AMD's TWIMTBP own version: Gaming Evolved

[Gikaseixas]

I think this is the right thing to do for them since Nvidia's so much involved with devs. Let's see if AMD can finally keep it going this time around.

Official Page:
http://sites.amd.com/us/game/community/Pages/aboutgamingevolved.aspx

Hexus Article:
http://www.hexus.net/content/item.php?item=25668

Gaming evolved

AMD and ATI's three-pronged approach to PC computing - encompassing CPUs, chipsets and graphics - has established itself over the last few years as the budget gamers' champion. Now, the company is going to give a little back to the PC community with the launch of its Gaming Evolved initiative.

While ATI, especially, produces some of the most powerful gaming hardware on the market, the company's support amongst developers has seemingly lagged behind archrival NVIDIA's. Its ‘The Way It's Meant To Be Played' program ensures that games run best on the latest GeForce hardware and take advantage of NVIDIA technologies such as PhysX and 3D Vision. Now AMD's Gaming Evolved looks like it will be trying to woo devs and publishers in much the same way.
Gamers come first

The cornerstone of this new program is that "Gamers Come First". According to the announcement, AMD has a "deep commitment" in bolstering the PC market, providing support to developers and helping to push the latest technologies. In a specific shot across its competitor's bow, the initiative also looks to ‘nurture open industry standards' like OpenCL and OpenGL.

This could all just be marketing bravado, but hopefully the company will genuinely support the PC gaming community. The growth of consoles over the last few years, among other things, has had the effect of marginalising PC gaming and pushing some developers away to other, more lucrative platforms. If AMD can help to bring triple-A titles back to the computer, its efforts will benefit all PC gamers. We also appreciate the company's commitment to open standards that everyone, regardless of hardware, can take advantage of.

Unfortunately, details on the new program are limited, but we're sure that we'll hear plenty more as the company manages to get some high-profile developers on board.

 

[Wreckage]

This is not new for ATI they had their counter to TWIMTBP at least 6 years ago called "Get In The Game"

http://www.hexus.net/content/item.php?item=794&redirect=yes

 

[Scali]

In a specific shot across its competitor's bow, the initiative also looks to ‘nurture open industry standards' like OpenCL and OpenGL.

Funny, the poor OpenCL and OpenGL support is one of the main reasons for me to upgrade my Radeon 5770 to a GTX460.

 

[Gikaseixas]

This is not new for ATI they had their counter to TWIMTBP at least 6 years ago called "Get In The Game"

http://www.hexus.net/content/item.php?item=794&redirect=yes

yes, you're right. I actually can't picture them having a robust program such as Nvidia's one. Then again, we could be wrong...

 

[Lonyo]

The cornerstone of this new program is that "Gamers Come First". According to the announcement, AMD has a "deep commitment" in bolstering the PC market, providing support to developers and helping to push the latest technologies. In a specific shot across its competitor's bow, the initiative also looks to ‘nurture open industry standards' like OpenCL and OpenGL.

This could all just be marketing bravado, but hopefully the company will genuinely support the PC gaming community.

Well they have already proved that they do open things. Eyefinity doesn't have hardware specific limitations, it's a way of encouraging developers to support resolutions/etc.
They've added non-specific hooks in their drivers for 3D effects.
They helped to add DX11 to games like Dirt 2 in an open manner.

Funny, the poor OpenCL and OpenGL support is one of the main reasons for me to upgrade my Radeon 5770 to a GTX460.

In what way? From a gaming perspective, last I heard, NV were the ones with OGL problems if anyone has them.

 

[Scali]

In what way? From a gaming perspective, last I heard, NV were the ones with OGL problems if anyone has them.

Well, I haven't played an OpenGL game in ages (Doom3 was the last title I guess)...
But my own code didn't run very well on AMD hardware.
For some reason, Vista/Windows 7 take a pretty big hit in OpenGL compared to XP or equivalent D3D code (like 30-40% slower). That hit doesn't appear to be there with nVidia hardware.
And the performance in linux is completely horrible.
Compiling the exact same code in linux gives me about 1/8th the performance of the Windows version. And I'm actually a FreeBSD-user. It's just that I have to run linux, because AMD doesn't have any FreeBSD drivers (yes, there are open source drivers, but they're even more horrible than the binaries). nVidia does.

 

[happy medium]

I guess they can finally afford it. Now they can spend all that money they made with the 6 month head start. I think its great.

 

[nitromullet]

I think at this point it's fair to be tad bit skeptical of any ATI gaming programs given their lack of much previous success. Maybe they will surprise us.

The sad fact for ATI this year was that the titles their marketing dept pushed earlier at the 5-series launch ended up running better on Fermi.

STALKER CoP (GTX 480 > 5870, GTX 470 > 5850 across the board)
DiRT 2 (GTX 480 > 5870, GTX 470 > 5850 across the board)
Heaven 2.0 (GTX 480 > 5870)

Plus, it's an interesting announcement to make on the same day that StarCraft 2 launches with AA support from NVIDIA but not ATI.

the ball is in ATI's court with this one...

 

[MrK6]

Success here is probably going to depend on how many resources (especially money and personnel) they dump into it. I think it's necessary as hardware performance is becoming more and more software dependent, and between drivers, feature sets, game optimizations, and GPGPU, I'd imagine one would need a whole sector devoted to such endeavors.

 

[Lonyo]

I think at this point it's fair to be tad bit skeptical of any ATI gaming programs given their lack of much previous success. Maybe they will surprise us.

The sad fact for ATI this year was that the titles their marketing dept pushed earlier at the 5-series launch ended up running better on Fermi.

STALKER CoP (GTX 480 > 5870, GTX 470 > 5850 across the board)
DiRT 2 (GTX 480 > 5870, GTX 470 > 5850 across the board)
Heaven 2.0 (GTX 480 > 5870)

Plus, it's an interesting announcement to make on the same day that StarCraft 2 launches with AA support from NVIDIA but not ATI.

the ball is in ATI's court with this one...

Yes, but some of those games launched many months before NV had a part that could even run that, and half the point of this is that ATI are doing things for gamers.
ATI did a DX11 push with games. Those games ran better on NV hardware once it was released. What does that tell you? Well 1) We know NV hardware is faster anyway, but 2) ATI didn't in any way hinder NV hardware through their development assistance and through working to add (or supporting adding) DX11 features. Which is the point.

 

[Skurge]

Are those games (mass effect 2, COD MW2, etc) you see when installing new ATi driver part of this program?

 

[golem]

Yes, but some of those games launched many months before NV had a part that could even run that, and half the point of this is that ATI are doing things for gamers.
ATI did a DX11 push with games. Those games ran better on NV hardware once it was released. What does that tell you? Well 1) We know NV hardware is faster anyway, but 2) ATI didn't in any way hinder NV hardware through their development assistance and through working to add (or supporting adding) DX11 features. Which is the point.

Does ATI still help developers with DX11 features now that Nvidia has DX11 hardware out now too? If they do, then I agree with your point that ATI does do things for gamers as a whole and not just their customers. But if this has mostly stopped, then I would disagree, since they were mostly supporting features that would only work on their cards, even if only temporarily.

Your 2) example I feel is a little off too. How could they hinder NV DX11 performance if, at the time there was no Nvidia DX11 hardware.

 

[SHAQ]

This is not new for ATI they had their counter to TWIMTBP at least 6 years ago called "Get In The Game"

http://www.hexus.net/content/item.php?item=794&redirect=yes

I am sure they were hoping people would forget. lol

 

[dev0lution]

Maybe they'll combine all of them into "Get in the gaming evolved, AMD Vision: the future is Fusion" program.

 

[nitromullet]

Success here is probably going to depend on how many resources (especially money and personnel) they dump into it. I think it's necessary as hardware performance is becoming more and more software dependent, and between drivers, feature sets, game optimizations, and GPGPU, I'd imagine one would need a whole sector devoted to such endeavors.

Of course it is. So far, ATI hasn't seemed to be willing to put the resources required into it. They can roll out a new name all they want, but if they continue to "support open standards" by just doing nothing it doesn't mean much.

This new initiative may turn out to be awesome, but I'll believe it when I see it. I think this Hexus article title "AMD gets serious about gaming (again)", sums it up perfectly.

 

[akugami]

My first thought was...didn't they already have a developer program? I believe they still had a developer program but decided the "Get in the Game" moniker wasn't working. Gaming Evolved sounds stupid but at least it's better than Get in the Game.

 

[OCGuy]

Good. We need both companies working with developers to ensure that graphics are being pushed to their limits (although still scalable for those with average/low-end rigs).

 

[Ben90]

For some reason, Vista/Windows 7 take a pretty big hit in OpenGL compared to XP or equivalent D3D code (like 30-40% slower). That hit doesn't appear to be there with nVidia hardware.

If I remember correctly, starting with Windows Vista, all OpenGL commands first get translated into their D3D counterpart then run as D3D.

Does AMD even have the OpenCL runtime out yet?

 

[Scali]

If I remember correctly, starting with Windows Vista, all OpenGL commands first get translated into their D3D counterpart then run as D3D.

No, that was just more FUD from the open source community.
OpenGL still works pretty much the same as it always did: The hardware vendor supplies an OpenCL ICD in their display driver, which contains pretty much the entire OpenGL implementation.
Besides, even if it didn't, it would be no excuse for the fact that AMD takes a hit in Vista/Windows 7, but nVidia doesn't.

Does AMD even have the OpenCL runtime out yet?

Nope, and it gets worse: The small print in the 10.7 driver release notes say this:

OpenCL™ 1.0 conformance tests have not been run with this version of the ATI
Catalyst™ Driver Suite in conjunction with the ATI Stream SDK v2.2. If you require
an OpenCL™ 1.0 conformant driver, we recommend that you install the ATI
Catalyst™ 10.5 Driver Suite

Dedicated to supporting open standards such as OpenCL? You're full of it, AMD!

 

[frozentundra123456]

Maybe they'll combine all of them into "Get in the gaming evolved, AMD Vision: the future is Fusion" program.

I really would like to see AMD do well in the CPU and GPU markets. However, it seems they are good at making up slogans but dont have the hardware to back it up.

I see the AMD Vision on cheap laptops and think "great it must have a dedicated graphics card, right??" But they usually dont, so I dont know what that slogan really means.

And they may say "the future is Fusion", but where are their new CPUs?? Intel actually had the first GPU integrated with the CPU, and will probably bring out another new series of chips before AMD comes out with Fusion.

And please dont say I am anti AMD. They do make good graphics cards and decent CPUs for the price, but sometimes their marketing gets ahead of their product. That said, I would love for AMD to work with game developers to bring optimize games and give the PC platform features that are not available on consoles. (Like physx from nVidia)

 

[Scali]

I really would like to see AMD do well in the CPU and GPU markets.

To be honest, I don't anymore.
I've given up on AMD for now.
I've tried to be friendly with them, I tried to help them, reported a few bugs with their OpenCL implementation, gave a few suggestions for future improvements/addons etc.
But the response was downright rude. They were actually in denial about the problems I reported (although eventually they got addressed anyway).
I've been asking for an OpenCL end-user runtime for over half a year, and they have only been beating about the bush, no straight answers on when I could expect it. They were treating me like some little kid.

And now they release drivers without even bothering to test if they work with OpenCL?
I'm sorry, but I can not support your actions. Especially not with what the marketing department has been spouting about OpenCL support.
I only bought the Radeon because I figured I could continue to develop OpenCL code with it (as I was doing on my GeForce 8800GTS at the time).
But the difference in driver quality and support with nVidia is just huge. And no sign of improving.

AMD needs to do a lot less hollow marketing talk, and a lot more actual development.

 

[cbn]

And they may say "the future is Fusion", but where are their new CPUs?? Intel actually had the first GPU integrated with the CPU, and will probably bring out another new series of chips before AMD comes out with Fusion.

Speaking of Intel, what if they have no interest in Open CL? Where does that leave the installation base for AMD fusion?

Apple is the only player I can think of.

 

[Scali]

Fusion needs OpenCL (or DirectCompute), but OpenCL doesn't need Fusion.
I think nVidia's support should already be enough to drive OpenCL.
Support from Intel shouldn't be all that interesting at this point, as there would be no way to compete in terms of performance anyway, with nVidia. So I don't think Intel will have much leverage.

 

[cbn]

To be honest, I don't anymore.
I've given up on AMD for now.
I've tried to be friendly with them, I tried to help them, reported a few bugs with their OpenCL implementation, gave a few suggestions for future improvements/addons etc.
But the response was downright rude. They were actually in denial about the problems I reported (although eventually they got addressed anyway).
I've been asking for an OpenCL end-user runtime for over half a year, and they have only been beating about the bush, no straight answers on when I could expect it. They were treating me like some little kid.

And now they release drivers without even bothering to test if they work with OpenCL?
I'm sorry, but I can not support your actions. Especially not with what the marketing department has been spouting about OpenCL support.
I only bought the Radeon because I figured I could continue to develop OpenCL code with it (as I was doing on my GeForce 8800GTS at the time).
But the difference in driver quality and support with nVidia is just huge. And no sign of improving.

AMD needs to do a lot less hollow marketing talk, and a lot more actual development.

You mentioned before that Open CL was initially proposed by Apple.

With the iMacs all containing Radeons now (and you mentioning lack of AMD drivers) I just wonder what plans for Open CL are really on the books for MacIntosh?

Is Apple really serious about innovating in the PC market with Open CL? It would be great to see some 3D/GPGPU educational/simulation type software from them.

 

[Scali]

You mentioned before that Open CL was initially proposed by Apple.

Yes, Apple initiated the OpenCL standard, as a platform-agnostic, vendor-agnostic answer to Cuda/DirectCompute.

With the iMacs all containing Radeons now (and you mentioning lack of AMD drivers) I just wonder what plans for Open CL are really on the books for MacIntosh?

On the Mac, there are OpenCL drivers out-of-the-box (I'm talking about the situation under Windows). They just don't work very well on AMD hardware currently.

Is Apple really serious about innovating in the PC market with Open CL? I'd like to see some 3D/GPGPU educational/simulation type software from them.

Hard to say. Is Microsoft serious about innovating with DirectCompute? I don't really think so. I just think they want to offer the technology on their platform, but aren't really planning to develop a lot of applications for it. They leave that up to third-party developers. I think the same goes for Apple. I think their role is just as an 'enabler' of the technology, nothing more.