So is it wort waiting for the 280/290. And I'm wondering what the dual GPU will be. 299? 292? 290x2?
So is it wort waiting for the 280/290. And I'm wondering what the dual GPU will be. 299? 292? 290x2?The prices are the same, AMD is rebranding their current lineup and sticking two new GPUs at the top to compete with 780 and Titan.
AMD >>better<< not use GCN AGAIN at 20nm.
If they aren't using GCN for their 20nm GPUs, they won't get any benefit from this stuff for more than literally half a year give or take.
Trying to fight a new architecture like Maxwell with GCN AGAIN is just madness.
AMD >>better<< not use GCN AGAIN at 20nm.
If they aren't using GCN for their 20nm GPUs, they won't get any benefit from this stuff for more than literally half a year give or take.
Trying to fight a new architecture like Maxwell with GCN AGAIN is just madness.
You're way over doing this. It's not like developers are suddenly going to skip developing with DirectX or OpenGL. Seriously.
It will work, it will just be slower, thats exactly the point, since NV GPUs running these future games will go through DX and windows.. on GCN, it will go through Mantle. NV will need a massive hardware grunt advantage to compete, since they are stuck with an inefficient API. Efficiency matters. <<-- this is the point of having a low lvl API for console/PC development.
We've seen this story before, and we know how it ends. Either the proprietary API fails and ends up as a footnote in history (glide). Or it closes off competition, and we get half-assed refreshes of the same technology for a few years (EAX), until the entire industry just gives up and goes another way.
The only people that should be cheering this on are AMD stockholders. This is a huge step back for gamers. At best it's a distraction for a few years, but it could get really ugly if it succeeds. You can call people crazy if you want, but we've seen this happen before, and the results speak for themselves.
Is that how you feel about PhysX also?
Right, but this is a relative performance increase for AMD cards over nVidia cards, not an absolute decrease for nVidia cards. Your nVidia card that was going to get 45fps in Battlefield 4 is still going to get 45fps in Battlefield 4, it's just that owners of the AMD card who were going to get 45fps may now get 50fps (pulling numbers out of my ass).
I don't really understand where nVidia card owners have a right to be angry about it? There card is just as good as it was, it has only lost performance relative to the competition.
First: I agree with you that it is like CUDA. CUDA is a perfectly excellent tech developed by NV, and is extremely useful.
Second: It's not an artificial lockdown. You need to use the proper terminology. An "artificial" lockdown means it was not needed. CUDA, for example, is not an artificial lockdown. It target's NV's hardware, because it is meant to target a specific architecture, because that's the fastest way to achieve the most performance out of your hardware and arch. So NV needed to do no such artificial lockdowns to make CUDA non-workable in AMD or Intel tech, artificial lockdowns meaning a GPU Vendor ID check, or a GPU Model ID check to see if it is your own company's model, etc. There's no need for that because, by nature of targeting a specific hardware arch, it will automatically not work (fail spectacularly) on a different class of hardware arch.
So, no artificial lockdowns. But yes, inherently, it will end up locked to GCN.
What won't happen, for sure, is that Mantle supplants DX. That's crazy talk. So it's not the end of the sane world of PC gaming. If that is your fear, then don't worry. The chances of that are nil.
I was just about to ask sushiwarrior the same exact thing!!!! Great minds!! eh?
Quote: "Yes, AMD spent money and man-hours to gain an additional performance benefit for their cards through low level optimization tweaks. Said API is open to Nvidia if they would like to go through the same process as AMD has. But are you suggesting that AMD should use THEIR time and THEIR money to optimize performance on Nvidia cards? LOL! "
Agree with a lot of this. Understand why AMD is going in this direction, but long term for gamers it's harmful. Problem is, DirectX is just really inefficient (not to mention Windows) so from that perspective I welcome anything that alleviates the wasted processor cycles.We've seen this story before, and we know how it ends. Either the proprietary API fails and ends up as a footnote in history (glide). Or it closes off competition, and we get half-assed refreshes of the same technology for a few years (EAX), until the entire industry just gives up and goes another way.
The only people that should be cheering this on are AMD stockholders. This is a huge step back for gamers. At best it's a distraction for a few years, but it could get really ugly if it succeeds. You can call people crazy if you want, but we've seen this happen before, and the results speak for themselves.
Even if they don't stop developing for DX anytime soon, this could give AMD cards such a price/performance advantage, that they just won't be competitive. If that happens, and AMD no longer has NVIDIA lighting a fire under their ass, innovation and performance increases will slow to a crawl.
If I made a game and I had the chance to add low level access support for the game with mantle, and add 2x performance to any gcn card, I jump at the chance.
Now the game bundle and such all make sense.
nVidia only needs to allow AMD to write their own back-end for Cuda. But they will not do it. It's the best example of artificial.
Mantle was developed for GCN. It's a specific low level API for a certain architecture. It's not able to run on other hardware. That is a artificial lockdown. Dice can use DX or OpenGL and trying to convince Microsoft for a better support in DX. But they decided to create an own API for GCN. Really that is right the definition of artificial and excactly the same like Cuda.
So, why would a developer use Mantle if they still need another DX path? The reason for low level API is that you dont want to optimize for other plattforms. More APIs mean more work, more investment. Mantle makes only sense if you start to ignore other vendors. .
And there is no cross plattform development between Mantle and X1 and PS4. Both using their own software stack.
Agree with a lot of this. Understand why AMD is going in this direction, but long term for gamers it's harmful. Problem is, DirectX is just really inefficient (not to mention Windows) so from that perspective I welcome anything that alleviates the wasted processor cycles.
The perfect solution to me would be a close to the metal, open graphics API on Linux. And no OpenGL is not good enough, in fact it's a bit of a mess the last few years.
Anytime the homogenization of console and PC games is served as a sh*t-sandwich, (especially when graphics are involved), all PC gamers should be concerned.
Mantle was developed for GCN. It's a specific low level API for a certain architecture. It's not able to run on other hardware. That is a artificial lockdown.
You've never done low level hardware development before have you?
Not PC gamers who are more concerned about actual performance, only "PC Master Race" people who are worried about keeping their platform as closed off and inefficient as possible.
You keep on insisting on your own terminology despite the very meaning of "artificial" and how I've already tried to explain it to you.Mantle was developed for GCN. It's a specific low level API for a certain architecture. It's not able to run on other hardware. That is a artificial lockdown. Dice can use DX or OpenGL and trying to convince Microsoft for a better support in DX. But they decided to create an own API for GCN. Really that is right the definition of artificial and excactly the same like Cuda.
This is nothing like the previous times precisely because there are already well supported common APIs and multiple competitors in the market place. OpenGL and DirectX won't go anywhere, and Intel and nVidia will continue to chug ahead. It would be moronic to release a game which only support Mantle or even favor Mantle too much. The vast majority of computers out there don't even have a discreet graphics card and use built in Intel graphics...
Anytime the homogenization of console and PC games is served as a sh*t-sandwich, (especially when graphics are involved), all PC gamers should be concerned.
We've been told at the GPU14 Tech Day event that the Mantle API is open, so theoretically Nvidia could purpose the technology in their GPUs. It should also make cross-development between PC and console games a lot easier, and also more incredible for those with a high-performance AMD GPU.
Yes, first processor I learned on was the 6809.