide was a proprietary API and there was need for a better open source API other then OpenGL. In fact, when 3Dfx released their first Voodoo card, it supported not only Glide, but also OpenGL.



Correct.  Glide was a derivation so to speak of OpenGL, the GL in GLide was because it was heavily based on OpenGL and they wanted to stress that.



mastrdrver said:


> There was also more then the 4 companies you listed earlier. It was somewhere around 8 with 3Dfx being the dominating one. S3, ATi, nVidia, 3Dfx, Matrox, and a couple others I can't think of off the top of my head.



I had forgotten S3, but other than them any others weren't worth mentioning, it was mostly nVidia, ATi, 3Dfx, S3, and Matrox--with the first 3 being the biggest players.



mastrdrver said:


> Glide failed because there were 8 GPU companies and there was an extreme need for an open graphics API then the lack luster support that was received for OpenGL. Also thanks to Glide, it helped push MS to make DX better as Glide supported things long before DX eventually supported them.



I think AMD is trying to do a similar thing, but the bigger problem is that 7-8 years of PC-esque consoles dragging along the corpse of DirectX 9 has lead to abysmal adoption of DirectX 10/11 which is much more streamlined--I've read DirectX 11 is easier to use than any previous version as well as OpenGL, so there's that.



mastrdrver said:


> To compare Mantle to Glide, I think, is not only wrong, but also is trying to compare the two APIs in totally different environments that the two APIs addressed two different problems. MS does not seem to be too interested in pushing DX forward too much more, thus why we see the push for Mantle as there's far less of a need for a universal API and need for one that is less hindering to the computational power that we find in today's computers.



I'm not saying it's a perfect comparison, but it's the closest comparison we have.  Also, is nobody going to point out the irony of AMD pushing OpenCL and then releasing Mantle???  They went from bragging about their high-level performance to releasing a low-level API in like a year flat.


----------



## RoutedScripter (Nov 17, 2013)

xenocide said:


> I'm not the one claiming a Graphics API can help cool your overheating computer.



I'm not even going to respond to BS. That guys problem with physical silicon limitation is fairly unlikely to be a problem for PC enthusiasts, throw the default cooler off, 1. put a better one on, 2. put watercooling on, problem solved. No more discussion needed. If it's a problem for "teh mainstream", they will have to join the PC enthusiasts crowd's ways, at least temporairly until the GPU vendor replaces the fans with better default ones; but , no handholding, no spoonfeeding, no babysitting, that's what Mantle is for, people who are sick of being limited by the petty mainstreamers, trying to hold us back.

Am I coming down too hard, maybe, I'm telling you the truth, someone has to do it, and definitely I'm not trying to attack anyone with this, just pointing out these compartmentalized groups, how they behave and all the background, but that's not important for Mantle, they won't change anything, they can just assume the moral high-ground until the numbers get out, and again, don't come back on me because I'm saying again, It will definitely not be a 100% jump in performance on day one, but in time, this is not such an unrealistic value, BUT, with time, this number will be murky, because it will be gradual, and we all know what that means, it's not as noticable, and certainly the compartmentalized groups aren't going to analyze the numbers to caluclate the total boost in it's entirety unless we have a controlled benchmark and those benchmarks don't represent all the other engines either.

Remember, I'm on the defensive side, I don't come out attacking the mainstream, nobody's taking your DX and OGL away from you, AMD has made that perfectly clear. I'm taking this fight dead serious, I've waited for this since 4 years ago when first started to slowly became aware of all the problems of PC APIs, look if it fails, it fails, there's no buts of ifs, I might be taking this attitude part personal, but all these explanations I am doing my best to stay objective and scientific, I'm not perfect so my stuff sounds a bit emotional, but all I'm doing is laying it out the differences and if I'm wrong I admit it and correct it; plus what's the worst that can happen, some bozo developer on MountainDew and Doritos comes from college and tries to build a Mantle game and fails, and blames AMD, and everyone in the industry takes him seriously and jumps ship?

And some people keep thinking that this whole Mantle thing is some kind of AMD's massive PR, the announcements being made just before the GPUs ship might be strategic, but I don't see any BS spin on it considerig 4 other developers are involved. It's not like they were showing puppies.



xenocide said:


> Sooooo DICE makes shit games, but since they helped AMD make Mantle they deserve medals, so they can make _efficient_ shit games?
> 
> I also wouldn't even put OpenGL and DirectX in the same league.  OpenGL is used by a very small portion of game developers where as DirectX is essentially the defacto Graphics API.  Even then almost nobody uses DirectX 11, which allows for many performance gains assuming you batch calls which almost nobody does because they'd rather hack a DX11 version together to say they have one.



With Mantle, it takes a bit longer to build the rendering pipeline, but it's a fixed cost, they don't have to maintain the codebase, they can keep improving it, and they have more time to worry about other parts of the game, it will shift the work away from all the effort going into making sure the game runs on PC, all the constant talk between GPU vendors.





xenocide said:


> Curious that you mention driver hacks specifically and also mention RAGE was a well developed game and all the problems were OpenGL's fault and not iD Software or AMD's fault--yet only AMD cards had issues with the game, it ran fine on Nvidia from what I recall.



Rage codebase was superclean and stable of almost every other game, the drivers were the only reason the game didn't work.

1. both drivers are hacks, "peformance" and "working" isn't the same thing so this is the big thing I want to point out, if it's working, it doesn't mean the optimizations are proper, it's still a ton of overhead, even if Nvidia's GPU driver hacks are better than AMDs, they're still hacks, kapish.
2. AMD Released the wrong beta driver mistakenly, the package contained the DLL file which was 3 weeks older than it should be
3. Proper AMD OGL drivers weren't as good as Nvidia's, not just app-specific, but AMD's driver had core support problems
4. Rage was ahead in complexity of any other OGL application.

Sorry for double post (i bet on the idea you would reply by now )

---------------------------------------
----------------------------------------


Should this be the smoking gun of all quotes from the Q&A:

When asked "what's the benefit to consumers": AMD Driver Guy Responded, but he then said he gave word to devs who can explain better:



> _*"Increased performance means two things, right? First, it means you can run faster, naturally, on decent hardware, the other way to look at it is that if I don't need to run faster, can I write on a lower end hardware? If I write on a lower end hardware, how does it expand my user base? So suddenly everybody with a small form factor not so powerful notebook can run all these games, right? Extremely expanded user base. So that's one way to look at it, right? The other way to look at it is performance is nice, but to me this in only a stepping stone, because if you're looking at 20% improvement, 2x, 3x, this is purely a performance advantage, when you think about 10x or more, the question you should start asking yourself, what is the new concept I can put on top of this, what new types of games ..."*_


Exact time: http://youtu.be/sSY2KXBoro0?t=26m45s


Also good to point out:
I'm not quoting exactly but this is what the AMD guy also said, he in his 30 Years of being at ATI and AMD for GPUs, said that no other API was developed with direct game developer contact, always isolated.


----------



## Pehla (Nov 17, 2013)

lot of good reads about mantle,i also hope they finaly make something that is groundbreaking
 but like one guy from my country use to say "since i cought my self in a lie...,i dont trust anyone any more.."
until i see it with my own eyes i can only hope!!
im not pesimist but stop talking to much,do that stuf!!


----------



## RoutedScripter (Nov 17, 2013)

Great article here: 
http://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-apu-developer-conference-mantle,25079.html

AMA:
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-ama-toms-hardware,3672.html

Sums up these 3 presentations:


----------



## RejZoR (Nov 17, 2013)

It's funny how people are all sceptical over Mantle. Like low level API's are something new. Am i really the only one who remembers 3dfx Glide and S3 Metal ?


----------



## xenocide (Nov 17, 2013)

RejZoR said:


> It's funny how people are all sceptical over Mantle. Like low level API's are something new. Am i really the only one who remembers 3dfx Glide and S3 Metal ?



I'm skeptical because it's AMD, their PR team is horrifically bad.  I remember Glide (not so much Metal) hence why I referenced it--I'm worried about a similar situation where one manufacturer depends on a low level API to maintain a performance edge.  Honestly, I find it a bit confusing that AMD claims all these developers are asking them for a solution to code to the metal when back during the Glide-era developers were begging Microsoft and SGI to make a hardware agnostic API to get away from coding to the metal.

We'll see how it plays out, but I'm not willing to accept these 10x performance gains AMD is touting.  I've heard similar talk in the past and it never pans out as well as intended.


----------



## The Von Matrices (Nov 17, 2013)

RejZoR said:


> It's funny how people are all sceptical over Mantle. Like low level API's are something new. Am i really the only one who remembers 3dfx Glide and S3 Metal ?



The skeptics like I don't doubt that the technology can provide performance improvements or if it can be implemented.  However, we are still wondering:


What magnitude of overall performance improvement will result?
Will this actually catch on and have widespread adoption?
Neither one is easy to quantify at the moment.  For performance figures AMD is using qualitative means to describe the overall performance improvement (e.g. "blow your socks off"  CPU utilization) and only using quantitative measures for low level performance measurements (e.g. number of draws per frame) that don't directly translate into the end user experience.  As far as widespread adoption, I am not willing to trust developers like EA just based upon them boasting that this will be used in all their latest games since games get cancelled and delayed all the time.

AMD has let me down a lot in the past (I still am waiting for the Crossfire Eyefinity frame pacing driver they promised 6 months ago); _if the company wants my business in the future they will have to prove that they can deliver products and technologies, not just talk about them._  Send out a few finished games and beta or release drivers to independent reviewers and let them confirm these claims.  If AMD's claims still hold up at that point, then I will be convinced.  I've learned to never buy a product based on anticipated releases or features since they rarely come about or are delayed significantly.  The people who bought their new graphics card claiming "it supports Mantle" are going to be in for a rude awakening when they realize that their card is horribly obsolete before Mantle games become widely available.


----------



## Frag_Maniac (Nov 17, 2013)

xenocide said:


> What right do people get to complain about inefficiencies if they cannot be bothered to make optimizations?  I never hear about Crytek or 4A Games complaining about Graphics API's.  I've heard Carmack voice his dislike of DirectX but also crap all over OpenGL for not updating quickly enough.  I like DICE's games, but they are far from perfect, and have really odd priorities if they think their time is best spent working with AMD on Mantle.  How about changing Battlefield's hit detection to serverside and fixing the god damn net code so people stop killing each other at the same time ~50% of the time.


In a perfect world all devs WOULD care a lot about optimization, CryTek, not so much. They're more interested in melting PCs, by their own words. Neither CryTek or Id are good examples of good game optimization. Carmack's horrible Megatextures concept obviously had benefits only on their side speeding up production, and nothing but tradeoffs on the user side. The nuances of how the games are made mean little really, it's more about the potential via the engines they build, because the rest is their personal vision vs expertise.





> Glide was supported by quite a few devs as well.  Hell, looking at the list EA and Interplay appear to have taken quite a liking to Glide.


Supported by is not the same as requested and co-developed by, not by a long shot. It's easy to sit back and say we'll try it if you make it, with no commitment up front.


----------



## Frick (Nov 17, 2013)

Frag Maniac said:


> In a perfect world all devs WOULD care a lot about optimization, CryTek, not so much. They're more interested in melting PCs, by their own words. Nether CryTek or Id are good examples of good game optimization. Carmack's horrible Megatextures concept obviously had benefits only on their side speeding up production, and nothing but tradeoffs on the user side. The nuances of how the games are made mean little really, it's more about the potential via the engines they build, because the rest is their personal vision vs expertise.Supported by is not the same as requested and co-developed by, not by a long shot. It's easy to sit back and say we'll use it if you make it, with no commitment up front.



Crytek games are well optimised, as you can run them on a lot of computers with lower settings. When you turn everything to 11 they melt PC's, and I believe the lack of that option is one of the things PC gamers bitch about when they talk console games.


----------



## xenocide (Nov 17, 2013)

Frick said:


> Crytek games are well optimised, as you can run them on a lot of computers with lower settings. When you turn everything to 11 they melt PC's, and I believe the lack of that option is one of the things PC gamers bitch about when they talk console games.



Exactly.  Games can be extremely taxing and in fact should be if they are perfectly optimized--that is, taking full advantage of all the hardware available.


----------



## RejZoR (Nov 17, 2013)

xenocide said:


> I'm skeptical because it's AMD, their PR team is horrifically bad.  I remember Glide (not so much Metal) hence why I referenced it--I'm worried about a similar situation where one manufacturer depends on a low level API to maintain a performance edge.  Honestly, I find it a bit confusing that AMD claims all these developers are asking them for a solution to code to the metal when back during the Glide-era developers were begging Microsoft and SGI to make a hardware agnostic API to get away from coding to the metal.
> 
> We'll see how it plays out, but I'm not willing to accept these 10x performance gains AMD is touting.  I've heard similar talk in the past and it never pans out as well as intended.



You're looking at two different situations. Back then we had like 10 graphic vendors, each doing their own thing. We had like 4 or 5 different API's back then and graphics were evolving heavily. They needed something to unify everything. These days, we only have 2 major graphics makers (and i'm not counting Intel), basically just 1 API where OpenGL isn't used much anymore and DirectX seems to be stagnating for the last few years.

S3 Metal was exactly what AMD Mantle is. And if S3 wasn't busted back then and disolved into VIA, it could most likely live on. It was after all supported by one of the widely used engines, Unreal Engine. The performance i got out of crappy S3 Savage3D 8MB was easily comparable with like 4 times more expensive RivaTNT2 back in those days. It was because of S3 Metal that i could enjoy best games of that era on a crappy graphic card. UT99, Deus Ex, Undying, The Wheel of Time etc. All this was the good stuff.

DICE has already officially supported AMD Mantle which is coming to BF4 in December. Since EA announced that they'll be using Frostbite engine for pretty much all games, that's already a massive number of games. Then there is again Unreal Engine which also announced support. Imagine how many developers use Unreal Engine including all the indie studios. These two are almost half of the entire game market, the rest are proprietary engines which could potentially also support Mantle. And if AMD is planning support for other vendors as well, it has a success no matter what you think right now.


----------



## RoutedScripter (Nov 17, 2013)

The Von Matrices said:


> The skeptics like I don't doubt that the technology can provide performance improvements or if it can be implemented.  However, we are still wondering:
> 
> 
> What magnitude of overall performance improvement will result?
> Will this actually catch on and have widespread adoption?



Here ya GO!
These are my own subjective speculations, nothing to do with anything else.






That 25% at the 4x might be even less, I didn't found a 4x comparison article to get an idea, but i guess the gain is so minimal they don't even make reviews about it.
And I also used the lowest of my own MT Boost estimate ...


------------------------
Great post I found on other sites on the web, not only agreeing with what I was saying before, but also explaining in detail which I could not.



> _
> The common misconception seems to be that Mantle brings only CPU gains, and only helps with low end GPUs. This is not true.
> 
> Here are some examples of potential GPU gains:
> ...


----------



## Frag_Maniac (Nov 17, 2013)

Frick said:


> When you turn everything to 11 they melt PC's, and I believe the lack of that option is one of the things PC gamers bitch about when they talk console games.



This pretty much makes my point. Instead of being optimized for the consumer market they target most, they "melt PCs". It's not hard in the final phases of production to dial things in for the current top shelf hardware at that time and not have this be the case. What's the point of having high end graphics if you can't use max settings without problems and have to wait to upgrade your GPU? By then most are tired of the game. This is why most games are NOT in fact made for hardware not available yet.


----------



## xenocide (Nov 18, 2013)

Frag Maniac said:


> This pretty much makes my point. Instead of being optimized for the consumer market they target most, they "melt PCs". It's not hard in the final phases of production to dial things in for the current top shelf hardware at that time and not have this be the case. What's the point of having high end graphics if you can't use max settings without problems and have to wait to upgrade your GPU? By then most are tired of the game. This is why most games are NOT in fact made for hardware not available yet.



I believe we're comparing apples and oranges.  

I know I (cannot speak for Frick) am saying that the companies I mentioned optimize in the sense that they use all available resources to push the games to the edge.  Yes, you usually need the highest end hardware to run them, but shouldn't that be the case with Max Settings?  They could do things like dial down the view distance, halve the texture resolution, and remove some lighting effects, but that detracts from the experience.  It's worth noting that a game like BF3 which ran at about 60 fps for me on mid/high settings with my HD5850 looked infinitely better than most games maxed which ran at 60 fps, because it had access to more hardware.  It was using all 4 threads of my i5-2500k where as most of the games I could run maxed out were only using about 2.

"Max Settings" is kind of irrelevant when comparing different titles with different standards.  Diablo 3 maxed out looks worse than Battlefield 3 on med/low settings because the standards are completely different.  If you use more available resources but also dial up the quality of the graphics you can turn what would have been a system pushing game at max to a system pushing game at medium/high.  It's essentially just scaling the quality upwards by accessing more available resources.  I always found it odd that people were turned off by only being able to use medium or high settings, and always wanted ultra or max regardless of what the quality was.


----------



## Frag_Maniac (Nov 18, 2013)

Optimization to the extent you're now referring to has never been CryTek's goal or result. You just can't expect a solid 60 FPS at 1080p with max settings unless you're doubling up your GPUs in SLI or Crossfire.

For the record I was for a long time willing to settle for the best settings I could make do with when I was using a mere GTS 250 for over two years, but CryTek games are noted for the extra details they bring graphically. 

It's kinda contradictory to equip yourself for such games and not use max settings, because it's only then that you employ the extra eye candy that separates them from other games, but at a cost.

Anyways, back on topic, we're somewhat straying from that. Mantle at least brings to the table not just an alternate graphics API that promises to bring more efficiency in gaming, but more in developing with it's debugging, and the latter is what I think is most exciting. 

Teams like CryTek that try to juice the most out of hardware should now be able do it more predictably without going overboard. It will help dial in graphics power much better within acceptable performance limits. 

Interesting to note too that CryTek started out with Nvidia, and with Crysis 3 went with AMD. I don't know if it had anything to do with Mantle, but it's certainly a possibility given what they're striving for with it's use in development.


----------



## RoutedScripter (Nov 18, 2013)

Frag Maniac said:


> Optimization to the extent you're now referring to has never been CryTek's goal or result. You just can't expect a solid 60 FPS at 1080p with max settings unless you're doubling up your GPUs in SLI or Crossfire.
> 
> For the record I was for a long time willing to settle for the best settings I could make do with when I was using a mere GTS 250 for over two years, but CryTek games are noted for the extra details they bring graphically.
> 
> ...




Long story of my opinions around Crytek ... we all know what happened with crysis 2 ... instead of building and improving on what they made in the beginning they jumped on the trendy failtrain, while making it seem like they're knowing what they're doing, ofcourse a new IP wouldn't be as respected in beginning, being heavily pirated but still made 3 million sales because it was a great damn game and people kept buying over the years, and over the time it became an icon.


When I think about mantle, there will always be 1 thing I will want to see in this world before I die. A Crysis 1 Remastered with a new engine and with Mantle! Improved Ai and even more harder difficulty to make the gameplay seriously tactical and calculated gameplay. I have really no interest much about anything multiplayer to be honest, I played over 2000 hours of call of duty 2, great times, I would play a remaster of it from time to time, but other than that, about FPSs, the other thing is FPA like Metroid, Zelda, etc, other than that it's RTS, but RTS doesn't really like critically require mantle. Crysis would benefit immensly. Crytek to me just seems like a confused company, they don't really know what the hell they want, the fix something that's not broken, the whole CryMod doesn't exist anymore, I didn't even checked where all the assets are in 2 years, it's sad and depressing I don't really want to think about it, I was there in the community in the core, such great people ... the crysis story went totally around it self it's not crysis any more and I simply didn't want to have anything to do with crysis 3, I don't even have enough good graphics card.


------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------

*Proudly Presents: an insight who Mantle haters are, usually some stupid programmers who have no idea what they're talking about, this guy isn't even in 3D programming, has no idea what benefits consoles have in terms of code efficiency. That's who the blogger twatter haters are, they don't have the complete picture for their opinion to even be considered, they have no critical thinking*


----------



## Frag_Maniac (Nov 19, 2013)

I think the best thing for Mantle would be if devs start using it successfully with engines *other* than Frostbite. Not that Frostbite isn't a good engine in it's own right, but it's complex coding is a big learning curve for most devs, and too much use of only Frostbite with Mantle is going to send a bad message to those wanting to implement it in their own engines.

I'm not sure Crysis 1 really NEEDS a remake with a different engine. Use of Mantle just might make it more efficient on the updated version of CryENGINE.


----------



## RoutedScripter (Nov 20, 2013)

Frag Maniac said:


> Not that Frostbite isn't a good engine in it's own right, but it's complex coding is a big learning curve for most devs, and too much use of only Frostbite with Mantle is going to send a bad message to those wanting to implement it in their own engines.



That doesn't make any sense.




Frag Maniac said:


> I'm not sure Crysis 1 really NEEDS a remake with a different engine. Use of Mantle just might make it more efficient on the updated version of CryENGINE.



These 2 statements contradict each other.


----------



## xenocide (Nov 20, 2013)

RuskiSnajper said:


> That doesn't make any sense.


 
 He's saying the growth of anything is dependant on the barrier to entry.  Frostbite is infinitely more difficult to use than say, Unity or Unreal.  Not to mention I believe it is very cost prohibitive, so you're unlikely to see anyone not developing for EA using it.  I would assume Mantle requires alterations to be made to game engines, so who knows if these other more readily available engines will be updated to make use of Mantle.


----------



## RoutedScripter (Nov 20, 2013)

xenocide said:


> He's saying the growth of anything is dependant on the barrier to entry.  Frostbite is infinitely more difficult to use than say, Unity or Unreal.  Not to mention I believe it is very cost prohibitive, so you're unlikely to see anyone not developing for EA using it.  I would assume Mantle requires alterations to be made to game engines, so who knows if these other more readily available engines will be updated to make use of Mantle.



What on earth does mantle have to do with Frostbite ?


----------



## xenocide (Nov 20, 2013)

RuskiSnajper said:


> What on earth does mantle have to do with Frostbite ?


 
Probably the fact that Frostbite is the entire center of their marketting strategy for Mantle?  If AMD just quietly released Mantle everybody would ignore it, they are pushing it hard with the Frostbite engine to show people its capabilities.


----------



## RoutedScripter (Nov 20, 2013)

xenocide said:


> Probably the fact that Frostbite is the entire center of their marketting strategy for Mantle?  If AMD just quietly released Mantle everybody would ignore it, they are pushing it hard with the Frostbite engine to show people its capabilities.



What the hell are you talking about. Nobody's pushing anything, they're still testing the thing, they're still making debug tools, they're still not ready to release the SDK planned for early 2014, ofcourse BF4 will have the first proof-point prototype because it's DICE who co-developed the API and they're the first ones who started working with it. There are 4 other developers who joined forces, however AMD said that the initial testing teams are intentionally kept small, so it was a few guys there at the Q&A; Oxide has their own demo planning to release in early 2014, or it's a game, or I may misheard the part but it's called Nitrous or Starswarm whatever it is.

And has nothing to do with any other engine or any other developer, and their implementation chances, it happens to be Frostbite, it could be anyone.


----------



## xenocide (Nov 20, 2013)

That's just patently false--AMD is pushing Mantle, to do such they have to prove it's actually worth investing in, that's where Frostbite comes in.  If they (along with DICE) can prove it has benefits other developers will work with it.  But as it stands, with only Frostbite they can't do a ton because EA keeps Frostbite under lock and key.  The biggest issue is that it needs to be configured to work properly with additional engines, preferabbly ones that are readily available--like Unity or Unreal--so that more developers can have a go at it.  As it stands right now, the people supporting AMD Mantle are DICE, Cloud Imperium (with Star Citizen), and Oxide Games.  Oxide is a development studio--made of primarily former Civ V devs--that is making an engine called Nitrous.


----------



## RoutedScripter (Nov 20, 2013)

xenocide said:


> That's just patently false--*AMD is pushing Mantle, to do such they have to prove it's actually worth investing in, that's where Frostbite comes in.*  If they (along with DICE) can prove it has benefits other developers will work with it.  But as it stands, with only Frostbite they can't do a ton because EA keeps Frostbite under lock and key.  *The biggest issue is that it [i assume you mean Mantle] needs to be configured to work properly with additional engines*, preferabbly ones that are readily available--like Unity or Unreal--so that more developers can have a go at it.



That's bullshit.


----------



## The Von Matrices (Nov 20, 2013)

RuskiSnajper said:


> That's bullshit.



I think you're confused here.  Most game studios never touch Mantle (or DirectX) directly; they will only utilize it through game engines.  So if game engines don't adopt Mantle support, Mantle will remain an interesting idea but nothing more.  EA's Frostbite is a test platform to try to convince other game engine developers to use it, but Frostbite is basically only for EA games; just announcing Frostbite support and nothing else is not enough to change the market.  Think about the last five years; there are countless games on Unreal Engine 3 but only a small minority on Frostbite 1/2 (basically EA only).  Believe it or not there is a lot of money invested in the DirectX ecosystem, and it's going to take a big push to change the status quo and convince companies like Epic Games to invest tens to hundreds of millions of dollars to integrate Mantle support.


----------



## xenocide (Nov 20, 2013)

Exactly.  The burden is on Developers to implement Mantle, and AMD has to entice them and prove it's worth the investment.  If Mantle were something they could just tack on everyone would already be working on it, but the fact is they have to rework their game engines to support it, which will take a lot of time and money.


----------



## RoutedScripter (Nov 20, 2013)

The Von Matrices said:


> I think you're confused here.  Most game studios never touch Mantle (or DirectX) directly; they will only utilize it through game engines.  So if game engines don't adopt Mantle support, Mantle will remain an interesting idea but nothing more.  *EA's Frostbite is a test platform to try to convince other game engine developers to use it, but Frostbite is basically only for EA games; just announcing Frostbite support and nothing else is not enough to change the market.*  Think about the last five years; there are countless games on Unreal Engine 3 but only a small minority on Frostbite 1/2 (basically EA only).  Believe it or not there is a lot of money invested in the DirectX ecosystem, and it's going to take a big push to change the status quo and convince companies like Epic Games to invest tens to hundreds of millions of dollars to integrate Mantle support.






xenocide said:


> Exactly.  *The burden is on Developers to implement Mantle, and AMD has to entice them and prove it's worth the investment. * If Mantle were something they could just tack on everyone would already be working on it, but the fact is they have to rework their game engines to support it, which will take a lot of time and money.




You guys have a preconditioned view that AMD is using DICE as PR, and also, it's developers who wanted Mantle, which pretty much invalidates everything you're trying to say;  not the other way around. If Mantle was nothing and there weren't big developers involved I would have detected PR spin a long time ago, basically I have no interest in discussing this, you're wrong, it doesn't work this way, you're mixing things around, Frostbite is not being exploited for PR, it could be any engine that happened to be the first one implemented, you guys are spinning this around Nothing what you have said makes sense considering everything we've heard, I suggest you go back to page 1 and check out all the links.






xenocide said:


> If Mantle were something they could just tack on everyone would already be working on it



Total BS.


----------



## Mussels (Nov 20, 2013)

looks like i might not need a CPU upgrade after all 


what i'm expecting is that if the consoles support this (mostly XB1 i assume) then all the console ports (and their engines which we all known will get reused a lot) support mantle, then its going to take off massively.


----------



## xenocide (Nov 20, 2013)

RuskiSnajper said:


> You guys have a preconditioned view that AMD is using DICE as PR, and also, it's developers who wanted Mantle, which pretty much invalidates everything you're trying to say;  not the other way around. If Mantle was nothing and there weren't big developers involved I would have detected PR spin a long time ago


 
Uhhhhh what?

They are using DICE as PR, DICE is on stage at conventions praising an AMD product, that is PR.  Your misconception is that PR is innately bad, which is not the case.  PR is just things like Press Releases, Demoes, and Keynotes to help market a product.  AMD could have just as easily released it, and used their own tech or developed a tech demo to show it off, but they didn't.  They worked with DICE, so DICE was the first to implement it and advertise its benefits. 

There are _some_ developers that wanted Mantle, and that's their decision.  On the flip side, there was a time when developers hated Low Level API's similar to Mantle, and that's where DirectX came from.  Yes, it could have been any engine, but it would have required the developer of said engine to work Mantle support into the engine.  We're talking about Graphics API's here, you need to have the engine setup to support these things or else nothing will work as intended.  There's a reason games are setup to run only in OpenGL or only in DirectX, it's because the Game Engines were designed to use those systems.



RuskiSnajper said:


> basically I have no interest in discussing this, you're wrong, it doesn't work this way, you're mixing things around, Frostbite is not being exploited for PR, it could be any engine that happened to be the first one implemented, you guys are spinning this around Nothing what you have said makes sense considering everything we've heard, I suggest you go back to page 1 and check out all the links.


 
That's a very pleasent attitude to have, essentially "I disagree with the things you're saying so I don't care or want to hear about it."  I never said Frostbite was being _exploited_, just that it was the first Engine to showcase Mantle, and for the technology to take off other Engines need to implement support for it.  Also, everything that we said makes sense, you just seem to be overly defensive and/or misinterpreting it.


----------



## Frag_Maniac (Nov 20, 2013)

RuskiSnajper said:


> You guys have a preconditioned view that AMD is using DICE as PR, and also, it's developers who wanted Mantle, which pretty much invalidates everything you're trying to say;  not the other way around. If Mantle was nothing and there weren't big developers involved I would have detected PR spin a long time ago, basically I have no interest in discussing this, you're wrong, it doesn't work this way, you're mixing things around, Frostbite is not being exploited for PR, it could be any engine that happened to be the first one implemented, you guys are spinning this around Nothing what you have said makes sense considering everything we've heard, I suggest you go back to page 1 and check out all the links.
> 
> Total BS.



We're not saying or even implying it's locked to Frostbite or can only work well on Frostbite, but to ignore that DICE did most of the non AMD development is to ignore that Johan and team made damn sure it was well suited to Frostbite. All I said earlier is that more devs using other engines need to step up and PROVE it's also easy to develop and game on THEIR engines, and so far we're really not seeing much of that.

You talk as if we're spinning a PR nightmare against AMD, but it's pretty clear when all the talk at their dev summit comes back to the testing done so far by DICE, that they need to extend themselves beyond the strictly controlled EA IPs to prove it's worth. Everyone knows that, it's not BS and it's not misleading, it's just a matter of simple proof of concept.

This is how the industry works. No matter how much something is requested or talked about, those involved at the development end want proof of concept.


----------



## xenocide (Nov 20, 2013)

Mussels said:


> what i'm expecting is that if the consoles support this (mostly XB1 i assume) then all the console ports (and their engines which we all known will get reused a lot) support mantle, then its going to take off massively.


 
Microsoft already said it wouldn't support Mantle (citing that it supports DX 11.2) and I believe AMD had said this round of consoles would not, but looking forward they might.

Source:  http://mygaming.co.za/news/hardware/59296-mantle-is-not-in-next-gen-consoles-amd.html


----------



## Frag_Maniac (Nov 20, 2013)

RuskiSnajper said:


> These 2 statements contradict each other.



Not really, an updated build of the same engine is far from being an entirely different engine. Typically in fact it's the same thing with a few added features.



xenocide said:


> Microsoft already said it wouldn't support Mantle (citing that it supports DX 11.2) and I believe AMD had said this round of consoles would not, but looking forware they might.



I've read that just MS are boycotting it, obviously because they prefer devs use their own Direct3D, but if anyone knows, I'd like to get some feedback on the details of that, because some are implying games developed on Xbone and ported to PC would not be affected by it. I don't see how.

When you say "this round of consoles" are you including PS4? Seems odd that Sony would block Mantle for the entire life of their new system.


----------



## jboydgolfer (Nov 20, 2013)

I may be a pessimist , or just a realist, either way I have A LOT of difficulty imagining CPU/GPU manufacturer's developing, and/or lying still while ANY company develops a method in which PC owners, and Console player's will No longer Need the TOP of the line CPU/GPU/System to run the Markets MOST current titles @ the highest setting's. I feel like this is equal to an engine that runs on 20% of the gasoline that current engines run on. AMD , Intel ,and Nvidia would stand to Lose SO much in Hardware sales due to gamers NOT needing the Most current or powerful CPU/GPU/console any longer to get the "optimal" gaming experience, or to play @ all. And let's be honest, if Their claims are Even 30% true, that WOULD be the case for ALL mantle incorporated Games, and Systems.

For example, I bought My GPU (HD 6950 1Gb) 1 year ago, give or take. Now I am getting to the point where I am hitting a crossroad where I need to make a upgrade in the next year or so , to be able to play @ the settings I prefer.

Now imagine that this Mantle technology applied to My GPU( I KNOW it doesn't), By their own claims, I wouldn't need to make My upgrade for Possibly another year or MORE. I DO understand that the OP stated that in game content COULD be increased both in graphic quality, and in Over all effects, So that the FPS increase wouldn't be such a Noticeable difference, but STILL, My point is valid, and TRUST me I would LOVE to see this come to fruition, but I think I'll leave the dreaming , and Hoping to those with Better imaginations than myself. And , Hopefully it WILL be reality @ some point, and I can Eat My doubt's, but till then I can do no more than lift a brow.


P.S.   

Why am I a "New Member"? I JUST noticed under My Icon that it say's New member, but I created this account over a year ago.....Is it anything less than 2 years....Not that it matter's, but I was just curious is all. Great topic BTW, thanks OP.


----------



## RoutedScripter (Nov 20, 2013)

Frag Maniac said:


> Not really, an updated build of the same engine is far from being an entirely different engine.



I've never said that, I sad new engine, newer version of cryengine with mantle. What I care about is gameplay, I have no interest in other crytek's games.


----------



## xenocide (Nov 20, 2013)

Frag Maniac said:


> When you say "this round of consoles" are you including PS4? Seems odd that Sony would block Mantle for the entire life of their new system.


 
Judging from their quote in the article I linked it sounds as though they had never intended for Mantle to be used for consoles, but just used consoles as an example of what they were aimming for--that is, a relatively easy to use "To The Metal" API for PC's.


----------



## ShiBDiB (Nov 20, 2013)

I stand by my prediction that mantle will be in niche engines by the end of 2014 and no more than that


----------



## Frag_Maniac (Nov 20, 2013)

RuskiSnajper said:


> I've never said that, I sad new engine, newer version of cryengine with mantle. What I care about is gameplay, I have no interest in other crytek's games.



You said Crysis 1 remastered with a "new engine". You didn't say a merely updated engine, so what I said applies.


----------



## RoutedScripter (Nov 20, 2013)

Frag Maniac said:


> You said Crysis 1 remastered with a "new engine". You didn't say a merely updated engine, so what I said applies.





Mussels said:


> looks like i might not need a CPU upgrade after all



Well by the increased optimizations, they might be able put more enemies on the screen, more happening, more Ai, background mingling etc. But still, it's a massive improvement so that won't cost as much.  So you might not see the effect, just get the games working, which is fine, still don't have to upgrade but this gap will close down in future.


I kind of regret posting this in gaming now, walk the damn talk, I should have posted it in general GPU stuff 





ShiBDiB said:


> I stand by my prediction that mantle will be in niche engines by the end of 2014 and no more than that



Just like that without taking any of the discussions into account, the breakdown of it, I did it over several pages because I just didn't want to commit taking 5 hours all at once to make an initial post, ofcourse this means you ignore all the speculation that I always noted where it is.

The analysis is not really tied to this event at all, developers were craving for this for years, you can go look it up, as a matter of fact I've posted the links to several of those, you know I'm not going to re-link it again, get off your lazy butts and do it your self, but it's just amazing it happend this soon when I totally forgot it. This is the biggest surprise in 2013 around tech, period.


Speaking of periods ... I think I believe I am more credible than him to say that, I wouldn't say this if I wouldn't be sure.


----------



## KainXS (Nov 20, 2013)

xenocide said:


> Judging from their quote in the article I linked it sounds as though they had never intended for Mantle to be used for consoles, but just used consoles as an example of what they were aimming for--that is, a relatively easy to use "To The Metal" API for PC's.


well at least sony is backing trueaudio, maybe theres at least a glimmer of hope for mantle support(if devs are willing)
But I can understand why ms would block it completely


----------



## RoutedScripter (Nov 21, 2013)

KainXS said:


> well at least sony is backing trueaudio, maybe theres at least a glimmer of hope for mantle support(if devs are willing)
> But I can understand why ms would block it completely




To be honest, this wasn't mean to be for console at all, in any way shape or form, and also, doesn't even matter, developers will eventually use the better approach. And if you ask me personally, I don't really give a damn what microsoft does or says or thinks.


Speaking of CPU optimizations with Mantle. Here is a good example. I was recently playing a custom Starcraft 2 map, and as you know SC2 is heavily CPU bound to begin with, and when you have 8 of the hardest AIs with a ton of units against you, it gets boggy and that's Sandy Bridge-E i7 2500, but when I use 150 Mutalisks to attack the armies, even if a ton of units are destroyed in the same time, the sheer amount of projectiles my units spew out at the same time basically brings the CPU to it's knees and the whole game is incredibly slow, almost 3 seconds of delays and freezing almost, all because of the projectiles having to be drawn, now with Mantle, you could have even more units and the Ai stuff that normally takes CPU resources, and if I would fire all my 150 Mutalisks, those projectiles will not produce any lag whatsoever. To give a perspective how huge of an impact will this make.


----------



## Frag_Maniac (Nov 21, 2013)

RuskiSnajper said:


> To be honest, this wasn't mean to be for console at all, in any way shape or form, and also, doesn't even matter, developers will eventually use the better approach. And if you ask me personally, I don't really give a damn what microsoft does or says or thinks.



The problem is, if they block it holistically at the Xbone OS level, that isn't just going to affect consoles, it's going to also affect games developed on Xbone and ported to  PC. Need I remind you that the bulk of ported games last gen came from
the 360?

In a perfect world, we wouldn't HAVE to care about what MS "does or says or thinks", but the reality is they have a big enough stake in the industry between PC OSes and multi plat game development that we can't really just ignore them and hope they go away.


----------



## RoutedScripter (Nov 21, 2013)

Frag Maniac said:


> The problem is, if they block it holistically at the Xbone OS level, that isn't just going to affect consoles, it's going to also affect games developed on Xbone and ported to  PC. Need I remind you that the bulk of ported games last gen came from
> the 360?



You really have no idea what you're talking about. We've already been through the discussion, PC and PS4 are going to drive the industry from now on, Xbone is irrelevant,but exclusive devs might make it quasi-relevant but that's just apparent, nor real. But it won't be like before, when a console was limiting what PCs could do, now, PS4 is going to dominate the technology on consoles, PC will totally spin-off into it's true glory.

There will be no such ports anymore, ofcourse the line will not be fixed, it's a gradual transition, DX will still be fallback option for some time, the rendering pipeline will look similarly to how engines are written on PS4, however, the porting of low-level optimization code will be only temporairly possible because of the console's and PC current GPU similarity, this will no longer be the case when PCs evolve to a newer architecture, but by then Mantle will be something normal, fast porting might not exist, but it will still be light years better than DX or OGL anyways.

It is totally clear to me now, why PCs were a big downfall, it actually wasn't only the console sales, it's the fact that PC development is absolutely catastrophic undertaking compared to how it is on consoles, what I'm referring to are development hurdles such as random driver crashes, continious chat with GPU Vendors, it's a total hellhole and I cannot thank Johan more, I understand how huge it is from an outside perspective, I cannot COMPREHEND how on earth were all these developers hanging in this trainwreck and how absolutely ignorant all the yappies and twitter twatter mantle-haters are, they live in a god damn cave, they can't see how ridicolous it is, they're inside it for so long they get almost adapted to it, kind of a stockholm syndrome, when a victim starts to develop psychological defence mechanism which casuses the victim to start liking the abuser and rationalizing his actions, That's excatly what these indoctrinated self-proclaimed "AAA" developers (he worked on some web game and calls it AAA) do, they defend microsoft like it's some king on a pedestal that has to monitor the industry.


Personally, I don't care about  anything microsoft or xbox, what ports, what games, I don't play them, I don't follow them, but I still explained, since It's analysis, and my personal stuff has nothing to do with it, but I basically put an effort into this, I think I did a good job getting the key people informed, so, you'll just have to study this a bit more, no offense, but I really don't have the temper to spoonfeed with all the other things you need to know before even can you understand this discussion, when I already explained everything there can be said without watching all the streams, I'm exhausted, and also out of time, I've already switched my focus right now on non-gaming stuff, for example JFK 50th anniversary - liberty push against the lockdown and mainstream media propaganda, so my posts right now are only from my good heart, I really don't want to repeat all the stuff, however, it's probably the last one about that, i've already said the above paragraphs before a few pages ago.


----------



## Frag_Maniac (Nov 21, 2013)

RuskiSnajper said:


> You really have no idea what you're talking about. We've already been through the discussion, PC and PS4 are going to drive the industry from now on, Xbone is irrelevant,but exclusive devs might make it quasi-relevant but that's just apparent, nor real. But it won't be like before, when a console was limiting what PCs could do, now, PS4 is going to dominate the technology on consoles, PC will totally spin-off into it's true glory.



You come off as pretty hostile and stubborn for someone that doesn't even get that AMD was intentionally using DICE and their use of Mantle on Frostbite for PR. We're having a mere discussion here, you keep going agro with a defensive attitude, it's not necessary or constructive.

All x86 architecture on next gen consoles really means is more games being able to be put on them, and by extension more ported to PC. That process is still subject to how efficiently they're coded for PC, and Mantle can help a lot there. 

And it's not like PS4 will suddenly become THE console to port from. The primary factors which influence how popular a console is to develop on is editing tools and the teams that make games for them. The power of the system itself is secondary to that.


----------



## TRWOV (Nov 21, 2013)

jboydgolfer said:


> I may be a pessimist , or just a realist, either way I have A LOT of difficulty imagining CPU/GPU manufacturer's developing, and/or lying still while ANY company develops a method in which PC owners, and Console player's will No longer Need the TOP of the line CPU/GPU/System to run the Markets MOST current titles @ the highest setting's. I feel like this is equal to an engine that runs on 20% of the gasoline that current engines run on. AMD , Intel ,and Nvidia would stand to Lose SO much in Hardware sales due to gamers NOT needing the Most current or powerful CPU/GPU/console any longer to get the "optimal" gaming experience, or to play @ all. And let's be honest, if Their claims are Even 30% true, that WOULD be the case for ALL mantle incorporated Games, and Systems.
> 
> For example, I bought My GPU (HD 6950 1Gb) 1 year ago, give or take. Now I am getting to the point where I am hitting a crossroad where I need to make a upgrade in the next year or so , to be able to play @ the settings I prefer.
> 
> Now imagine that this Mantle technology applied to My GPU( I KNOW it doesn't), By their own claims, I wouldn't need to make My upgrade for Possibly another year or MORE. I DO understand that the OP stated that in game content COULD be increased both in graphic quality, and in Over all effects, So that the FPS increase wouldn't be such a Noticeable difference, but STILL, My point is valid, and TRUST me I would LOVE to see this come to fruition, but I think I'll leave the dreaming , and Hoping to those with Better imaginations than myself. And , Hopefully it WILL be reality @ some point, and I can Eat My doubt's, but till then I can do no more than lift a brow.



AMD would surely love to cut R&D costs by leveraging a 3 year product cycle instead of the yearly arms race they're running now, Mantle could very well guarantee them that. Heck, the 7000 series is entering its third year in the market as we're speaking. although that's related to stagnated development more than anything. Would that lead to slower hardware sales? Not necessarily, not everyone goes and buy the high end GPUs, there would always be some room for upgrades.

Still, all that depends on Mantle doing well but I see AMD severely mishandling it. Mantle won't be ready for prime time for another 5 months, BF4 is a test case as it stands now and every speculation just promises more and more (where at what? 300% improvement over DX?). It's like Bulldozer all over again.


If I was AMD, I would have DICE release the BF4 mantle renderer as a patch, then AMD would release the Mantle driver in a regular CCC package and  a quick "Improved performance in BF4 with GCN cards" in the release notes. If Mantle performs as good as it's supposed to people would find out in their own, articles would be written and everyone would love Mantle. Then AMD comes out and says, "you know? The new FB engine will have a Mantle renderer too!" and everyone would come and lit up a cigarette. But no, what AMD has gained now are a few (short term) points in their market index and lots of bickering on forums.


----------



## The Von Matrices (Nov 21, 2013)

RuskiSnajper said:


> Speaking of CPU optimizations with Mantle. Here is a good example. I was recently playing a custom Starcraft 2 map, and as you know SC2 is heavily CPU bound to begin with, and when you have 8 of the hardest AIs with a ton of units against you, it gets boggy and that's Sandy Bridge-E i7 2500, but when I use 150 Mutalisks to attack the armies, even if a ton of units are destroyed in the same time, the sheer amount of projectiles my units spew out at the same time basically brings the CPU to it's knees and the whole game is incredibly slow, almost 3 seconds of delays and freezing almost, all because of the projectiles having to be drawn, now with Mantle, you could have even more units and the Ai stuff that normally takes CPU resources, and if I would fire all my 150 Mutalisks, those projectiles will not produce any lag whatsoever. To give a perspective how huge of an impact will this make.



Starcraft II is a horribly threaded and optimized game, but GPU compute or reducing GPU renderer overhead is not a panacea for its problems.  Starcraft II uses 1-2 CPU cores of a system, so a quad-core CPU will rarely if ever hit 50% utilization in that game.  There are plenty of other RTS games that can handle massive combat much better than Starcraft II because they separate the functions outside of the combat system (e.g. the UI and renderer) into separate threads.  Starcraft II could perform much better without any renderer changes if the developers had taken the time to do this, but at this point such a change would require pretty much a fresh rewrite of the game code so I wouldn't expect it to occur without a whole new revision of the game.

However, the limitation in performance of RTS games is in the computation of unit interactions, which is a single threaded process.  In fact, you can't have a parallel process for this and get repeatable results.  To use an example, in two-unit battles with units of equal strength, you could create two threads where each thread tracked one unit's attack.  The problem is that you can't synchronize these threads' execution rate while still remaining faster than a single thread (the order of attacks could change depending on things like operating system functions using CPU time on one core and slowing down one thread).  So the outcome of the battle would be pretty much random, and this would make the game involve more luck and less skill.  The needs to be a serial process, and scaling this up to hundreds of units at a time is a major challenge because the number of unit interactions doubles with each unit added to the battle.

And by the way, how were you controlling 150 mutalisks?  Even if you had no workers you could only build 100 of them with the supply cap.  And then a THOR or seeker missile comes along and they're all dead in about 3 seconds.  Build diversity FTW.


----------



## RoutedScripter (Nov 21, 2013)

Frag Maniac said:


> You come off as pretty hostile and stubborn for someone that doesn't even get that AMD was intentionally using DICE and their use of Mantle on Frostbite for PR. We're having a mere discussion here, you keep going agro with a defensive attitude, it's not necessary or constructive.
> 
> All x86 architecture on next gen consoles really means is more games being able to be put on them, and by extension more ported to PC. That process is still subject to how efficiently they're coded for PC, and Mantle can help a lot there.
> 
> And it's not like PS4 will suddenly become THE console to port from. The primary factors which influence how popular a console is to develop on is editing tools and the teams that make games for them. The power of the system itself is secondary to that.




Look, I don't have to have this discussion, I look forward to what comes on the PC, and from an analysis standpoint, I don't cover speculation that is a waste of time, PR or not PR, mantle is a real thing, real proven thing, lower level you go, better will it be, there's no debate about it, the only thing we don't know is how low-level will it be can what stuff will AMD unlock on their GPU, I said I did this thread to point out stuff that needed to be, I am well over that, I've gone into making a speculation-ridden Multi-Device chart, other than that I have no more time nor interest since for my self I already know the whole story, you find someone else to sit down with you and talk about PR and consoles all day you want, I know Xbox has zero relevance, if it has, then those developers are either exclusives or they're stupid. I don't care about the mainstream and "other developers", there are only like 10-20 of the top developers, they will all have to do the switch because they won't be able to compete against the ones who have Mantle already, I play 3 games, starcraft 2, company of heroes 2, battlefield 3,  I don't care about anything else, I am practically almost out of gaming, I haven't followed squat this year, I don't care about the next gen, from consoles I only care is zelda and metroid, that's it. I could be a market analyst and get paid, in that case I would have stuck here and keep explaining on all the other stuff I don't personally care, but in this case, this analysis is personally driven, I am very excited about mantle, I am interested in this tech discussion, so that's why I did it.

The AMD Mantle announcement was big enough to get me injected into this for 1 week, I had the time because I was planning for this ofcourse since the inital announcement, I did what I wanted with this thread, I provided the arguments, if it wasn't a real thing, i would have detected PR spin a long time ago.

For example, G-SYNC, I've taken a look into it, it turns out it's irrelevant for me with 144hz monitor and hardly playing any games that need high FPS, BF3 i normally goof around, I don't play FPS games seriously anymore, I don't care about the stats and scores and crap like that, those were COD2 times. Then is the personal factor, I don't care about visuals, I care about performance, I don't mind the slight tearing that is practically non-existant on +12+hz monitors, so for me, G-SYNC is not an interest, because of that I don't have interest to make a negative thread about it, but I could go in and type 3 walls of texts and explain in detail why I think so, I just chosen not to, I just bought a new monitor, I have no intention replacing any time soon.

Objectively, from the analysis, Xbox One has no play in this game, if it is anyone it could be PS4 because of GDDR5 making some influence or advantage over PC in some post-process effect, that's all there is, but with Multi-Device configs, PC's might come up on top again, because of the way Mantle manages memory and multi-threading. That's as far as this goes, we don't know no more, that's going to be known when SDK get's released to see the specification.

So, you understand, that this is personally motivated, Mantle was a big enough thing I took the time to do this. If there are legitimate criticisms from the community about this being a , my point was specifically to point out that it's mostly the ones who don't really know that are making ; I don't know who the hell were the idiots who made up rumors about Mantle being proprietary, it's been said many times over the month it's not, these developer twitter twatter bloger people, I don't know what is inside their heads, they clearly don't think straight when they just spew BS out and this is why I mostly left gaming scenes because I don't want to hang out with sheeple, gaming communities are one of the most unhealthy ignorant cave-lifestyle of eating doritos and mountain dew, I just don't want waste much time, because at the bottom of it, I don't care about some virtual world fantasy fake reality, i've completely grown up out of gaming, it's like on a far side, so I guess you can understand I don't have time for kindergarden.

The people who understood, they know, there are many people who don't understand and will take time to, there are other people who never understand, I am not a paid doctor to sit down and explain to everyone on a per-case basis, kapish.

Hopefully this gives you an insight. As long as there is progress on PC, I don't care about the petty problems for others, if they like DX and OGL so much, why don't they shove it up their butt and shut up?

If they make crysis 1 with mantle, that's all I would like to see to play the damn game in 120FPS, other than the ones I mentioned before,  i don't care about anything else from the gaming world, period.  I simply don't care about entertainment anymore, do you get it, I don't watch movies, I don't watch TV, I don't care about the industry of making entertainment, I don't care about mainstream complaining. But you know, those are deeper truths, you are not supposed to make that influence you when doing objective analysis, so that's why I emphaized why it's important to keep things separate.

Even if you might be correct, this is simply a very low priority issue for me to consider spending extra more time to get to the bottom of it, it's not life-important.

But simply making this post, just going way out of what this thread is, you know, that says something I do actually care about the accuracy of things and making people informed and I don't want to be the guy blamed for half-assed explanations and confusions, I also don't like being a scammer or a bullshitter, I like to provide quality, that's what people should inspire to, I rather do it good or not do it at all. But you see, my effectiveness is only to a point, you 2 guys with xenocide simply didn't get on board before, I spend a fixed amount of time for the most effectiveness it will have, now it's getting bascially non-effective anything I say, and that's not a problem with me, you are only one of the great ignorant masses out there, it's not worth my time, sorry.

The good news is, you have ability to research on your own without any help, if you put effort into it, skills will come.






The Von Matrices said:


> Starcraft II is a horribly threaded and optimized game, but GPU compute or reducing GPU renderer overhead is not a panacea for its problems.  Starcraft II uses 1-2 CPU cores of a system, so a quad-core CPU will rarely if ever hit 50% utilization in that game.  There are plenty of other RTS games that can handle massive combat much better than Starcraft II because they separate the functions outside of the combat system (e.g. the UI and renderer) into separate threads.  Starcraft II could perform much better without any renderer changes if the developers had taken the time to do this, but at this point such a change would require pretty much a fresh rewrite of the game code so I wouldn't expect it to occur without a whole new revision of the game.
> 
> However, the limitation in performance of RTS games is in the computation of unit interactions, which is a single threaded process.  In fact, you can't have a parallel process for this and get repeatable results.  To use an example, in two-unit battles with units of equal strength, you could create two threads where each thread tracked one unit's attack.  The problem is that you can't synchronize these threads' execution rate while still remaining faster than a single thread (the order of attacks could change depending on things like operating system functions using CPU time on one core and slowing down one thread).  So the outcome of the battle would be pretty much random, and this would make the game involve more luck and less skill.  The needs to be a serial process, and scaling this up to hundreds of units at a time is a major challenge because the number of unit interactions doubles with each unit added to the battle.
> 
> And by the way, how were you controlling 150 mutalisks?  Even if you had no workers you could only build 100 of them with the supply cap.  And then a THOR or seeker missile comes along and they're all dead in about 3 seconds.  Build diversity FTW.




Blizzard isn't famous for their engines anyways, it's quite way behind ...


People on the outside just need to realize there are many types of developers, only a fraction is responsible for the core engine.
And as we have enthusiasts and hardcore people in the communities, that's how there are really good and informed developers, which also means you have the mainstream and noobs too, one of the biggest things in mainstream developers is that they think they know better if they have a job in one of the studios, they think they automatically possess higher understanding, in actuality, they just do what they're told, they don't really research anything, they focus on their little bubble they are interested in, the worse part is, arrogance, they think they know everything around tech, they probably programmed UI in Java for some web game, then they come out to make outrageous claims about APIs. The big thing is, realizing there is a bigger world and you never know everything, that's why you don't claim and make opinions before you research it to be sure what it is about.

But this is a general problem with people, it's the general degeneracy of society, nothing to do with tech or gaming, it's everywhere, they rather spew BS instead of admitting they really don't know to make a valid opinion. Arrogance, they think they achieved some godly status or something, "_oh I work for a developer who sold many millions of copies, I know everything, even tho I was mostly responsible for taking the trash out every day, and I happend to spot a few lines on the monitors, hihi hoho I'm so pro, I got my stupid twitter twatter chatter account for my 15 year old fanboys to post to, hi hi ho ho, my opinions get referenced in many publications, even tho those are also mostly stupid blogger basement dwellers, hi hi hoho, check out my stupid facebook, hi hi ho, im a developer, im so famous_"

Most of these "developers" have been manufactured by the indoctrination camps you call Universities, they have been spoonfed and babysit from the very beginning, their minds are hardwired, programmed to carry out the work in this closed virtual environment they're trapped in, a perception of sorts, they don't possess vision or optimism for something better, they don't aspire to, they are the gatekeepers of status quo, these are arrogant selfish people, from these waters come the people who made up false rumors and unbased claims and conclusions, and I have striken back at them full force. Ofcourse not from TPU, but this will get out to some of them as random people find this thread via search later, etc.

Just look around, every of those college dropouts and those that self-learned are the top developers now to this day. Valve guy, didn't finish, Carmack, didn't finish.


Last paragraph: Custom game, supplies modified. (it's public and I call it "SwxImproved: Antiga Shipyard Zerg Test 2.0" , it's nothing special, just a map where i goofed around with editor years ago)

To admit ... there are moments of boredom and that's the time I play games  Thankfully these moments have been diminishing constantly.

That's enough for the morning, this rant is over for good.


----------



## Frag_Maniac (Nov 21, 2013)

Geez dude, chill out. No one in their right mind strikes up a tech discussion thread about something like this then just goes off on a tantrum when people merely point out facts that are being misinterpreted or glossed over.

Honestly, I didn't read much of that wall of text because in fact AMD hasn't really proven Mantle yet, that's what everyone is waiting to see. You can believe it's proven all you want, but until it's in the hands of consumers there's no real way to tell how it performs on a multitude of systems, and that's not even counting  a multitude of games, and it will be some time before that becomes a reality, if it ever even does.


----------



## RoutedScripter (Nov 21, 2013)

Frag Maniac said:


> Geez dude, chill out. No one in their right mind strikes up a tech discussion thread about something like this then just goes off on a tantrum when people merely point out facts that are being misinterpreted or glossed over.
> 
> Honestly, I didn't read much of that wall of text because in fact AMD hasn't really proven Mantle yet, that's what everyone is waiting to see. You can believe it's proven all you want, but until it's in the hands of consumers there's no real way to tell how it performs on a multitude of systems, and that's not even counting  a multitude of games, and it will be some time before that becomes a reality, if it ever even does.




They don't need to prove anything, and they can't anyways, developers will. It's proven because it provides an environment already on consoles and other devices, it's not a new type of product, it's just a "brand" name.


----------



## Mussels (Nov 21, 2013)

i appreciate all the starcraft talk, it makes me happy.

what this boils down to is optimism or pessimism for mantle, and thats all we can have til it comes out.


----------



## xenocide (Nov 21, 2013)

RuskiSnajper said:


> You really have no idea what you're talking about. We've already been through the discussion, PC and PS4 are going to drive the industry from now on, Xbone is irrelevant,but exclusive devs might make it quasi-relevant but that's just apparent, nor real. But it won't be like before, when a console was limiting what PCs could do, now, PS4 is going to dominate the technology on consoles, PC will totally spin-off into it's true glory.



Xbox One is not irrelevant, and being a little more civil would get you a long ways.  PS4 may dominate on consoles, but the issue is it won't be using Mantle anyway, AMD already confirmed it.  Mantle is intended to offer a console-esque development environment for PC developers, but it's going to face an uphill battle where Developers are now going to have to develop DirectX/OpenGL and Mantle versions should they chose to for PC, and even then I would imagine you won't see massive improvements because they want to keep the gameplay experience level across all hardware--will probably be a lot of games with Mantle support that just run a little better (as in lower resources).



RuskiSnajper said:


> There will be no such ports anymore, ofcourse the line will not be fixed, it's a gradual transition, DX will still be fallback option for some time, the rendering pipeline will look similarly to how engines are written on PS4, however, the porting of low-level optimization code will be only temporairly possible because of the console's and PC current GPU similarity, this will no longer be the case when PCs evolve to a newer architecture, but by then Mantle will be something normal, fast porting might not exist, but it will still be light years better than DX or OGL anyways.



Actually porting games from Xbox 360 to PC was pretty streamlined, it was one of the things Microsoft worked tirelessly on because they have a large stake in both markets.  I can't speak for OpenGL since almost nobody uses it these days (largely due to slow update cycles).  And there will always be ports, good and bad.  The console market cannot be ignored, so to think because of Mantle developers would start focusing exclusively on PC is absurd.  PS4 reportedly sold 1m units on day 1, developers aren't going to avoid numbers like that.  There are plenty of games that were ported well and had their own teams for PC; Grand Theft Auto 4, Sleeping Dogs, Borderlands 2, obviously Battlefield 3.



RuskiSnajper said:


> It is totally clear to me now, why PCs were a big downfall, it actually wasn't only the console sales, it's the fact that PC development is absolutely catastrophic undertaking compared to how it is on consoles, what I'm referring to are development hurdles such as random driver crashes, continious chat with GPU Vendors, it's a total hellhole and I cannot thank Johan more, I understand how huge it is from an outside perspective, I cannot COMPREHEND how on earth were all these developers hanging in this trainwreck



It was not a trainwreck.  There is a reason a majority of Indie Development is done on PC--it has a lower barrier to entry and more advanced options.  Programming for consoles on the other hand, is a god damn nightmare, especially towards the end of the life cycle.  You see wacky stuff like developers embedding texture files in weird spots just to get them into the memory without crashing the system--and this is a pretty common thing, enough that Gamasutra has several pages of high profile devs revealing the crazy stuff they did.  There's also the fact that PC hardware is always substantially better than Consoles, which means you can be a little lazier when it comes to things like texture compression because you're developing for a platform where people are using 2-4-16GB of RAM versus 256MB.



RuskiSnajper said:


> Personally, I don't care about  anything microsoft or xbox, what ports, what games, I don't play them, I don't follow them



You might not, but guess who does--Game Publishers.  Do you think they want to pay for games that are going to ignore a massive market?  The answer is no, it was a rhetorical question.



RuskiSnajper said:


> you'll just have to study this a bit more, no offense, but I really don't have the temper to spoonfeed with all the other things you need to know before even can you understand this discussion



And every time we've raised facts you've said we were wrong or stupid without actually addressing the issue.  I stopped posting because whenever a valid point was made you dismissed it and harassed the person asking without ever answering the question.  I believe Frag Maniac knows exactly how Mantle is intended to work, and any criticism he has of the proposed technology has been pretty reasonable.



Frag Maniac said:


> Geez dude, chill out. No one in their right mind strikes up a tech discussion thread about something like this then just goes off on a tantrum when people merely point out facts that are being misinterpreted or glossed over.



Let's talk about this new technology!

...

Your opinions are bad and you should feel bad!!!



Frag Maniac said:


> Honestly, I didn't read much of that wall of text because in fact AMD hasn't really proven Mantle yet, that's what everyone is waiting to see. You can believe it's proven all you want, but until it's in the hands of consumers there's no real way to tell how it performs on a multitude of systems, and that's not even counting  a multitude of games, and it will be some time before that becomes a reality, if it ever even does.



Which is essentially what I've been saying but it seems to be falling on deaf ears.  It's going to be a hard sell to get every game developer behind Mantle to ensure its survival when most games are multiplatform, and one of the two major players is already stating they won't use it.



RuskiSnajper said:


> They don't need to prove anything, and they can't anyways, developers will. It's proven because it provides an environment already on consoles and other devices, it's not a new type of product, it's just a "brand" name.



Yes, they do have to prove stuff.  If they market a product and then it ends up being just a proof of concept they essentially mislead consumers.  PC's are not consoles, and even something as small as the difference between say an HD7770 and HD7850 is pretty significant when you're coding to the metal.  The reason the low-level approach works so well on consoles is because the hardware is always identical--a PS3 is a PS3 is a PS3--so you can spend time you would normally spend optimizing it for various chipsets on going deeper (Programception).


----------



## Frag_Maniac (Nov 21, 2013)

xenocide said:


> And every time we've raised facts you've said we were wrong or stupid without actually addressing the issue.  I stopped posting because whenever a valid point was made you dismissed it and harassed the person asking without ever answering the question.  I believe Frag Maniac knows exactly how Mantle is intended to work, and any criticism he has of the proposed technology has been pretty reasonable.



Exactly, and it negates any good intentions of making such a thread when the author himself derails it with denial of his own naivety and senseless hostility.

Proof of concept is key in the tech industry, but you also need prove it to consumers. Otherwise it would be like politics, where mere talk easily misleads people. They can show us charts all day and have big name devs up on stage with lofty claims, but until we see it for our own eyes it is not proven to those whom matter most, the ones that generate the cash flow.

And this isn't merely a matter of creating a better API, perhaps that's where the argument escalated. It's a matter of implementing it without creating a rift between AMD and Nvidia customers the likes of which could very well be off putting to devs considering using Mantle.

Even if they were to prove Mantle could increase performance noticeably on Nvidia spec, if AMD customers get quite a bit more increase, there's still going to be Nvidia customers crying foul saying AMD created Mantle to boost their own performance and cripple Nvidia's.

So at the end of the day, this is not just about creating a better API, it's about improving gaming in general on a level that all gamers can accept. If they can't accomplish that with Mantle, which is a monumental task really, it very well could die out quickly like Glide did, even WITH the extra debugging features.


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Nov 21, 2013)

Some of you are not getting what mantle is about at all, its an Api yes but it is still compatible with dx11.x (the render bits anyway and no doubt dx compute) anyway so any code written for dx11.2 shaders and optimised for dx11.2 can itself be ported onto mantle which in itself is easier then porting bare metal redering optimisations for last gen console into the dx api with its probably intentional restrictions on things(draw calls for eg).
fine microsoft wont use mantel, but that which is made for direct xbox will actually be doable with mantle(due to gcn) as opposed to a Api that WONT allow it at all therein requiring an alternate code write or further adjustment and all the while trying to have the game look and feel the same.

It does not matter if neither console EVER uses mantle, the mear fact they both use GCN means anything coded to work well using GCN arch can then be ported to a mantle running game engine without as much stress.

bare metal api to me means we might actually get what we feckin pay for in a top end gpu without M$ limiting my games to make their console look good, there's the nut kick no ones mentioning(30000 draw calls max wtf little better then a ps2s poly count, NO LIMITS pls)


----------



## the54thvoid (Nov 21, 2013)

Elephant in room.

The devs need to code specifically for Mantle to work.  That much we know.  It's more work for them.  So it really comes down to who pays to, ahem, 'help' develop the game.  Such games as Assassins Creed (purely as an example) where Nvidia provided tech assistance.  If Nvidia choose to ignore Mantle, they will certainly not allow developer cooperation on games they sponsor.

AMD will need to encourage devs to write it into the code.  If MS and Nvidia don't want that to happen, it'll be a blatant development bribery generation.  I don't think Mantle will get very far across the gaming spectrum unless all three companies concerned sit down and talk about it.

We can hype Mantle as much as AMD want us to but it needs developer support and if Nvidia want to buy in to the bigger AAA titles, well, we know what'll happen.


----------



## RoutedScripter (Nov 23, 2013)

xenocide said:


> Xbox One is not irrelevant, and being a little more civil would get you a long ways.  PS4 may dominate on consoles, but the issue is it won't be using Mantle anyway, AMD already confirmed it.  Mantle is intended to offer a console-esque development environment for PC developers, but it's going to face an uphill battle where Developers are now going to have to develop DirectX/OpenGL and Mantle versions should they chose to for PC, and even then I would imagine you won't see massive improvements because they want to keep the gameplay experience level across all hardware--will probably be a lot of games with Mantle support that just run a little better (as in lower resources).



I don't care about multi-platform games and other console ports at all, this probably won't hold, but even if it would, i don't care, it's their problem, I care what happens on PC, if there is no PC game, there is nothing for me, I don't want to have a NSA box in my house and I don't care what they have to offer at all, I do not play FPS games much, and I certainly won't play FPS games on a controler, I am so glad RTS games cannot be cheaply adapted to controllers, so glad that even the dumbest of mainstream circles admit it's a bad idea.





xenocide said:


> Actually porting games from Xbox 360 to PC was pretty streamlined, it was one of the things Microsoft worked tirelessly on because they have a large stake in both markets.  I can't speak for OpenGL since almost nobody uses it these days (largely due to slow update cycles).  And there will always be ports, good and bad.  The console market cannot be ignored, so to think because of Mantle developers would start focusing exclusively on PC is absurd.  PS4 reportedly sold 1m units on day 1, developers aren't going to avoid numbers like that.  There are plenty of games that were ported well and had their own teams for PC; Grand Theft Auto 4, Sleeping Dogs, Borderlands 2, obviously Battlefield 3.



Because console ports were so great! Right.

You clearly don't understand that I don't give a damn about console developers and their issues and opinions and justifications and rationalization to not develop on PC on any other issue than API.  Now that Mantle is here, with mantle all that genuine issues will go away that only a fraction of developers talk about and actually do something about it, others are, the only thing will be financial, studio resources and skills barring them to develop good games on PC.

"_The console market cannot be ignored_" I don't care about their financial shit, I don't care about corporations, I don't care about their arrogance, I don't care about them being hungry for profit, I don't care about capitalism, they can all go to hell, do you understand, I don't care what it takes, bring me great PC games or go the heck away. The problems can be ultimately traced down to the social and the fractional reserve debt slave financial system that is in control of the modern society, tear it down and make a better one, then you can make great PC games, don't say it can't be done, it can, give me a month, we organize 1 million sized protest across 100 cities, the capitalism falls, we make a better system, politely awake the society to become less corrupt and decadent, corporations like we know today wouldn't exist anymore, there would be no such thing as "return on investment", etc etc etc, there, and we start making our great PC game, It can be done, find a way to make it happen, be unique, be original, stop following suits, stop being just a sheep in herd, develop something new, find a better business model, challenge the status quo.




xenocide said:


> It was not a trainwreck.  There is a reason a majority of Indie Development is done on PC--it has a lower barrier to entry and more advanced options.  Programming for consoles on the other hand, is a god damn nightmare, especially towards the end of the life cycle.  You see wacky stuff like developers embedding texture files in weird spots just to get them into the memory without crashing the system--and this is a pretty common thing, enough that Gamasutra has several pages of high profile devs revealing the crazy stuff they did.  There's also the fact that PC hardware is always substantially better than Consoles, which means you can be a little lazier when it comes to things like texture compression because you're developing for a platform where people are using 2-4-16GB of RAM versus 256MB.



That has little to do with APIs, sure the higher-level API provides faster development and less skills required. But you're totally mixing stuff up, those are console-exclusive issues, PS3 development was a trainwereck because of the hardware it self, and even those console issues aren't as big as the development on PC when it comes to performance and efficiency.




xenocide said:


> You might not, but guess who does--Game Publishers.  Do you think they want to pay for games that are going to ignore a massive market?  The answer is no, it was a rhetorical question.



If you didn't yet got the message from all those posts, excuse my expression: I don't give a rats ass about game publishers, what they think, what they say, they do nothing, they are a consolidation of wealth, they are nothing but profit driven corporations, they don't provide anything good, I don't care what problems and issues will they have as a result of Mantle, as a matter of fact, I wish there would be a snowden-type guy exposing some of the shady stuff on them and do as much damage as possible. That's what I would do if I was employed at EA, I would seriously apply for a job just for this. But ... you know, my effectiveness is limited, game publishers are nothing compared to the pharmaceutical industrial complex and military industrial complex or financial complex or for that matter corporate intelligence complex, I would rather use my abilities on them.



xenocide said:


> And every time we've raised facts you've said we were wrong or stupid without actually addressing the issue.  I stopped posting because whenever a valid point was made you dismissed it and harassed the person asking without ever answering the question.  I believe Frag Maniac knows exactly how Mantle is intended to work, and any criticism he has of the proposed technology has been pretty reasonable.



Yes, because you're making something out of nothing.

The people who do understand as much as I do, probably are asking them selfs why do I still keep coming back and replying, unless it starts to eat into my nerves and time I don't have, then I don't mind it, but we all have our limits.




xenocide said:


> Which is essentially what I've been saying but it seems to be falling on deaf ears.  It's going to be a hard sell to get every game developer behind Mantle to ensure its survival when most games are multiplatform, and one of the two major players is already stating they won't use it.



I don't care about multi-platform games. Especially those which are PC derivatives designed on consoles and brought back to the PC through a console port. (post-IW COD Modern Warfare is a nice example)





xenocide said:


> Yes, they do have to prove stuff.  If they market a product and then it ends up being just a proof of concept they essentially mislead consumers.  PC's are not consoles, and even something as small as the difference between say an HD7770 and HD7850 is pretty significant when you're coding to the metal.  The reason the low-level approach works so well on consoles is because the hardware is always identical--a PS3 is a PS3 is a PS3--so you can spend time you would normally spend optimizing it for various chipsets on going deeper (Programception).



AMD Provides the API to developers. Developer 1 makes a bad game. Developer 2 makes a great game. Developer 3 makes a great game. Developer 4 makes a great game. Developer 5 makes a great game. Who's fault it is ?








Frag Maniac said:


> Otherwise it would be like politics, ...



Everyone with a brain knows what Mantle's agenda is. It is not something that fate of a nation will depend on. One of the biggest things to learn when fighting for truth is to not make up conspiracies where there aren't any.



Frag Maniac said:


> So at the end of the day, this is not just about creating a better API, *it's about improving gaming in general on a level that all gamers can accept*. If they can't accomplish that with Mantle, which is a monumental task really, it very well could die out quickly like Glide did, even WITH the extra debugging features.



That sounds authoritarian.

So you hope, that Mantle is a way to collectivize everyone to a single type of game standards, one for all, no choice, no freedom. You are insane.


That said, you have now been exposed to be nothing but a gatekeeper for the status quo, unknowingly helping the companies who clearly benefit from no-mantle on PC, I know well enough about paid shills and trolls hired by companies, I don't want to go that far right now, but I mention it to point out that is always a possibility, I'm not accusing you anyways, but it is not designed for your ideas, it is designed to get the hardcore PC market away from the chains of a company that clearly blocks innovation and progress.


I really am sorry it taken me that far, I am finished with you in this thread, because, I don't want it end, you guys go ahead and discuss your self now, I'll just rather observe ...


Let me go back and point out that you guys have a fair point about not having any proof, that is indeed the case, but your lack of understanding makes you go into assuming problems that probably not going to be real, there might be some other unknown problem for mantle getting traction, that possbility is not out.  What I'm saying is that you guys think that mantle needs to dominate or else it's useless, that's the point, mantle doesn't have to dominate all the PC space, and if your game is not mantle-ready, it's not AMD's problem, it's not Mantle's problem.




the54thvoid said:


> It's more work for them.



The work they always wanted. 

Which pretty much invalidates everything else you said.


----------



## Frick (Nov 23, 2013)

RuskiSnajper said:


> I don't want to have a NSA box in my house



That would be anything connected to the internet.

What I don't get why you're still around when you just want people to accept whatever it is you are saying. Multiplatform is very important, but *you *don't care so you dismiss everything and then rant about capitalism and profit and whatever.

And the rants are not even entertaining.


----------



## Frag_Maniac (Nov 23, 2013)

RuskiSnajper said:


> Everyone with a brain knows what Mantle's agenda is. It is not something that fate of a nation will depend on. One of the biggest things to learn when fighting for truth is to not make up conspiracies where there aren't any.


You don't seem to get that stating an "agenda" is not the same as proving you can accomplish it to whom matter most, the end users. No matter how many devs buy into it the USERS are the ones putting out the hard earned cash to buy the games. It's rather fitting that you used the word agenda, because it falls right in line with what I said about it being no more than smoke and mirror politics without proving it to the public. You're sounding like AMD's yes man.





> That sounds authoritarian.
> 
> So you hope, that Mantle is a way to collectivize everyone to a single type of game standards, one for all, no choice, no freedom. You are insane.
> 
> ...


The word "authoritarian" here is another irony, because it's already been implied even by some of the brightest minds in the industry that AMD is leveraging their unit market share across all platforms to be seen as the authority on a better API, and one that could cause a serious rift between AMD and Nvidia users. I don't think you understand the scope of what's going on here. Nvidia aren't the type to adopt something the competition implements (and vise versa), and devs, no matter which chip vendor endorses their games, don't typically use more than one graphics API to make their games. So that is why I said AMD will have to hope they can try and improve gaming across the board to an acceptable level for all users, or Nvidia customers will cry foul. How can you not see this, it's obvious?

As for the rest, I'll sift through all that passive aggressive implied name calling you like to indulge in when people make valid points, and just skip to the part where you said "company that clearly blocks innovation and progress", which I assume means Microsoft. As much as I dislike that most devs have struggled to implement DX11 features without serious performance problems, it's merely a lightweight, neutral API designed to not favor anyone's GPU architecture. Do you even understand why? If anything Mantle has proven thus far  it's that like Glide, to really get the most out of a graphics API, you invariably have to make it design specific enough to where it favors one chip vendor over another. So when you say "PC market", don't just spout it like everyone's going to equally benefit. It's not that simple.

You end by FINALLY admitting we have valid points in saying it's not proven, only to take away any effect of  it's impact by saying we're assuming problems that won't likely exist. That's quite a contradiction in terms to admit it's not proven, then insist there won't be any problems. I got news for you, EVERYTHING in gaming, esp on PC, has to be proven to the end user, whether it be hardware, software, whatever. It's an industry that's full of Murphy's Law, anything that can happen, WILL happen, and you have to be prepared for it when it does. Look at the last two releases of BF alone, and all the problems leading up to and at launch, despite LOTS of free beta testing and feedback from players, and tell me with certainty that DICE, one of the key players in making Mantle, have not had some serious problems on the software end.

An even bigger task Mantle has to overcome is to prove it can be implemented without making devs worry half of their customers, obviously Nvidia users, will be angry at them for getting what will most assuredly be worse performance than AMD users. This isn't just a proof of performance issue, that was never the problem with Glide. What killed Glide was lack of acceptance from most devs for the very reasons I just pointed out, and the same could easily happen to Mantle.

I had to LOL at your comment on the NSA, because the government has had the capability of snooping on anyone's PC since a certain system file was modified to do so with ever since late versions of Windows 95. You act like an "authoritarian" on the subject of PCs and gaming in general, but you're seriously out of the loop on several issues.


----------



## the54thvoid (Nov 23, 2013)

RuskiSnajper said:


> Which pretty much invalidates everything else you said.



You are completely devoid of reason and logic.  This thread is nothing but a pissing post for you to relieve your enormous bladder all over.  The parts about Nvidia stifling Mantle are not invalidated by devs wanting to develop Mantle.  Money develops games, not idealistic do gooders.  It's a multi million dollar industry run for profit.  If MS and Nvidia see Mantle as an issue, they will either hop on or scuttle it by 'buying' allegiance.

Like I said, Mantle needs to be adopted by* all *to make it worthwhile.  Everybody can see that except you. 

No point returning to this thread as it's blatantly obvious you are hugely and unreasonably biased towards all things Mantle.  

Good luck to anyone else with reasoned arguments as to why Mantle may not be the best thing ever.


----------



## Frag_Maniac (Nov 23, 2013)

the54thvoid said:


> The parts about Nvidia stifling Mantle are not invalidated by devs wanting to develop Mantle.  Money develops games, not idealistic do gooders.  It's a multi million dollar industry run for profit.  If MS and Nvidia see Mantle as an issue, they will either hop on or scuttle it by 'buying' allegiance.



Exactly, ultimately it will come down to how many devs really support it. I keep saying end users though because their reactions will be what makes devs decide whether or not to jump onboard. The smart devs will sit back and watch the reactions of the first implementations of Mantle before they take the leap. No matter how eager a dev team is to get their hands on a good API, and I'm not doubting it IS a good one, they have to be realists and appease their customers, esp those worrying about reaching profit goals. There's PLENTY of devs already not reaching their expected goals, even on fairly big titles. Mantle is just another complexity in trying to achieve such goals due not just to the learning curve of using it, but the huge potential disparity of performance between users.

It's easy to just sit back and focus on the positives, better performance, less potential bugs in development and quicker production time once they know how to use it, but you have to factor in the biggest potential Achilles Heel, and that we have already learned from history is not just a thing of paranoia or speculation.


----------



## Enterprise24 (Nov 24, 2013)

RuskiSnajper said:


> To be honest, this wasn't mean to be for console at all, in any way shape or form, and also, doesn't even matter, developers will eventually use the better approach. And if you ask me personally, I don't really give a damn what microsoft does or says or thinks.
> 
> 
> Speaking of CPU optimizations with Mantle. Here is a good example. I was recently playing a custom Starcraft 2 map, and as you know SC2 is heavily CPU bound to begin with, and when you have 8 of the hardest AIs with a ton of units against you, it gets boggy and that's Sandy Bridge-E i7 2500, but when I use 150 Mutalisks to attack the armies, even if a ton of units are destroyed in the same time, the sheer amount of projectiles my units spew out at the same time basically brings the CPU to it's knees and the whole game is incredibly slow, almost 3 seconds of delays and freezing almost, all because of the projectiles having to be drawn, now with Mantle, you could have even more units and the Ai stuff that normally takes CPU resources, and if I would fire all my 150 Mutalisks, those projectiles will not produce any lag whatsoever. To give a perspective how huge of an impact will this make.


 
Total War Rome II is another poorly optimize RTS game.
Although game can utilize quad core but main thread still use singlethread (thread 0 load 100% other 7 threads load 40-50%)
Naval Battle with 160 ships vs 160 ships (12,000 units vs 12,000 units) on extreme setting make my system like crap ... single digit ... 3 FPS.
Even lowest setting doesn't help much 30FPS with lot of stutter.

I don't sure this is because insufficient CPU power (but honestly if 3770K @ 5ghz can't play then nothing will)
or the game itself is 32bit (game never use system RAM more than 4GB but VRam can go up to 2.7GB with 24,000 units).


----------



## RoutedScripter (Nov 24, 2013)

Enterprise24 said:


> Total War Rome II is another poorly optimize RTS game.
> Although game can utilize quad core but main thread still use singlethread (thread 0 load 100% other 7 threads load 40-50%)
> Naval Battle with 160 ships vs 160 ships (12,000 units vs 12,000 units) on extreme setting make my system like crap ... single digit ... 3 FPS.
> Even lowest setting doesn't help much 30FPS with lot of stutter.
> ...



Whether or not the exe is 64-bit has nothing to do with it's RAM usage.





Frag Maniac said:


> Exactly, ultimately it will come down to how many devs really support it. I keep saying end users though because their reactions will be what makes devs decide whether or not to jump onboard. The smart devs will sit back and watch the reactions of the first implementations of Mantle before they take the leap. No matter how eager a dev team is to get their hands on a good API, and I'm not doubting it IS a good one, they have to be realists and appease their customers, esp those worrying about reaching profit goals. There's PLENTY of devs already not reaching their expected goals, even on fairly big titles. Mantle is just another complexity in trying to achieve such goals due not just to the learning curve of using it, but the huge potential disparity of performance between users.
> 
> It's easy to just sit back and focus on the positives, better performance, less potential bugs in development and quicker production time once they know how to use it, but you have to factor in the biggest potential Achilles Heel, and that we have already learned from history is not just a thing of paranoia or speculation.



Majority will not care about the games that don't use it.


----------



## Zakin (Nov 24, 2013)

RuskiSnajper said:


> Whether or not the exe is 64-bit has nothing to do with RAM usage.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I've been reading this for awhile, and found it quite entertaining, but finally I've truly got to agree with a lot of the others and simply reply with. What..?


----------



## Frag_Maniac (Nov 24, 2013)

RuskiSnajper said:


> Majority will not care about the games that don't use it.



What's your idea of majority, because clearly the majority here disagrees with you? 

More to the point however is your not getting that 1), the number of games using it directly defines it's success, and 2), it's more important what Nvidia customers think about it in the games that DO use it, and as we keep telling you will be THE biggest factor in determining it's success.

For the record, currently I'm a happy AMD customer, gaming on a single Sapphire 7970 OC. I have no doubts Mantle will bring me better performance if utilized properly by the devs that implement it. I'm a realist though. I know full well such things are subject not just to the A camp's approval, but the N camp as well.

You appear to live in a world where you think game developers and publishers only care about what AMD or Nvidia thinks, but they have to think about BOTH side's needs as far as the end user side of it, or they fall to the same thing that ended Glide. Has history not taught you anything?


----------



## xenocide (Nov 24, 2013)

Zakin said:


> I've been reading this for awhile, and found it quite entertaining, but finally I've truly got to agree with a lot of the others and simply reply with. What..?



He's just on some next level thought process in a mythical land where 32-bit executables have no RAM limitations.


----------



## RoutedScripter (Nov 24, 2013)

Zakin said:


> I've been reading this for awhile, and found it quite entertaining, but finally I've truly got to agree with a lot of the others and simply reply with. What..?



Just because there's nobody else around to confirm my point in this thread, doesn't mean it's wrong.

You are quoting 2 statements. The first one is one that I'm referring to. The second one is my prediction. There was no mistake with those statements from what I meant, I don't take back anything.

I suggest you read it again.


----------



## Zakin (Nov 24, 2013)

I read it fine and clear as day, so have many others, which is why others have brought up how you seem to be neutrally attacking people for their opinions. You seem to take anything that anyone is saying in here as a personal insult, when they're just replying because your opinions are being stated as if actual facts more than half of the time. That's the only thing that people are getting all annoyed and having a fun time about, is the fact that you are basically assaulting people without actually getting violent about it. Although Frag said that a few posts up. I mean I understand that this is all your predictions or opinions, but the way that you state and reply to people, you seriously talk about stuff as if facts and solid in stone.

It's just funny because almost everyone in this topic wants Mantle to be good, including myself, it just doesn't look too good when you get hyper defensive about it because AMD hasn't actually stated any real time benchmarks on it. I just don't understand your stance on this whole topic, like you seriously feel borderline troll with a lot of your responses, a very elaborate one.


----------



## Mussels (Nov 24, 2013)

RuskiSnajper said:


> Just because there's nobody else around to confirm my point in this thread, doesn't mean it's wrong.
> 
> You are quoting 2 statements. The first one is one that I'm referring to. The second one is my prediction. There was no mistake with those statements from what I meant, I don't take back anything.
> 
> I suggest you read it again.



could you explain your comments about 32/64 bit not having any effect on ram usage? i'd like to see that comment explained.


----------



## RoutedScripter (Nov 24, 2013)

Mussels said:


> could you explain your comments about 32/64 bit not having any effect on ram usage? i'd like to see that comment explained.


----------



## Mussels (Nov 24, 2013)

RuskiSnajper said:


>





ok.... but if its 32 bit, it cant go over 2/4GB depending on your OS. so it is in fact relevant to ram usage. 

also, 64 bit programs use slightly more ram than 32 bit ones. i think your intention is not coming across clearly.


----------



## RoutedScripter (Nov 24, 2013)

Mussels said:


> so it is in fact relevant to ram usage.



Nobody was talking about the RAM usage of the system.


----------



## Mussels (Nov 24, 2013)

RuskiSnajper said:


> Nobody was talking about the RAM usage of the system.



the same 2/4GB limit of address space applies to VRAM as well, its shared between the two. you directly replied to someone talking about that, so yes - it was being mentioned. no it doesnt show up in task manager.


----------



## RoutedScripter (Nov 24, 2013)

Mussels said:


> the same 2/4GB limit of address space applies to VRAM as well, its shared between the two. you directly replied to someone talking about that, so yes - it was being mentioned. no it doesnt show up in task manager.



I was talking about RAM, not VRAM.




Enterprise24 said:


> .... or the game itself is 32bit (game never use system RAM more than 4GB but VRam can go up to 2.7GB with 24,000 units).



Whether or not the exe is 64-bit has nothing to do with it's RAM usage.

Unless it's above 4GB, then you would know.


----------



## Mussels (Nov 24, 2013)

RuskiSnajper said:


> I was talking about RAM, not VRAM.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



on a 32 bit OS, a 32 bit app has 2GB of address space for ram and VRAM combined. you only know because the app crashes: see fordGT90's thread about his large address aware (LAA) patcher for many examples of this happening.


----------



## RoutedScripter (Nov 24, 2013)

All I was saying is that you don't suppose to decide whether it's x32 or x64 on it's RAM usage by saying "oh it never wen't above 4gb so it's probably 32 bit".

EDIT:
Or 2GB or whatever is it, i didn't know it was combined though

so it's RAM + VRAM =/= 4GB ?


----------



## xenocide (Nov 25, 2013)

RuskiSnajper said:


> All I was saying is that you don't suppose to decide whether it's x32 or x64 on it's RAM usage by saying "oh it never wen't above 4gb so it's probably 32 bit".
> 
> EDIT:
> Or 2GB or whatever is it, i didn't know it was combined though
> ...


 
You can easily tell if programs are 32-bit or 64-bit, the issue is that most developers don't bother to make 64-bit executables for their games, which puts a hard restriction on how much RAM/VRAM they can access.  The executables see the type of RAM they access as the same, so they can only access 2/4GB of RAM/VRAM period (depending on the OS).  I don't believe he said anything to the equivalent of "it never went above 4GB so it's probably 32-bit", just that there are plenty of games that would benefit from having access to more resources--Strategy games in particular.


----------



## HTC (Nov 27, 2013)

Found this link @ XS, courtesy of Heinz68.

*Delving deeper into AMD's Mantle API*
by Cyril Kowaliski — 3:30 PM on November 25, 2013, at TechReport


----------



## RoutedScripter (Nov 28, 2013)

HTC said:


> Found this link @ XS, courtesy of Heinz68.
> 
> *Delving deeper into AMD's Mantle API*
> by Cyril Kowaliski — 3:30 PM on November 25, 2013, at TechReport



.. hmm Andersson said late december, so they have even more time to optimize this, will be a great christmas present.


EDIT: Great article ofcourse, nothing new for me except the above.

As expected, many people need to be spoonfeed to find out what things are about. Nice stories of people understanding and posting that in comments.

I kind of like the fact Nvidia and Valve geared up for OpenGL for SteamBox, and let it set in even tho I would want to see Mantle expanding; but because Mantle will basically roll over OGL even on much better OS than Windows, which will still leave the PC with advantages to be the top platform. 

SteamBox is actually a PC in a fancy case, similarly like Mac, Valve is kind of a joke company that tries to piggyback on something to get profits from, remember dota debacle, now they want to get into consoles. Yeah I'm critical, they aren't doing anything better than a standard corporation, all the piles of cash sitting there doing nothing.


----------



## RejZoR (Nov 28, 2013)

Well, SteamBox idea isn't stupid you know. I have my Lian Li placed in a living room right now and it looks like it belongs there from day one. It doesn't even look much as a PC in a smaller black ion platted case. It looks more like a HiFi component.

So bottom line, for SteamBox it's all about what they pack in it. For countless indie games on Steam, you really don't need much of a hardware. Any half decent AMD Fusion system could do the job at 1080p. For high end games, it really depends.

I've also tried Big Screen Steam and it looks rather nice. So, clearly, there is a potential.


----------



## RoutedScripter (Nov 29, 2013)

RejZoR said:


> So, clearly, there is a potential.



Potential for them to make more money? So what do we get back, better PC games that actually support the hardcore platform to make it relevant or we get some more dota clones with pay2win and fancy contholler ?


----------



## RejZoR (Nov 29, 2013)

The potential to ressurect PC platform. Essentially today's consoles are just fixed hardware high end PC's and nothing else. But i don't want locked down OS on console and i don't want locked down overpriced games that stop working when you replace a console with a new one.

No one will force you to buy SteamBox, which will essentially be just a PC sold in a fancy box. You'll assemble your own, install SteamOS or Steam with BigScreen and that way you'll support the PC, despite the fact it will be turned into sort of PC console hybrid. You'll still be able to make hacks to the games and patch them to run on modern OS. Something you can't do with consoles and the reason i don't like them much at all.


----------



## DannibusX (Nov 29, 2013)

RuskiSnajper said:


> SteamBox is actually a PC in a fancy case, similarly like Mac, Valve is kind of a joke company that tries to piggyback on something to get profits from, remember dota debacle, now they want to get into consoles. Yeah I'm critical, they aren't doing anything better than a standard corporation, all the piles of cash sitting there doing nothing.



You're right.  Steambox is a PC in a fancy case.  So is the Xbox One and PlayStation 4. 

lol, Valve is totally a joke company.  I mean they didn't revitalize the PC gaming market or anything.  They haven't saved me hundred of dollars on AAA titles or anything like that.  The super greedy fatcats at Valve are so evil that they are spending money on a project that might actually fail, while trying to get support from the rest of the video game industry to move some of their games to a platform which has next to no profitability.  All in the name of their wallets.  Valve can do whatever it wants because it has both the finances to do so, and no public shareholders demanding profit.  I hope I don't upset you when I tell you that the vast majority of gamers don't want to do it on the PC, it's too much of a hassle and the perceived expense also holds them back.

Mantle, a great idea that it is, will do jack shit unless AMD can get more companies that DICE to work with it.  Why would a company put more work into a game on the PC when the same exact platform (Xbox One) would require DirectX?  AMD needs not only game developers, but competing hardware manufacturers to be on board, and it ain't gonna happen unless AMD allows it to be used outside of their own ecosystem.


----------



## Frick (Nov 29, 2013)

DannibusX said:


> They haven't saved me hundred of dollars on AAA titles or anything like that.



Given Steam AAA games cost more than physical versions, this is probably correct.


----------



## RoutedScripter (Nov 29, 2013)

In that TechReport article, they actually said them self 50% could eventually be the performance boost over time as rewrite their rendering engines from ground up, but they wanted to stay low at 20% for the initial proof point demos etc.


----------



## Frag_Maniac (Nov 29, 2013)

DannibusX said:


> Why would a company put more work into a game on the PC when the same exact platform (Xbox One) would require DirectX?



Made by Microsoft, authors of Windows and Direct3D. Same exact platform, pffft.

I find it odd you acknowledge the differences and challenges AMD faces with their Mantle API, yet seem clueless on why Xone is strictly Windows and Direct3D, vs Linux or Mantle.

The Xone does not "require" DirectX, nor does any other platform, it's a conscious business decision by the manufacturer.


----------



## xenocide (Nov 29, 2013)

RuskiSnajper said:


> Potential for them to make more money? So what do we get back, better PC games that actually support the hardcore platform to make it relevant or we get some more dota clones with pay2win and fancy contholler ?



DotA 2 is hardly a DotA Clone considering it's made by the longest running dev of the original game and updates were ran side-by-side up until the most recent patch (when DotA 2 started getting updates sooner).  It's also not Pay-to-Win since none of the items you can buy have any affect on the actual gameplay--I cannot speak on behalf of TF2 but last I heard the items were largely cosmetic as well.  The controller they are introducing is very interesting, it's been a long time since anyone has tried to do anything rather than just 2 thumbsticks, a d-pad, 4 buttons on the right, and 2 shoulder buttons.  Other than moving an analog stick up or down the PS2/PS3/PS4/Dreamcast/Xbox/Xbox 360/Xbox One/Wii U "Pro" have all largely been the exact same design.


----------



## Frag_Maniac (Nov 30, 2013)

xenocide said:


> ...it's been a long time since anyone has tried to do anything rather than just 2 thumbsticks, a d-pad, 4 buttons on the right, and 2 shoulder buttons.  Other than moving an analog stick up or down the PS2/PS3/PS4/Dreamcast/Xbox/Xbox 360/Xbox One/Wii U "Pro" have all largely been the exact same design.



Amen to that!


----------



## RoutedScripter (Nov 30, 2013)

Well actually, my interest stops there, even about dicussing what new "gaming experiences" (read: hypnotization programmes) will this new controller bring , I just see gaming as nothing else than what music and hollywood movies are, a part of social engineering as most gamers' life revolves around it and sitting down on a lazy couch and being a good consumer buying the things you don't need with the money you don't have that every corporation loves. All this VR is fantastic stuff technically, but I rather live in the real world.

I can understand some competitive gaming as a sport where it's all as a hobby, not as a way of life that you turn into a mindless zombie promoting

I follow regularly the starcraft 2 esports stuff, big tournaments only, twice per 3 months or something, but, It makes me sick when I see them promoting all the toxic poison redbulls and other energy drinks and promoting lack of sleep as something cool and trendy, among other "gamer life" features, you see all the people giving each other confidence to the way of life they bless, some kind of a ritual or something they make them selfs feel like they're in the heights of mankind's achivement or something.

It's kind in the back of my head, I don't watch these matches like a standard football fan or something, I don't participate in any discussions either, it's just a time filler that I really wouldn't mind missing.


----------



## bpgt64 (Nov 30, 2013)

As someone who's first build was an AMD64 3400, I would love to support them again.  Since that CPU I have largely been using Intel for gaming, but if Mantle changes that, it would be revolutionary.


----------



## TheHunter (Nov 30, 2013)

Well I can't wait to see more Devs supporting it, this thing will own. 
Final fantasy movie like gfx in the horizon ^^


Hopefully U4E, Luminous (SquareEnix engine) will follow too..



And since Mantle its open to all, its up to nvidia to write a driver for it.


----------



## HTC (Nov 30, 2013)

I don't mind* if this ends up giving AMD ... say ... 20% boost in performance* of Mantle able cards BUT nVidia must be able to *"join in on the fun"* by coming up with drivers that take advantage of this and have a boost too (probably not as good as AMDs since their CGN architecture is what Mantle is designed to work with) because, if not, i foresee bad times ahead for us consumers.

If it works, Mantle is DEFINITELY a good thing BUT it MUST be useable by all manufacturers even if it gives one an edge over the others: as long as that edge isn't big, there's no excuse to overprice the cards but if the edge is wide, then they have that excuse and that is *VERY BAD*.


----------



## RoutedScripter (Nov 30, 2013)

bpgt64 said:


> As someone who's first build was an AMD64 3400, I would love to support them again.  Since that CPU I have largely been using Intel for gaming, but if Mantle changes that, it would be revolutionary.




CPU Performance will be improved extremely, but doesn't mean what CPU you use.



HTC said:


> because, if not, i foresee bad times ahead for us consumers.



Like what?



BTW for everyone: https://twitter.com/UnnDann/status/403593218341617664

And:
http://www.rebellion.co.uk/blog/2013/11/21/rebellion-throws-weight-behind-amd-mantle

Come on guys ... there will no shortage of mantle games.


----------



## Frag_Maniac (Nov 30, 2013)

Quite frankly I'm not sure I'll buy into O Rift either, and not just out of resistance to accept any implied marketing "hypnotism". I'm seriously concerned about long term effects on vision, attention span, etc. Just LCD displays themselves are bad enough long term on eyesight, and OLED/PLED has yet to prove to have a lifespan adequate enough for anything but small devices that people don't keep very long (cell phones, etc).

As far as Mantle's projected performance boost, one thing that concerns me is most only talk in terms of added frames per second, but we're seeing an increasing number of games that don't play smoothly even if you're getting good frame rates.  I think both AMD and Nvidia need to focus more on frame pacing before they go trying to boost performance, and it's not just an issue with Crossfire and SLI. Single GPU performance is often crippled by erratic frame rate fluctuation too.


----------



## HTC (Dec 1, 2013)

RuskiSnajper said:


> Like what?



Overpricing: having a measurable lead means you can overprice. Just look @ nVidia with Titan or Intel with lots of their CPUs.


Don't get me wrong: i hope Mantle succeeds but if it's to give one side a clear advantage over the other, then this could end up hurting us consumers more then it helps, IMO.


----------



## xenocide (Dec 2, 2013)

RuskiSnajper said:


> BTW for everyone: https://twitter.com/UnnDann/status/403593218341617664
> 
> And:
> http://www.rebellion.co.uk/blog/2013/11/21/rebellion-throws-weight-behind-amd-mantle
> ...


 
I can't see the first link (damn firewall at work) but Rebellion Development is really nothing to brag about, the only "noteworthy" title they've made recently was Sniper Elite, and that game was pretty awful.  I would say Mantle needs someone like Epic Games, ID, Bethesda, or Crytek to fully endorse/support the API for it to stand a fighting chance.



HTC said:


> Overpricing: having a measurable lead means you can overprice. Just look @ nVidia with Titan or Intel with lots of their CPUs.
> 
> 
> Don't get me wrong: i hope Mantle succeeds but if it's to give one side a clear advantage over the other, then this could end up hurting us consumers more then it helps, IMO.


 
Intel actually charge a reasonable market value for most of their products, with the exception of the ultra high-end which is just paying for bragging rights really.  You can't say an i5-3570 or something like that is unreasonably expensive considering the alternatives.  Titan also wasn't horrifically overpriced, the problem is people only looked at it as a Gaming Graphics Card--It was a very low-end Tesla, and when you consider the performance it offered, it was a fucking STEAL at that price point.

I hope it works out, but if AMD locks down the market, it's bad for everyone.


----------



## HTC (Dec 2, 2013)

xenocide said:


> Intel actually charge a reasonable market value for most of their products, *with the exception of the ultra high-end*



What if Mantle works out and the difference is high enough for mid high level (or mid level even) cards to have around the performance of high end competitor's performance levels? What's to stop AMD from overpricing the shit out of their high end cards then?



xenocide said:


> Titan also wasn't horrifically overpriced, the problem is people only looked at it as a Gaming Graphics Card--*It was a very low-end Tesla, and when you consider the performance it offered, it was a fucking STEAL at that price point.*


Agree there.*
*


xenocide said:


> I hope it works out, but if AMD locks down the market, it's bad for everyone.



Exactly.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Dec 2, 2013)

HTC said:


> If it works, Mantle is DEFINITELY a good thing BUT it MUST be useable by all manufacturers even if it gives one an edge over the others: as long as that edge isn't big, there's no excuse to overprice the cards but if the edge is wide, then they have that excuse and that is *VERY BAD*.


Mantle is open unlike most of NVIDIA technologies.



xenocide said:


> I can't see the first link (damn firewall at work) but Rebellion Development is really nothing to brag about, the only "noteworthy" title they've made recently was Sniper Elite, and that game was pretty awful.  I would say Mantle needs someone like Epic Games, ID, Bethesda, or Crytek to fully endorse/support the API for it to stand a fighting chance.


It could.  We'll find out as the next generation of games start launching.


----------



## xenocide (Dec 2, 2013)

HTC said:


> What if Mantle works out and the difference is high enough for mid high level (or mid level even) cards to have around the performance of high end competitor's performance levels? What's to stop AMD from overpricing the shit out of their high end cards then?


 
Historically AMD has *not* shyed away from pricing their top tier products absurdly high when they have the performance crown.  Anyone remember the original FX CPU's?  Or when a 200MHz bump cost about $100 on Socket 939?  Luckily Nvidia has kept them on their toes and Intel came back with Core2.  I have no doubt if Phenom worked out as intended and Core2 never happened we would have seen _years_ of AMD CPU's running at the price point Intel's high end did.

If AMD corners the market, and Mantle pans out as intended, it could be bad.  If Nvidia has to spend a year or two recovering, and CPU performance becomes somewhat irrelevant, expect Steamroller-based CPU's to launch at or above the price point of Intel CPU's (if Intel can't offer 8-core CPU's and threads are now all that matter why wouldn't AMD charge a pretty penny?) and their GPU's to slowly climb in price as people hurry to replace their Nvidia hardware with Mantle-friendly AMD GPU's.


----------



## HTC (Dec 2, 2013)

FordGT90Concept said:


> Mantle is open unlike most of NVIDIA technologies.



While it seems so, it definitely seems to favor CGN architecture which will obviously give an edge to AMD: what i'm saying is that, as long and that edge is small, no worries, but if it turns out to be big, then that could be bad for us, $ wise.


----------



## xenocide (Dec 2, 2013)

HTC said:


> While it seems so, it definitely seems to favor CGN architecture which will obviously give an edge to AMD: what i'm saying is that, as long and that edge is small, no worries, but if it turns out to be big, then that could be bad for us, $ wise.


 
My major concern is that they are using a misleading definition of "open".  Something along the lines of, it's free for all developers to use, but for hardware vendors you have to pay a licensing fee to actually implement support.  I mean, technically PhysX ran on AMD hardware, but  Nvidia inmplemented that nasty "emulate on CPU when AMD GPU detected" line of code which basically ruined any chance of it running _well_ on competing hardware.


----------



## bwat47 (Dec 2, 2013)

DannibusX said:


> You're right.  Steambox is a PC in a fancy case.  So is the Xbox One and PlayStation 4.
> 
> lol, Valve is totally a joke company.  I mean they didn't revitalize the PC gaming market or anything.  They haven't saved me hundred of dollars on AAA titles or anything like that.  The super greedy fatcats at Valve are so evil that they are spending money on a project that might actually fail, while trying to get support from the rest of the video game industry to move some of their games to a platform which has next to no profitability.  All in the name of their wallets.  Valve can do whatever it wants because it has both the finances to do so, and no public shareholders demanding profit.  I hope I don't upset you when I tell you that the vast majority of gamers don't want to do it on the PC, it's too much of a hassle and the perceived expense also holds them back.
> 
> Mantle, a great idea that it is, will do jack shit unless AMD can get more companies that DICE to work with it.  Why would a company put more work into a game on the PC when the same exact platform (Xbox One) would require DirectX?  AMD needs not only game developers, but competing hardware manufacturers to be on board, and it ain't gonna happen unless AMD allows it to be used outside of their own ecosystem.


AMD has said multiple times that they are not interested in having mantle being limited to AMD hardware, and that they want to make it an open standard. Currently its still in early development and only runs on AMD GCN cards, but that is not the long term plan. They even said they'd consider handing it off to khronos group: http://techreport.com/review/25683/delving-deeper-into-amd-mantle-api/4 ("For its part, AMD isn't opposed to addressing some of those political hurdles. Guennadi Riguer said the company is "fairly open to working with other [independent hardware vendors]," and he reiterated that Mantle has been "purposely structured . . . in such a way that it's as clean as possible, as transferable to other vendors as possible." When asked if AMD would be amenable to making Mantle an open API overseen by the Khronos Group—the same folks who look after OpenGL—he replied, "I don't see why not." At this point, Jurjen Katsman chimed in, saying that AMD shouldn't hand Mantle to Khronos right away, because it's "not done."")

Mantle also already has support from non-dice developers. In addition to the 15 or so frostbite 3 powered games, it will also be supported by the upcoming thief and star citizen games. From what I've seen developers seem fairly enthusiastic about mantle.


----------



## Fourstaff (Dec 2, 2013)

bwat47 said:


> AMD has said multiple times that they are not interested in having mantle being limited to AMD hardware, and that they want to make it an open standard.



Open standard doesn't mean anything if GCN is the only architecture able to support Mantle.


----------



## erocker (Dec 2, 2013)

Fourstaff said:


> Open standard doesn't mean anything if GCN is the only architecture able to support Mantle.



From what I gather it's not. Mantle is it's own thing, like Driect X. Nvidia gets their architecture to work with Direct X, so does AMD. Nvidia just needs to make their architecture work with Mantle.

...unless I'm totally wrong, which is always a possibility.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Dec 2, 2013)

Yeah, AMD wants NVIDIA and Intel to adapt Mantle too.  The only way I see that happening is Microsoft implementing it in DirectX 12 or 13 but the won't because Mantle completes with DirectX more than it complements it.  If AMD is the only one to implement it, it'll turn into PhysX where it gets a surge of support then fades to nothing.

If it does deliver on the performance promises, I can't see NVIDIA and Intel not implementing it with or without Microsoft.  On titles where it is supported, AMD would trounce the competition and that makes the competition look bad.  They'll want to rectify it just from a marketing stand point.

Mantle (or something like it) is what Windows has been lacking since the 1990s.  Back then, game developers coded for the silicon because they needed to wring every drop of performance they could out of the hardware.  Now everyone has gotten lazy and codes for APIs like DirectX which does mean we get shiny looking games for little production costs but at the same time, computer hardware isn't operating anywhere close to optimal.  Mantle represents a return to coding for silicon.


----------



## erocker (Dec 2, 2013)

FordGT90Concept said:


> Yeah, AMD wants NVIDIA and Intel to adapt Mantle too.  The only way I see that happening is Microsoft implementing it in DirectX 12 or 13 but the won't because Mantle completes with DirectX more than it complements it.  If AMD is the only one to implement it, it'll turn into PhysX where it gets a surge of support then fades to nothing.



Well, if enough developers pick it up, it works better than Direct X (visuals, performance) and if customers like it, want it... Nvidia and Intel will most likely jump on it.


----------



## xenocide (Dec 2, 2013)

Wouldn't Nvidia and Intel have to spend a good amount of resources to get their hardware to work properly with Mantle?  And at that point wouldn't AMD basically be dictating where hardware development went from that point on?  I don't believe Khronos is the best group to oversee something like Mantle considering they have done a miserable job keeping OpenGL updated and running properly...


----------



## Fourstaff (Dec 2, 2013)

erocker said:


> From what I gather it's not. Mantle is it's own thing, like Driect X. Nvidia gets their architecture to work with Direct X, so does AMD. Nvidia just needs to make their architecture work with Mantle.
> 
> ...unless I'm totally wrong, which is always a possibility.



So if we get open source Mantle, OpenCL will be consigned to history?


----------



## bwat47 (Dec 2, 2013)

Fourstaff said:


> So if we get open source Mantle, OpenCL will be consigned to history?


No, OpenCL and Mantle are used for different things. OpenCL is more like an open source version of Nvidia's CUDA, its used for GPU Compute stuff. Mantle is more like OpenGL or DIrectX (but lower-level than directx).


----------



## bpgt64 (Dec 2, 2013)

I don't completely understand the difference between OpenGL, OpenCL, DirectX, Mantle, etc....  It makes me wonder how this shifting of rendering methods will be effected if a substantial amount of gamers go to Linux with SteamOS on top of Android's OS exploding.


----------



## CD2 Solutions (Dec 2, 2013)

bpgt64 said:


> I don't completely understand the difference between OpenGL, OpenCL, DirectX, Mantle, etc....  It makes me wonder how this shifting of rendering methods will be effected if a substantial amount of gamers go to Linux with SteamOS on top of Android's OS exploding.



with any luck, mantle will move to the ARM powered sectors too.

openGL directx and mantle are all used to make graphics engines and games easier to make for a wide variety of hardware. without them, a developer would need to make a different version of the game for EVERY graphics chip out there, something that is frankly ludicrous. by using a graphics api, it gives the developer a wider coverage, only having to adjust a little for different architectures (amd cards from the 7xxx series for example share the same basic architecture).

openCL does a similar thing, but its for compute tasks like video conversions.
mantle is open as well, so a linux version will just require porting. how long that will take i dont know, but with a company like valve behind it.........

PS: i hope you werent being sarcastic lol. either way, somebody who doesnt know will read this.


----------



## bpgt64 (Dec 2, 2013)

CD2 Solutions said:


> with any luck, mantle will move to the ARM powered sectors too.
> 
> openGL directx and mantle are all used to make graphics engines and games easier to make for a wide variety of hardware. without them, a developer would need to make a different version of the game for EVERY graphics chip out there, something that is frankly ludicrous. by using a graphics api, it gives the developer a wider coverage, only having to adjust a little for different architectures (amd cards from the 7xxx series for example share the same basic architecture).
> 
> ...



I wasn't being sarcastic at all.  My experience with Graphics APi's has been, well this runs on Direct X 9 so it generally looks so-good.  Where as some of the games i have seen on DX11 look pretty amazing.  All I know is what I experience in different games(varying based on developer/execution).

Thank you for the explanation.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Dec 2, 2013)

I think the best synonym for Mantle is x86.  I believe Mantle exposes a set of instructions software can use directly in the GPU instead of going through layers of APIs.  As long as the GPU supports those instructions (I highly doubt NVIDIA and Intel do but they can add it in future silicon), Mantle will work.


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Dec 2, 2013)

RejZoR said:


> Well, SteamBox idea isn't stupid you know. I have my Lian Li placed in a living room right now and it looks like it belongs there from day one. It doesn't even look much as a PC in a smaller black ion platted case. It looks more like a HiFi component.
> 
> So bottom line, for SteamBox it's all about what they pack in it. For countless indie games on Steam, you really don't need much of a hardware. Any half decent AMD Fusion system could do the job at 1080p. For high end games, it really depends.
> 
> I've also tried Big Screen Steam and it looks rather nice. So, clearly, there is a potential.




no one really sits in front of a 42-50" living room telly checking facebook and playing peggle(thats why we sit with pads/phones),, they have consoles and its consoles that they (steambox's)have to contend with in performance terms,at least imho and as good as open Gl is I think Steam need to climb aboard the HSA / Mantle train ,to optimise there bang for buck with Amd based steambox's.


----------



## bpgt64 (Dec 2, 2013)

theoneandonlymrk said:


> no one really sits in front of a 42-50" living room telly checking facebook and playing peggle(thats why we sit with pads/phones),, they have consoles and its consoles that they (steambox's)have to contend with in performance terms,at least imho and as good as open Gl is I think Steam need to climb aboard the HSA / Mantle train ,to optimise there bang for buck with Amd based steambox's.



I think Valve just needs get something on Debian based Linux and let developers decide which makes better use of end-hardware, and in turn let development of games drive which gets used more.


----------



## RejZoR (Dec 3, 2013)

theoneandonlymrk said:


> no one really sits in front of a 42-50" living room telly checking facebook and playing peggle(thats why we sit with pads/phones),, they have consoles and its consoles that they (steambox's)have to contend with in performance terms,at least imho and as good as open Gl is I think Steam need to climb aboard the HSA / Mantle train ,to optimise there bang for buck with Amd based steambox's.



I do? I have my BlackBox rigged to 42 inch LCD and i do everything on it right now. Did increase the DPI to see smalls tuff easier...


----------



## RoutedScripter (Dec 3, 2013)

erocker said:


> Fourstaff said:
> 
> 
> > Open standard doesn't mean anything if GCN is the only architecture able to support Mantle.
> ...



You are correct, the code that is there currently only supports GCN, all you have to do is to include code for other architectures, it has nothing to do with GCN code already sitting beside it, Nvidia would have to include and develop code from scratch, AMD will in any case have at least 2 years of advantage, possibly more if Nvidia is arrogant enough to not take this seriously, which looking at it's history, probably will happen.





xenocide said:


> I don't believe Khronos is the best group to oversee something like Mantle considering they have done a miserable job keeping OpenGL updated and running properly...



I fully agree with that. That was a terrible thing to ask. Since the Mantle presentations i've been on several public chats and extensively discussed Mantle with OGL community people, even they aren't happy with Khronos at all.





Fourstaff said:


> So if we get open source Mantle, OpenCL will be consigned to history?



Depends to what low level the GPU gets unlocked, let's not forget this is not 100% like on consoles, it's still some abstraction going on, but I do think that these tasks can be done manutally via Mantle anyways, and if it's lower level it might be even better than with OpenCL which is supposably higher-level, however Carmack pointed out how Nvidia is quick to include new OGL/OCL extensions for devs, I don't think I am suitable to discuss this more than this, I do not have full understanding.





bpgt64 said:


> It makes me wonder how this shifting of rendering methods will be effected if a substantial amount of gamers go to Linux with SteamOS on top of Android's OS exploding.



That is not certain, SteamOS is now more tied to Nvidia's OGL polish, the efficiency and performance of Linux OS alone probably will not be enough to beat Mantle on windows. The most powerful available (not _possible_, because everything is possible if you want to make it, talking about in present time) combination in the industry will is Mantle and Linux.

Android OS is irrelevant.


----------



## bpgt64 (Dec 3, 2013)

The only way it seems to tell which approach is better, is to watch AMD and see if they can reclaim the performance crown with Mantle and AMD CPUs while nvidia sticks with intel CPUs and uses OpenGL/Linux approach.


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Dec 3, 2013)

Its all smoke and mirrors until W1zz reviews. Also did I just read Android OS is irrelevant? I sure hope your kidding.


----------



## Frag_Maniac (Dec 3, 2013)

bpgt64 said:


> The only way it seems to tell which approach is better, is to watch AMD and see if they can reclaim the performance crown with Mantle and AMD CPUs while nvidia sticks with intel CPUs and uses OpenGL/Linux approach.



Mantle's development was primarily GPU oriented. It only frees up CPU cycles in the process due to being less dependent on the CPU by extension of more GPU efficiency. There should be no change in how AMD CPUs fare against Intel's under Mantle.


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Dec 3, 2013)

bpgt64 said:


> I think Valve just needs get something on Debian based Linux and let developers decide which makes better use of end-hardware, and in turn let development of games drive which gets used more.


you know whilst i implied it as a recomendation my opinion is that valve Are working on utilising mantle and hsa


Frag Maniac said:


> Mantle's development was primarily GPU oriented. It only frees up CPU cycles in the process due to being less dependent on the CPU by extension of more GPU efficiency. There should be no change in how AMD CPUs fare against Intel's under Mantle.



Whilst initially id expect what your saying to hold out i dont think that will remain true with time ,who after all knows Amd's 64bit arch and instruction set best , plus Mantle is like the very tip of the corner(just 1) of a pyramid Amd are trying to construct with us the end user at the top utilising Various Dsp's cpu's(inc arch variance) GPu's in every day ways easily and faster ,mantle is undoubtabely tied into Hsa due to Amd leaning toward APu's and an Amd Apu runs code optimised for an amd cpu better then intels so that initial parity (still enhanced for both) wont last.


----------



## RoutedScripter (Dec 4, 2013)

Example of what Mantle would improve, in terms of CPU.


----------



## Frag_Maniac (Dec 5, 2013)

theoneandonlymrk said:


> Whilst initially id expect what your saying to hold out i dont think that will remain true with time ,who after all knows Amd's 64bit arch and instruction set best...



Except that AMD are smart enough thus far to have acknowledged that best case scenario is an abstraction layer as thin and universally seamless as possible, while still getting performance gains worthwhile enough to even pursue such a project. Otherwise the same thing will happen that happened with Glide. I think those overly enthusiastic about Mantle don't always realize the amount of caution Mantle's development was approached with, and I'm sure it has to do with the fact that is was requested by devs, vs initiated in house for AMD's exclusive benefit. 

I'm sure the devs requesting it would rather the benefits of using it not be so drastically skewed to one side of their customer base. The common scenario and difference between games that sell well and those that don't is not how many are willing to buy it, but how many refuse to, and things like skewed performance can certainly cause the latter. There are ALWAYS going to be hardcore gamers whom have to have the latest titles, what differs is how many there are that cry foul and say not me.


----------



## xenocide (Dec 5, 2013)

RuskiSnajper said:


> Example of what Mantle would improve, in terms of CPU.



Or Blizzard could make their engine use more than 1 thread, which would completely remove the CPU bottleneck.


----------



## Frag_Maniac (Dec 5, 2013)

LOL, yeah single threading on games that are more data than graphics intense is really stupid anyway.


----------



## RoutedScripter (Dec 5, 2013)

Frag Maniac said:


> Except that AMD are smart enough thus far to have acknowledged that best case scenario is an abstraction layer as thin and universally seamless as possible, while still getting performance gains worthwhile enough to even pursue such a project. Otherwise the same thing will happen that happened with Glide. I think those overly enthusiastic about Mantle don't always realize the amount of caution Mantle's development was approached with, and I'm sure it has to do with the fact that is was requested by devs, vs initiated in house for AMD's exclusive benefit.
> 
> I'm sure the devs requesting it would rather the benefits of using it not be so drastically skewed to one side of their customer base. The common scenario and difference between games that sell well and those that don't is not how many are willing to buy it, but how many refuse to, and things like skewed performance can certainly cause the latter. There are ALWAYS going to be hardcore gamers whom have to have the latest titles, what differs is how many there are that cry foul and say not me.



I think you do not understand how much pressure has been made on the industry to get rid of API limitations on the PC. It is understandable, you have not researched and followed this as long as I was, there is still historical information available if you dig it. It is more of an insider-thing that doesn't creep out heavily in the mainstream gaming media, the naysayers are irrelevant noob-developers who show clear signs of enthusiastic-beginners, who use their novelty and instant-hit factor to influence the media which supercharges the exposure of these opinions they spew out.

While john carmack was a big part of these talks to get better development environment on PC, his priorities have been "compromised" (cannot criticize subjectively, he made no promises, his right to choose) by VR technology to the point his existing situation started to crumble apart, he is now considered totally irrelevant in this cause, he currently does not develop any game engine code, but I do not know if he has any contacts with the GPU vendors, if anything most probably VR-specific.



There will be no educated customer that would refuse to buy a mantle game purely based on opinion constructed with technical details. As an AMD engineer already said, Mantle's success is mostly limited by political and economical issues that may arise, for example, developers that wouldn't afford to be present in the transition period, or wouldn't believe it's a worthy enough thing, those mostly are irrelevant developer studios who have little influence on the shape of the industry, they are not required to be a part of the transition period.




xenocide said:


> Or Blizzard could make their engine use more than 1 thread, which would completely remove the CPU bottleneck.



You are wrong.


All DX applications have multi-threading utilization limitations.
It would not completely remove the bottleneck.
Starcraft 2 is not running on only 1 core, it does on 2, (but that's not real mutlithreading still, draw and physics probably run on one, and Ai on the other, overall it's not anywhere compared to some top FPS games.)
http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/cpus/2010/08/18/how-many-cpu-cores-does-starcraft-2-use/1


First of all, the bottleneck always exists, it's just much higher in the performance graph, you will hit that bottleneck if you use the extra performance for more Ai, physics and other gameplay things.

Once games utilize this extra performance, the noticable boost gap will be lowered and eventually become nonexistant as the Ai, graphics and other things will consume this performance naturally, but this will take a few years.

The complexity of PC games will increase considerably in this transition to a new API, until another big increase comes, that might be quantum micro-chip technology.



EDIT:


----------



## RoutedScripter (Dec 14, 2013)

Update:

Oops, that one slipped out.

http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showpost.php?p=25445660&postcount=21


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Dec 14, 2013)

personally im not interested in a link to another thread on another forum with people bickering  about mantle, I have that right here at home on TPU and since the name 8ball means nowt to me some context might have been helpfull


----------



## RoutedScripter (Dec 14, 2013)

theoneandonlymrk said:


> personally im not interested in a link to another thread on another forum with people bickering  about mantle, I have that right here at home on TPU and since the name 8ball means nowt to me some context might have been helpfull



What are you saying, I haven't linked any thread to the stuff you mentioned, I linked to a post, and if you can't read who made that post than that's unfortunate for you. That post is a major indicator, now, those who don't understand mantle from the get go, obviously won't find this a big deal, this is news, but ofcourse, I don't really care what mainstream shit news decide to be "newsworthy".

After all this, I'm not really in a mood to bring up stuff for lazy people on a silver plate, I don't have any intention anymore to deeply discuss mantle with mantle haters/doubters/downplayers. I've exhausted what I meant in the 9 pages of this thread.

And who's 8ball ? It's 8 pack and if you checked a little more down you would see it's a staff member, and if you'd check the thread for info without paying attention to worthless posts  than you'd know that someone from OCUK was at the AMD Summit and was rumored to be in the shown the closed demo from Oxide.

I have no trouble explaining, I have trouble because you lazy people expect it like I'm some kind of public service here.


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Dec 14, 2013)

RuskiSnajper said:


> What are you saying, I haven't linked any thread to the stuff you mentioned, I linked to a post, and if you can't read who made that post than that's unfortunate for you. That post is a major indicator, now, those who don't understand mantle from the get go, obviously won't find this a big deal, this is news, but ofcourse, I don't really care what mainstream shit news decide to be "newsworthy".
> 
> After all this, I'm not really in a mood to bring up stuff for lazy people on a silver plate, I don't have any intention anymore to deeply discuss mantle with mantle haters/doubters/downplayers. I've exhausted what I meant in the 9 pages of this thread.
> 
> ...


So my point was I don't know the guy and lazy I read a fair bit of that thread but your second post described it how you should have been wrote the first , why cryptic and why point to a vague dude all vague but not now thanks oh and im no mantle hater


----------



## TheHunter (Dec 14, 2013)

OpenCL won't go anywhere, its here for totally different reasons - direct compute, meaning the gpu is used  for normal computing, not just for graphics.


> OpenCL provides parallel computing using task-based and data-based parallelism.




To some that still don't know, Mantle's only role is to have a thin layer between game and gpu, it can access all gpu features and much more beyond dx11.2 specifications.
Performance impact is minimal, it can have up to 100.000 directdraw calls  @16ms which is 60fps, directx11 is capped at max ~ 12-16000 @ 16ms on average., openGL with bindless extensions up to 25000 calls. Consoles usually from 35000-50000 up to 100.000 or more.

So now you can have the same gfx detail and faster gameplay or richer worlds with more detail at steady 16ms - Im thinking CGI type of gfx.

Also it doesnt matter if a game uses  lets say openCL physics or cuda physx DLL for physics simulations, it will coexist with this api just like direcX or openGL is now.



Anyway Mantle will rock you will see! 

More devs need to step up, ie U4E, Luminous, Glacier2, Cryengine already is to some degree - it will be supported in Star Citizen, etc..


----------



## Frag_Maniac (Dec 14, 2013)

RuskiSnajper said:


> I think you do not understand how much pressure has been made on the industry to get rid of API limitations on the PC. It is understandable, you have not researched and followed this as long as I was, there is still historical information available if you dig it. It is more of an insider-thing that doesn't creep out heavily in the mainstream gaming media, the naysayers are irrelevant noob-developers who show clear signs of enthusiastic-beginners, who use their novelty and instant-hit factor to influence the media which supercharges the exposure of these opinions they spew out.
> 
> While john carmack was a big part of these talks to get better development environment on PC, his priorities have been "compromised" (cannot criticize subjectively, he made no promises, his right to choose) by VR technology to the point his existing situation started to crumble apart, he is now considered totally irrelevant in this cause, he currently does not develop any game engine code, but I do not know if he has any contacts with the GPU vendors, if anything most probably VR-specific.
> 
> ...



I find it odd after all the people that have pointed out things you're not aware of or understanding of in this thread you still insist we're clueless. No one knows the exact numbers percentage wise of devs in the industry that have made a specific request for AMD or anyone else to come up with an alternative to Direct3D, and I'm sure most of them, unlike you, are understanding of the fact that if not implemented carefully, the same thing could happen that did with Glide. You keep glossing over that. Like I said earlier, you're ignorant of history in the industry in this regard. If you can't even grasp that simple concept, then no, you have not in fact "researched" this so well. I find it odd you'd even use the word research as naive as you sound.

If you had a shred of sense you'd angle this thread toward things that AMD/DICE have done to ensure Mantle will not suffer the same fate as Glide, but instead you insist it's a non issue. There really isn't enough proof that they've done much to make devs think Nvidia and their customers will support this, and THAT'S what matters most, not your narrow minded perception. If all that mattered were the opinions of a few naive AMD fanboys there'd be nothing to worry about, but there's a whole lot more to it than that. You keep insisting we're pessimistic skeptics. No, we're just realists that aren't easily convinced by a few stage presentations.


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Dec 14, 2013)

Well I think I disagree on how much nvidia matters to mantle to say the least. 
I did recently note a verdant nvidia owning friend has refused to buy his fave ever game bf4 and he loves it and Nv interesting. 
Shit hurry up and switch mantle On already in bf4.


----------



## HTC (Dec 15, 2013)

The way i understood it is that any GPU with GCN tech will be able to use Mantle immediately while others will have to have "help" be it from special drivers or, worse, from hardware changes.

If this "help" comes from special drivers, i expect a performance hit because, instead of the game "using" Mantle to "talk" to the graphics card, it will have to use "a translator" because, without CGN tech, it can't "talk" to it directly. This, to me, is what makes the most sense as it explains why Mantle is multi-vendor and also why it works best with CGN tech: if there's a need for "a translator" for other vendors, time will be lost, hence the performance hit.

If this help requires hardware changes, then i don't see Mantle surviving very long in what will be, for all intents and purposes, a proprietary API due to the CGN being AMD tech only.


----------



## bpgt64 (Dec 15, 2013)

Show me numbers and I'll care.  Or Wizzards review.


----------



## RoutedScripter (Dec 15, 2013)

Frag Maniac said:


> I find it odd after all the people that have pointed out things you're not aware of or understanding of in this thread you still insist we're clueless. No one knows the exact numbers percentage wise of devs in the industry that have made a specific request for AMD or anyone else to come up with an alternative to Direct3D, and I'm sure most of them, unlike you, are understanding of the fact that if not implemented carefully, the same thing could happen that did with Glide. You keep glossing over that. Like I said earlier, you're ignorant of history in the industry in this regard. If you can't even grasp that simple concept, then no, you have not in fact "researched" this so well. I find it odd you'd even use the word research as naive as you sound.
> 
> If you had a shred of sense you'd angle this thread toward things that AMD/DICE have done to ensure Mantle will not suffer the same fate as Glide, but instead you insist it's a non issue. There really isn't enough proof that they've done much to make devs think Nvidia and their customers will support this, and THAT'S what matters most, not your narrow minded perception. If all that mattered were the opinions of a few naive AMD fanboys there'd be nothing to worry about, but there's a whole lot more to it than that. You keep insisting we're pessimistic skeptics. No, we're just realists that aren't easily convinced by a few stage presentations.



You and xenocide definitely didn't spend 5 hours watching all the presentations, slides, and even all the other research and knowledge about how much of a difference low-level APIs make.

A good experienced man can predict things, you are inexperienced, you need hard proof to be able to see that.  Just like the obamacare supporters, they had to see it written in their mail that they would have to pay 3 times as much, but we who were telling this would happen for months prior, because we done the research, they didn't take it seriously.

You can keep saying whatever you want, but it's only your perception, which obviously doesn't affect reality.





theoneandonlymrk said:


> Well I think I disagree on how much nvidia matters to mantle to say the least.
> I did recently note a verdant nvidia owning friend has refused to buy his fave ever game bf4 and he loves it and Nv interesting.
> Shit hurry up and switch mantle On already in bf4.



I can't even read that ...





HTC said:


> The way i understood it is that any GPU with GCN tech will be able to use Mantle immediately while others will have to have "help" be it from special drivers or, worse, from hardware changes.
> 
> If this "help" comes from special drivers, i expect a performance hit because, instead of the game "using" Mantle to "talk" to the graphics card, it will have to use "a translator" because, without CGN tech, it can't "talk" to it directly. This, to me, is what makes the most sense as it explains why Mantle is multi-vendor and also why it works best with CGN tech: if there's a need for "a translator" for other vendors, time will be lost, hence the performance hit.
> 
> If this help requires hardware changes, then i don't see Mantle surviving very long in what will be, for all intents and purposes, a proprietary API due to the CGN being AMD tech only.



Wrong

Nvidia would have to code in support, has nothing to do with mantle being on GCN only currently.






bpgt64 said:


> Show me numbers and I'll care.  Or Wizzards review.



Here are the numbers

CPU boost;  ~600%
GPU boost: 100%-300%

or in other words:
"_amazing_"


But as I said, this will be spent on better visuals, more draw distance, more complexity, so if you check back 2 years this post, this numbers will not match, but if you had same visuals, same complexity, then it would hold, this can be done great with something like 3DMark, they should keep improving the performance optimizations, without any fidelity and load stuff, to see clearly see the difference.


----------



## Frag_Maniac (Dec 15, 2013)

RuskiSnajper said:


> You and xenocide definitely didn't spend 5 hours watching all the presentations, slides, and even all the other research and knowledge about how much of a difference low-level APIs make.



This just makes it all the more obvious you are not paying attention and narrow mindedly focused on one thing. I never argued that such an API can improve performance. Hell, I doubt most devs have. The lesson learned from Glide was not just focusing on performance but rather it being universally beneficial, meaning including Nvidia customers. No matter how many times that is said it just goes right over your head.

Only a fool studies the obvious and ignores the most pertinent details. It's as if someone needs to draw you a picture at this point.


----------



## HTC (Dec 15, 2013)

HTC said:


> The way i understood it is that any GPU with GCN tech will be able to use Mantle immediately while others will have to have "help" be it from special drivers or, worse, from hardware changes.
> 
> *If this "help" comes from special drivers, i expect a performance hit because, instead of the game "using" Mantle to "talk" to the graphics card, it will have to use "a translator" because, without CGN tech, it can't "talk" to it directly. This, to me, is what makes the most sense as it explains why Mantle is multi-vendor and also why it works best with CGN tech: if there's a need for "a translator" for other vendors, time will be lost, hence the performance hit.*
> 
> If this help requires hardware changes, then i don't see Mantle surviving very long in what will be, for all intents and purposes, a proprietary API due to the CGN being AMD tech only.





RuskiSnajper said:


> Wrong
> 
> Nvidia would have to *code in support*, has nothing to do with mantle being on GCN only currently.



You just said what i highlighted, dude: that's what i was referring to as "translator".

Let me put it this way:


Mantle uses CGN to "speak" with the game
Since nVidia doesn't have CGN, it'll need a translator which is where the support code comes in
Since nVidia will have to use an extra step for Mantle, it has to process more data then AMD which means there's a hit in performance


----------



## Zakin (Dec 15, 2013)

Frag Maniac said:


> This just makes it all the more obvious you are not paying attention and narrow mindedly focused on one thing. I never argued that such an API can improve performance. Hell, I doubt most devs have. The lesson learned from Glide was not just focusing on performance but rather it being universally beneficial, meaning including Nvidia customers. No matter how many times that is said it just goes right over your head.
> 
> Only a fool studies the obvious and ignores the most pertinent details. It's as if someone needs to draw you a picture at this point.


If you haven't noticed, he notoriously replies to what he wants to read, he did it with my posts a few pages back. When I pointed this out he flat out ignored me, I'd just drop it and be happier forgetting about this honestly. It's incredibly rude the tone he has when he responds to people.


----------



## RoutedScripter (Dec 15, 2013)

Frag Maniac said:


> This just makes it all the more obvious you are not paying attention and narrow mindedly focused on one thing. I never argued that such an API can improve performance. Hell, I doubt most devs have. The lesson learned from Glide was not just focusing on performance but rather it being universally beneficial, meaning including Nvidia customers. No matter how many times that is said it just goes right over your head.
> 
> Only a fool studies the obvious and ignores the most pertinent details. It's as if someone needs to draw you a picture at this point.




It sounds that way it really does, I don't ignore details, I just maybe do admit I am kind of getting sick so It sounds like I'm closed minded, but because of your perception it's a spin you add on your conclusion that is the problem, and everything can be spinned out of context and in a certain way, just not getting some of the stuff right makes your story totally different.

And not everything, I'm particularly pointing to the jumping of conclusion and constant comparing to Glide, it's not 1998 anymore, it's totally differend landscape of the industry, there are developers that will use this thing to push the standards up and that will pull up the rest of the industry, the other part is the extra benefit of consoles being on GCN so developers would not be wasting time re-writting the optimization code, some of it yes, some converted but far easier than from scratch, that's what is the money&time saver right there.


I wouldn't be saying any of this if I wasn't sure.





HTC said:


> You just said what i highlighted, dude: that's what i was referring to as "translator".
> 
> Let me put it this way:
> 
> ...



No, i didn't meant that.

If Nvidia had to do that, makes no point using the new API.

It doesn't use GCN to speak with the game, GCN is an architecture, it uses Mantle to speak with the game. Mantle supports GCN currently and It may later support more GPUs because it's open standard and Nvidia can put their code straight beside AMD's


----------



## Frag_Maniac (Dec 15, 2013)

RuskiSnajper said:


> It sounds that way it really does, I don't ignore details, I just maybe do admit I am kind of getting sick so It sounds like I'm closed minded, but because of your perception it's a spin you add on your conclusion that is the problem, and everything can be spinned out of context and in a certain way, just not getting some of the stuff right makes your story totally different.
> 
> And not everything, I'm particularly pointing to the jumping of conclusion and constant comparing to Glide, it's not 1998 anymore, it's totally differend landscape of the industry, there are developers that will use this thing to push the standards up and that will pull up the rest of the industry, the other part is the extra benefit of consoles being on GCN so developers would not be wasting time re-writting the optimization code, some of it yes, some converted but far easier than from scratch, that's what is the money&time saver right there.
> 
> ...



But that's just it, there's really no way to be sure. Sure a lot of things have changed in the industry, but mostly technically. The one thing that hasn't changed is that AMD and Nvidia still take their own separate paths. This in reality is a discussion of potential, POTENTIAL mind you, tech sharing. Name ONE piece of tech as significant as Mantle that AMD and  Nvidia have shared that was created by either side? There's no previous model for how this will play out other than Glide, so obviously many are using it as an example. You can call it jumping to conclusions all you want, but blindly assuming Mantle will overcome the obstacles that shot down Glide is where the conclusions are being monumentally leapt to.

Look, as I've said before I am currently an AMD GPU owner. Of COURSE I want it to succeed. I really get sick of seeing DX11 games suffer from lack of optimization. It's why a LOT of devs don't even bother writing in such features in their games. I'm a realist though, I know a lot of Nvidia customers out there are not likely to accept this, it's obvious from the chat that exists already.

If you wanted to argue your points better you'd have examples to showcase WHY you feel we are jumping to conclusions, ones that show how AMD and Nvidia have shared tech successfully. No one can though because in reality the only tech they actually share is that which is neutral, such as the horribly inefficient Microsoft written API they already use.


----------



## RoutedScripter (Dec 15, 2013)

Look, I scour the web and all the mantle threads out there, almost everyone who compares Mantle with Glide in a negative way is wrong in most of their opinions on other things around mantle.

What examples to showcase, the first post of this thread has it all, I'm just talking what I pulled out of that stuff man, I don't have to make stuff to show you to know, I could make it and you'd understand, but I don't have time to do that anymore.

Because, all you guys on the forums out there, think that it's about YOUR opinion that these threads want to influence, I didn't post this thread to try to convince you as a primary goal, no, whatever your opinion is has no influence on reality, and is totally irrelevant, everyone in this thread can be negative, you won't change anything, but if you think you'll feel better after doing that, go ahead.

I am interested to explain to a certain point, but this is ridicolous, it just means, you're opinion is set, and that is a sign that I don't have to waste more time with you.

I can see some people having posts like "When I see the hard numbers, i'll care" .... well, who cares about that guy, he is a mainstream gamer, he is not interested in the topic as a tech thing to research it on his own,

Who do you think the people in forums mostly are, avreage gamers, they don't have a wide attention span, they are consumers, they consume what is feed into them, and if you don't bring it to their attention, I have done my research on Mantle from a personal interest, without any gaming interest for the moment, I will not play BF4, or Thief or whatever, I don't even have a mantle-GPU, and I definitely won't get a new GPU just to play a bugfest in terms of gamplay and balance.


---------------------------

Going back to those who bring up developer interest and the glide comparison, they don't know much about, so they psychologically default to negative, because they speculate on the "developer interest" and then their mind makes up excuses to fit that belief, and from a small speculation you end up 9 pages bringing up new arguments which are actually the stuff that fits your view

So I've realized that mostly it's all from the root of "developer interest"

That's why I'll link the most important stuff below, one article mentioned it a few days ago, but the real deal stuff is years old, I've already posted this on this thread, guess I just need to do it again.


http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/graphics/2011/03/16/farewell-to-directx/

http://www.polygon.com/2013/12/13/5170612/amd-mantle-interview


----------



## Frag_Maniac (Dec 15, 2013)

RuskiSnajper said:


> What examples to showcase, the first post of this thread has it all, I'm just talking what I pulled out of that stuff man, I don't have to make stuff to show you to know, I could make it and you'd understand, but I don't have time to do that anymore.



Your first post has nothing but AMD claims on performance, and that's all good if that were all that mattered, but it's not, and it's what you don't understand.

So what you "pulled out of that stuff" is nothing new, it's what most already know and won't mean beans unless the majority of devs in the industry don't see it as a problem with their Nvidia customers.

It's not just about performance on AMD spec, in fact if it's too good, it may be even harder for Mantle to succeed because that very well may mean an even bigger differential between performance of Nvidia and AMD hardware for gamers, and those games could very well sell poorly with Nvidia customers because of it.

You talk like you don't have the time and have more than once said you're not going to participate here anymore, but all you do is repeat the same copy and paste info that anyone can obtain, it's common knowledge, not research.

What you SHOULD be researching is what made Glide fail, instead of insisting it's a non issue, because you still don't seem to get that this is more about overall industry reception than performance gains on just AMD's side.


----------



## natr0n (Dec 15, 2013)

Is mantle getting released this month still?

I haven't read in here much.


----------



## RoutedScripter (Dec 15, 2013)

Frag Maniac said:


> Your first post has nothing but AMD claims on performance, and that's all good if that were all that mattered, but it's not, and it's what you don't understand.
> 
> So what you "pulled out of that stuff" is nothing new, it's what most already know and won't mean beans unless the majority of devs in the industry don't see it as a problem with their Nvidia customers.
> 
> It's not just about performance on AMD spec, in fact if it's too good, it may be even harder for Mantle to succeed because that very well may mean an even bigger differential between performance of Nvidia and AMD hardware for gamers, and those games could very well sell poorly with Nvidia customers because of it.



That might mean bad for nvidia, not mantle, you're twisting things. Also, I don't care about sideffects it will cause to others, it's coming, it will be great, it will uplift the industry into the correct path.

--------------------













natr0n said:


> Is mantle getting released this month still?
> 
> I haven't read in here much.



SDK is released early 2014, the only thing released this year is BF4 update, expect on xmas, probably not later, they're going home to holidays.


----------



## xenocide (Dec 16, 2013)

RuskiSnajper said:


> You and xenocide definitely didn't spend 5 hours watching all the presentations, slides, and even all the other research and knowledge about how much of a difference low-level APIs make.
> 
> A good experienced man can predict things, you are inexperienced, you need hard proof to be able to see that.  Just like the obamacare supporters, they had to see it written in their mail that they would have to pay 3 times as much, but we who were telling this would happen for months prior, because we done the research, they didn't take it seriously..


 
We didn't need to spend 5 hours watching AMD's PR team direct executives through talking points about a new product of theirs to be skeptical.  You know why?  History.  I've seen this kind of song and dance before, and it didn't work out so great then.  AMD has always overstated the benefits of their products; HD3xxx series, Bulldozer, Phenom I, etc.  We know how much difference low level API's can make, hell they are currently around, the problem is they don't succeed unless they are truly 100% open, and nobody has actually done that yet.  PhysX is a low level API, and it works great on Nvidia hardware, but terrible on AMD's cards.  It has pretty much floundered since Nvidia bought up Aegia because of this fact.  Lets look at past examples, Glide was great for 3dfx customers, but terrible for Nvidia, AMD, S3, and Matrox customers.

The basic fact is to have a low level API you need to be able to talk directly to the hardware, in the case of Mantle, apparently GCN.  If you cannot speak directly to the hardware you need to add abstraction layers to translate, this causes noticable performance loss.  Either AMD\Khronos will have to update Mantle to support Nvidia's architecture, or Nvidia will have to change their architecture to match GCN, and I guarantee that will *never* happen.  For Mantle to succeed it needs to be supportable by Intel and Nvidia, and I just don't see that being possible without those companies paying a fortune.

Even though it is not relevant I'll touch down on Obamacare--simply put, you're wrong.  Any increase in cost is actually saving people from financial ruin.  In previous years you could have health insurance plans that gave nearly 0 benefits and cost next to nothing, and because most people aren't diagnosed with serious ailments it gave the illusion of an effective plan.  Sure, at the lowest level (Bronze Plans) you're paying more, but your plan is orders of magnitude better, Insurance companies can no long drop you the second you get sick, and pre-existing conditions don't force you to pay 5x as much if you can even get insurance.  Cost will come down over time as healthy people start essentially fronting the cost for those who have serious health problems.



RuskiSnajper said:


> You can keep saying whatever you want, but it's only your perception, which obviously doesn't affect reality.


 
Don't worry, you're distorting enough reality for everyone here.



RuskiSnajper said:


> If Nvidia had to do that, makes no point using the new API.


 
When I read this I was so certain we had broken through, it was like a TPU rendition of _The Miracle Worker_, but then you just kind of shrugged it off and it was like _Requiem For A Dream_...



RuskiSnajper said:


> It doesn't use GCN to speak with the game, GCN is an architecture, it uses Mantle to speak with the game. Mantle supports GCN currently and It may later support more GPUs because it's open standard and Nvidia can put their code straight beside AMD's


 
The point of low-level API's is that they exist within the engine and communicate with hardware.  They aren't some kind of intermediary software that works wonders and just improves performance.  It's basically like this--The engine is programmed with the API within it, the API directs the Engine in how to directly communicate with the hardware, if the API does not recognize the hardware it has to translate it so the hardware can understand it which takes time and causes a loss in performance.  Engine->Mantle->Hardware.  If the API does not adequately communicate with the hardware the whole purpose of the API is lost.

Nvidia can't just plop a bunch of code in there either, and it's not easy to create a low-level API, it takes years of development.  There's also the fact that unless I'm missing something, adding tons of code to add support for various GPU architectures would bog down the API, just like it has with DirectX in the past.


----------



## Frag_Maniac (Dec 16, 2013)

RuskiSnajper said:


> That might mean bad for nvidia, not mantle, you're twisting things. Also, I don't care about sideffects it will cause to others, it's coming, it will be great, it will uplift the industry into the correct path.



You're still not getting it. No wonder you dismiss Glide's failure, because you still don't seem to get WHY it did. This is not just a matter of AMD customers selfishly enjoying better performance without giving a damn about what Nvidia customers think. Developers have to write for ALL those customers. If you, God forbid, were a developer, do you really think you could afford to not care what half your customers think? Try that attitude in ANY business and see how long it lasts.

I mean jeez put your thinking cap on if you have one. Anything "bad for Nvidia" does not stay bad for long because they have the money and the customer base to easily compete, whereas AMD have very little of the former to throw around. They simply can't easily afford to spend lots of time and money on projects only to have to extensively rework them or have them fail.

You may not realize it, but in a way Nvidia can potentially be in the driver's seat on this, because they can afford to sit back and let AMD be the guinea pig testing this API, and if it has success they'll probably just come up with their own, and they'll have WAY more money to spend on talented developers for it.

In reality you're only seeing AMD and DICE's slant on this, and that is but a tip of the iceberg. It's far from proven yet, because proof of concept with this type of tech means acceptance just as much as technical achievement, esp if that tech is one sided. Furthermore, being able to compete with any such future endeavors by the completion.

THAT'S what will define success with this project, not merely what AMD customers think. There's too many unknowns to be calling this an easy win for AMD. That is an extremely naive and overly optimistic viewpoint.


----------



## RoutedScripter (Dec 17, 2013)

*Update:*

"Secret" OXIDE Demo now Available!!!


----------



## xenocide (Dec 18, 2013)

And so it continues...

I'll check it out when I get home from work.


----------



## RoutedScripter (Dec 18, 2013)

Another, but just a bit older story:

http://gamingbolt.com/nitrous-engin...-gen-engines-utilize-eight-core-architectures


----------



## RejZoR (Dec 18, 2013)

@Frag Maniac
Low level and open generally don't go together...


----------



## xenocide (Dec 18, 2013)

RejZoR said:


> @Frag Maniac
> Low level and open generally don't go together...


 
That's because it requires high amounts of access to the hardware to implement, and different companies aren't exactly keen to share trade secrets...


----------



## RoutedScripter (Dec 18, 2013)

Another Update: but much older from 2nd december, I didn't notice: 

Johan interview with TomsHardware  (Mantle API on 7 and 8 page)

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/johan-andersson-battlefield-4-interview,3688-7.html


----------



## freeleacher (Dec 19, 2013)

*Have Battlefield 4′s Woes Delayed AMD’s Mantle Roll-Out?*

http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/news/video/have-battlefield-4s-woes-delayed-amds-mantle-roll-out/

Typical delay...


----------



## RoutedScripter (Dec 19, 2013)

Johan tells on twitter they have their own site for all things frostbite engine, I don't think it takes all of them to fix bugs that are mostly game logic stuff  , and core programmers usually never fix bugs unless it's it's a deep engine bug, that's all handled by support and balance teams.



Well ... here we go again https://twitter.com/repi/status/412728565101113344

More awesomeness every day ...


----------



## freeleacher (Dec 19, 2013)

awsome


----------



## The Von Matrices (Dec 19, 2013)

freeleacher said:


> *Have Battlefield 4′s Woes Delayed AMD’s Mantle Roll-Out?*
> 
> http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/news/video/have-battlefield-4s-woes-delayed-amds-mantle-roll-out/
> 
> Typical delay...



I never expected them to make the deadline.  Even disregarding previous technical issues, releasing a new product just before your development team goes on holiday vacation for one to two weeks seemed like a ridiculous proposition.   You need your team to be ready to fix launch day issues.


----------



## RoutedScripter (Dec 26, 2013)

Here's a more clear video of the diagnostic info from Oxide's Mantle Demo:










It's greately recommended to use 720p or download source.


----------



## Flogger23m (Dec 26, 2013)

freeleacher said:


> *Have Battlefield 4′s Woes Delayed AMD’s Mantle Roll-Out?*
> 
> http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/news/video/have-battlefield-4s-woes-delayed-amds-mantle-roll-out/
> 
> Typical delay...



Not surprising. DICE needs to patch up BF4 before they add in some new tech.


----------



## RoutedScripter (Dec 27, 2013)

Actually, better now they have more time to polish the first mantle release even more lol


----------



## RoutedScripter (Dec 29, 2013)




----------



## happita (Dec 29, 2013)

When the heck is the Mantle patch coming out for BF4? I feel sad that they are going to be dragging this out, what with all the hype they've given this thing. I just hope they deliver on what they've promised, if this thing is what AMD says it is then it will be crazy, but then again "if ifs and buts was candys and nuts, we'd all have a merry Christmas".


----------



## RoutedScripter (Dec 29, 2013)

I think even if release it now, I don't think i would take my time off the stuff I already scheduled non-PC related ... give me a rest for just a week


----------



## xenocide (Dec 30, 2013)

happita said:


> When the heck is the Mantle patch coming out for BF4? I feel sad that they are going to be dragging this out, what with all the hype they've given this thing. I just hope they deliver on what they've promised, if this thing is what AMD says it is then it will be crazy, but then again "if ifs and buts was candys and nuts, we'd all have a merry Christmas".


 
The longer it takes the more AMD's message is hurt.  They went to great lengths to point out the API is easy to use, but the first game to implement Mantle has continuously had problems and is now delaying the actual implementation patch.


----------



## caleb (Dec 30, 2013)

RuskiSnajper said:


> Here are the numbers
> 
> CPU boost;  ~600%
> GPU boost: 100%-300%
> ...



How is that showing, thats just a claim. Post some code fragment that utilizes real computing task 600% faster than normally done so we can run it on our machines. Haven't seen any of these in thread just hype from AMD slides that stretch out truth since radeon 8500LE.

I need some solid proof cause at my univ they thought me that reaching 80% in thread utilization is considered a pretty good result in scaling, when you post an improvement of 600% it sounds like bullshit out of the box or they made some sort of revolution on that field which I highly doubt.


----------



## NeoXF (Dec 30, 2013)

RuskiSnajper said:


> Here's a more clear video of the diagnostic info from Oxide's Mantle Demo:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Pretty impressive considering from start to finish it quadruples in AI and render workload, yet, the latency and render times stay the same. Not to mention the batch count itself, that goes up and down to huge numbers, way above anything we're seeing in current games.


----------



## Mussels (Dec 30, 2013)

theoneandonlymrk said:


> no one really sits in front of a 42-50" living room telly checking facebook and playing peggle(thats why we sit with pads/phones),, they have consoles and its consoles that they (steambox's)have to contend with in performance terms,at least imho and as good as open Gl is I think Steam need to climb aboard the HSA / Mantle train ,to optimise there bang for buck with Amd based steambox's.



shit, we're not meant to? i'm on a 46" here right now with facebook in the other tab...


(i like the idea of mantle. we need something to replace the mostly defunct openGL)

oh and as for some of the "just make it use more threads!" arguments, that doesnt work.

if you have two AI's with one thread each, they cant work together at all - they're independent. this slows things down as one thread has to wait for the other to finish before it can continue, resulting in stalls, or vastly increased overheads.

this is why multithreading continues at a slow pace, its not simple to scale.


----------



## kn00tcn (Dec 30, 2013)

caleb said:


> How is that showing, thats just a claim. Post some code fragment that utilizes real computing task 600% faster than normally done so we can run it on our machines. Haven't seen any of these in thread just hype from AMD slides that stretch out truth since radeon 8500LE.
> 
> I need some solid proof cause at my univ they thought me that reaching 80% in thread utilization is considered a pretty good result in scaling, when you post an improvement of 600% it sounds like bullshit out of the box or they made some sort of revolution on that field which I highly doubt.



do you not realize how much wasted cpu power is used for directx & opengl? this has been talked about for years, the most obvious example being draw calls

in addition, the dev has more control over how to deal with their data instead of relying on the driver or OS to do it for them, that's what efficiency is... nobody knows what they want to do or what the game engine is doing other than the dev

there are some slides from the star citizen devs that have the miliseconds laid out, it is a revolution in the sense of doing things very differently than normal (for pc that is, it's similar to consoles, that's why 360/ps3 run what they run at mostly 720p 30fps, you cant run the pc versions of those very games on the equivalent x1900 or 7900 at the same settings)

not sure if this was posted earlier in the thread, http://www.kitguru.net/components/g...check-out-the-first-amd-mantle-gameplay-demo/



> Once the demo gets going it looks very pretty, but nothing too special. When they zoom out however and you realise the engine is rendering thousands of little ships, alongside some large capital space craft all firing their own weaponry at a very high level of detail, it turns into something very impressive. On top of that, the frame rate is constantly well over 200 and this is all before any GPU optimisation. It’s speculated that the scene should easily be able to handle 300 FPS after tweaking.
> One large carrier has over 200 individual missile tubes which can target different enemies, leading to upwards of 25,000 individual objects in any one scene at one time. That’s nothing though, after optimisations, the Oxide spokesperson reckons they can squeeze in 100,000 objects and make it playable on most AMD hardware.
> The demo was run on an FX8350 and a “hawaii board,” so one of the new 290x boards.



now there's no need to preach about herp derp nvidia is over or anything, it's just another tool, an experiment, few titles will need to utilize it, let's just see how it translates to a complex game & if it really boosts low end or APUs


----------



## Steevo (Dec 30, 2013)

Frag Maniac said:


> Quite frankly I'm not sure I'll buy into O Rift either, and not just out of resistance to accept any implied marketing "hypnotism". I'm seriously concerned about long term effects on vision, attention span, etc. Just LCD displays themselves are bad enough long term on eyesight, and OLED/PLED has yet to prove to have a lifespan adequate enough for anything but small devices that people don't keep very long (cell phones, etc).
> 
> As far as Mantle's projected performance boost, one thing that concerns me is most only talk in terms of added frames per second, but we're seeing an increasing number of games that don't play smoothly even if you're getting good frame rates.  I think both AMD and Nvidia need to focus more on frame pacing before they go trying to boost performance, and it's not just an issue with Crossfire and SLI. Single GPU performance is often crippled by erratic frame rate fluctuation too.


The issues with frame pacing all start with the number of calls made and the CPU's ability to setup and hand off that data, in short all the spiky lag seen is an issue with the underpinning of DX. Recent tests show the 2XX series GPU's as lag free as Nvidia, and now both are at the mercy of what the dev and DX are doing. We can only hope Mantle is better tha nall he other vaporware that ATI/AMD have given us in the past that was well thought out but poorly implemented, then never supported, or supported with a heft fee, but only works if you hold your finger up this way but not that, left foot in, right foot flat on the floor, head cocked, nose up, eyes closed and pray.


----------



## The Von Matrices (Dec 31, 2013)

The delay is official now.  It only took AMD until there was one day remaining in order to actually announce it.

Pick your favorite source:
https://news.google.com/news?ncl=d9QPbZ5MjqhUX0MHrP8HblEV0UMLM&q=amd mantle delayed&lr=English&hl=en&sa=X&ei=4VTCUrCxLLSusASK9YG4DQ&ved=0CC8QqgIwAA


----------



## Steevo (Dec 31, 2013)

The Von Matrices said:


> The delay is official now.  It only took AMD until there was one day remaining in order to actually announce it.
> 
> Pick your favorite source:
> https://news.google.com/news?ncl=d9QPbZ5MjqhUX0MHrP8HblEV0UMLM&q=amd mantle delayed&lr=English&hl=en&sa=X&ei=4VTCUrCxLLSusASK9YG4DQ&ved=0CC8QqgIwAA


So EA fucking up a game with many issues and their lack of desire to associate with the issues is somehow a bad on them? We could blame AMD for this, or we could say that EA released a rushed to market for the holiday shopping season turd and now has to clean that shithouse before the new tenant can move in.


----------



## The Von Matrices (Dec 31, 2013)

Steevo said:


> So EA fucking up a game with many issues and their lack of desire to associate with the issues is somehow a bad on them? We could blame AMD for this, or we could say that EA released a rushed to market for the holiday shopping season turd and now has to clean that shithouse before the new tenant can move in.



It clearly is a mutual arrangement.  EA is not innocent, but it's hard to not believe that integrating Mantle support took time away from the developers working on the initial release (DirectX) version of the game.  AMD had to have known of EA's history of releasing games that need multiple patches before working properly.  AMD made the logical choice to delay, but a better choice would be to not announce a date in the first place.  I firmly believe that AMD was pressured into announcing a release date months ago because without a release date Mantle would be considered vaporware (moreso that it is even now) and developers would be discouraged that there were no commitments to games using it.

You have to wonder if EA set the Battlefield 4 release date of late 2013 before AMD chose to partner to integrate Mantle, and instead of focusing all developers on the initial release and then Mantle later, the developers were split between two projects causing the intitial release to be a mess and the Mantle update to be delayed.


----------



## RoutedScripter (Dec 31, 2013)

caleb said:


> How is that showing, thats just a claim. Post some code fragment that utilizes real computing task 600% faster than normally done so we can run it on our machines. Haven't seen any of these in thread just hype from AMD slides that stretch out truth since radeon 8500LE.
> 
> I need some solid proof cause at my univ they thought me that reaching 80% in thread utilization is considered a pretty good result in scaling, when you post an improvement of 600% it sounds like bullshit out of the box or they made some sort of revolution on that field which I highly doubt.




Let's bookmark this and check back how accurate I was 

More Cores More CPU boost, ofcourse that 600% probably doesn't apply to quad core and below.


----------



## the54thvoid (Dec 31, 2013)

Genuine question?

Mantle is for Radeon GCN GPU's (going on their own info for now) but it talks about far greater use of the CPU, so....

Even if you have a non Radeon or even non GCN Radeon, will Mantle still make better use of the CPU?  Does this also refer to AMD CPU's or Intel as well, i.e. if I have a GCN card and Intel CPU does it still utilise the Intel CPU to it's fullest extent or is it primarily focused on AMD hardware?

Genuine question looking for genuine answer.  Truth is, it needs to be very easily adapted to Nvidia and Intel or else it will just be a very good gimmick for GCN owners running Mantle coded games.  It can't work long term unless these guys either (a) get in on it, or (b) they both go bust and we only have AMD left.


----------



## Mussels (Dec 31, 2013)

the54thvoid said:


> Genuine question?
> 
> Mantle is for Radeon GCN GPU's (going on their own info for now) but it talks about far greater use of the CPU, so....
> 
> ...



the entire point is less CPU usage - so if your high end super fast CPU was fast enough, then its going to be under utilised. this isnt about doing more with the same - its about doing the same with less.


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Dec 31, 2013)

the54thvoid said:


> Genuine question?
> 
> Mantle is for Radeon GCN GPU's (going on their own info for now) but it talks about far greater use of the CPU, so....
> 
> ...


It is GCN only initially at least and it is not cpu brand specific, intel cpu's wont have any dissadvantage over amd, at least initially.
and less cpu use is a coincidence of the api not the sole reason or benefit of it, due to mantle's use the cpu will no longer be the bottleneck holding gpu's back(the gpu can do things without the cpu being involved in every little bit ,hence less load), the bottleneck will be something else then is all ,,likely memory or storage or busses.


----------



## xenocide (Jan 1, 2014)

the54thvoid said:


> Genuine question looking for genuine answer.  Truth is, it needs to be very easily adapted to Nvidia and Intel or else it will just be a very good gimmick for GCN owners running Mantle coded games.  It can't work long term unless these guys either (a) get in on it, or (b) they both go bust and we only have AMD left.


 
That's my largest concern.  If AMD makes developers and\or manufacturers jump through hoops to implement Mantle (or worse, make them pay) it will never succeed.


----------



## RoutedScripter (Jan 2, 2014)

Mussels said:


> this isnt about doing more with the same - its about doing the same with less.



Only in that case.

But, games were built around the limitations, that's why the speedboost in updated, games designed for mantle will shake the industry with what you call "more".

However some existing games even when designed with Mantle, the genre they're using does not allow to take all that power and turn it into units-on-screen and other stuff because it would not be the the same sub-genre anymore or a spinnoff. In those cases the performance difference will be very visible if there would be a DX or OGL render mode also available, what's more, the  minimal requirements would be significantly lower than what would be with DX or OGL version. 

For the genres that don't yet exist or have been dead since the 90', if those are designed with pushing the boundaries of AI, physics, visuals, they are not going to have this "boost" effect obviously. 

So beware what "mantle reviews" you try, they aren't reviewing mantle API it self which continues to improve and is not a fixed thing so it cannot be reviewed ** , they're reviewing the *mantle code of a specific game* or in other words the* effort that a developer put into optimizing the mantle code for that game.* Just as with DX games, all the CPU and GPU benchmarks weren't benchmarking the hardware, they were benchmarking the DX API along with driver, so much of the optimization and also stability code residing in the driver basically made all the hardware wars technically invalid, it was and is all a driver war, there was no GPU or CPU war, it's just percieved that way.

Ofcourse practically it can be labeled as "hardware benchmarking" since DX was the only thing used (OGL doesn't even count, a few AAA pushing-the-limits games here and there) , but it's not a valid technical test at all.

** (eg. pre-release game reviews are usually invalid since day 1 patches became popular, i don't read nor care about any mainstream gaming site)


----------



## HD64G (Jan 2, 2014)

^ I agree.

Doing the same with less is Phase 1 of mantle implementation. Phase 2 is doing more with the same. We all saw it clearly in the tech  space demo. And Phase 2 is just a setting in the game away to have a whole diffirent world to play if a game is optimised for mantle from the beginning. So, BF4 is Phase 1, but the coming next games might easily have Phase 2 implemented.


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Jan 2, 2014)

So many people think THIS TIME will be different. THIS TIME I can feel it!


----------



## HD64G (Jan 2, 2014)

Nobody _thinks_ it will be diffirent. *It is a fact that mantle IS a game changer non-API bridge between game, GPU and CPU*. It is by far obvious in any demo and interview we watched. *Speed and scale of implementation is to be seen. Not Mantle's productivity.* Only ignorants or AMD-haters or console-haters can ignore the public known facts and proofs.


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Jan 2, 2014)

HD64G said:


> Nobody _thinks_ it will be diffirent. *It is a fact that mantle IS a game changer non-API bridge between game, GPU and CPU*. It is by far obvious in any demo and interview we watched. *Speed and scale of implementation is to be seen. Not Mantle's productivity.* Only ignorants or AMD-haters or console-haters can ignore the public known facts and proofs.



Meats not meat till its in the pan.


----------



## the54thvoid (Jan 2, 2014)

HD64G said:


> Nobody _thinks_ it will be diffirent. *It is a fact that mantle IS a game changer non-API bridge between game, GPU and CPU*. It is by far obvious in any demo and interview we watched. *Speed and scale of implementation is to be seen. Not Mantle's productivity.* Only ignorants or AMD-haters or console-haters can ignore the public known facts and proofs.



Voice of reason required again.  I use an Nvidia card (as do 3 or 4 other of the 5 regular guys I play BF4 with).  It isn't going to be a game changer for me or them, is it?  Am I going to abandon my gfx card (which is plenty fast for me now) to join AMD?  No, of course not (though I am still waiting on a R290X Lightning to surface ).  There is no doubt whatsoever Mantle will be excellent for the owners of GCN cards but because of it's specificity - it cannot be a game changer unless the majority co-opt into it.
It doesn't matter the performance increase it brings because it is not going to bring it to the majority of gamers.  Again it's another 'buy in' development.  For this special super dooper thing to work - you need to own a GCN card.  It's tha same reason G-Sync will be doomed to be niche - it requires extra investment AND potentially a gfx card purchase.   How many 290(X) owners will buy a G-sync monitor and a new Kepler gfx card? Probably less than the small amount that will swap to AMD from Nvidia for Mantle.

I like the idea of Mantle but it cannot be implemented to be a game changing development in a market that is so very fractured.  Mantle absolutely requires more than AMD for it to work.  As long as Microsoft want to maintain DX11.x and Nvidia have such a large share of discrete cards, Mantle won't be a game changer.  It is not ignorant (nor worse, to be a Hater) to say what I am saying.  I *AM* saying Mantle should be *superb* for the games it is coded with and the cards that can play it but you really need to appreciate the market clout Microsoft and Nvidia have in the industry.  If Mantle proves a threat, rest assured Nvidia will do something about it (they are after all vicious corporate bastards ). 

FTR, I think AMD and Nvidia should talk about it at the coding level.  I think as folk have suggested, once it is matured it should be handed over to the Khronos(?) group to oversee in an open, non proprietary way.  I just don't see a company like Nvidia (that everyone loves to hate on a business level) will let Mantle roll over their perceived superior 'performance' in GPU's.  All Nvidia have to do is make more investment in AAA games (AC3 & 4 and Starcraft(?), I think are good examples) which _cripple_ AMD hardware.

Mantle is good, yes, no doubts, very good for GCN.  But it does not have a very straight forward or easy future.  It can only truly be a game changer if Nvidia (and Microsoft) let it.  To be fair, it is in AMD's favour to approach Nvidia and propose something to make it work out.  If Nvidia are given enough tech knowledge to work with Mantle then they can help out with the development costs for Mantle coding in games.  I read that it costs an extra 10% to code for it in development?  That's a lot for AMD to spend on more and more games.  If Nvidia were co-opted into it, they could then share that 'sponsorship' cost in games.  That way Nvidia get the tools for free and pay for the game development directly and AMD reduce Mantle coding costs on their side.  Very naive but so is much of the Mantle discussion.


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Jan 2, 2014)

I'm gonna GLIDE over to a new thread for now. In a month or so Ill come back and check things out.


----------



## HTC (Jan 2, 2014)

Mussels said:


> the entire point is less CPU usage - so if your high end super fast CPU was fast enough, then its going to be under utilised. this isnt about doing more with the same - its about doing the same with less.



I agree.

Personally, they should try and make it do *exactly* what the DX and OpenGL versions do *so that we can see the difference with and without Mantle *and *only then* aim for better graphics or doing something else that's not possible with current APIs.

When they get Mantle working the difference should be noticeably visible and this will make this API the future but, even then, only when nVidia adopts it will it really take off. It doesn't matter how good it turns out to be: without wide adoption, it's future is doomed.


----------



## HD64G (Jan 2, 2014)

the54thvoid said:


> Voice of reason required again.  I use an Nvidia card (as do 3 or 4 other of the 5 regular guys I play BF4 with).  It isn't going to be a game changer for me or them, is it?  Am I going to abandon my gfx card (which is plenty fast for me now) to join AMD?  No, of course not (though I am still waiting on a R290X Lightning to surface ).  There is no doubt whatsoever Mantle will be excellent for the owners of GCN cards but because of it's specificity - it cannot be a game changer unless the majority co-opt into it.
> It doesn't matter the performance increase it brings because it is not going to bring it to the majority of gamers.  Again it's another 'buy in' development.  For this special super dooper thing to work - you need to own a GCN card.  It's tha same reason G-Sync will be doomed to be niche - it requires extra investment AND potentially a gfx card purchase.   How many 290(X) owners will buy a G-sync monitor and a new Kepler gfx card? Probably less than the small amount that will swap to AMD from Nvidia for Mantle.
> 
> I like the idea of Mantle but it cannot be implemented to be a game changing development in a market that is so very fractured.  Mantle absolutely requires more than AMD for it to work.  As long as Microsoft want to maintain DX11.x and Nvidia have such a large share of discrete cards, Mantle won't be a game changer.  It is not ignorant (nor worse, to be a Hater) to say what I am saying.  I *AM* saying Mantle should be *superb* for the games it is coded with and the cards that can play it but you really need to appreciate the market clout Microsoft and Nvidia have in the industry.  If Mantle proves a threat, rest assured Nvidia will do something about it (they are after all vicious corporate bastards ).
> ...



"Voice of reason required again" you said. Do you mean not to repeat what the post above contains without needing to? So, you wrote all this just to repeat basicly with extensive analysis just what I already said: *Speed and scale of implementation is to be seen. Not Mantle's productivity.*

Where is your crusial point of argue with this? 

And yes, it is game changer, because it makes things better in games using less resources and allowing developers to use them otherwise and in more exciting features.. How quickly are we going to use it and how much or quickly per game doesn't make the prospect of Mantle less exciting or the meaning of it less important for gamers and devs.


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Jan 2, 2014)

HD64G said:


> "Voice of reason required again" you said. Do you mean not to repeat what the post above contains without needing to? So, you wrote all this just to repeat basicly with extensive analysis just what I already said: *Speed and scale of implementation is to be seen. Not Mantle's productivity.*
> 
> Where is your crusial point of argue with this?
> 
> And yes, it is game changer, because it makes things better in games using less resources and allowing developers to use them otherwise and in more exciting features.. How quickly are we going to use it and how much or quickly per game doesn't make the prospect of Mantle less exciting or the meaning of it less important for gamers and devs.


Its vaporware until its adopted by everyone. It could print money and still fail if it isn't adopted by the ENTIRE industry. PhysX is awesome too but is dying a slow death. Why? Because no one wants to pay for it.


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Jan 2, 2014)

TheMailMan78 said:


> Its vaporware until its adopted by everyone. It could print money and still fail if it isn't adopted by the ENTIRE industry. PhysX is awesome too but is dying a slow death. Why? Because no one wants to pay for it.


they are not the same though are they, dev's have to pay to use physx(likely per feature i gather from the physx games ive tried(them all)) whereas mantle is not licensed, and no one and certainly not you has called physx a failure as it has realistically bumped Nvidia's coffers as well as creating the gpgpu world.
plus matnle is different again because it is'nt soley concerned with a single aspect of games and apps like physx(just for physics) ,instead its the whole Api and rendering engine that the tech is aimed at.

Killer app's are what decide what will or wont work as a technical exorcise,, and that  i think we all can agree on is what's going to decide mantle's fate, 
though i dont think the entire industry needs to switch to it for it to be a success, because two years from now for eg in an Amd dreamy future they might well be able to sell OEM built cheap home systems that play games on par with consoles where'as intel wont be able to compete on that footing and nvidia's scarcely even in this game.
and if customer A can get 60fps Cod bashing going on for 500 notes with Amd or 700 notes with an intel/nvidia system who is going to get those sales, enthusiasts dont count towards that statement either as its the 98% of regular buyer's im talking about.


----------



## erocker (Jan 2, 2014)

To me... It doesn't exist for another couple weeks until they show it at CES. 


TheMailMan78 said:


> Its vaporware until its adopted by everyone. It could print money and still fail if it isn't adopted by the ENTIRE industry. PhysX is awesome too but is dying a slow death. Why? Because no one wants to pay for it.


I agree. For now it is vaporware. 

PhysX analogy doesn't really work as no one will have to pay AMD to use mantle... They just need to pay their driver teams to get it working.


----------



## HD64G (Jan 2, 2014)

Mantle's big diffirences to PhysX.

1) As erocker said, game devs paid nVidia to use it.
2) PhysX need much power from GPU (a pricy one in other words) or a secondary one to handle just physx. Mantle needs any 77X0 or above GPU to use it making CPU power less important. Even Kaveri APUs will utilize it no matter the model and the price.
3) While PhysX was a close protocol, Mantle isn't. It just works perfectly for CGN. If nVidia dedicate people to utilise it it will work.
4) Mantle's career begins by Frostbyte and Crytek engines, the best game engine of our gen. So, popularity and spreading to game devs is already guaranteed. Only game devs that are very low in personnel, time or funded from the "green" team might not be interested at the moment.

So, why not all of us be a little more patient? We don't have to lose anything after all. It is a win-win occassion this with Mantle.


----------



## phanbuey (Jan 2, 2014)

its a cool API, and a cool idea... I don't think it will be adopted widely, but I hope I'm wrong.  Glide had quake, unreal, and a bunch of engines still didn't help.


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Jan 2, 2014)

phanbuey said:


> its a cool API, and a cool idea... I don't think it will be adopted widely, but I hope I'm wrong.  Glide had quake, unreal, and a bunch of engines still didn't help.



I already mentioned GLIDE as did a few other people. It doesn't fit the narrative of OMG MANTEL WILL SAVE PC GAMING! So we ignore such things.

As I said "Meats not meat till its in the pan."


----------



## RoutedScripter (Jan 3, 2014)

Everyone with the Glide Card pulls out the negative side of it.


----------



## crazyeyesreaper (Jan 3, 2014)

And yet lets face it nothing using Mantle has released anything that was coming has been delayed. Even then looking at Steam hardware survey as a cross section only 31.35% are AMD gpus of that 31.35% only 5.44% are GCN ready If we extrapolate the data and include 290 and 290x along with APUs there is maybe 7% of the Steams users can utilize GCN.

so only 22% if I did the math right of AMD's market share is capable of mantle. of which only around 5% can actually utilize it in a meaningful way.

Mantle right now is a bust its a gimmick it has the ability to be adopted utilized and improved going forward. Much like how DX had growing pains. Regardless it won't be the market changing amazing API that becomes a sensation at the drop of a hat. It will be years before Mantle hits its stride. If it survives the growing pains awesome. if not oh well. Regardless hardware will continue to move forward. As it stands though from what I remember Mantle required Double Floating point precision. When looking at the Kepler lineup only the GeForce Titan offers that ability. So currently the only Nvidia gpu that has the ability support Mantle is Titan.  Maxwell may in fact change that but guess we will see.  Regardless Mantle is still a no show with one demo. Sadly that demo does not show an appreciable comparison to DX or Open GL. As such I agree with erocker its vaporware. We know its in the works it might eventually get here but its not here we can't use it. 

Right now AMD's Mantle API has LESS appeal than Nvidia's PhysX.    Mantle has the ability to penetrate up to 7% of the market currently. PhysX in a hardware sense as around 25-35% of the market is capable of utilizing it on the GPU. Granted AMD's Mantle is free vs PhysX costing money. The point remains. Until Nvidia can utilize the API Mantle will remain a second fiddle feature. Games will still be made with Direct X in mind first Mantle a distant second. Hell if Open GL catches on with Steam OS then Mantle will take a third seat. 

Mantle does not open up new markets.  Steam OS does.  Mantle doesn't support Linux currently. Overall AMD has a long way to go with their API.


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Jan 3, 2014)

crazyeyesreaper said:


> And yet lets face it nothing using Mantle has released anything that was coming has been delayed. Even then looking at Steam hardware survey as a cross section only 31.35% are AMD gpus of that 31.35% only 5.44% are GCN ready If we extrapolate the data and include 290 and 290x along with APUs there is maybe 7% of the Steams users can utilize GCN.
> 
> so only 22% if I did the math right of AMD's market share is capable of mantle. of which only around 5% can actually utilize it in a meaningful way.
> 
> ...




A lot of that be opinion

in fact 90%  of that is opinion but your chatting absolutes agian.

you must be in the know eh, no of course your not, have you tried steam-ing OS(doubtfull), i have and i have also tried physx so i can easily have an opinion on them as could you but mantle, well we can have an opinion and can discuss it but dont spout shit like you know it all as fact it's just annoying(<your point per haps) and in truth you dont know how mantle will roll or its adoption or use, speculate fine but dont get all fact'y with vague ass indirect facts and opinion.


----------



## crazyeyesreaper (Jan 3, 2014)

No reason for you to be a complete dick! But then when it comes to anything GPU related on TPU it always resorts to this kind of behavior. It doesn't take a genius to realize GCN is all that is supported right now and its market share is minimal. And I do in fact know a bit more about API support than the average jackass having attended college for a Bachelors degree in Computer Animation and Game Design.  Fact is Mantle has amazing potential. But everyone in here acts like it will immediately breathe new life into games offering instant performance boosts etc. Thats not how things will play out. Direct X is pretty much FORCED on developers and it took 5 years to move away from DX9 with DX10 being a failure and DX11 finally gaining traction. Yet somehow with decades of API introductions and failures. Of hardware launches and software updates. People still seem to expect miracles. 

Once Mantle gains support from the Nvidia and can be ported to Linux it can truly thrive. It opens the door to new possibilities. Being stuck with GCN only at this time on a broken AAA game and on Windows only limits its ability to take hold. And considering a huge portion of Mantle is based on AMD's Stream technology which they already abandoned once. Well It takes more than slides a bit of marketing and a single Demo no one else has access to to win me over. As a Tech Demo is not a game lol.


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Jan 3, 2014)

crazyeyesreaper said:


> No reason for you to be a complete dick! But then when it comes to anything GPU related on TPU it always resorts to this kind of behavior. It doesn't take a genius to realize GCN is all that is supported right now and its market share is minimal. And I do in fact know a bit more about API support than the average jackass having gone attended college for a Bachelors degree in Computer Animation and Game Design.  Fact is Mantle has amazing potential. But everyone in here acts like it will immediately breathe new life into games offering instant performance boosts etc. Thats not how things will play out. Direct X is pretty much FORCED on developers and it took 5 years to move away from DX9 with DX10 being a failure and DX11 finally gaining traction. Yet somehow with decades of API introductions and failures. Of hardware launches and software updates. People still seem to expect miracles.




Not everyone is expecting miracles, im certainly not after trying steam OS with 20 games and no sound but hey ,thats no reason to be spouting mega neg is it ,hence im not on here bemoaning steam OS ,despite being able to prove that point, I will keep trying it as its beta now anyway and deserves fair chance to impress ,as does mantle.

Your the one going over the top, In the neg direction.

what the fecks wrong with optimism anyway ,you dont NEED to piss on others dreams even if they are a bit diluded


----------



## crazyeyesreaper (Jan 3, 2014)

How am I being negative. I am being realistic.

fact Steam hardware survey is a useful way to analzye GPU and CPU adoption
Fact AMD hardware that supports Mantle is around 7% of the market as a whole.
Fact of that 7% a good deal of it are APUs which even with better CPU performance are still to weak on the GPU to be meaningful for another few years.
Fact Nvidia still dominates AMD in GPU market share. 50% to 30%

I am not bemoaning Mantle. I actually Applaud AMD for being brave enough to pursue it. However the fact is  long term success depends on getting more HARDWARE support.   if Nvidia and AMD are 80% of the PC market in terms of Steam users. and of that 80% only 7% can use Mantle thats not good for adoption.

Mantle needs a greater degree of Industry adoption. If that happens it will be a massive success.  I hope it does happen as Direct X is truly a mess. Open GL while viable is also stagnant just copying what Direct X does but with a bit more freedom. Mantle being able to interface with GPUs at a lower level is much needed. But again being based on a failed technology that AMD couldn't gain traction with in a market that is dominated by a Rival. This isnt red vs green. The simple point here is most people won't know what mantle is how it helps or why its important. I mean hell most people around where I live barely even know AMD is a viable alternative. It takes more than a fancy marketing campaign and a few salivating fans to make this work. I hope Mantle succeeds. An open API is a great idea, but considering the failure that is Khronos and their Open GL stewardship along with the Industry still sticking to defacto market leaders and proprietary APIs. It will take more than a few developers and promises to get widespread adoption of Mantle.

As for Steam OS I agree its a mess right now. Then again Valve straight up ADMITS its a mess and basically said only Linux gurus should mess with it. At least they are honest about it before they released it.


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Jan 3, 2014)

afaik imho Mantle is one point on a pyramid your simply looking in an erelivant hardware direction is all(largely opinion), nvidia's adoption of mantel is also erelivant imho, mantle as an Api could eventually bridge Pcs - consoles - Iot - set top boxes - handhelds - dishwashers. 

An api though aimed at games does not have to isolate itself just to that , and as Amd have eluded to imho a few other Gpu manufaturers will try to get mantel running on their chips just not intel or nvidia atm
they plan to make, many an Soc in the future, and they might all or a large amount be mantel capable in principle any bit helps and its gimick lovein pc tweakers that DO want to try some new fangled whatsit thats faster or better like physx , I set the steam box up with specific hardware for windows gameing with full correct physx after all to keep giving it a chance to impress too, same with steam os which i still have no sound on, games run well though 

I respect your not daft btw , realistic possibly,,, but the market is flexible and time will tell what happens with this mantle vapour malarky


----------



## crazyeyesreaper (Jan 4, 2014)

And thats exactly my point ^ "I respect your not daft btw , realistic possibly,,, but the market is flexible and *time will tell what happens with this mantle vapour malarky*" But in the mean time why hype it up to be the greatest thing ever when theres nothing to actually back it up? A single demo no one else has full access to is nice but it doesnt really inspire confidence think of it like Nvidia's head demo that showed skin pores sub surface scattering of light etc it looked REALLY pretty but it wasnt for another 2-3 years after that that games started pushing that and even so they have not hit that same level yet.

I have no doubt in my mind that Mantle is a fantastic API.
I have no doubt that its beneficial in many ways

But as we all know just because its beneficial doesnt mean it gets adopted in the PC industry lol. Intel compiler comes to mind it no longer purposefully hamstrings AMD cpu performance but it doesnt have optimizations for AMD or VIA etc either.

I hope Mantle succeeds I just don't see it being viable until the big three support it.  AMD / Intel / Nvidia when all three support it PCs / Tablets / Smartphones / Future consoles will see a much more fluid development process. Currently though its just empty promises with lots of Hype.

All we have to do is look back at AMD hype to realize why blindly hailing this as the greatest thing since sliced bread is a bad idea.
Hype its benefits to much and fails to meet expectations = people cry foul
Hype it up and it never gains traction = people get pissy

All i have to do is look back at HD2900 series  6970 stock cooler issues R9 290x cooler and performance issues Bulldozers failure to deliver

Hell the fact AMD's newest APUs still only have the performance on a pure CPU level as the Athlon x2 6000 + thats right on a per core basis the A4 series CPUs on the desktop are only on par with the ancient Athlon X2 chips lol. The GPU is of course far better than anything from the Era but you get my point low end hardware has a long ways to go Mantle isnt a savior for that. It just means you could pair a 7870 to an A4 and it wont suck as bad lol.

Hype is a dangerous thing and at this point Mantle is saturated with it. I am not saying it cant or wont be great but people need to check themselves before they ride the Hype train over the proverbial cliff is all 

Mantle is not going to be a Day one Game one fix for these issues it takes time and support.  The sooner AMD gets hardware vendors on board namely Nvidia / Intel = the faster Mantle can be adopted. With faster adoption comes added benefits, greater market penetration and consumers get to enjoy what it offers sooner as well. No one is gonna drop their GTX 780 or 780 Ti etc to grab a 290x just for Mantle in a buggy BF4. Its unlikely they will do so any time soon especially if they are an average consumer that keeps there PC for a few years. As such time will tell but with that said people should be clamoring for Nvidia and Intel to support it. Rather than bitching on how awesome or lackluster it will be.


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Jan 4, 2014)

we dissagree go figur


----------



## MxPhenom 216 (Jan 4, 2014)

There will be no Mantle.


----------



## KingPing (Jan 4, 2014)

What about the devs, until everybody has a Mantle capable card (many people still don't have a DX11 capable card) developing for Mantle will increase the cost and effort from the studios, specially small ones, 10% is pretty big for a small dev. They will have to develop for at least DX and Mantle, IMO it's a better bet to start developing for OpenGL and Linux, Steam OS.


----------



## Mussels (Jan 4, 2014)

people are being so ridiculous.


3D glass support gets added into games, and its got a helluva lot less market share than AMD does for their GPU's.

same goes for EAX, 5.1 sound and many other technologies. (oh no directX 9 cards outnumber directX11 cards, better stick with 9)
oh no its not fucking nvidia, well stop crying. its got a LOT larger userbase than many other features that get succesfully implemented into games.


----------



## RoutedScripter (Jan 4, 2014)

Some people are looking at perception of others (public, industry ..) and forming their own opinion with and based on their existing perception of the information at hand.

It's a public percpetion that makes Physx currently more of a "hot feature". It's not even the same thing so why does it even get mentioned as a comparision? That is an invalid comparison, the 2 things are not of same type.

But then people state facts which are only valid right now in this moment, doesn't make any sense since when the reality of mantle get's shown to an extent it breaks the public perception

Some people like myself just understand and did a lot of research so just being closer to that reality that already is there, nothing will change in basics of mantle, just perception will change of living people, but ofcourse later they will say "_omg mantle looks great now_", the point is I know that already, I won't be surprised. And it doesn't _look great now_, it's your perception that has changed because of the new info introduced, it was great all the time. That's just clearing out this common context mismatch that happens many times in these kind of discussion (generally speaking, for all the web)

But people seem to talk and discuss about how they feel currently in this moment, with the given information, some of that being a perception of the information, and then they obviously have to pull out the "time will tell" card, ofcourse they say that because they don't really have the capacity to have a educated prediction, but that's not all, this is also a form of perception-based negative statement that somehow the fate is still to be decided, like it's something totally unknown, but just because the current viewer's perception is such, doesn't mean the reality will change, that is an opinion-based discussion which I think it's totally irrelevant and I usually don't discuss it, because I do objective analysis. The data shows this thing is a semi-revolution, and while the details are uncertain and in those cases time will tell how fast it gets adopted and how much it gets adopted, but that's not really the goal of mantle, many people speak about irrelevant things mantle is not trying to achieve, ofcourse it's good to have it used by all GPU vendors and as many developers, but this is a consumer-type of perception based "success".

The problem is, many people up their own standards for when to call it a success or failure based on their personal opinion or in other words the shaky perception of the information that formed the opinion.
That usually ends up cases where people say it's a failute just because the thing was not used on their platform or one of their favourite franchises, these kind of discussions have zero credibility and should be dismissed.


It's a mathematical certainty that mantle will be a success. It is however a perception of the public that will make up their own mind, largely based on their own expecations which mantle probably wasn't set out to do or designed for. First of all, mantle is not a replacement. Many people keep saying how "time will tell" if mantle makes it on Nvidia and Linux and all the rest, it doesn't have to, all the people talking about market share, it's all irrelevant, if mantle uses

If Mantle is not used as much, it doesn't make it a failure. It only makes the industry a failure to use it. The thing if used will work and it will make what it claims to do, to the ease of development, low level, application control etc.

So people will try to paint something a failure, but while it only was a "failure" of the industry to use it, and that "failure to use it" for example might have come from the industry it self having a shaky perception of the thing that formed their opinion which lead to not adopting it.

Mantle is primairly designed for AAA developers , if all the top 20 AAA developers use Mantle, it is a success in both areas. Mantle does not require to dominate, it's not designed for mainstream and casuals, butthurt consumers and fanboys of those games will whine anyways.


This is the same way how Glide is being treated, while it lasted it was great, and that thing actually lasted for years, and then it died, but why it died, it didn't had more to do with how it was percieved by the industry and how the industry didn't want to adapt, the industry was more interested in standardization which is oviously a choice and not a abolute thing, standardization is a CHOICE and not a "correct" way or a "better" way necessairly, it's all a set of tradeoffs in the big picture, but ofcourse when people debate they use their opinion-based consumer viewpoint which always ends up with standardization being  "correct" way and everything else a "failure" which is ofcourse a totally subjective based on the how system works (includingly lifestyle, etc and ofcourse base on their limitation impsed by the fiat monetary system), there are so many other invalid points the Glide people make that I can't even phantom to explain, I basically did as the above explanation applies to how they think when using the Glide card to prove their perception-based points. Some of those points are the difference in time, that was 15 years ago, now it's totally different and developers are more experienced, more evolved, etc


Oh also, that "time will tell" card, with the "fate to be decided" ... you would notice I didn't reference the point of "adoptability" (popularity) because I actually learned from typing that, so what I want to add to that when I written the "fate to be decided" is actually the adoptability that is what I explained is just one of the subjective and practical points the people seek to judge it upon and pronounce either a failure or success. Yes,  that's all invalid, mantle is not designed to replace industry standards, and it's just some people's joy to debate everything around the point of popularity. (adoptability might not be the correct term, i mean popularity throughout the post)

Also want to point out, that I'm not focusing on the "adoptability" discussion, in this case I mean adoptability (how costly it is for them to support, how viable, worth it or not) because that's all truly up in the air, that all depends on developer and their goals and their needs, it's pointless to debate how popular will it be, some developer might use mantle just for ease of development and not so much for consumer benefits, for example, it's all time will tell, in this case, so I don't debate stuff I cannot predict, because there's not enoug info to know this on a big scale. And ofcourse, the decision of each developer is based also on their PERCEPTION of mantle, so if they happen to , there's no way for me to know that so that's why it's 



And speaking of this research, it's all mathematical and can be simply explained in this statement, with experience and understanding you can caluclate the equation and get a close approximation of the result, the values in the quation are information, the equation design is the understanding of how things work, there is also the accuracy of the information put into the equation (perception), now there can be many cases, and as you can see you need to basically know all those factors and variables to get the one result, and some people may lack the proper equation design, some may lack some values, etc, you can see there is more chance to be wrong than right.  
Some people are so inexperienced, and lacking of information that they absolutely require to see the end result before they can understand, those are the kind of very short posts you see usually as "i'll believe it when I see it"


----------



## phanbuey (Jan 4, 2014)

IMO it comes down to practicality, money, and the current momentum of where things are going.  Mantle is not in that pathway.  Most of the naysayers actually secretly wish that mantle is successful, but history tends to repeat itself and the odds are not that great - especially since many of the elements that made Glide (and hell - BetaMax and MiniDisk, etc...) fail are there: 1) new standard introduced by one company for a competitive advantage, 2) no incentives to join, 3) no benefit to any other stakeholders with the exception of said company and its consumers.

Soo... I am a mass-market developer... why would I code for this, when i can spend the extra time optimizing the code for consoles and then just crap-porting it to PC since the hardware is 100X more powerful and can deal with it?


----------



## RoutedScripter (Jan 4, 2014)

phanbuey said:


> IMO it comes down to practicality, money, and the current momentum of where things are going.  Mantle is not in that pathway.  Most of the naysayers actually secretly wish that mantle is successful, but history tends to repeat itself and the odds are not that great - especially since many of the elements that made Glide (and hell - BetaMax and MiniDisk, etc...) fail are there: 1) new standard introduced by one company for a competitive advantage, 2) no incentives to join, 3) no benefit to any other stakeholders with the exception of said company and its consumers.
> 
> Soo... I am a mass-market developer... why would I code for this, when i can spend the extra time optimizing the code for consoles and then just crap-porting it to PC since the hardware is 100X more powerful and can deal with it?



So that means mantle is not for you, why are you participating in this discussion then and painting mantle as not being successful because it doesn't do what you want ?

It's not designed to do what you want, that makes everything you said invalid towards mantle it self.

Yes your opinion is fine, but it's not mantle's fault, it's not a downside to mantle, it doesn't affect mantle, you and everyone else can have such opinions about mantle, but they are all irrelevant in the big picture.

Using populairty and self-benefit to compare different types is all invalid, you guess I probably dismiss any sort of FPS vs RTS comparison, in stupid gaming sites where they have GOTY, it's all a joke, there should be GOTY for all genres separately, there is no one game better then all the rest.


----------



## phanbuey (Jan 4, 2014)

RuskiSnajper said:


> So that means mantle is not for you, why are you participating in this discussion then and painting mantle as not being successful because it doesn't do what you want ?
> 
> It's not designed to do what you want, that makes everything you said invalid towards mantle it self.
> 
> ...



actually it is for me -  i game and i love graphics and i loved glide (Voodoo banshee was my first real 3d card), I want better 3d graphics and mantle is designed for that.... soo i dont really see your point?  I want mantle to succeed, i really do - i just dont think it will.


----------



## the54thvoid (Jan 4, 2014)

I can't believe how absurd this thread has become. The main educated arguments ALL agree on the technical merits of the API.  I don't think there is anyone that wants Mantle to fail (from the gaming community). The only downside to Mantle  the same as other 'pre' viewers, like Anandtech,  said is what is being said here and that is adoption. The cost to code has to be covered and some of us are interested in the financial implications which in all fairness are what will prove or kill it. Mantle can't be considered on the basis of its technical merit alone. That is naive. Like all tech it requires very astute business acumen to succeed and even more to 'change' the industry. Comparisons to Physx are poor. G sync is more of a comparison but i think that has too much cost complication for end consumer. 
If i am to understand this thread it is my belief the supporters believe that Mantle will become the defacto API for coding in the future?  If that's not the thought then a lot of the arguments are for nothing.  If people believe Mantle will 'be there' as an accessory to other API's for the foreseeable future then yes, I can well see that being the case. 

I can't wait see the effect it has on BF4 and hopefully we'll get a good selection of reviews to gauge it on. I think BF4 will be make or break it from a business investment perspective. I really hope EA let Dice push out Mantle this month and dont hold it back.


----------



## Crap Daddy (Jan 4, 2014)

> I can't believe how absurd this thread has become



All tech forums are full of this sort of mantle threads. I pop in from time to time to see if something is really happening. Nope, nothing.


----------



## happita (Jan 4, 2014)

Very boring indeed. You hear the same regurgitated nonsense between so many different people arguing that it won't/will succeed, is inferior/superior to DX/OpenGL, won't/will change the industry, etc. Shit is getting old quick in here, I think I'll take a page from Mailman's book and come back to this thread in about a month or so.


----------



## Frick (Jan 4, 2014)

happita said:


> Very boring indeed. You hear the same regurgitated nonsense between so many different people arguing that it won't/will succeed, is inferior/superior to DX/OpenGL, won't/will change the industry, etc. Shit is getting old quick in here, I think I'll take a page from Mailman's book and come back to this thread in about a month or so.



He said that a month ago, but the trolling opportunities is bringing him back.


----------



## RoutedScripter (Jan 4, 2014)

Update


Someone says he knows Oxide demo will be out this month:

http://forums.elementalgame.com/451041/page/1/#3430480


----------



## HD64G (Jan 4, 2014)

At last. Now all will have the experience of what Mantle would provide if they got a CGN GPU. Even from videos on tube. A new thread is going to explode by that time.


----------



## the54thvoid (Jan 4, 2014)

RuskiSnajper said:


> Update
> 
> 
> Someone says he knows Oxide demo will be out this month:
> ...



From that link:


> The biggest advantage of Mantle is that unlike DirectX, Mantle is truly multicore aware. With DirectX 11, more cores don't buy you nearly as much. That said, Nitrous, even on DirectX, is still two orders of magnitude faster than say a typical DirectX 9 engine.
> 
> *A Mantle optimized game can show a massive performance gain depending on how many cores the user has on their CPU*.  Contrary to what I read on some forums, most games remain CPU or video driver bound (i.e. the GPU is waiting to be fed).  Mantle lets you get a lot more stuff onto the GPU.



I come back to the question which seems answered above in bold and counters what people have replied to me - Mantle feeds much more info to the CPU, if it is multi core, which lets the GPU not get bogged down by CPU coded limitations.

Also, the Oxide benchmark is not intrinsically a Mantle benchmark so we'll all be able to run it, so we can get good comparisons of GCN benefits versus non GCN cards.  

Finally, if a game is coded for Mantle, does that imply the GCN cards will natively run that API or will the Catalyst drivers need to be tweaked?


----------



## RoutedScripter (Jan 4, 2014)

The game uses mantle for it's rendering pipeline and the shape and way it self of the pipeline is different, emulating D3D is not the way to go, so that's what Johan meant the engine code looks similar to PS4 one because they have a good low-level API compared to xone API.

No mantle doesn't feed anything.

You need a new driver for mantle, it has nothing to do with directX drivers.

Whether or not both drivers could be installed at the same time is still unknown. 

The API code could be in DLLs shipped with the game (version specific), or with the drivers them selfs, we don't know.


----------



## 15th Warlock (Jan 4, 2014)

the54thvoid said:


> Finally, if a game is coded for Mantle, does that imply the GCN cards will natively run that API or will the Catalyst drivers need to be tweaked?



It's my understanding that Mantle completely bypasses the graphics driver, speaking directly to the hardware in the video card.


----------



## RoutedScripter (Jan 4, 2014)

15th Warlock said:


> It's my understanding that Mantle completely bypasses the graphics driver, speaking directly to the hardware in the video card.



A wrong understanding.


----------



## 15th Warlock (Jan 4, 2014)

RuskiSnajper said:


> A wrong understanding.



So you're saying Mantle still uses the Catalyst driver? because that was the54thvoid's question, and from what I've read the intention of using Mantle is to completely bypass said driver, working as an API that communicates directly to the hardware, thereby, bypassing all the Catalyst driver layers...

Now you're confusing me...


----------



## erocker (Jan 4, 2014)

15th Warlock said:


> It's my understanding that Mantle completely bypasses the graphics driver, speaking directly to the hardware in the video card.



I think that video cards will still "need" drivers to work with Mantle. It's Direct X (mostly) that is getting bypassed/replaced.


----------



## 15th Warlock (Jan 4, 2014)

erocker said:


> I think that video cards will still "need" drivers to work with Mantle. It's Direct X (mostly) that is getting bypassed/replaced.



I see, thanks for clearing that up!


----------



## HD64G (Jan 4, 2014)

Some dll's in catalyst and some profiles for the games using it, will enable Mantle for CGN GPUs. No need to install 2 set of drivers.


----------



## Frag_Maniac (Jan 4, 2014)

Yeah, a graphics API should just be a thin abstraction layer between the graphics driver and graphics program (game). There won't be a need for an additional driver, though that isn't to say AMD won't be doing a bit of driver reworking to fine tune performance.

For those whom may not know, abstraction in this context just means pulling out bits of data, but the API will also go further and sort and assign draw calls. Mantle is also capable of very intricately finding errors through it's wealth of debugging coding. 

Debugging is where it's going to implement never before used features in a graphics API. The debugging feature set alone should make development go much smoother, while allowing devs to confidently push the envelope on what they can do in games.


----------



## RoutedScripter (Jan 4, 2014)

HD64G said:


> Some dll's in catalyst and some profiles for the games using it, will enable Mantle for CGN GPUs. No need to install 2 set of drivers.



There is no any app-specific driver code any of those mantle games will use.

Most of the validation is on developer's hands, the API and driver has minimal to no validation ("code security") compared to what currently exists in DX and DX drivers.


----------



## Mathragh (Jan 4, 2014)

Quote from Frogboy, Oxide/Stardock developer: "BTW, Star Swarm (the benchmark) is going to go up on Steam this month so all this admitted hyping I'm doing is something you will be able to verify first hand in a few weeks."

Star swarm is the mantle demo showed by Oxide, so this means that we'll see any mantle improvements on our own PC by the end of this month.

Edit: another quote from later in the thread:
"
Hmm, is the version of Star Swarm being released on Steam going to have any sort of modding support? Cause I can't help but drool a little over the potential this offers.


//


Yes.  It's very moddable. It would be interesting to see someone put together the Revenge of the Sith opening battle with it
"


----------



## Steevo (Jan 4, 2014)

Just in time for me to replace my GPU, since it died.


----------



## happita (Jan 5, 2014)

And you sir, just got to the 1,000 thanks mark. Congrats, now go get an R9 card to celebrate this wonderous occasion


----------



## Steevo (Jan 5, 2014)

I wonder if W1zz will take it on trade for a 290 that i can slap my block on. I am down to my laptop and phone till I get the money for one, so no gaming and my rig sits idle.


On a side note whats the easiest way to remove the GPU to make something out of? Oven on foil, flameless torch?


----------



## Frag_Maniac (Jan 5, 2014)

There needs to be a comprehensive demo other than Star Swarm, which many have already seen, that isn't biased toward RTS titles. Granted RTS is where Mantle can show big performance improvements, but they need to show they can bring big performance gains in the more popular genres.


----------



## crazyeyesreaper (Jan 6, 2014)

Yea Mantle in Total War would be nice. 50k troops without a 5ghz Intel CPU would be nice hahaha.


----------



## erocker (Jan 6, 2014)

crazyeyesreaper said:


> Yea Mantle in Total War would be nice. 50k troops without a 5ghz Intel CPU would be nice hahaha.



It's funny... 

because it's true.


----------



## crazyeyesreaper (Jan 6, 2014)

Yea Most people are lucky to keep 6-10k troops running at 30 fps with todays CPUs all heavily limited by single thread. 1 Thread for Game 1 for AI thats about it. Animation subsystem needs multi threading per soldier would be impossible but per unit? that could be done. Oh well one can dream haha


----------



## Steevo (Jan 6, 2014)

Multithread the AI and then intermix units 50 across that unit type and allow use of one call for all of them, 50K render units just dropped to 1K actually rendered in animation and an equal number of setup calls, improving efficiency.


----------



## crazyeyesreaper (Jan 6, 2014)

Yea something like that.  Add to that physics calculations as in Total War physics for charges is calculated on a unit / soldiers left in unit. Overall the CPU limitation could with Mantle be removed for the most part. Sadly That would require CA re writting their game engine and support from AMD with mantle. Considering CA wasted 40% of the Rome 2 budget on a new building and the Game itself was the worst out of the entire series. Its doubtful those key changes will happen. Ah well another one of those OH THE POSSIBILITIES of Mantle moments. That wont come about for years.


----------



## Mathragh (Jan 6, 2014)

Fudzilla article about AMD conference yesterday.
Yeah I know its Fudzilla, but they claim the slides from the conference said the BF4 patch would improve FPS by up to 45% on kaveri.



> Perhaps the most interesting part of the presentation involved Mantle. AMD claims it will deliver a performance boost of up to 45 percent in Battlefield 4 and in some cases we could be looking at even more


Do with it what you will!

Personally, if they say up to 45%, it'll realistically probably be closer to 30%, which in the end still not that bad, certainly if the min fps spikes also improve as a result of less bottlenecking.

Edit: fixed link


----------



## RoutedScripter (Jan 6, 2014)

Oh yeah


----------



## xenocide (Jan 6, 2014)

I don't buy those for a second.  In a "Very CPU Intensive" Game an i7-4700K will walk all over any APU, definitely more than a 4fps difference to be had there.  Looking at old benchmarks the current line of AMD APU's are still about half the performance of Intel's higher end Desktop CPU's with identical graphics configurations.  This is implying that from the current line of AMD APU's (Richland) to Kevari we're to expect a *80%* CPU performance gain from a hardware revision alone?  Unlikely...


----------



## The Von Matrices (Jan 6, 2014)

xenocide said:


> I don't buy those for a second.  In a "Very CPU Intensive" Game an i7-4700K will walk all over any APU, definitely more than a 4fps difference to be had there...



I agree.  It seems odd that the 4770K is only 50% faster than the Kaveri results in DirectX.  I've give the benefit of the doubt and say that the game code can't make use of a quad core+ HT system over a dual module system, which is why the results are closer than if you were to compare a highly threaded process like video encoding, for example.

The GPU in the systems isn't stated either.  It could just be something on the low end like a R7 250 and be completely bottlenecked by the GPU.


----------



## Mathragh (Jan 6, 2014)

The Von Matrices said:


> I agree.  It seems odd that the 4770K is only 50% faster than the Kaveri results in DirectX.  I've give the benefit of the doubt and say that the game code can't make use of a quad core+ HT system over a dual module system, which is why the results are closer than if you were to compare a highly threaded process like video encoding, for example.
> 
> The GPU in the systems isn't stated either.  It could just be something on the low end like a R7 250 and be completely bottlenecked by the GPU.


 This would appear to be exactly what oxide developers were "moaning" about when it comes to directx, eventhough dx11 can utilize multiple threads, theres still only one main "game engine" thread which still bottlenecks by loads,


----------



## xenocide (Jan 6, 2014)

Mathragh said:


> This would appear to be exactly what oxide developers were "moaning" about when it comes to directx, eventhough dx11 can utilize multiple threads, theres still only one main "game engine" thread which still bottlenecks by loads,


 
But they also claimed that super underclocked AMD CPU's could run programs at the same level as high-end Intel CPU's.  If that were the case the Mantle graphs should be identical since it largely removes the CPU bottleneck they claimed to experience--yet the difference between the AMD APU and Intel CPU is nearly identical.

I want to see that Slide 2.7 configuration to see what their setups were because the raw numbers don't add up.


----------



## the54thvoid (Jan 6, 2014)

The Von Matrices said:


> I agree.  It seems odd that the 4770K is only 50% faster than the Kaveri results in DirectX.  I've give the benefit of the doubt and say that the *game code can't make use of a quad core+ HT system* over a dual module system, which is why the results are closer than if you were to compare a highly threaded process like video encoding, for example.
> 
> The GPU in the systems isn't stated either.  It could just be something on the low end like a R7 250 and be completely bottlenecked by the GPU.



I think that's the point.  It does say "Very CPU limited".  That term is generally taken to mean very poor multi core performance.   They'll always use worse case scenario's of CPU use to demo oxide running with mantle.  Remember that AMD pay for Mantle coding in games so much like other proprietary stuff you'll always get pre-release info that is skewed to favour the thing it is touting.


----------



## kn00tcn (Jan 6, 2014)

maybe they're doing a single thread, before optimizations? it's a prototype afterall

how do those cpus compare in that sense? still.. 12 to 32fps... very interesting

EDIT: 





xenocide said:


> But they also claimed that super underclocked AMD CPU's could run programs at the same level as high-end Intel CPU's.  If that were the case the Mantle graphs should be identical since it largely removes the CPU bottleneck they claimed to experience--yet the difference between the AMD APU and Intel CPU is nearly identical.



that difference must be the AI & everything unrelated to graphics calls


----------



## Mathragh (Jan 6, 2014)

xenocide said:


> But they also claimed that super underclocked AMD CPU's could run programs at the same level as high-end Intel CPU's.  If that were the case the Mantle graphs should be identical since it largely removes the CPU bottleneck they claimed to experience--yet the difference between the AMD APU and Intel CPU is nearly identical.
> 
> I want to see that Slide 2.7 configuration to see what their setups were because the raw numbers don't add up.


Edit:  read your text wrong.

I agree, i suppose they really mean that its very cpu limited then, with more than a 100k draw calls(their showcase topped out at 50k i think).


----------



## RoutedScripter (Jan 6, 2014)




----------



## xenocide (Jan 6, 2014)

kn00tcn said:


> maybe they're doing a single thread, before optimizations? it's a prototype afterall
> 
> how do those cpus compare in that sense?


 
In CPU limited situations under DirectX the 4770K performs about twice as well as the highest end Richland CPU (there's a Guru3D review of the 6800K where they pair both with a GTX 580--when the CPU is the limiting factor the 4770K is about twice as powerful), so in order for that DirectX graph to make sense we would need to expect a near 75% gain in per thread performance from Richland, which is not possible.


----------



## kn00tcn (Jan 6, 2014)

xenocide said:


> In CPU limited situations under DirectX the 4770K performs about twice as well as the highest end Richland CPU (there's a Guru3D review of the 6800K where they pair both with a GTX 580--when the CPU is the limiting factor the 4770K is about twice as powerful), so in order for that DirectX graph to make sense we would need to expect a near 75% gain in per thread performance from Richland, which is not possible.



what about cpu only tasks like cinebench or known single threaded ones like lame encoder

i guess i'll look around, or we'll have more info in the coming weeks as more tests happen


----------



## HD64G (Jan 6, 2014)

xenocide said:


> In CPU limited situations under DirectX the 4770K performs about twice as well as the highest end Richland CPU (there's a Guru3D review of the 6800K where they pair both with a GTX 580--when the CPU is the limiting factor the 4770K is about twice as powerful), so in order for that DirectX graph to make sense we would need to expect a near 75% gain in per thread performance from Richland, which is not possible.



What are you talking about? Kaveri's iGPU vs 4770's iGPU isn't in your calculations? Why? CPU's bottleneck is* almost *diminished in Mantle, so iGPUs are the ones that work most. So, Kaveri's iGPU matches 4770's in this demo.


----------



## The Von Matrices (Jan 6, 2014)

HD64G said:


> What are you talking about? Kaveri's iGPU vs 4770's iGPU isn't in your calculations? Why? CPU's bottleneck is* almost *diminished in Mantle, so iGPUs are the ones that work most. So, Kaveri's iGPU matches 4770's in this demo.



That benchmark is not comparing iGPUs.

Even the "old" Trinity based A10-5800K beats the 4770K at iGPU performance in DirectX.  Also, you can't run Mantle code on a Intel iGPU, unless the world has begun to end and Intel adopted Mantle.


----------



## xenocide (Jan 6, 2014)

kn00tcn said:


> what about cpu only tasks like cinebench or known single threaded ones like lame encoder
> 
> i guess i'll look around, or we'll have more info in the coming weeks as more tests happen


 
Here's the review I was looking at:  http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/amd_a10_6800k_review_apu,1.html

There are very few situations where the CPU alone performs anywhere _near_ what an i7-4770K can do.



The Von Matrices said:


> That benchmark is not comparing iGPUs.
> 
> Even the "old" Trinity based A10-5800K beats the 4770K at iGPU performance in DirectX.  Also, you can't run Mantle on a Intel iGPU, unless the world has begun to end and Intel adopted Mantle.


 
Exactly.  Which means they are measuring exclusively CPU performance, and as the link above shows, there's nearly no way it would be that close without some fudging.


----------



## HD64G (Jan 6, 2014)

The Von Matrices said:


> That benchmark is not comparing iGPUs.
> 
> Even the "old" Trinity based A10-5800K beats the 4770K at iGPU performance in DirectX.  Also, you can't run Mantle code on a Intel iGPU, unless the world has begun to end and Intel adopted Mantle.



And how do you explain 4770 increase from 12-13 to 32-33? And the graph label saying no API overhead?

What isn't normal here is that Intel CPU-APU owners trying to fight the proofs of something they should wish. Mantle's ability to diminish the CPU load in games. Hey guys, don't you wish your 8-threaded cpus would do more things at the same time except for losing cycles because of directX's inefficiency?


----------



## The Von Matrices (Jan 6, 2014)

HD64G said:


> And how do you explain 4770 increase from 12-13 to 32-33? And the graph label saying no API overhead?



You use the same discrete GPU in both systems?


----------



## HD64G (Jan 6, 2014)

The Von Matrices said:


> You use the same discrete GPU in both systems?



Correct. But then AMD would crossfire if some GPUs were used. Do we have the system specs to clarify this?


----------



## The Von Matrices (Jan 6, 2014)

HD64G said:


> What is normal here is that Intel CPU-APU owners trying to fight the proofs of something they should wish. Mantle's ability to diminish the CPU load in games. Hey guys, don't you wish your 8-threaded cpus would do more things at the same time except for losing cycles because of directX's inefficiency?



This would be nice, but it's not happening in this benchmark.  If the benchmark could use 8 threads, then we would expect ~80% more performance from the Intel CPU since it has double the number of cores/threads.  This is why people like I are skeptical about these results, because a threaded workload would still heavily favor the Intel CPU.  It's almost as if this benchmark is constrained to 2-4 threads and is using a weak discrete GPU in order to shine the best light on the APU as possible.  Note, I'm not doubting that Mantle can improve performance, just the benchmark's claim that Mantle makes CPUs of different performance tiers in other applications perform equally in games.



HD64G said:


> Correct. But then AMD would crossfire if some GPUs were used. Do we have the system specs to clarify this?



I doubt we'll get that information until after the NDA of January 14.  However, I also doubt Crossfire with the iGPU was used; after all, wouldn't the AMD system be on top if it had two GPUs instead of one?  That wouldn't be a very good PR slide if the advertised system with double the GPUs still performed worse than the competition.


----------



## xenocide (Jan 6, 2014)

I know Mantle has the potential to cause great performance gains, but their numbers don't add up, and they are throwing out astronomical values left and right with nothing but slides to back it up.


----------



## the54thvoid (Jan 6, 2014)

If Mantle uses my cpu's 12 threads of awesomeness I'm going to buy a matchbox filled with resistors to do my gfx work.


----------



## RoutedScripter (Jan 6, 2014)

The Von Matrices said:


> I doubt we'll get that information until after the NDA of January 14.  However, I also doubt Crossfire with the iGPU was used; after all, wouldn't the AMD system be on top if it had two GPUs instead of one?  That wouldn't be a very good PR slide if the advertised system with double the GPUs still performed worse than the competition.




*That's because i7-4770 is in 350$ price range while A8-7600 is below 120$*.  yo yo yo 







http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819116901


http://i.imgur.com/8axFUzi.jpg


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Jan 6, 2014)

Pixie dust and black magic.


----------



## the54thvoid (Jan 6, 2014)

TheMailMan78 said:


> Pixie dust and black magic.



Put me down for a black pixie and some magic dust instead.


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Jan 6, 2014)

The old saying goes "If its to good to be true, then chances are its not". These performance slides are reminiscent of a Chuck Norris meme.


----------



## xenocide (Jan 6, 2014)

RuskiSnajper said:


> *That's because i7-4770 is in 350$ price range while A8-7600 is below 120$*.  yo yo yo
> 
> http://i.imgur.com/8axFUzi.jpg



I'll bite--it's got nothing to do with price, it's more of AMD's shit marketing, assuring you their products are better than they really are.  AMD shows these pretty slides using a bunch of lopsided synthetic benchmarks in outlandish configurations that give them performance benefits.  All of those are in reference to the performance of the IGP--which almost anyone will tell you Intel has continually lagged behind AMD in, but that's to be expected considering AMD nearly bankrupted themselves buying up the second largest GPU manufacturer a few years back, they kind of had a head start.

All of that aside the issue at hand is that Oxide Games is claiming using DirectX that an A8-7600 performs about the same as an i7-4770 in "CPU Intensive" situations--that is false.  There are hundreds of real world benchmarks that suggest that is nearly impossible.  If we look at current AMD APU's we see the CPU portion performs at best around the same level as an i3-3220--which has half as many cores and threads as the cited i7.  It is inconceivable that a 4 Core AMD CPU would offer even remotely similar performance to a 4 Core Intel CPU with Hyperthreading in CPU-heavy scenarios.  Basically the slide doesn't make sense--if they are making use of the iGPU the APU should win hands down, if they are using a discrete card the Intel CPU should decimate the APU.  They are relatively close, and that is confusing as hell.


----------



## RoutedScripter (Jan 6, 2014)

big thread on overclock.net got deleted before I could save a ton of slides ... but im not in a hurry basically, i can wait 7 days for the talk along with the slides.


----------



## HD64G (Jan 6, 2014)

Here are the 88 slides: http://imgur.com/a/4WiVM/all


----------



## bpgt64 (Jan 6, 2014)

Meh, having access to a Micro center means intel CPU's at ~200 bucks (4770k).    Kevari seems like a 15% overall performance boost.  Interested in seeing how Mantle stacks with an APU setup.


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Jan 6, 2014)

xenocide said:


> I'll bite--it's got nothing to do with price, it's more of AMD's shit marketing, assuring you their products are better than they really are.  AMD shows these pretty slides using a bunch of lopsided synthetic benchmarks in outlandish configurations that give them performance benefits.  All of those are in reference to the performance of the IGP--which almost anyone will tell you Intel has continually lagged behind AMD in, but that's to be expected considering AMD nearly bankrupted themselves buying up the second largest GPU manufacturer a few years back, they kind of had a head start.
> 
> All of that aside the issue at hand is that Oxide Games is claiming using DirectX that an A8-7600 performs about the same as an i7-4770 in "CPU Intensive" situations--that is false.  There are hundreds of real world benchmarks that suggest that is nearly impossible.  If we look at current AMD APU's we see the CPU portion performs at best around the same level as an i3-3220--which has half as many cores and threads as the cited i7.  It is inconceivable that a 4 Core AMD CPU would offer even remotely similar performance to a 4 Core Intel CPU with Hyperthreading in CPU-heavy scenarios.  Basically the slide doesn't make sense--if they are making use of the iGPU the APU should win hands down, if they are using a discrete card the Intel CPU should decimate the APU.  They are relatively close, and that is confusing as hell.



Whilst I get what your saying about the slides, implying Amd pick and choose benches is a bit silly when its a direct game comparison(admittedly vague on specs) and its also slightly biased, do you think intel plays fair with benchmarks, or that their intel compiler (often used) is not in effect a cheat on benches against Amd's arch.
.


----------



## erocker (Jan 6, 2014)

So... any demo using an actual game yet? No? Yawn...


----------



## Frag_Maniac (Jan 6, 2014)

erocker said:


> So... any demo using an actual game yet? No? Yawn...



Good point, graphics demos can too easily be slanted toward the strengths of the software they're testing. It's a lot like the way synthetic benchmarks yield big results when games don't.


----------



## xenocide (Jan 7, 2014)

theoneandonlymrk said:


> Whilst I get what your saying about the slides, implying Amd pick and choose benches is a bit silly when its a direct game comparison(admittedly vague on specs) and its also slightly biased, do you think intel plays fair with benchmarks, or that their intel compiler (often used) is not in effect a cheat on benches against Amd's arch.
> .


 
I don't deny any of that, but we also have no real world examples to compare them against.  The point I'm making is this;

They claimed DirectX caused significant CPU bottlenecks, yet the DirectX portion has a near identical difference between a very powerful Intel CPU and a not so powerful AMD APU (using the CPU portion).  They claimed Mantle would remove the need for a very powerful CPU entirely, yet the difference is between the AMD APU and Intel CPU is almost identical when Mantle is implemented.  They claim that example is a CPU heavy workload, but somehow a CPU with better threading and substantially better per thread performance is barely beating an APU.  All of these things cannot be simultaneously occuring is the point I'm making.  If the benchmark is GPU bound there should be no real difference between the two CPU's no matter what API is used, if it's CPU bound the Intel CPU should be blowing the doors off the APU in the bottom graph.

The ~20fps gain with Mantle is a bit more than I expected, but not outlandish.


----------



## HD64G (Jan 7, 2014)

xenocide said:


> I don't deny any of that, but we also have no real world examples to compare them against.  The point I'm making is this;
> 
> They claimed DirectX caused significant CPU bottlenecks, yet the DirectX portion has a near identical difference between a very powerful Intel CPU and a not so powerful AMD APU (using the CPU portion).  They claimed Mantle would remove the need for a very powerful CPU entirely, yet the difference is between the AMD APU and Intel CPU is almost identical when Mantle is implemented.  They claim that example is a CPU heavy workload, but somehow a CPU with better threading and substantially better per thread performance is barely beating an APU.  All of these things cannot be simultaneously occuring is the point I'm making.  If the benchmark is GPU bound there should be no real difference between the two CPU's no matter what API is used, if it's CPU bound the Intel CPU should be blowing the doors off the APU in the bottom graph.
> 
> The ~20fps gain with Mantle is a bit more than I expected, but not outlandish.



You must be very confused. The diffirence w/o mantle is 40-50% between Kaveri and i7.  When Mantle is on it is <10%. Where do you see it doesn't work as intended? It just stops games giving the main role to CPUs. And having a $150 CPU in games using mantle will be the same as using a $300 one. Simple as this.


----------



## xenocide (Jan 7, 2014)

HD64G said:


> You must be very confused. The diffirence w/o mantle is 40-50% between Kaveri and i7.  When Mantle is on it is <10%. Where do you see it doesn't work as intended? It just stops games giving the main role to CPUs. And having a $150 CPU in games using mantle will be the same as using a $300 one. Simple as this.


 
Show me a CPU Intensive program where a 4C i7 performs only 50% faster than a 4C APU.  Every benchmark I see pegs it at at least 100% faster.


----------



## RoutedScripter (Jan 7, 2014)

erocker said:


> So... any demo using an actual game yet? No? Yawn...




Silence before the storm.




HD64G said:


> You must be very confused. The diffirence w/o mantle is 40-50% between Kaveri and i7.  When Mantle is on it is <10%. Where do you see it doesn't work as intended? It just stops games giving the main role to CPUs. And having a $150 CPU in games using mantle will be the same as using a $300 one. Simple as this.



I don't know if those guys are just that stupid or trolling the hell out of this thread.


----------



## erocker (Jan 7, 2014)

RuskiSnajper said:


> Silence before the storm.



Are they going to be showing any BF4 w/Mantle at CES this week? I though I heard something about it. I'm also curious to see how it's coming along with Star Citizen. I left a couple questions for the devs about it... It might be too early for an answer though.


----------



## Mathragh (Jan 7, 2014)

erocker said:


> Are they going to be showing any BF4 w/Mantle at CES this week? I though I heard something about it. I'm also curious to see how it's coming along with Star Citizen. I left a couple questions for the devs about it... It might be too early for an answer though.



Apparently there has already been a demonstration, according to this dutch site:
Edit: also got a note at anandtech.

They tested with an R9 290X and a kaveri APU, difference between directx and mantle in BF4 was 45%. They also state that this percentage is a bit variable, with some set-ups and scenes having a lower boost, but with stuff like crossfire the boost could be well in excess of 45%.

For a game that is supposed to be quite CPU-agnostic(as long as there are atleast 4 threads) thats quite a big boost imho.


----------



## crazyeyesreaper (Jan 7, 2014)

single player not multiplayer thus kinda worthless as no one really gives a flying f about BF4 single player lol


----------



## Mathragh (Jan 7, 2014)

crazyeyesreaper said:


> single player not multiplayer thus kinda worthless as no one really gives a flying f about BF4 single player lol


Wasnt multiplayer even more CPU-bottlenecked than singleplayer?


----------



## crazyeyesreaper (Jan 7, 2014)

yup pretty much depending on the map / player count etc but then with server sync and other background items such anti cheat systems etc who knows maybe single player benefits more and thus got shown off. That or its just an internal benchmark that they used as a quick demo to prove it does run lol


----------



## Mathragh (Jan 7, 2014)

crazyeyesreaper said:


> yup pretty much depending on the map / player count etc


Then logically you'd expect an increase in excess of 45% with lower end CPU's that usually struggle in MP, since mantles main advantage is supposed to be alleviating CPU bottlenecks. I Suppose atleast.
We'll have to wait for more info as always, but the 45% is way over what I was expecting, especially in singleplayer, where the CPU performance hardly seemed to matter.


----------



## crazyeyesreaper (Jan 7, 2014)

One thing to keep in mind Single player is heavily scripted meaning easy to optimize and probably easy to work with mantle and get a large performance boost. Multiplayer on the other hand is unpredictable so performance difference could be less or more depending on situation / map / etc


----------



## Mathragh (Jan 7, 2014)

crazyeyesreaper said:


> One thing to keep in mind Single player is heavily scripted meaning easy to optimize and probably easy to work with mantle and get a large performance boost. Multiplayer on the other hand is unpredictable so performance difference could be less or more depending on situation / map / etc


Yeah as usual we'll have to wait a bit longer, but as Erocker stated he "heard something" and I came across some info regarding the demo so I decided to share it


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Jan 7, 2014)

Mathragh said:


> Apparently there has already been a demonstration, according to this dutch site:
> Edit: also got a note at anandtech.
> 
> They tested with an R9 290X and a kaveri APU, difference between directx and mantle in BF4 was 45%. They also state that this percentage is a bit variable, with some set-ups and scenes having a lower boost, but with stuff like crossfire the boost could be well in excess of 45%.
> ...


----------



## Recus (Jan 7, 2014)

So Mantle is 290X? Not sure if serious.



Spoiler




















6790K with GTX 580.


----------



## the54thvoid (Jan 7, 2014)

Recus said:


> So Mantle is 290X? Not sure if serious.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I'm not being funny, what do you mean?


----------



## brandonwh64 (Jan 7, 2014)

So will mantle install like directx does or with the GFX drivers? I still love these slides comparing a I7 IGP to a APU since the I7 was DEF made for GFX performance


----------



## HD64G (Jan 7, 2014)

xenocide said:


> Show me a CPU Intensive program where a 4C i7 performs only 50% faster than a 4C APU.  Every benchmark I see pegs it at at least 100% faster.



A game engine's demo uses iGPUs too. Not so difficult to see the difference here as AMD's iGPU is much better than i7's.


----------



## Recus (Jan 7, 2014)

the54thvoid said:


> I'm not being funny, what do you mean?



What exactly you don't understand? You think all Mantle stuff will be showed on iGPU?


----------



## Mathragh (Jan 7, 2014)

Recus said:


> What exactly you don't understand? You think all Mantle stuff will be showed on iGPU?


It would appear that you don't understand something, or are maybe trolling.

Mantle isn't specific to any CPU vendor or GPU, the only thing it (currently) needs, is GCN hardware, because thats currently the only architecture with support. So the full range from the slowest(kaveri) APU till the power guzzling R9 290X will support mantle, in combination with any CPU.


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Jan 7, 2014)

Mathragh said:


> It would appear that you don't understand something, or are maybe trolling.
> 
> Mantle isn't specific to any CPU vendor or GPU, the only thing it (currently) needs, is GCN hardware, because thats currently the only architecture with support. So the full range from the slowest(kaveri) APU till the power guzzling R9 290X will support mantle, in combination with any CPU.


This. So basically 1% of the market will be able to take advantage of Mantle assuming Intel and NVIDIA stand aside and let AMD run the show. Seems legit!

I can only describe this thread in meme....


----------



## Chetkigaming (Jan 7, 2014)

Mantle is a fake.


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Jan 7, 2014)

Chetkigaming said:


> Mantle is a fake.


Its not "fake". Its just CODING TO THE METAL BABY!


----------



## Mathragh (Jan 7, 2014)

TheMailMan78 said:


> This. So basically 1% of the market will be able to take advantage of Mantle assuming Intel and NVIDIA stand aside and let AMD run the show. Seems legit!
> 
> I can only describe this thread in meme....


Dude lol, what do you expect. Something is finally being done about the wall developers are running into when making games people like us love to play. Its kind of silly to post childish gifs for reactions totally belonging in this thread.

The simple fact of the matter is, this tech is great, long overdue, and with this demo finally real. The ONLY reason for not being enthousiastic about it now, is because you either don't have the hardware, or simply hate progress.

Stop being so lame lol


----------



## the54thvoid (Jan 7, 2014)

Recus said:


> What exactly you don't understand? You think all Mantle stuff will be showed on iGPU?



I didn't understand your ref to the 290X and what relevance the charts had.  Genuinely, not being obstinate or rude.  I don't know if the AMD slides use dGPU's or just APU's. 



Mathragh said:


> It would appear that you don't understand something, or are maybe trolling.
> 
> Mantle isn't specific to any CPU vendor or GPU, the only thing it (currently) needs, is GCN hardware, because thats currently the only architecture with support. So the full range from the slowest(kaveri) APU till the power guzzling R9 290X will support mantle, in combination with any CPU.



That makes my head hurt.  If it works with any CPU and it makes the CPU work more optimally then what relevance is the GPU?  Or, is it the case that it optimises the load that would *normally be sent to the CPU* and instead sees the GCN architecture and offloads all that work to the GPU instead.  I really don't know how it works if it works on *any* CPU and makes better use of it.  To me it makes it seem counter intuitive. 

What does Mantle do first?  Is it driver based -> see's GCN core, optimises load to all GCN cores to alleviate stress on CPU?  Or is it coded to make better use of a (neutral) CPU, therefore allowing the GPU to flex it's muscles with less restriction?

Ruski seems to be the most informed and passionate - would appreciate a technical answer from him.


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Jan 7, 2014)

Mathragh said:


> Dude lol, what do you expect. Something is finally being done about the wall developers are running into when making games people like us love to play. Its kind of silly to post childish gifs for reactions totally belonging in this thread.
> 
> The simple fact of the matter is, this tech is great, long overdue, and with this demo finally real. The ONLY reason for not being enthousiastic about it now, is because you either don't have the hardware, or simply hate progress.
> 
> Stop being so lame lol


Its not being lame. Its just the sad fact this is another API with high expectations that the smallest player in the game is trying to push. GLIDE, OpenGL all of these API have not been adopted because MS, Intel and NVIDIA will not allow them too. AMD is betting their dominance in the console market will make THIS TIME different AND we all know how AMD never skews numbers.........its a gamble and its pixie dust. Black magic meets black jack is the only way to describe Mantle. HIT ME AGAIN MAC!

Ill wait for a W1zz review before I drink the kool aid.


----------



## the54thvoid (Jan 7, 2014)

There is also a secondary issue with Mantle.

It's AMD centric for now, which means AMD need to get in at the start.  This means from the get go the game will be coded in favour of AMD.  Any Mantle released title will favour AMD (arguably) as they will have invested in it, therefore the developers will 'show' some loyalty to AMD.  Look how well BF4 plays on AMD cards compared to BF3 (at 1080p the 290X is 12% behind the 780Ti in BF3.  In BF4 the difference is 6%.).  Just a thought.

FTR this is just the same as NV buying in dev support for Physx.  Either way, first GPU team to a 'AAA' title get's the optimisations.


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Jan 7, 2014)

the54thvoid said:


> There is also a secondary issue with Mantle.
> 
> It's AMD centric for now, which means AMD need to get in at the start.  This means from the get go the game will be coded in favour of AMD.  Any Mantle released title will favour AMD (arguably) as they will have invested in it, therefore the developers will 'show' some loyalty to AMD.  Look how well BF4 plays on AMD cards compared to BF3 (at 1080p the 290X is 12% behind the 780Ti in BF3.  In BF4 the difference is 6%.).  Just a thought.
> 
> FTR this is just the same as NV buying in dev support for Physx.  Either way, first GPU team to a 'AAA' title get's the optimisations.


Hence my comment on the console gamble.


----------



## BiggieShady (Jan 7, 2014)

the54thvoid said:


> I really don't know how it works if it works on any CPU and makes better use of it. To me it makes it seem counter intuitive.



It's all about how effectively multi-threaded application uses available CPU cores to feed the GPU faster. Also Mantle is not only removing directx out of the picture but also the driver because there is no driver thread. Drivers sits in memory and does nothing while mantle game is running. That's why devs say they have written their custom mantle driver using the AMD Mantle SDK, rather than saying they added the mantle specific code to their game engine. These slides confirm that :


----------



## the54thvoid (Jan 7, 2014)

BiggieShady said:


> It's all about how effectively multi-threaded application uses available CPU cores to feed the GPU faster. Also Mantle is not only removing directx out of the picture but also the driver because there is no driver thread. Drivers sits in memory and does nothing while mantle game is running. That's why devs say they have written their custom mantle driver using the AMD Mantle SDK, rather than saying they added the mantle specific code to their game engine. These slides confirm that :



I give you thanks but I'm still a bit 'duh.....'


----------



## Mathragh (Jan 7, 2014)

the54thvoid said:


> I give you thanks but I'm still a bit 'duh.....'


In essence, it comes down to two things: One, you remove the need for the driver thread, which normally is a huge performance drain. This is because for every draw call the game engine does, The driver has to convert these calls to the machine language which GPU's can understand. As you can imagine, the more complex the scene, and the quicker a GPU can process these commands, the more commands need to be generated. This is where the main bottleneck is today I believe, with GPU's scaling way better than CPU's, and since I believe the driver thread cannot(or atleast is not) properly multithreaded.
Two: the rest of the "rendering" work can be parallelized way better and more efficient, because of how mantle lets the game communicate with the rest of your PC.


@ TMM, I know man, its just a gamble, and nothing is certain. However, I do still think this is different compared to glide and OpenGL, in that it takes the best from both worlds. But, like I end half of my posts in this thread, we'll have to wait and see anyway.

I do know however that I'd much rather be enthousiastic about this tech than about yet another proprietary standard by a semi-monopolist, or the demise of another player in the hardware market.


----------



## xkche (Jan 7, 2014)

Just think for a moment that MANTLE works very well (40-45% improve).

Many developers join and more games are supported.

Later NVIDIA join and take advantage of MANTLE.

Who win?


----------



## HD64G (Jan 7, 2014)

Exactly! We all who will buy the newer GPU (not the more expensive ones-speaking for myself) and will enjoy games with features unable to have till Mantle. That's why I want to watch it succeeding. Because I am sure about the potential.

Just imagine in BF4 and other Mantle optimised games when you bought 7870 and now it will run as if you bought 290. Or having 7770 and running BF4 like with a 7870. Isn't it a win-win for customers?


----------



## BiggieShady (Jan 7, 2014)

Mathragh said:


> The driver has to convert these calls to the machine language which GPU's can understand. As you can imagine, the more complex the scene, and the quicker a GPU can process these commands, the more commands need to be generated. This is where the main bottleneck is today I believe, with GPU's scaling way better than CPU's



Not quite, kinda missing the point here, there is nothing remotely complex about generating draw calls on the cpu - quite the opposite. One draw call is extremely simple for CPU. The problem arises if each and every one of those simple operations carry some latency or overhead (like with directx/opengl vs driver inter-process communication - there are all kinds of overheads) ... anyways those latencies add up real quick and eat up at each frame time. I would guess that Mantle is merging/simplifying api+driver (no backward compatibility woes) into single DLL that runs with game in the same process space so multithreading can be done optimally.


----------



## RoutedScripter (Jan 7, 2014)

I don't do this often nor do I proclaim anything but it's just what i've been looking and seeing and even if it's probably not the latter, it just feels like it nontheless 

And it's been fine for like ... when I still wasn't quite sure of myself last year, still kind of reserved and playing it safe, I made bold statements early on as I was sure of a bigger than expected speedup, but ofcourse not something that is fixed, it'll keep getting improved, but the whole PR conspiracy theory, it's a pile of trash, unless they played a giant hoax for some stupid reason.

https://twitter.com/stewox1/status/420705811082395648

http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2344633&page=165#4123

I was reading that for quite some time, that guy is just absolutely out of his mind, even if AMD doesn't have detailed benchmars and accurate "average FPS" it's not going to change much, the API is still low level, we still know and saw the starswarm demo. 






erocker said:


> Are they going to be showing any BF4 w/Mantle at CES this week? I though I heard something about it. I'm also curious to see how it's coming along with Star Citizen. I left a couple questions for the devs about it... It might be too early for an answer though.

















brandonwh64 said:


> So will mantle install like directx does or with the GFX drivers? I still love these slides comparing a I7 IGP to a APU since the I7 was DEF made for GFX performance



I think i heard on some amd-twitter or some dev that it's not going to be inside the catalyst, it'll be inside the eninge like a DLL or something, i don't know, the only thing AMD will release is the mantle driver i believe, if the support is not integrated into the display driver or what, it might just take an update and then won't be needing separate updates thereafter, it's just like 4 or more scenarios and look I don't know which one are they going to pick how it's delivered.


----------



## xenocide (Jan 8, 2014)

RuskiSnajper said:


> I think i heard on some amd-twitter or some dev that it's not going to be inside the catalyst, it'll be inside the eninge like a DLL or something, i don't know, the only thing AMD will release is the mantle driver i believe, if the support is not integrated into the display driver or what, it might just take an update and then won't be needing separate updates thereafter, it's just like 4 or more scenarios and look I don't know which one are they going to pick how it's delivered.


 
It will be programmed into the Game Engine, and when you install the game it will install a Mantle DLL that the engine uses to communicate with the drivers.  At least that's the most efficient way they could do it.


----------



## kn00tcn (Jan 8, 2014)

mantle mantle mantle mantle










hey wait, in that bf4 video, isnt that the new mac pro at the end?


----------



## TheHunter (Jan 8, 2014)

xkche said:


> Just think for a moment that MANTLE works very well (40-45% improve).
> 
> Many developers join and more games are supported.
> 
> ...




Us gamers.


In perfect scenario it would be like so

MS should include it in next OS aka win9 and Mantle should be adopted by all gpu makers and then we will live a perfect gaming world ;D



And such comments as mantle is a fake bs and what not  are just plain sad and stupid... Wth are you a gamer or not??? Don't you want better GFX, better performance, for f sake. And nvidia needs a proper mantle driver that's all.

Some fanboys make me sick, they're like plague.


----------



## xkche (Jan 8, 2014)

HD64G said:


> Exactly! We all who will buy the newer GPU (not the more expensive ones-speaking for myself) and will enjoy games with features unable to have till Mantle. That's why I want to watch it succeeding. Because I am sure about the potential.
> 
> Just imagine in BF4 and other Mantle optimised games when you bought 7870 and now it will run as if you bought 290. Or having 7770 and running BF4 like with a 7870. Isn't it a win-win for customers?



And 4K still hard on a 290, mantle can help running 4K smoothly.

7870-7970 (R9 270X - R9 280) playing with Eyefinity at 60FPS withou problems (on high).

*.*


----------



## Recus (Jan 8, 2014)

Mathragh said:


> It would appear that you don't understand something, or are maybe trolling.
> 
> Mantle isn't specific to any CPU vendor or GPU, the only thing it (currently) needs, is GCN hardware, because thats currently the only architecture with support. So the full range from the slowest(kaveri) APU till the power guzzling R9 290X will support mantle, in combination with any CPU.



Where I said something about support?



the54thvoid said:


> I didn't understand your ref to the 290X and what relevance the charts had.  Genuinely, not being obstinate or rude.  I don't know if the AMD slides use dGPU's or just APU's.





> The Battlefield 4 Mantle demonstration ran on a system with AMD A10 Kaveri processor and AMD Radeon GPU R9 290x Hawaii.



As for charts, point is you don't need Mantle to boost APU.

http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2344633&page=168


----------



## RoutedScripter (Jan 8, 2014)

Someone made this hehe:






I think it's justified, mantle is not a small thing.


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Jan 8, 2014)

RuskiSnajper said:


> Someone made this hehe:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I'm not sure you are serious anymore.


----------



## erocker (Jan 8, 2014)

What does it matter? I haven't seen a serious post out of you in this thread either. 

Here's an idea.

Post relevant information in this thread.

Okay, it's not an idea but more a rule of this forum... To keep on topic.

Thanks.


----------



## Frag_Maniac (Jan 8, 2014)

@ MailMan,
Any developer whom did not partake in the development and is testing it is technically a 3rd party, so I beg to differ on your claim of it being mere smoke and mirrors "gorilla marketing".

Oxide are showing real world results via demos. It may not be the same as testing actual existing games, but it DOES show what the API can do just the same. The only real question is how that will extrapolate into using it in games.

Developers would be stupid to make bold claims that they didn't think they could back up by real world game use. There's a certain amount of credibility at stake here, and they know the entire gaming industry, including it's customer base, have a close eye on the proceedings here.

It's funny how when John Carmack makes a comment, it's taken as truth and trust worthy, despite a lot of failings of his lately, yet when a team like Oxide show real results, suddenly it's snake oil "hearsay" that we can't trust.


----------



## ShiBDiB (Jan 8, 2014)

someone needs to tl;dr this thread


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Jan 8, 2014)

Frag Maniac said:


> @ MailMan,
> Any developer whom did not partake in the development and is testing it is technically a 3rd party, so I beg to differ on your claim of it being mere smoke and mirrors "gorilla marketing".
> 
> Oxide are showing real world results via demos. It may not be the same as testing actual existing games, but it DOES show what the API can do just the same. The only real question is how that will extrapolate into using it in games.
> ...


The developers are "Gaming Evolved" developers. Of course they are going to say Mantle is awesome. I want a W1zz review of a real world game. Not some tech demo that really proves nothing.


----------



## RoutedScripter (Jan 8, 2014)

Serious of what ?

Just wait 7 days until it's out, im not discussing much anymore, got other things to worry about now (freaking cold got me on new year, now im sick as hell with a big ear and headache), all this mantle discussion is way over what I planned to use time discussing anyways ... an well It's not really much to discuss, not trying to downplay anything but I feel everything's been kind of said, any newcomers, late guys go ahead and discuss. (and besides, I was pretty sick of all the early discussions because I kind of couldn't control even my self out of frustration,, so some of the middle few pages of this thread are more of a trainwreck, unfortunately)

Oh, I mean a "small thing" as in it's not just a small feature, it's a major milestone, it's not some feature on top.

EDIT: *UPDATE*

Here you go, mr. serious:









numbers numbers numbers ovar ziben thauzand units


----------



## Frag_Maniac (Jan 9, 2014)

TheMailMan78 said:


> The developers are "Gaming Evolved" developers. Of course they are going to say Mantle is awesome. I want a W1zz review of a real world game. Not some tech demo that really proves nothing.



That's a very narrow and unrealistic viewpoint. Developers aren't of the corporate mindset. They don't buy into a concept ahead of time unconditionally. Case in point CryTek, whom have waffled back and forth from Nvidia to AMD for Crysis, one of the biggest AAA titles.

My point is, just because some have chosen to support Mantle, does not necessarily mean they are in bed with them to the point of compromising their credibility to the extent of exaggerating and even lying about results as you seem to imply. There's also plenty developers out there whom are working on or planning projects that have yet to decide whether they want Nvidia or AMD endorsement whom are taking a serious look at Mantle.

You're oversimplifying this as if it's a handful of AMD fanboy devs and that's it. You're also belittling the purpose and value of the tech demos. They CAN show how many draw calls Mantle is capable of.  If you're going to cry foul with that you may as well just say every synthetic benchmark ever in gaming has no purpose.

The only real difference is we don't know how it will extrapolate to games, but what you're not appreciating is that it DOES show raw rendering power. The main reason you can't guarantee how well it plays out in actual games is because it's heavily dependent on how graphically intense the game is and how well it's coded, and of course how well Mantle is implemented by the dev team.


----------



## RoutedScripter (Jan 15, 2014)

Update:

http://www.engadget.com/2014/01/14/oxide-star-swarm-real-time-strategy-mantle-demo/
*"It's a difference of at least an order of magnitude," *_says Oxide founder Dan Baker (who was previously Graphics Lead on Civilization V)._* "Take the most complex scene you've ever seen in StarCraft II and multiply it by 10."*

I've seen so many "smart-gamer-heads" talking how starcraft 2 won't benefit from Mantle, on various gaming and SC2 related forums, like a month ago, i can't link some of those discussions because the debates got heated too much the threads got deleted and some of the people banned including me (i couldn't care less honestly, not interested in kindergarden)


----------



## BiggieShady (Jan 15, 2014)

Funny thing is that all these years developers are leveraging CPU and GPU usage against inefficient API, resulting with less batches (draw calls) where each one is relatively complex for the GPU (shaders and polycount wise). Now with Mantle to max the usage (and scene complexity) they suddenly need to back off with "big static complex objects reused on scene as much as possible" principle and think more in terms of "greater number of less complex objects but all different and all dynamic or animated". The question is how to change mindset of an entire industry?
Some game genres favor this approach more than others. Space sim genre for instance, no wonder oxide went for mantle first.


----------



## Mathragh (Jan 15, 2014)

BiggieShady said:


> Funny thing is that all these years developers are leveraging CPU and GPU usage against inefficient API, resulting with less batches (draw calls) where each one is relatively complex for the GPU (shaders and polycount wise). Now with Mantle to max the usage (and scene complexity) they suddenly need to back off with "big static complex objects reused on scene as much as possible" principle and think more in terms of "greater number of less complex objects but all different and all dynamic or animated". The question is how to change mindset of an entire industry?
> Some game genres favor this approach more than others. Space sim genre for instance, no wonder oxide went for mantle first.



I think the need for this change isn't as needed as one would first think. Since consoles don't have this handicap and most games also get developed for consoles(if not primarily for consoles) most developers will probably already have a similar mind-set, which they can now also use for developing on PC. Furthermore, continuing to program in a way similar to how dx optimally was programmed will probably still result in better performance, even though it would be far from optimal.


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Jan 15, 2014)

Frag Maniac said:


> You're oversimplifying this as if it's a handful of AMD fanboy devs and that's it. You're also belittling the purpose and value of the tech demos. They CAN show how many draw calls Mantle is capable of.  If you're going to cry foul with that you may as well just say every synthetic benchmark ever in gaming has no purpose.


 Pretty much. Synthetic benchmarks are in fact useless for real world gaming.


----------



## ShiBDiB (Jan 15, 2014)

RuskiSnajper said:


> numbers numbers numbers ovar ziben thauzand units




What game is that 0_0

Looks like a new homeworld AND I WANT IT


----------



## RoutedScripter (Jan 15, 2014)

Oh I forgot the video:










^^ It's not a game, it's a barebone demo.

Homeworld survey is here https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/QZGG77X‎

Upd: Fixed Link


----------



## Mathragh (Jan 15, 2014)

RuskiSnajper said:


> Homeworld survey is here http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/QZGG77X‎



Homeworld link is broken for me?

Edit: fixed


----------



## RoutedScripter (Jan 15, 2014)

Weird link, some bug with copying from search engine and hyperlinking code, dunno, took me some time to fix, try it now.


----------



## RoutedScripter (Jan 16, 2014)

*Update:*

Battlefield 4 in Mantle-Mode played on a laptop with EYEFINITY... okay it may be fake, this is breaking, so let me check it out deeper

http://www.nordichardware.se/CES2014/vi-spelar-mantle-versionen-av-bf4-i-eyefinity-pa-en-laptop.html










There are some screenshot of Johan saying that it's fake, but I don't find that tweet on his account, why would he delete it ?

The screenshot doesn't look like real either, unless it's from a twitter app that has different font, that I'm not aware of.

Here is the website translated:



> Mantle version of Battlefield 4 has been delayed and is expected to appear sometime in January. During CES2014 we took the opportunity to test the forthcoming update of the BF 4 on a MSI GX70 laptop with R9 M290X graphics and an impressive resolution of 5760 x 1080 pixels.
> 
> As a replacement for DirectX, AMD promised performance increases of 45 percent in some circles and use scenario. Then it was all about the integrated graphics in the upcoming APU processor Kaveri and it is unclear what the performance improvements we will see in just the Battlefield 4 with different GPUs. AMD did not want to talk or show any performance differences between the traditional DirectX version of BF 4 with the next Mantle version. During a brief test session, we were able to observe that the substantial equipped MSI laptop was capable of driving Mantle version of BF 4 at around 30 fps with 5760 x 1080 pixel resolution and graphics settings set to high.
> 
> Unfortunately, we also managed to crash the system twice in ten minutes, which may be one of the reasons that AMD and Dice kept on the crisp version of Mantle update. The latest data we have heard are still talking about a boat launch in January, and of course we will come back with more information when it reaches we get the opportunity to test the final version of BF 4 with Mantle.





I think it's real, I think there would be AMD coming out saying it's fake it if really was.1

----------------------------------------------------------
EDIT:

LoL the trolls have retreated to bunkers, so quiet .... all around the web, feels like a paradigm shift in these few days of that video getting out.

My analysis wasn't far from the reality was it ?


----------



## Mathragh (Jan 17, 2014)

RuskiSnajper said:


> *Update:*
> 
> Battlefield 4 in Mantle-Mode played on a laptop with EYEFINITY... okay it may be fake, this is breaking, so let me check it out deeper
> 
> ...




I've seen that exact same laptop demo (start at 1:15 for that specific system) at teksyndicate. Logan said it was just a an M290X aka rebadged Radeon 8970M aka rebadged Radeon 7970M aka clocked down version of the HD 7870 and he didn't say anything about it running mantle. Sooo unless Logan missed something, or they have an exact same set-up secretly running mantle somewhere else I'd say this guy is talking out of his behind .

Thanks for the digging though, moaar information!


----------



## xenocide (Jan 22, 2014)

So, how about that Mantle version of Battlefield 4?


----------



## Recus (Jan 26, 2014)

xenocide said:


> So, how about that Mantle version of Battlefield 4?



Glide delayed till February. https://twitter.com/antal120/status/427045152654249984/photo/1


----------



## xenocide (Jan 28, 2014)

Recus said:


> Glide *revolutionized* till February. https://twitter.com/antal120/status/427045152654249984/photo/1


 
Fixed that for you.


----------



## Fluffmeister (Jan 28, 2014)

I bet DICE are already working on Battlefield 5


----------



## RoutedScripter (Jan 29, 2014)

Example of a webshit article:

http://www.extremetech.com/gaming/1...-again-as-battlefield-4-struggles-to-fix-bugs


If anyone was reading this, this article has major flaws, not only is the title written by a 10 year old ("battlefiled 4 struggles to fix bugs" .. right) and most importantly the constant mistake of mixing who claiming what, they mixed the 3x and 45% thing totally.  Oxide Nitrous Demo is the one with 3x claims, and DICE's battlefield 4 is with the 45% claim, there is no AMD claims at all, yes the AMD logos are on the slides because the latest presentation was done by AMD but it does contain the numbers of those games or demos, there is no AMD claims at all, Developer decides the performance and only the developer knows the performance until they provide it, there is no "optimization" that AMD would do to get "their own numbers", there is no such thing.

This article appears to be written by someone who doesn't even speak proper english.


----------



## erocker (Jan 29, 2014)

New driver should be tomorrow! 

I believe the 45% "claim" is referring to Kaveri and possibly in hybrid CrossFire.

Also, the majority of bad "journalists" on the internet to the decent ones is like putting a basketball and a grain of sand next to each other for comparison.


----------



## xenocide (Jan 29, 2014)

While AMD is allegedly releasing a new driver (it has a news post and everything) there is no sign of Mantle or TrueAudio in there.


----------



## RoutedScripter (Jan 29, 2014)

Well, looks like the whole thing is just hours away ...


----------



## 15th Warlock (Jan 29, 2014)

I just hope this is not another broken promise...can't complain about my 290Xs, they are as fast as a bat out of hell, but the reason I decided to try an AMD card after so many years was the promise of Mantle and TrueAudio...

To be honest I don't really care about the BF4 patch anymore, the game is so broken I gave up trying to play it a long time ago...

Oh well, Chris Roberts said Star Citizen will use Mantle and I hope by the time it's finally released 290X users will finally be able to reap the rewards from our investment


----------



## erocker (Jan 29, 2014)

xenocide said:


> While AMD is allegedly releasing a new driver (it has a news post and everything) there is no sign of Mantle or TrueAudio in there.



No. That driver was from Toshiba and has nothing to do with the next driver. The driver itself is older than the latest beta on AMD's site.


----------



## xenocide (Jan 29, 2014)

erocker said:


> No. That driver was from Toshiba and has nothing to do with the next driver. The driver itself is older than the latest beta on AMD's site.


 
Ah my mistake.  I apparently skimmed over that part.


----------



## natr0n (Jan 30, 2014)

Everything happens today.


----------



## broken pixel (Jan 30, 2014)

@ 4:00am EST you get the BF4 Mantle patch, the AMD Mantle driver is?


----------



## BiggieShady (Jan 30, 2014)

http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Graphi...rings-Mantle-Support-Frame-Pacing-Phase-2-HSA

So Mantle is released as an early beta with this driver ... and cross fire frame pacing ... and HSA support ... well done AMD *clap* *clap*


----------



## the54thvoid (Jan 30, 2014)

It'll be good to see the actual FPS graphs from those %'s.  For those on APU's and high end GFX it'll be a massive boost but I'd like to know what the FPS are in the first instance.  How much oomph do you get with a Kaveri and 290X boosted with Mantle, versus (for example) a 4930k and 290X or more flamebait worthy, a 4930k and a 780ti?  I'm on a 3930k at 4.4GHz so I expect I'd see very low returns with Mantle (if I had a GCN card).
What we all want to see (or some really don't want after all the trash talk ) is with a powerfully specced CPU, will Mantle make a significant impact on fps in a 290x versus 780ti scenario?

And FTR, where's MSI's 290X Lightning at?


----------



## KingPing (Jan 30, 2014)

The Star swarm benchmark is out now on Steam, it's Dx11 capable too.


----------



## BiggieShady (Jan 30, 2014)

the54thvoid said:


> with a powerfully specced CPU, will Mantle make a significant impact on fps in a 290x versus 780ti scenario?



Define significant ... article mentions 10% frame rate increase on high end cpus, and 40% frame rate increase on kaveri in BF4. With multi gpu setups where you are rarely gpu bound, it should be similar increase for all kinds of cpus.


----------



## TheHunter (Jan 30, 2014)

KingPing said:


> The Star swarm benchmark is out now on Steam, it's Dx11 capable too.


Yep, so far it looks like DirectX11 is limited to avg ~ 3800 units, doesnt matter which gpu.


With Mantle +10000 units


----------



## crazyeyesreaper (Jan 30, 2014)

So essentially on really low end systems which no one around here really runs theres a huge performance gain. However on hardware thats of the high end or enthusiast class theres about a 10% gain?...... I could have sworn i said maybe 20% at best..... and here it seems to be 10% which can be offset with a GPU overclock. Mantle does not seem that impressive. Then again BF4 is not the best choice for Mantle anyway.   an RTS would have made more sense. The Star Swarm benchmark is interesting but its not a game.  Lets see Star Craft / Total War / Company of Heroes / World in Conflict / etc etc etc with Mantle. the benefit in those games would actually be noticeable.


----------



## TheHunter (Jan 30, 2014)

Any kind of boost is welcome imo even if its minimal.



And from what I saw 7970 can have avg 25% boost..


----------



## crazyeyesreaper (Jan 30, 2014)

25% on an AMD CPU

on an Intel CPU it seems to be 7.5% to 10%

it just puts AMD and Intel on equal footing but does not impact playability that much.   We have seen larger performance increases from simple VGA driver updates lol.


Core i7-4960X CPU + R9 290X GPU
1080p, Ultra Preset, 4xAA: 9.2% improvement with Mantle
1600p, Ultra Preset, 4xAA: 10% improvement with Mantle

Core i7-4960X CPU + R7 260X GPU
1080p, Ultra Preset, 4xAA: 2.7% improvement
1600p, Ultra Preset, 4xAA: 1.4% improvement

A10-7700K CPU + R9 290X GPU
1080p, Ultra Preset, 4xAA: 40.9% improvement
1600p, Ultra Preset, 4xAA: 17.3% improvement

A10-7700K CPU + R7 260X GPU
1080p, Ultra Preset, 4xAA: 8.3% improvement
1600p, Low Preset: 16.8% improvement

So from what I can see here is that the performance change from Mantle on a high end system are less then what can be achieved through overclocks and traditional driver optimizations.



TheHunter said:


> Any kind of boost is welcome imo even if its minimal.
> 
> 
> 
> And from what I saw 7970 can have avg 25% boost..


Low end system getting such ahuge boost is nice but then how many people here are gonna buy a A10 7700k and pair it with a $600 GPU. Even you have a 4770K so at best if you got a 290X with 10% boost it would offer enough performance to be on par with a 780Ti in BF4.

so..... yea not really that impressive. 290X ends up out pacing a stock 780Ti but aftermarket 780 Ti beats the aftermarket 290X even with Mantle. At worst case senario they Tie. Yes AMD is cheaper but I would still take the Nvidia card at this point.


----------



## Crap Daddy (Jan 30, 2014)

TheHunter said:


> Any kind of boost is welcome imo even if its minimal.
> 
> 
> 
> And from what I saw 7970 can have avg 25% boost..



With an AMD CPU.


----------



## BiggieShady (Jan 30, 2014)

crazyeyesreaper said:


> BF4 is not the best choice for Mantle anyway. an RTS would have made more sense. The Star Swarm benchmark is interesting but its not a game. Lets see Star Craft / Total War / Company of Heroes / World in Conflict / etc etc etc with Mantle. the benefit in those games would actually be noticeable.



Exactly. All that Mantle does now is open the possibilities for developers. We can't expect to see full benefits until whole new generation of games gets designed with wider constraints in mind. Even then it will be less performance benefits and more eye candy ... there will be situation where game's DX11 mode looks worse because, for example, "very high" setting for view distance in DX11 mode is 2 km and in mantle mode it's 10 km.


----------



## crazyeyesreaper (Jan 30, 2014)

Thats all well and good and I have said that all along but the trolls here including the one who started the thread like to continually tell me I am wrong and have no damn idea whats going on. Its honestly a joke we have laughed about in the TPU teamspeak for awhile now.

Mantle wont change anything anytime soon yet the believers are as bad as the beliebers in their unflinching devotion that its inclusion in BF4 means instant success.

Lets face it A10 7700k + 290x works well in BF4 
now lets take a look at the entire Steam / Origin / GOG library and realize its a drop in the ocean right now. It has no meaning Mantle wont matter for a number of years. When it does matter the current implementation of GCN will be much like the HD 5000 series is now. Old and nearly forgotten.


----------



## TheHunter (Jan 30, 2014)

Then you two didnt see this yet..




> *Test case 1: Low-end single-player*
> CPU/GPU: AMD A10-7850K (‘Kaveri’ APU), 4 cores @ 3.7 GHz
> Settings: 720p MEDIUM settings.
> OS: Windows 7 64-bit
> ...






> *Test case 2: Standard 64-player multiplayer*
> CPU: AMD FX-8350, 8 cores @ 4 GHz
> GPU: AMD Radeon 7970 3 GB
> Settings: 1080p ULTRA 1x MSAA
> ...






> *Test case 3: High-end single-player with multiple GPUs*
> CPU: Intel Core i7-3970x Extreme, 12 logical cores @ 3.5 GHz
> GPU: 2x AMD Radeon R9 290x 4 GB
> Settings: 1080p ULTRA 4x MSAA
> ...



straight from battlelog.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Jan 30, 2014)

crazyeyesreaper said:


> The Star Swarm benchmark is interesting but its not a game.  Lets see Star Craft / Total War / Company of Heroes / World in Conflict / etc etc etc with Mantle. the benefit in those games would actually be noticeable.


Command & Conquer: Generals 2

That's the only big RTS title coming up I can think of that is likely to support Mantle.


----------



## BiggieShady (Jan 30, 2014)

crazyeyesreaper said:


> When it does matter the current implementation of GCN will be much like the HD 5000 series is now. Old and nearly forgotten.



Funny enough, AMD team addressed that exact issue when presenting Mantle saying they have targeted right level of API abstraction to allow them two things: to make it work with next versions of GCN, and to make it work with competitors GPUs. Essentially they said wait for these two things to happen


----------



## crazyeyesreaper (Jan 30, 2014)

My point is performance wise it wont matter.

oh wow so AMD fixed Crossfire X with Mantle...... huh thats not surprising in the least. They needed to change how Crossfire worked at a base level to fix it. so of course mantle allows xfire to work better but again how many buy 2x $600-700 GPUs because righ tnow the 290X is $700 and the 290 is $500+ so still $1000-1400 and the only game that benefits is BF4 a Game that a single gpu maxes without issue at 1200p no problem.  I see the benefits I just don't care they don't offer enough change to make them look better its all specific situations.

They picked BF4 because its market presence is huge. Sadly an FPS is not the best way to show off improved CPU utilization.

again Star Craft / Total War / Company of Heroes / etc are better options for showing marked gains with a new API.  BF4 just wasnt that bottlenecked. The frame pacing aspect is a nice change but generally it just puts them closer to and on par with Nvidia which good but not mind blowing.

As for waiting for support from Nvidia sure we can wait not that big a deal but so far BF4 and Thief which are big mantle titles are a MESS.

At this point Thief is shaping up to be a flop. and BF4 is broken still so its a better running game thats still broken lol.

You could say AMD has continued to be AMD with a launch that offers hope but really just doesn't live up the hype train.


----------



## erocker (Jan 30, 2014)

crazyeyesreaper said:


> They picked BF4 because its market presence is huge. Sadly an FPS is not the best way to show off improved CPU utilization.



They picked BF4 because DICE said "yes".


----------



## crazyeyesreaper (Jan 30, 2014)

That to but doesnt change the fact its a paltry 9-10% which considering BF4 performance means the 290x is now = 780Ti in BF4 and they both cost the same on Newegg. So....... not really impressive haha.


----------



## erocker (Jan 30, 2014)

I don't care what cards cost. Those with cards already get a free boost, be it small or large to work with. It's something... and it's free.


----------



## TheHunter (Jan 30, 2014)

Yawn.. 

Not worth the energy to argue with diehard nv fanboys, 
laterz.


----------



## Crap Daddy (Jan 30, 2014)

crazyeyesreaper said:


> That to but doesnt change the fact its a paltry 9-10% which considering BF4 performance means the 290x is now = 780Ti in BF4 and they both cost the same on Newegg. So....... not really impressive haha.



I remember an AMD rep saying that with mantle the 290x will dwarf the Titan. How things change in a few months. Nevertheless we should wait for some real benchies. Thing is it seems it's not enough you have an AMD card,  now you also need an FX!


----------



## crazyeyesreaper (Jan 30, 2014)

Yea it is funny how things change. I also love how everyones default reply is oh your a fanboy. When sadly I have probably owned more Radeon GPUs then the people claiming I am a fanboy lol.
AMD
4870x2
5850 x2
6950 x2
6970 x2
7970 

NVIDIA
7800 GTX
8800 GTS 640MB
GTX 780

lol oh well. I myself am not impressed granted I didnt believe the bs PR and expectations either. Single player gains are worthless in a game where the single player was worthless and people only played it to unlock weapons for MP. In two to three years Mantle has the ability to be amazing BF4 just doesn't benefit much from the API unless your PC is shit to begin with.


----------



## Frick (Jan 30, 2014)

Crap Daddy said:


> Thing is it seems it's not enough you have an AMD card,  now you also need an FX!



Now you're just making things up. Mantle is not the End Of Technology, but that is just wrong.


Multi-GPU single-player
CPU Intel Core i7-3970x Extreme, 12 logical cores @ 3.5 GHz
GPU 2x AMD Radeon R9 290x 4 GB
Settings Ultra 1080p 4x MSAA
OS Windows 8 64-bit
Level South China Sea
DX11 avg 13.24 ms/f (78.4 fps)
Mantle avg 8.38 ms/f (121.5 fps)


EDIT: Yeah yeah "singleplayer in a MP game!!!111! loooooool" etc etc, this just shows it works with Intel CPUs.


----------



## Crap Daddy (Jan 30, 2014)

Frick said:


> Now you're just making things up. Mantle is not the End Of Technology, but that is just wrong.
> 
> 
> Multi-GPU single-player
> ...



There seems something wrong without mantle because I don't believe 2x290x provide only 78 fps in single player. Only if cf is broken. A single 780ti pumps over 80.


----------



## KingPing (Jan 30, 2014)

FordGT90Concept said:


> Command & Conquer: Generals 2
> 
> That's the only big RTS title coming up I can think of that is likely to support Mantle.



Didn't EA canceled it?


----------



## Mathragh (Jan 30, 2014)

Well, they sure take their time for what they call "the finishing touches"(twitter).

On another note, it is kinda typical that for a technology that is supposed to mainly reduce CPU bottlenecking AMD chose a game that already is doing very well on that front to begin with. I suppose Mantle will be much more effective in engines that are either more bottlenecked to begin with, or actually try to put all that extra capability to use(like the oxide engine). However it still seems like a bit of a funny decision. The fact that the BF4 engine will be used by multiple other games was probably at least as important.

Edit: Just gave the Star Swarm Demo a try on D3D settings, the loading screen caused some coils to whine for me for the first time evar! Its also awesome to see my CPU utilisation dropping from 50%+ to sub 25% when going from looking away from the swarm to getting as many units in view as possible. It is also really striking to see these parameters closely follow the batch count.
Also, for people wondering what is with the blurryness: they use something called "Temporal AA", which basically does exactly what it sounds like it does, as maybe quadruples the draw calls. Without it, even my CPU(albeit overclocked) atleast doesnt totally grind to a halt when all units are in full view in D3D mode.
Apparently their engine was already so efficient(i mean 4k+ units is quite impressive) that they had to add an extra performance breaker to really grind systems to a halt, which then can be alleviated again by mantle.
Awesome demo anyhow.


----------



## 15th Warlock (Jan 31, 2014)

Thief is gonna support mantle too right?


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Jan 31, 2014)

Crap Daddy said:


> I remember an AMD rep saying that with mantle the 290x will dwarf the Titan. How things change in a few months. Nevertheless we should wait for some real benchies. Thing is it seems it's not enough you have an AMD card,  now you also need an FX!



Done yall should have been listening


----------



## BiggieShady (Jan 31, 2014)

crazyeyesreaper said:


> You could say AMD has continued to be AMD with a launch that offers hope but really just doesn't live up the hype train.



AMD did push the hype all the way to the end user, when at this point only engine developers should be hyped about Mantle. The project may have incredible progress over the next years, but the end user will have the impression it delivered late and promised more than it delivered. 3 months ago they marketed their GPUs with support for their API that wasn't available at a time and today exist as a very early beta ... buy it and you will get benefits from all games that might be built using it ... you never know  I hate to do car analogy, but it is like marketing a car today that can use alternative fuel once that alternative fuel research is completed and there are new fuel pumps all over the country.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Jan 31, 2014)

KingPing said:


> Didn't EA canceled it?


Not canceled, just in development limbo.  It seems EA can't keep a development studio open long enough to make it.


----------



## RoutedScripter (Jan 31, 2014)

crazyeyesreaper said:


> Then again BF4 is not the best choice for Mantle anyway.   an RTS would have made more sense.



Indeed. But, old news, I knew that before any of the Mantle guys even talked about that.



crazyeyesreaper said:


> The Star Swarm benchmark is interesting but its not a game.



Story is irrelevant. this argument is not valid.


----------



## ZenZimZaliben (Jan 31, 2014)

Mantle is AMD exclusive and will only be supported by developers that are willing to use it. Where as DirectX and OpenGL are available to everyone. Mantle is cool and all but it is a step backwards. The other downside to mantle is it will be used mainly on Consoles. Most consoles are using AMD this means AAA title games for PC will have poor support or no support for mantle and there will be very few select titles for PC that support it. I'm thinking like phsyx but worse. For Mantle to succeed it needs to be cross platform like OpenGL/DirectX.


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Jan 31, 2014)

So worth dealing with AMD drivers. Gonna sell my 670's ASAP. I just hope I can find some sucker that hasn't heard of Mantel yet so I can buy a jacked up MANTLE MONSTER AMD GPU ASAP!

I made such a mistake getting 670's and 144FPS when I could get an APU and Mantle and have like 900FPS!


----------



## natr0n (Jan 31, 2014)

Imagine people arguing online and putting something down when we haven't even tried it yet. IMAGINE !!!


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Jan 31, 2014)

natr0n said:


> Imagine people arguing online and putting something down when we haven't even tried it yet. IMAGINE !!!


Its almost as bad as people praising and saying how revolutionary something is without even trying it. IMAGINE!!!!!!!


----------



## the54thvoid (Jan 31, 2014)

TheMailMan78 said:


> Its almost as bad as people praising and saying how revolutionary something is without even trying it. IMAGINE!!!!!!!



Ah, riposte.


----------



## erocker (Jan 31, 2014)

Imagine all the people.. Living life with green.. oooh oooh!

You may say I'm a fanboy...

But I'm not the only one.

I hope some day you can join us...

and Mantle will work and be fun...


Meh.


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Jan 31, 2014)

erocker said:


> Imagine all the people.. Living life with green.. oooh oooh!
> 
> You may say I'm a fanboy...
> 
> ...


Ya know that guy married Yoko Ono. Personally I wouldn't trust his judgment.


----------



## erocker (Jan 31, 2014)

He's dead Jim.


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Jan 31, 2014)

erocker said:


> He's dead Jim.


And boom goes the dynamite.


----------



## RoutedScripter (Jan 31, 2014)

ZenZimZaliben said:


> Mantle is AMD exclusive and will only be supported by developers that are willing to use it. Where as DirectX and OpenGL are available to everyone. Mantle is cool and all but it is a step backwards. The other downside to mantle is it will be used mainly on Consoles. Most consoles are using AMD this means AAA title games for PC will have poor support or no support for mantle and there will be very few select titles for PC that support it. I'm thinking like phsyx but worse. For Mantle to succeed it needs to be cross platform like OpenGL/DirectX.



You're late to the party man!

Also, most of your post is wrong and subjective or poor conclusions.


----------



## TheHunter (Feb 1, 2014)

TheMailMan78 said:


> So worth dealing with AMD drivers. Gonna sell my 670's ASAP. I just hope I can find some sucker that hasn't heard of Mantel yet so I can buy a jacked up MANTLE MONSTER AMD GPU ASAP!
> 
> I made such a mistake getting 670's and 144FPS when I could get an APU and Mantle and have like 900FPS!



lol typical nv fan

And you completely missed the point.


Mantle can bring so much more then just fps boost, now we're limited to ~ 10000-15000 draw calls, you see what worlds, characters, animations, physics we get.. Mediocre most of the time.. Now look at  the same world enhanced with extra detail that is now limited to 30000 or even 90000 calls @ same fps. CGI gfx detail..

Its up to nvidia now to make a proper mantle driver, ps GCN is very similar to Nv fermi+ gpus so there shouldn't be any real issues.


----------



## Chetkigaming (Feb 1, 2014)

1. Mantle is shit, few fps its nothing
2. The era of GCN ends soon.
3. Directx 12 will bring much more than this 1 game mantle shit 5% performance(WTF LOL), how thf you are really thinking this is some next gen shit? no, this is only for consoles.
4. Mantle doesn't deserve so many words at all.


----------



## RoutedScripter (Feb 1, 2014)

^^ best troll post ever since I started follwing mantle in like september


----------



## broken pixel (Feb 1, 2014)

Why do people find the need to bitch is beyond me. If you do not understand it or dislike it just ignore it. 

Leak the driver already I want to test on my own rig.


----------



## erocker (Feb 1, 2014)

People tend to hate, dismiss and/or get angry at what they don't understand.


----------



## the54thvoid (Feb 1, 2014)

RuskiSnajper said:


> ^^ best troll post ever since I started follwing mantle in like september



Couldn't agree more.



broken pixel said:


> Why do people find the need to bitch is beyond me. If you do not understand it or dislike it just ignore it.



Juvenile loyalty and stung e-peen



erocker said:


> People tend to hate, dismiss and/or get angry at what they don't understand.



Correct indeed.

Given the results so far I'd like to add that 10% on high end is still pretty decent.  Won't persuade me to leave my overclocking friendly Titan though.  I'm waiting to see the 290X Lightning but I'm not hopeful given recent incarnations...

There is a problem with Mantle though and it's not the tech and it is something people are overlooking or pointing out in slightly hysterical, emotional posts.  I play BF4 a lot - way more than any other game.  So it would be good if i had a GCN card for that.  But... what about all the other games that don't elect to develop code for Mantle? (And don't shout out THief and Star Citizen and the handful of others, it needs saturation to change the world)

Mantle is only as useful as the games that work with it and no matter how efficient it is over DX11.x, it can't become a 'game changer' without Nvidia and Microsofts backing.  I see it going one of three ways and only one is good.

1) AMD work with M/soft and Nvidia to make Mantle happen across the board.  This is currently the awesome but highly unlikely option.
2) Nvidia doesn't like what it sees with Mantle's performance boost and starts to heavily invest in AAA titles and worse (like the AC franchise) starts locking out AMD cards (this will lead to number 3)
3) Mantle doesn't gain traction due to poor uptake.  A few AAA titles wont help it survive.  It dies quietly.

We can see early on Mantle is fantastic if you have low end CPU, GCN GPU architecture and a Mantle coded game (so you need 2 things for Mantle to work).  But it's out of AMD's hands now in many ways.  No matter how hard people want to say otherwise, Nvidia and Microsoft can kill it off if they choose to by effectively buying up the best games.  This would be tragic for us all quite frankly.

M/Soft has pride - too much pride.  Do we think it will like what it sees Mantle doing to DX11.x?  Absolutely not.  It can support it or fight it.
Nvidia, well, the exact same as M/soft. 

If I was an arrogant son of a bitch at the head of these companies (oops, they both have them!) I would be thinking how i could kill Mantle.  If i saw the light, I'd approach AMD and ask to co-operate with it.

That's where Mantle's future lies.  Death or Glory, there is no middle road.


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Feb 1, 2014)

TheHunter said:


> lol typical nv fan
> 
> And you completely missed the point.
> 
> ...


You're relatively new so Ill let that go.


----------



## broken pixel (Feb 2, 2014)

Mantle does have an on/ off menu button. 

To Mantle or not to Mantle.


----------



## RoutedScripter (Feb 2, 2014)

I told everyone the first patch is not going to be the last one, and they said exactly that more mantle optimizations are coming. And I said exactly that there will be people jumping to conclusions if the first patch won't be like the top number AMD PR talked about.

Next, we all know nobody expected existing FPS games to gain that much as it was talked about in "what will be possible" in the first round of patches.

Also, I was never talking about multiplayer benefits, because that's all connected to netcode and we all know whow crappy Frostbite's netcode is compared to idTech.

That's said, Mantle isn't just performance as they see from their ignorant state, it makes the framerate more smooth, and a huge benefit in stability, being able to polish the game really good.


----------



## MxPhenom 216 (Feb 2, 2014)

ZenZimZaliben said:


> Mantle is AMD exclusive and will only be supported by developers that are willing to use it. Where as DirectX and OpenGL are available to everyone. Mantle is cool and all but it is a step backwards. The other downside to mantle is it will be used mainly on Consoles. Most consoles are using AMD this means AAA title games for PC will have poor support or no support for mantle and there will be very few select titles for PC that support it. I'm thinking like phsyx but worse. For Mantle to succeed it needs to be cross platform like OpenGL/DirectX.



Christ, you would have been better off keeping this to yourself, because you couldn't be more wrong.

1. Mantle is technically not exclusive to AMD. It can be used on NVidia as well, just NVidia needs to support it in their driver which they probably never will.
2. Mantle is a step forward if you look at it in a technical way.
3. AMD has said(Multiple times) that Mantle will not be used in consoles. It was not developed for consoles. So no, what you call a downside, is irrelevant, as its false.


----------



## erocker (Feb 2, 2014)

I getting about a 5-8 fps increase with Mantle. FRAPS doesn't seem to be working with it.


----------



## Nordic (Feb 2, 2014)

I don't see the rush that everyone seems to have to either love or hate mantle. Most software like this, amd or not, is extremely buggy at first. Lets just say it works great. The games it supports is so few. Mantle needs to mature. People need to give it time.


----------



## CrackerJack (Feb 2, 2014)

erocker said:


> I getting about a 5-8 fps increase with Mantle. FRAPS doesn't seem to be working with it.



Fraps only gathers from DirectX or OpenGL, I'm sure Mantle will be in the future


----------



## natr0n (Feb 2, 2014)

Have you guys played in game mp, I keep having issues now cant see guns in menus. when i spawn I have no gun and arms glitch out farther. 

This is on DX after testing manlte. Gonna reinstall it see what happens.


----------



## CrackerJack (Feb 2, 2014)

I had that issue before installing 14.1, along with no sounds like others. So I assume it was just another in game issue. Tried a game repair.. no go.


----------



## ZenZimZaliben (Feb 3, 2014)

MxPhenom 216 said:


> Christ, you would have been better off keeping this to yourself, because you couldn't be more wrong.
> 
> 1. Mantle is technically not exclusive to AMD. It can be used on NVidia as well, just NVidia needs to support it in their driver which they probably never will.
> 2. Mantle is a step forward if you look at it in a technical way.
> 3. AMD has said(Multiple times) that Mantle will not be used in consoles. It was not developed for consoles. So no, what you call a downside, is irrelevant, as its false.



1. It is AMD exclusive...meaning if Nvidia wants it they have to licence it AND make changes to hardware, which will require more licensing because the hardware to take advantage is also IP. It;s not just a new instruction set or middle-ware, it is a software instruction set dependent on proprietary hardware.
2. Technically it is a step back because it is proprietary and proprietary limits development.
3. Not be used in consoles initially.


----------



## erocker (Feb 3, 2014)

From what I understand this Nvidia or any other company doesn't need a licence for Mantle. It's free, they just need to make a driver for it that works with their hardware. It is not proprietary.


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Feb 3, 2014)

erocker said:


> From what I understand this Nvidia or any other company doesn't need a licence for Mantle. It's free, they just need to make a driver for it that works with their hardware. It is not proprietary.



I have also heard the same thing. HOWEVER I find it very hard to believe a company would create an API that would help their competitors out without a cost. SOMEONE has to pay for the development of Mantle.


----------



## erocker (Feb 3, 2014)

TheMailMan78 said:


> I have also heard the same thing. HOWEVER I find it very hard to believe a company would create an API that would help their competitors out without a cost. SOMEONE has to pay for the development of Mantle.



Yes, if a company were to adopt Mantle they would have to pay their employees to make drivers for it. Just like they have to do for Direct X or any other API that decides to come along.


----------



## Crap Daddy (Feb 3, 2014)

TheMailMan78 said:


> I have also heard the same thing. HOWEVER I find it very hard to believe a company would create an API that would help their competitors out without a cost. SOMEONE has to pay for the development of Mantle.



It is proprietary. Not even the 5*** or 6*** series from AMD are supported. Business is business.


----------



## erocker (Feb 3, 2014)

Crap Daddy said:


> It is proprietary. Not even the 5*** or 6*** series from AMD are supported. Business is business.



How does that make it proprietary? Perhaps it just needs to be coded to work with those GPU's. That takes time, money, etc.

If it were proprietary, a company such as Nvidia would have to pay AMD in order to use it. They don't.


----------



## MxPhenom 216 (Feb 3, 2014)

ZenZimZaliben said:


> 1. It is AMD exclusive...meaning if Nvidia wants it they have to licence it AND make changes to hardware, which will require more licensing because the hardware to take advantage is also IP. It;s not just a new instruction set or middle-ware, it is a software instruction set dependent on proprietary hardware.
> 2. Technically it is a step back because it is proprietary and proprietary limits development.
> 3. Not be used in consoles initially.


 
AMD has said multiple times it is not proprietary (There is a slide, that said it works on all hardware, during their presentations). If NVidia wants it to be compatible with their hardware, they just need to include that support in their driver, which will likely never happen, because we all know NVidia's business practices.

It will not be used on consoles really at all. One of Mantle's purposes is to give developers and easier environment to work with when developing/porting to PC. It gives developers lower level access to the architecture of the hardware, giving them a more console like environment.

Developers do not need that on consoles. They already have a "coding to the metal" environment.



erocker said:


> How does that make it proprietary? Perhaps it just needs to be coded to work with those GPU's. That takes time, money, etc.
> If it were proprietary, a company such as Nvidia would have to pay AMD in order to use it. They don't.


 
Agreed.


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Feb 3, 2014)

erocker said:


> Nvidia would have to pay AMD in order to use it. They don't.


Has then been confirmed? Or is it just the internet saying that hoping for an open source world again? Where is a link saying its free to everyone?


----------



## erocker (Feb 3, 2014)

TheMailMan78 said:


> Has then been confirmed? Or is it just the internet saying that hoping for an open source world again? Where is a link saying its free to everyone?



It is mentioned. Here's just one article of many that mentions it on the last paragraph: http://www.techspot.com/news/54134-amd-launches-mantle-api-to-optimize-pc-gpu-performance.html

*I hope Nvidia picks it up. Truth be told, they'd probably do it better than AMD>


----------



## HD64G (Feb 3, 2014)

CGN is just made for HSA and brings the possibility for the CPU to offload some of its job to GPU due to its way of handling data and physics which is way better than previous GPU architectures. That is the only reason why Mantle is ONLY for CGN from AMD's GPU series of products. nVidia is another story though. Personally I didn't like this company only because of its price strategy=arrogance the last 10 years. So, if they try to sabotage Mantle instead of making their GPUs work with it, this will be the proof that they don't care about the customers AT ALL but ONLY for money. Every company does this but they exceed every limit in doing so.

And Mantle is perfect for people with CPUs up to $150 or having 2 or more GPUs. It diminishes the bottleneck of CPU. And in game engines made from the base up with it gives devs much more freedom in creation.


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Feb 3, 2014)

erocker said:


> It is mentioned. Here's just one article of many that mentions it on the last paragraph: http://www.techspot.com/news/54134-amd-launches-mantle-api-to-optimize-pc-gpu-performance.html
> 
> *I hope Nvidia picks it up. Truth be told, they'd probably do it better than AMD>


Awesome. Thank you sir. I still don't understand why AMD would spend that kind of money to develop and API just to give it away as open source. Just doesn't make sense. There HAS to be an angle to it I'm ignorant of. Where the hell is the old goat to simplify things for me?!


----------



## erocker (Feb 3, 2014)

TheMailMan78 said:


> Awesome. Thank you sir. I still don't understand why AMD would spend that kind of money to develop and API just to give it away as open source. Just doesn't make sense. There HAS to be an angle to it I'm ignorant of. Where the hell is the old goat to simplify things for me?!



Who knows. Maybe this was a pet project of some of the guys at AMD and it works.. kinda.


----------



## Mathragh (Feb 3, 2014)

TheMailMan78 said:


> Awesome. Thank you sir. I still don't understand why AMD would spend that kind of money to develop and API just to give it away as open source. Just doesn't make sense. There HAS to be an angle to it I'm ignorant of. Where the hell is the old goat to simplify things for me?!



I think the reward for AMD would be the adoption of mantle by Nvidia and Intel itself, since at that point AMD will (probably) have the advantage of being the most experienced player using an API that is used by all, resulting in a competitive advantage for AMD. The advantage will probably weaken over time, but it might just gain AMD some additional sales/marketshare.


----------



## The Von Matrices (Feb 3, 2014)

TheMailMan78 said:


> Awesome. Thank you sir. I still don't understand why AMD would spend that kind of money to develop and API just to give it away as open source. Just doesn't make sense. There HAS to be an angle to it I'm ignorant of. Where the hell is the old goat to simplify things for me?!



Where are you seeing that it's open source?  All I see is that the API is open, meaning that anyone can use it, just like how DirectX's API is open.  All the other reports I've read state that AMD is not releasing the code because it's "not ready."

It's a closed source API at the moment.  AMD is officially "open to changes" but is not obligated to introduce them.  In a sense this is good because it reduces fragmentation of the code.  However, if for example NVidia wanted to adopt it but wanted changes that would be able to use functional units specific to their GPUs, it would be completely up to AMD to decide whether or not to implement them.  In the end Mantle is no more open to third parties than DirectX.


----------



## RoutedScripter (Feb 3, 2014)

I'm just looking at like 10 articles from various sources , crappy flashy tech sites posting their manure. ExtremeTech, HardOCP, what the hell ever, one of them made a BF4 crossfire mantle benchmark ofcourse it's all bugged it got 50% less performance and the idiots went into their story about how "mantle doesn't look good here".

Just as I told you what will happen, they're all making these reviews like it's some kind of a "release" and talking about how mantle will not make GPUs performance faster. I TOLD you the stupid ass media will make this up. Go look my posts from a month ago.

A lot of the dribel is totally false because, as Oxide said, they don't have any real GPU opimizations in the starswarm code, they don't have crossfire support, it's all *WORK IN FUCKING PROGRESS*, and these sites make me sick, they make it like a "product" has been released.

AMD said that the implementation is all beta, it's total early beta, and that's exactly how I expected the numbers to show, around 30% for the games, and around 300-400% for starswarm from CPU performance.


----------



## ZenZimZaliben (Feb 3, 2014)

I am positive I have read this is not opensource and is hardware specific, meaning it will take more then just a software licence to use.

https://twitter.com/Thracks/status/383872285351739393


"@Thracks is MANTLE open source ?"

"@GnrlKhalid No. It is an API for the industry-standard GCN Architecture and its specific ISA, done at the request of game developers."

These means the hardware has to have built in means of handling these instructions. Like during chip fabrication, not some driver that just makes it work.


----------



## BiggieShady (Feb 3, 2014)

TheMailMan78 said:


> Awesome. Thank you sir. I still don't understand why AMD would spend that kind of money to develop and API just to give it away as open source. Just doesn't make sense. There HAS to be an angle to it I'm ignorant of. Where the hell is the old goat to simplify things for me?!





Mathragh said:


> I think the reward for AMD would be the adoption of mantle by Nvidia and Intel itself, since at that point AMD will (probably) have the advantage of being the most experienced player using an API that is used by all, resulting in a competitive advantage by itself. The advantage will probably weaken over time, but it might just gain AMD some additional sales/marketshare.



Free licensing is Mantle's only hope for market wide adoption ... even with free license, I'm sure Nvidia will wait out a year or so to see how Mantle is working out for early adopters. But they will support it in 2015. Why do I think so? If AMD knew surely that Microsoft would push for Dx12 with optimized latencies and better mutithreading, they wouldn't invest in Mantle. So AMD knows that DX is at dead end, or Mantle is free byproduct of PS4 API development. Either way, nvidia, not being in the console business, will eventually have to decide to support Mantle after they see how "healthy" the development of DX12 really is.



ZenZimZaliben said:


> I am positive I have read this is not opensource and is hardware specific, meaning it will take more then just a software licence to use.



It is hardware specific in this version, but it's not like that by design. Currently it's not supported by any other driver than AMD latest beta only for GCN cards.
nvidia Kepler and amd GCN chips are *very similar from the outside* (both adhere to dx11.1 specs) so technically mantle can be supported in drivers for any dx11 capable gpu.


----------



## bpgt64 (Feb 3, 2014)

BiggieShady said:


> Free licensing is Mantle's only hope for market wide adoption ... even with free license, I'm sure Nvidia will wait out a year or so to see how Mantle is working out for early adopters. But they will support it in 2015. Why do I think so? If AMD knew surely that Microsoft would push for Dx12 with optimized latencies and better mutithreading, they wouldn't invest in Mantle. So AMD knows that DX is at dead end, or Mantle is free byproduct of PS4 API development. Either way, nvidia, not being in the console business, will eventually have to decide to support Mantle after they see how "healthy" the development of DX12 really is.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



How can you say that Mantle is a bi-product of the PS4 Api development when it can't, or isn't being implemented on PS4.


----------



## MxPhenom 216 (Feb 3, 2014)

BiggieShady said:


> Free licensing is Mantle's only hope for market wide adoption ... even with free license, I'm sure Nvidia will wait out a year or so to see how Mantle is working out for early adopters. But they will support it in 2015. Why do I think so? If AMD knew surely that Microsoft would push for Dx12 with optimized latencies and better mutithreading, they wouldn't invest in Mantle. So AMD knows that DX is at dead end, or Mantle is free byproduct of PS4 API development. Either way, nvidia, not being in the console business, will eventually have to decide to support Mantle after they see how "healthy" the development of DX12 really is.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Mantle compliments DirectX. When Mantle is used as the game API, DirectX is still there. It does not go away. DirectX will not be going anywhere. DirectX is not only used in games, but its used as the graphical component for almost everything Microsoft. Windows, etc.


----------



## xenocide (Feb 4, 2014)

BiggieShady said:


> Free licensing is Mantle's only hope for market wide adoption ... even with free license, I'm sure Nvidia will wait out a year or so to see how Mantle is working out for early adopters. But they will support it in 2015. Why do I think so? If AMD knew surely that Microsoft would push for Dx12 with optimized latencies and better mutithreading, they wouldn't invest in Mantle. So AMD knows that DX is at dead end, or Mantle is free byproduct of PS4 API development. Either way, nvidia, not being in the console business, will eventually have to decide to support Mantle after they see how "healthy" the development of DX12 really is.


 
Microsoft hasn't bothered to push out DX12 because very few companies even bother to make games that are _DX11_.  Developers making multiplatform games generally stick to DX9.0c, and the adoption rate for DX10/11 has been miserable.  But, the next generation of consoles just rolled out, and they are DX11 compatible, which should make them DX12 compatible looking forward, and push developers to actually make DX11/12 games.


----------



## BiggieShady (Feb 4, 2014)

bpgt64 said:


> How can you say that Mantle is a bi-product of the PS4 Api development when it can't, or isn't being implemented on PS4.



Oh right, I am supposed to believe it's totally unrelated ... I didn't say it was direct code branch of PS4 API project ... more like using the same practices and principles, because 'Mantle' is a market name and API is application programming interface ... after all they did say that Mantle was designed with consoles in mind and that extra code Mantle enabled app requires is already being commonly used even in last gen console games (in similar fashion, mind you, there is no direct porting).
I did say it might be a free byproduct, when I should've put quotes around "free".



MxPhenom 216 said:


> Mantle compliments DirectX. When Mantle is used as the game API, DirectX is still there. It does not go away. DirectX will not be going anywhere. DirectX is not only used in games, but its used as the graphical component for almost everything Microsoft. Windows, etc.



No, it's not going anywhere, currently it's just in danger of becoming less relevant



xenocide said:


> Microsoft hasn't bothered to push out DX12 because very few companies even bother to make games that are _DX11_.  Developers making multiplatform games generally stick to DX9.0c, and the adoption rate for DX10/11 has been miserable.  But, the next generation of consoles just rolled out, and they are DX11 compatible, which should make them DX12 compatible looking forward, and push developers to actually make DX11/12 games.



IMO, DX12 doesn't need to bring bunch of new features and change how old ones are used ... what it needs is less new features, less api changes and more optimizations and internal changes. That way DX12, while being late with its optimizations, would have no adoption issues. The question remains how fast is Mantle going to be adopted.


----------



## HTC (Feb 6, 2014)

Some dude @ XS tested starswarm Mantle VS DX with a R9-290X, a Tyan S7010 and Dual Xeon X5570s clocked at 3.2 (turbo) under full load, and 3.33ghz with 1-2 cores loaded.

Interesting results: http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums...-Mantle-Vs-DirectX-11-Star-Swarm-With-R9-290X


----------



## xenocide (Feb 10, 2014)

The only interesting thing I saw was that Motion Blur cripples DirectX.  The massive gains are nearly squashed when that single feature is turned off.


----------



## the54thvoid (Feb 10, 2014)

xenocide said:


> The only interesting thing I saw was that Motion Blur cripples DirectX.  The massive gains are nearly squashed when that single feature is turned off.



Never use it - completely unrealistic.  My daily life never sees this effect.  My eyes and brain work correctly.


----------



## RCoon (Feb 10, 2014)

the54thvoid said:


> Never use it - completely unrealistic.  My daily life never sees this effect.  My eyes and brain work correctly.


 
That, and the fact it's the most hated video option in existence. To this day I don't know anyone that uses it, or even likes it. About as useful as PhysX in Arkham Oranges. More blur, MOAR SMOKE!


----------



## xenocide (Feb 11, 2014)

RCoon said:


> That, and the fact it's the most hated video option in existence. To this day I don't know anyone that uses it, or even likes it.


 
Turning it off is preferable in most games.  I have yet to encounter one where it really enhanced the experience...


----------



## HammerON (Feb 11, 2014)

the54thvoid said:


> Never use it - completely unrealistic.  My daily life never sees this effect.  My eyes and brain work correctly.


 Same here. I disable in all games that has the feature. Gives me a headache if left on.


----------



## 15th Warlock (Feb 11, 2014)

I thought motion blur was created in the PS2/Xbox era to hide the hideous frame drops those consoles had, funny how now it's considered a "feature" by some developers


----------



## xenocide (Feb 26, 2014)

Not trying to necropost (granted it's only been 2 weeks for this topic) but some updates on Mantle and the Graphics API environment that I found interesting.

1.  Thief has delayed it's Mantle implementation.  That makes 2 consecutive AAA games plagued with technical problems at launch that have delayed Mantle implementation.  This is not what AMD wants to see.

2.  DirectX and OpenGL are going to announce efforts to allow lower levels of access through their API, and reduce driver overhead at GDC.  DirectX lowering overhead, DirectX will be going lower level--"to the metal", and OpenGL reducing driver overhead with support from Nvidia, Intel, and ... AMD?


----------



## erocker (Feb 26, 2014)

1. Thief is a mess of a game apparently anyways.

2. Good news for everyone!


----------



## xenocide (Feb 26, 2014)

erocker said:


> 1. Thief is a mess of a game apparently anyways.


 
How many titles until it becomes a trend though, at least in the public and development communities minds.  Games developed with DirectX and Mantle support are so far 2/2 in being buggy messes of a game.



erocker said:


> 2. Good news for everyone!


 
I completely agree!  Better performance with pre-existing API's/technologies sounds fantastic.


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Feb 26, 2014)

xenocide said:


> How many titles until it becomes a trend though, at least in the public and development communities minds.  Games developed with DirectX and Mantle support are so far 2/2 in being buggy messes of a game.
> 
> 
> 
> I completely agree!  Better performance with pre-existing API's/technologies sounds fantastic.


I can only talk of bf4 because I don't own thief but bf4 is innately bugy in dx or mantle that doesn't make it Amd's fault but dices .its not the api its developer's that requires a prod. 
See how yet again Amd leads the sheep out of their skulky sheds and into the future. 
Respec the red.


----------



## RCoon (Feb 26, 2014)

xenocide said:


> I completely agree! Better performance with pre-existing API's/technologies sounds fantastic



AMD charge into the fray with good intentions. Even if mantle flops because of poor implementation by devs, at least it's encouraged DX and OpenGL to be more efficient. Can't fault them for that.


----------



## BiggieShady (Feb 26, 2014)

RCoon said:


> AMD charge into the fray with good intentions. Even if mantle flops because of poor implementation by devs, at least it's encouraged DX and OpenGL to be more efficient. Can't fault them for that.


They did stir up things a little bit. I also believe that BF4 and Thief are both games with problems in development unrelated to Mantle (BF4 was kind of rushed and Thief was changed several times over). Really bad choices for presenting Mantle. At least that Oxide Nitrous engine demo shows Mantle can work really well.


----------



## RoutedScripter (Mar 22, 2014)

Boom!

http://cryengine.com/news/crytek-partner-with-amd-to-bring-mantle-support-to-cryengine


----------



## the54thvoid (Mar 22, 2014)

Boom? 

Nvidia also have collaborated with their gameworks stuff I think. What we don't want to see is development being fought over like divorcing parents. 
Open standards would be preferable and by open  I also mean, industry standard. 

Let's see if Cryengine can do better than DICE and frostbite. And by that I mean release a bug free game with excellent UNIVERSAL driver provision.


----------



## Vario (Mar 22, 2014)

What amazes me is with Direct X, BF4 at 1080P with Ultra looks horrible yet taxes my system higher than any other game I own.  Is this the case with Mantle as well?  I was playing Hard Reset yesterday and that game not only looks better but it uses a lot less resources.


----------



## BiggieShady (Mar 22, 2014)

Vario said:


> I was playing Hard Reset yesterday and that game not only looks better but it uses a lot less resources.



Hard Reset has very high texture resolutions because of lots of texture re-using (sci-fi environment) and a world that can be effectively culled to keep the frame rate high. Their engine is also very advanced http://www.dsogaming.com/interviews...-optimizations-mantle-mod-tools-future-plans/


----------



## Xzibit (Mar 22, 2014)

GameSpot - Report: EA secures rights to Titanfall 2

What if its true. EA replaces Source Engine with Frostbite and supports Mantle


----------



## xenocide (Mar 23, 2014)

BiggieShady said:


> Hard Reset has very high texture resolutions because of lots of texture re-using (sci-fi environment) and a world that can be effectively culled to keep the frame rate high. Their engine is also very advanced http://www.dsogaming.com/interviews/flying-wild-hog-talks-shadow-warrior-64bit-cpu-optimizations-mantle-mod-tools-future-plans/


 
I imagine that is publishing rights because I think Respawn insisted on retaining intellectual property rights to Titanfall.  EA had publishing rights for the current game so it's not surprising they would get them since the first game was insanely successful so far.



Vario said:


> What amazes me is with Direct X, BF4 at 1080P with Ultra looks horrible yet taxes my system higher than any other game I own.  Is this the case with Mantle as well?  I was playing Hard Reset yesterday and that game not only looks better but it uses a lot less resources.


 
That sounds like something on your end.  I have a weaker system than yours and the game looks great on Ultra for me but is still playable.  The engine is very well optimized and requires you to spend some time fiddling with settings to find a good medium.  I had to adjust antialiasing settings a lot to keep the game playable.


----------

