DarkKnightDude
Senior member
- Mar 10, 2011
- 981
- 44
- 91
If Mantle really does what AMD advertises, would really help out the low end computers, or at least somewhat anyways.
Lets not get too carried away, ok? IF Mantle really works as well as we hope, AMD will have an advantage this generation. It is not like people without GCN will not be able to play in DX, they will just not get as good performance and perhaps image quality. It is is a bit like you need certain cards for DX11, but DX9 still works. Then NV will either make their own API or get onboard the Mantle train some time in the future.Nope, seems completely fine to me. Mantle is exactly what PC gamers have been crying out for - better graphics and performance than consoles (and less reliance on CPU). This will lead to much cheaper systems being viable gaming machines.
Oh, if you're an Nvidia fan? You got two options, either switch to red or get in the DX11 slow lane. Your choice, I'm benefiting from Mantle and you can as well. This is the crux of the issue - Nvidia never had an overwhelming product that made people switch from ATI. CUDA or PhysX, we didn't care.
Do you care enough about Mantle to switch? If so, AMD has won. Only the most lost of Nvidia fans will stay loyal to green in the face of overwhelming fps superiority.
Nope, seems completely fine to me. Mantle is exactly what PC gamers have been crying out for - better graphics and performance than consoles (and less reliance on CPU). This will lead to much cheaper systems being viable gaming machines.
Oh, if you're an Nvidia fan? You got two options, either switch to red or get in the DX11 slow lane. Your choice, I'm benefiting from Mantle and you can as well. This is the crux of the issue - Nvidia never had an overwhelming product that made people switch from ATI. CUDA or PhysX, we didn't care.
Do you care enough about Mantle to switch? If so, AMD has won. Only the most lost of Nvidia fans will stay loyal to green in the face of overwhelming fps superiority.
Or you know what, maybe Nvidia could start selling cards for $100 cheaper than their AMD counterparts instead of $200 more? Imagine that!
And AMD supports DX, Mantle is just there so developers can leverage their feature set much faster.nVidia supports OpenCL and DirectCompute. Cuda is there that they can leverage their feature set much faster. For graphics they use OpenGL in the same way with their own extensions.
Cuda would be same if we compare Cuda to x86 and saying that nVidia is much faster with GPGPU than AMD GPUs while using x86...
Mantle is here that developers dont use DX/OpenGL anymore to give AMD an advantage. If their hardware would be so much better they would not need an own API.
And Cuda is only usefull for the professional market. People want to solve problems. Cuda has no feature in the consumer market in which developers want to sell their software to as many people as possible.
And how ist Mantle resolving this problem? :hmm:
And AMD supports DX, Mantle is just there so developers can leverage their feature set much faster.
Notice how it states that it allows full access to graphics hardware capabilities.
I could swear I saw a dude from Dice saying how they worked with AMD for this and how it allows them to use the hardware in a much more interesting way.
One possible market response I can forsee is Microsoft being rather displeased with Mantle (being OS compatible) and wanting to drag it down, wouldn't the best move be to evolve DirectX in such a way that future DirectX compliance requires low level hardware architecture decisions which directly conflict with GCN, pressuring AMD to either change architecutres and drop GCN compatibility.
I see it going one of two ways, either it will fail to be widely adopted outside of AMD sponsored titles, in the same way that PhysX failed as a GPU accelerated physics engine. OR it might get widespread adoption and really harm DirectX but then set us up for a long term fail being tied to GCN. Normally I would say it's the next PhysX, but factoring in native console support and potentially steam machine support...as well as developers constant battle to reduce their development to 1 build fits all (max audience, min effort) I think there's a distinct danger this could go either way.
Nope, seems completely fine to me. Mantle is exactly what PC gamers have been crying out for - better graphics and performance than consoles (and less reliance on CPU). This will lead to much cheaper systems being viable gaming machines.
Do you honestly believe that in the long run this will lead to "much cheaper systems"? If AMD dominate and take the market, and Nivida are forced to pull out or cease to make a competing product, what do you think will happen to AMDs prices?
What about willingness to invest in R&D and push to have faster and faster hardware, is that going to get better or worse?
All gamers who have been on the scene since the early days of 3D gaming, know that a single dominant player in the market with a monopoly is just about the worst of all possible long term outcome, for absolutely everyone.
That's one of the reasons DirectX was widely adopted, because it eliminated hardware favoritism and allowed a free market of hardware devices to compete fairly, competition creates low prices and high value.
This is way too good to be true. AMD seems to be outmaneuvering Nvidia for once. First consoles, and now this? This can't be happening.
There has to have been a serious shift over in More-Cores Land for this to be possible. :hmm:
My main issue with this is it most likely will cause NV to bring out their own version of mantle. Once that happens then it will really pollute the gaming environment. Some games will support mantle, some will support nv-mantle. Now what?
A common API (DX, even though developers want it to be better) is better for the gamer (who isn't a video card company groupie) and isn't that what WE want?
Lets not get too carried away, ok? IF Mantle really works as well as we hope, AMD will have an advantage this generation. It is not like people without GCN will not be able to play in DX, they will just not get as good performance and perhaps image quality. It is is a bit like you need certain cards for DX11, but DX9 still works. Then NV will either make their own API or get onboard the Mantle train some time in the future.
And what do you think happens to AMD going forward with that kind of FPS dominance? You think you're still going to see the same year over year improvement, or maybe they'll just bump the clocks a few MHz, give it a new name, and pretend like its a major improvement over last year?
Just like cude/phsyx. I don't know if fighting fire with fire is the best option, but it's funny to see the nvidians squirm and switch goalposts anyway.
Even if Nvidia makes their own API they're going to have to pay the devs an awful lot of money to code for their GPU's. This is the genius part of AMD's plan here - if the API is basically the same as in the XBone and PS4 all it will take is a few bucks "incentivizing" for console ports and they'll have a huge advantage.
Do you honestly believe that in the long run this will lead to "much cheaper systems"? If AMD dominate and take the market, and Nivida are forced to pull out or cease to make a competing product, what do you think will happen to AMDs prices?
What about willingness to invest in R&D and push to have faster and faster hardware, is that going to get better or worse?
All gamers who have been on the scene since the early days of 3D gaming, know that a single dominant player in the market with a monopoly is just about the worst of all possible long term outcome, for absolutely everyone.
That's one of the reasons DirectX was widely adopted, because it eliminated hardware favoritism and allowed a free market of hardware devices to compete fairly, competition creates low prices and high value.
Lol, the UE4 is optimize for Kepler. nVidia only need to put their own "Mantle" API in it and AMD is screwed. No difference. Nobody is developing multi port games with an low level API in mind. They using Windows PCs. Right now only DICE is using it. Other companies have nVidia machines (Ubisoft) or using them for PC only games (Witcher guys).
Lol, the UE4 is optimize for Kepler.
nVidia only need to put their own "Mantle" API in it and AMD is screwed. No difference.
Nobody is developing multi port games with an low level API in mind. They using Windows PCs. Right now only DICE is using it. Other companies have nVidia machines (Ubisoft) or using them for PC only games (Witcher guys).
If AMD kills Nvidia, they'll stop innovating and their quality will slip, just like what happens to EVERY COMPANY IN EVERY INDUSTRY that's ever been in that position - gamers lose.
The end of quad core gaming as far as mainstream performance goes perhaps?
Exactly. If you're some sort of graphics card fanboy you get to celebrate a temporary victory, and then your worst nightmare comes true. We've seen this happen SO MANY TIMES in so many industries. I don't care how much performance it can unlock, there's literally no realistic scenario where this results in any tangible benefit to anyone but AMD shareholders.
And strangely there is a lack of noise about this...
If Nvidia is still around in the 2+ years it will take them to develop it, you mean.
So why the fear? Is it because you know that the devs have been asking for it? Surely you must realise that Crytek are bound to follow next...then it could just be like a stack of dominos.
In the end this is enabling better graphics and better performance. Those that move with it will prosper and those who don't, won't.
:thumbsup: I hope so. I can't wait. If games start using 6-8 threads effective, a lot of us will jump to $500 level 6-core & 8-core Intel/AMD CPUs for example. As Intel/AMD fatten up their margins through higher ASPs, they will devote more resources to desktop CPUs than they do now where the focus is largely mobile and performance/watt.
If there are games that will run 35-40% faster on 6-8 core CPUs over quads, many of us will actually consider dropping $500 on a CPU vs. 4770K.
This is what amazed me how smart AMD have been, despite their aweful presentation techniques and tradionally lackluster public relationships. They might have had Mantle in mind for years, and when the new consoles come they invest an undisclosed fortune to make sure they own 100% of that market. That, together with a pretty substantial market share of discrete graphics cards, allows AMD to push through Mantle as a new defacto standard to replace DirectX. It could never have been feasible if they did not own the consoles. It will be very interesting to see how this developes. I think Microsoft has a lot more to fear than Nvidia.Whether this fails or not, it's an interesting development in the gaming industry for sure. The most surprising part of this all is that AMD did it first despite far lagging NV in financial resources and historically weak developer/gaming relations.