So, there is a memory leak? In both mantle and DX? That could explain the worse performance compared with Nvidia. Is it only with AMD video cards?
I'm not sure how much BF4 you play but I found the game quite "functional" thanks.n0x1ous
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 935
Quote:
Originally Posted by ASM-coder
I would say that the majority may still be happy, because they have seen what is possible, and can look forward to the improvements.
I don't even have a GCN card, but I am happy with it, and I have decided to buy one.
Just waiting for the dust to settle, maybe for 14.2(or whatever.)
Had AMD/Dice waited, we would all be more frustrated, so I think it was the right move.
You think releasing broken software that promises to be fixed later is better than delaying and fixing before release? Do you also think BF4 should have been released as it was or should Dice have had a functioning game before release?
You are certainly entitled to your opinion, but I just dont see how releasing something that knowingly doesnt work makes any sense. It just makes them look bad to the users who are perhaps not in the know to the same degree of AT forum members....
__________________
I'm not sure how much BF4 you play but I found the game quite "functional" thanks.
I think your "knowingly doesn't work" comment is being a little careless with the facts.
I play plenty of BF4. Its fine now; I am referring to its state at the time of its release. It was a disaster - one of the buggiest releases I can remember.
yes, here just Mantle..I don't have a memory leak unless I use mantle, DX works fine.
You think releasing broken software that promises to be fixed later is better than delaying and fixing before release? Do you also think BF4 should have been released as it was or should Dice have had a functioning game before release?
You are certainly entitled to your opinion, but I just dont see how releasing something that knowingly doesnt work makes any sense. It just makes them look bad to the users who are perhaps not in the know to the same degree of AT forum members....
ok, but I would have presented the "revolution" better than this...and above all already released a fix after the 14.1...If you've worked for a software company, then you'll know that a Beta release is an important tool used to find/shake out bugs. It's virtually impossible to reproduce all situations and variables that exist on customer setups...
Memory leaks are notoriously tricky business, and we are still only assuming it's a memory leak, based onAnd yet, how is possible that someone, after 2 years (at least) of development, doesn't see a memory leak with the "old" cards (or not only?), available to them for so long or has not an already and efficient "thin driver"? That's a basic thing. OR 2-3 years of development is a fake OR they are so slow like snails :biggrin:
...assuming...
OK, say that's the case. Then my "guess" is that it will be fixed in a BF4 patch. I think Mantle gives the developer much more control over memory management, and someone didn't do some required housekeeping.
how you define it when the memory usage goes always higher than your available Vram, regardless of any graphic setting? and then what does that entail?
tested again and again...and i think that there's an issue with GPU-Z and Mantle rendering...seems it does conflict 'cause HWINFO64 doesn't show that vram usage, instead...and the game doesn't stutter in the same way despite the stuttering is sometimes noticeable yet...so maybe it takes purely optimizationOK, say that's the case. Then my "guess" is that it will be fixed in a BF4 patch. I think Mantle gives the developer much more control over memory management, and someone didn't do some required housekeeping.
Which goes with what I was saying before.tested again and again...and i think that there's an issue with GPU-Z and Mantle rendering...seems it does conflict...
Mantle effectively halves CPU requirements in games. It makes desktop CPU upgrades optional for at least one more generation and has tremendous implications in mobile gaming.
If you don't see how this translates into more GPU and more games sales combined then you couldn't possibly be NVidia's CEO in the first place.
If it's not Mantle, it will be something else, but it's gonna happen, whether some people like it or not. The $$$ implications are just too big.
If Microsoft releases DX12 with Windows 9 with greatly reduced CPU overhead and increased thread management capabilities (same for OpenGL), then Mantle is history.
Just because someone doesn't like the direction Mantle may take us (fragmentation), doesn't mean we prefer one brand over the other. And just because someone doesn't like Mantle, doesn't mean they don't recognize what it does well. Just because someone likes Nvidia or AMD, doesn't make them blind, or require them to be a fanboy.A lot of ifs in that statement.
Windows 9 is planned for mid-late 2015 depending on the rumours you believe. Even then there are no guarantees that DX12 will be part of that release.
I find it amazing that the vast majority of Nvidia fans are happy to predict Mantle's demise before it has been given a chance. Instead of waiting to see if it can bring benefits to PC gaming they are much quicker to declare it pointless. Even after many previews/reviews show that there are definite benefits for even enthusiast level PCs many Nvidia fans declare it "meh".
It's in alpha at the moment and will continue to improve. Hopefully to the point where other devs and even Nvidia take notice.
Something tells me they actually would prefer if the PC gaming industry stagnated rather than accept AMD tech in their Nvidia cards. I wonder how they feel about Eyefinity or GDDR3/4/5.
I don't see any way MS could produce a low level API like Mantle without have full access to the hardware specifications of each generation.
No one outside of AMD or NVDA has that other than specific game developers.
So unless MS had a "Game optimizations" dept I don't see how DX could ever work as closely with the hardware as an individual API created by the chip designers themselves.
I don't think they have to go low level like Mantle. I don't even think they need to have as good of performance as Mantle. DX just needs to be close enough for it to be a superior choice.
As we have seen, the primary advantage to Mantle is removing the CPU bottleneck. 10%-15% boosts are not worth fragmentation. What may be worth fragmentation is the 50% boosts gained in CPU bottleneck situations. That is all MS needs to address. Give DX a multithread overhaul, and make it a little lighter per call would go a long ways to being good enough and not require fragmentation.
As you have seen from a lot of benchmarks, there has been very little improvements if the game is GPU bound, when using Mantle. Sometimes 0 improvements. That goes to show that DX isn't completely holding people back. The problem comes with the draw calls. A huge performance improvement could be had simply by making the API multithread friendly. Instead of being held back by a single thread, if you could leverage 2-4 cores, you remove most existing bottlenecks on a balanced system.They would have to rewrite it from the ground up. What they have right now is a bandaid to an outdated design. I don't think a high level API is ever going to be able to compete with a low level API in terms of performance. That is kind of why you use a low level API. Raw performance. High level APIs leverage other strengths like easy of use, wide compatibility, among other things.
As you have seen from a lot of benchmarks, there has been very little improvements if the game is GPU bound, when using Mantle. Sometimes 0 improvements. That goes to show that DX isn't completely holding people back. The problem comes with the draw calls. A huge performance improvement could be had simply by making the API multithread friendly. Instead of being held back by a single thread, if you could leverage 2-4 cores, you remove most existing bottlenecks on a balanced system.
Cutting back how much time each call takes may be more difficult, and much more limited with such a high level API, but multi-threading should be something that can be done, and remain high level. Which means better support for a wider range of hardware.
1st off, I didn't say what MS is doing. I said what they can do. I said IF they do this or that and you are the only one saying that they will or will not do.I don't believe you read anything I just said nor do you understand what DX is doing right now. DX 9/10 was designed for a single thread and they've already put the bandaids in so DX11 can use 2-3 threads effectively. DX11 doesn't scale beyond that. DX11 mutithreading can, but it shunts the responsibility to the driver, which is basically like building a mutithreaded OS at the GPU level. Not even remotely trivial. So we already know that MS doesn't want to do the heavy lifting themselves. Your idea that MS is going to do this has already been disproved. All that aside, DX11 mutithreading implementation only doubles your object/draw-call throughput. Mantle is so far beyond double the draw calls.