"A future AMD Catalyst release will allow for the WDDM 1.1 (Windows 7 driver) to be installed under Windows 8.0 for those users unable to upgrade to Windows 8.1"

Love the guy doing a fist pump.

Awesome, im grabbing it in 30 minutes on my desktop. I am dieing to play Murdered soul suspect, cannot wait for it to be out!

still no support in AMD Overdrive Tab for HD 7990; GPU Select drop down box is missing so only one gpu can be overclocked [that's not going to end well is it AMD!]

Watch Dogs performance improvement is non existent with this driver.

gdallskWatch Dogs performance improvement is non existent with this driver.

That's because nvidia ensured that it would be crippled on AMD cards
A GTX 770 is faster than a 290X
www.extremetech.com/gaming/183095-watch-dogs-analyzing-the-impact-of-nvidias-gameworks-integration-and-amd-performance

Batou1986That's because nvidia ensured that it would be crippled on AMD cards
A GTX 770 is faster than a 290X
www.extremetech.com/gaming/183095-watch-dogs-analyzing-the-impact-of-nvidias-gameworks-integration-and-amd-performance

What a joke.
Extremetech guy is worried about the Forbes reviewers findings:

Over at Forbes, reviewer Jason Evangelho has tested the R9 290X against the Nvidia GTX 770 with full results in a range of configurations coming today. His preliminary results show exactly the kind of skewed pattern I’d previously been concerned about

Concerned enough to write it up, yet couldn't replicate the Forbes numbers (and nor could anyone else)...

I spent a significant chunk of Monday attempting to replicate his results, but was unable to do so.

...and even referenced the Techspot review that had the 290X decimating the GTX 770, which falls exactly in line with just about every other gameplay review published
PCLab.pl
GameGPU
HardOCP
Guru3D
PCGH
...and then goes on to prattle on about Mantle being open source and not limited to GCN

AMD’s Mantle, a low-level API, doesn’t require the company’s GCN architecture to function properly. AMD says it will work equally well on Nvidia cards. The company clearly waves a banner of open-source development and ideals.

Must have missed the bits where AMD made the Mantle code and SDK freely available (isn't that the definition of open source?), and the API running happily on VLIW4 and 5 architectures. Isn't Mantle already integrated into two shipping game titles ?

Seems like a case of clickbait and getting a juicy quote from an AMD product marketing manager and tailoring findings to fit the conclusion.

HumanSmokend then goes on to prattle on about Mantle being open source and not limited to GCN

Must have missed the bits where AMD made the Mantle code and SDK freely available (isn't that the definition of open source?), and the API running happily on VLIW4 and 5 architectures. Isn't Mantle already integrated into two shipping game titles ?

Seems like a case of clickbait and getting a juicy quote from an AMD product marketing manager and tailoring findings to fit the conclusion.

Anyone with half a brain understands why Mantle doesn't work on VLIW, and why it can work on Nvidia's new cards.

SteevoAnyone with half a brain understands why Mantle doesn't work on VLIW, and why it can work on Nvidia's new cards.

Anyone with half a brain would also know the difference between open source software and Mantle. I can't think of any open source software that requires itsdevelopers sanctionin this manner:

Only a limited set of developers are provided access to the Mantle NDA Developer SDK and access is subject to a selection process.

HumanSmokeAnyone with half a brain would also know the difference between open source software and Mantle. I can't think of any open source software that requires itsdevelopers sanctionin this manner:

Considering it has been promised to be open, and they are still working on it I am sure they are holding their cards close, it is and has been something revolutionary and forced the hand of MS and Nvidia, opened the eyes of gamers and developers to how much the status quo has been held back by the lack of innovation on everyone's part. While developers and other content creators sit idly by being fed time and resources in the name of making hardware company "A" happy by providing instance specific optimizations AMD has pushed ahead with open standards like OpenCL to allow everyone access to higher performance at no cost by standardizing language.

So now your complaint in a AMD news thread is what exactly? That your 780's are going to get their asses whooped by cheaper cards with more new features, so you are butthurt and want to incite FUD?

Go play games or with yourself.

SteevoConsidering it has been promised to be open, and they are still working on it....

It's supported in two AAA titles, so why is open access to the code denied ?

SteevoI am sure they are holding their cards close

Apologist sighting!

Steevoit is and has been something revolutionary

Ahhhhh, Red Kool Aid....so refreshing! :laugh:

SteevoSo now your complaint in a AMD news thread is what exactly?

If you'd have bothered to check, I was commenting on the post of Batou1986.

SteevoThat your 780's are going to get their asses whooped by cheaper cards with more new features

Whaaaaaaaaat! And here I thought my cards would reign supreme forever....but then I probably thought the same of my GTX 670...and my GTX 580's...and my HD 5850's....and my HD 5770's...and my...etc., etc. Just kidding, some of us realise that GPU's have an accelerated built in obsolescence

Steevo, so you are butthurt and want to incite FUD?

As opposed to your PR ? " something revolutionary" :laugh: :laugh:. Living the dream I see.

SteevoGo play games or with yourself.

:shadedshu:

FluffmeisterLove the guy doing a fist pump.

lol me too.

I needed a good laugh today :laugh:

So, yeah...more importantly than random bitching and gpu-allegience flame wars...

...Pitcairn-targeted support in Mantle (in the guise of 8970m)...yay...finally...

I get why they put that wording (because they are probably in amd cpu laptops), but when that is essentially a 270 on the desktop, and 270/265 have got to be one of their main markets now (considering how cheap 760 got versus 7870/270x) and it has little competition in it's price/performance bracket, I would think maybe they'd highlight that...or not.

I like the fact they seem to be on a feature role this month. Next stop, incorporating John Mautari's (old) stuff into Catalyst?

Quit it, let me dream.

Batou1986That's because nvidia ensured that it would be crippled on AMD cards
A GTX 770 is faster than a 290X
www.extremetech.com/gaming/183095-watch-dogs-analyzing-the-impact-of-nvidias-gameworks-integration-and-amd-performance

Then play it on PS4, peasant.

SteevoAnyone with half a brain understands why Mantle doesn't work on VLIW, and why it can work on Nvidia's new cards.

: D

SteevoAMD has pushed ahead with open standards like OpenCL to allow everyone access to higher performance at no cost by standardizing language.

Except Geforce, Intel HD/Iris, Mali, PowerVR. Trolling -2/10.

I like these. Work fine with my HD7950. I just wish their stupid AMD Uninstall Utility would stop deleting my Sound Blaster Z drivers when i clean Catalysts...

SteevoConsidering it has been promised to be open, and they are still working on it I am sure they are holding their cards close, it is and has been something revolutionary and forced the hand of MS and Nvidia, opened the eyes of gamers and developers to how much the status quo has been held back by the lack of innovation on everyone's part. While developers and other content creators sit idly by being fed time and resources in the name of making hardware company "A" happy by providing instance specific optimizations AMD has pushed ahead with open standards like OpenCL to allow everyone access to higher performance at no cost by standardizing language.

So now your complaint in a AMD news thread is what exactly? That your 780's are going to get their asses whooped by cheaper cards with more new features, so you are butthurt and want to incite FUD?

Go play games or with yourself.

I second this. Most of AMD projects are open, such as OpenCL, Havok, TressFX and recently DisplayPort 1.2a with Adaptive Sync. Mantle is open, too. You can get the SDK for free when registering with AMD.
Unlike them, a certain firm tried to make everything proprietary and charged a premium on consumers. That firm even go as low as restricting its partner studios from working with AMD drivers, in order to cripple the performance of AMD's cards in their sponsored games. :mad:

sweetI second this. Most of AMD projects are open, such as OpenCL, Havok, TressFX and recently DisplayPort 1.2a with Adaptive Sync.

Yeah, AMD's projects are open and failing as fast as they can (Open physics stuff, boundless gaming).

Mantle is open

Sure it's open just pay from 1k$ till 125k$ year or whatever much.

Unlike them, a certain firm tried to make everything proprietary and charged a premium on consumers. That firm even go as low as restricting its partner studios from working with AMD drivers, in order to cripple the performance of AMD's cards in their sponsored games. :mad:

You cry like only Nvidia is using proprietary. :confused: Now I know why Tomb Raider and Deus Ex aren't GOTY in Never Settle bundles, because AMD hates DLCs and micro-transactions.

RecusYeah, AMD's projects are open and failing as fast as they can (Open physics stuff, boundless gaming).



Sure it's open just pay from 1k$ till 125k$ year or whatever much.



You cry like only Nvidia is using proprietary. :confused: Now I know why Tomb Raider and Deus Ex aren't GOTY in Never Settle bundles, because AMD hates DLCs and micro-transactions.

Nice try, where did you get "1k$ till 125k$" from? And I'm sure OpenCL, Havok and TressFX are kicking asses. Games in the bundles never could be a GOTY version of course, they was bought before the first release to put in the bundles. How could a GOTY version be bundled anyway?

And could you please give a feature from AMD that is prevented from being optimized for others then?

Just admit it, nVidia is full of proprietary stuff. PhysX cards refuse to run PhysX if the main GPU is not nVidia, 3Dvision requires nVidia glasses and GPU to work, Gsync ask extra money for an addition board on your monitor, which is useless if you don't use nvidia GPU. Is that enough? No, they just "invented" Gameworks to restrict the involved developers working with AMD for drivers. They would go as low as possible to beat cheaper solutions, in order to milk more from their loyal cows. Heck, I'm smart and I'm not a cow though.

sweetAnd could you please give a feature from AMD that is prevented from being optimized for others then?

I actually linked to the Mantle page earlier. The SDK is limited. Use of the SDK is requires an NDA. AMD vet the applicants.
If Mantle is open source and available to anyone why do the applicants have to sign a non disclosure agreement? It.Makes.No.Sense.
Open Source means just that. It doesn't mean that there is a restriction on who can view the code, and it doesn't mean that a commercial company has the final say in whether you can use it.

sweetJust admit it, nVidia is full of proprietary stuff. PhysX cards refuse to run PhysX if the main GPU is not nVidia, 3Dvision requires nVidia glasses and GPU to work, Gsync ask extra money for an addition board on your monitor

Yup, Nvidia is the very definition of proprietary, but that's their business model. They have (more or less) only have one string to their bow, so they make sure that they sell a hardware+software ecosystem rather than just components. Leaving your fate to others tends to be business suicide - see what effect Intel denying Nvidia access to QPI/DMI and AMD ditching Nvidia chipsets had on iGP market share.

sweetNo, they just "invented" Gameworks to restrict the involved developers working with AMD for drivers.

That's your opinion, not fact. If Gameworks restricts AMD driver access then it should be a simple matter to review the game code to see if the allegation is true - all I see at the moment is people acting like chimps tossing shit at each other.
It was my understanding that Gameworks was more aimed at optimizing for Nvidia with engines such as UE4. Both companies tend to play fast and loose with letting the other see code as early as possible- I believe the last instance was AMD's sponsored Tomb Raider that Nvidia had no access to final game code to.

www.anandtech.com/show/7868/evaluating-amds-trueaudio-and-mantle-thief

Looks like I could use Mantle with my old 1100T and a newer card and not have any issues. So I am wondering where the failure is here, I agree both companies try to get the upper hand, its business. But overall, the adoption of open software has been handled much better by AMD than Nvidia.

HumanSmokeI actually linked to the Mantle page earlier. The SDK is limited. Use of the SDK is requires an NDA. AMD vet the applicants.
If Mantle is open source and available to anyone why do the applicants have to sign a non disclosure agreement? It.Makes.No.Sense.
Open Source means just that. It doesn't mean that there is a restriction on who can view the code, and it doesn't mean that a commercial company has the final say in whether you can use it.

Yup, Nvidia is the very definition of proprietary, but that's their business model. They have (more or less) only have one string to their bow, so they make sure that they sell a hardware+software ecosystem rather than just components. Leaving your fate to others tends to be business suicide - see what effect Intel denying Nvidia access to QPI/DMI and AMD ditching Nvidia chipsets had on iGP market share.

That's your opinion, not fact. If Gameworks restricts AMD driver access then it should be a simple matter to review the game code to see if the allegation is true - all I see at the moment is people acting like chimps tossing shit at each other.
It was my understanding that Gameworks was more aimed at optimizing for Nvidia with engines such as UE4. Both companies tend to play fast and loose with letting the other see code as early as possible- I believe the last instance was AMD's sponsored Tomb Raider that Nvidia had no access to final game code to.

1. Of course you has to sign that agreement. You can access it if you want, so it is qualified as an open source. On this stage, NDA is a must-have for the healthy development of Mantle.

2. It's not "letting your fate to others". It is shutting down options of others, including the consumer. For example a guy buys a nVidia's card because he believes that it could run PhysX. It can for sure, but it is not allow to run, because that guys has an AMD as his main GPU. Lame.

3. Whether or not it crippled AMD's performance is not confirmed. But it is clear that Gameworks restricts developers to share the code related to that library with AMD. With no idea how an important library works in those games, no way can anyone optimize them to non Gamework games' level. The same story happened when Intel x86 compiler decide to play bad with AMD cpu. Well, we are lucky that AMD gpu has better market shares than their CPU department though.

In Tomb Raider's case, a patch for nVidia's GPU was released around 2 weeks after launch. However, nVidia "worked very closely to Crystal Dynamics" in order to achieve that. For Gameworks' games, it will take a long time for an AMD patch, or maybe never like in Arkham Origin's case

sweet1. Of course you has to sign that agreement. You can access it if you want, so it is qualified as an open source. On this stage, NDA is a must-have for the healthy development of Mantle.

Nah, that's bullshit.
Only a limited set of developers are provided access to the Mantle NDA Developer SDK and access is subject to a selection process.

NDA is a must have for the healthy development of Mantle ???? You think that software developers not being able to discuss the SDK with others for their thoughts and input is healthy development ? But then go on to deride Nvidia for doing much the same thing:

sweetBut it is clear that Gameworks restricts developers to share the code related to that library with AMD.

:shadedshu:

sweetFor example a guy buys a nVidia's card because he believes that it could run PhysX.

Why would he think that? The only people likely to do that are the kind that don't bother researching before buying, or listen to forum posters with a miniscule knowledge base that think that a driver hackis an easy option (the fact that the driver needs hacking should be a giveaway). Ain't no cure for stupid (or lack of research before buying as the case may be). A very quick look at Nvidia's PhysX FAQwould tell you the answer.

Can I use an NVIDIA GPU as a PhysX processor and a non-NVIDIA GPU for regular display graphics?
No. There are multiple technical connections between PhysX processing and graphics that require tight collaboration between the two technologies. To deliver a good experience for users, NVIDIA PhysX technology has been fully verified and enabled using only NVIDIA GPUs for graphics.

sweetIt can for sure, but it is not allow to run, because that guys has an AMD as his main GPU. Lame.

Don't see it as an issue personally. AMD themselves and most of the AMD fanboys don't rate PhysX at all, so why should anyone care- least of all Nvidia. Nvidia paid around $150 million for Ageia to acquire PhysX- you think it's viable to shell out for the tech just to give it away to your competitor, especially when the same competitor couldn't be arsed to buy the same techa year earlier. Kind of reminds me of the "mates" you have that never put in for the keg, and always show up once the foods already ordered.
Just for interests sake, if PhysX was allowed to run on AMD GPUs who would be responsible for maintaining compatibility with changing drivers/µarchs? You trust AMD to make sure it runs OK, or do you expect AMD to give Nvidia access to their driver code to ensure compatibility?

sweetIn Tomb Raider's case, a patch for nVidia's GPU was released around 2 weeks after launch. However, nVidia "worked very closely to Crystal Dynamics" in order to achieve that.

Didn't really help on launch day when all the sites did their GPU performance evaluations did it?

HumanSmokeJust for interests sake, if PhysX was allowed to run on AMD GPUs who would be responsible for maintaining compatibility with changing drivers/µarchs? You trust AMD to make sure it runs OK, or do you expect AMD to give Nvidia access to their driver code to ensure compatibility?

Nvidia would just have to allow PhysX acceleration outside of CUDA and wouldn't have to worry about maintaining anything. Allow it to be accelerated through Microsofts Direct Compute like AMD did with TressFX.

XzibitNvidia would just have to allow PhysX acceleration outside of CUDA and wouldn't have to worry about maintaining anything. Allow it to be accelerated through Microsofts Direct Compute like AMD did with TressFX.

Nvidia is already beginning that process with PhysX FleX

HumanSmokeNvidia is already beginning that process with PhysX FleX

If it is good on them.
Though that link doesn't mention anything about it being open to acceleration outside of CUDA.