If Mantle is the low level API from the Xbox One then it's dead right from the start.
Nobody is porting a game based on a console optimizing level. That's the reason why developers start with D3D and a high level API.
Going up to down makes the wholes development process much easier than the opposite way. Optimizing only happens after the port to the target plattform.
And because Mantle and the low level API of the Xbox are not the same (especially the software stack) the developer still need to debug the whole Mantle path.
Microsoft is writing the software stack not AMD. If Microsoft changes something AMD would need to do the same.
And the whole plattform is different especially because Bonaire/Hawaii are more advanced than the older GCN architectures.
How do you know the low level API of the Xbone and Mantle aren't the same or very similar?
Microsoft is writing the software stack not AMD. If Microsoft changes something AMD would need to do the same.
And the whole plattform is different especially because Bonaire/Hawaii are more advanced than the older GCN architectures.
How do you know the low level API of the Xbone and Mantle aren't the same or very similar?
How do you know the low level API of the Xbone and Mantle aren't the same or very similar?
Ryan didn't say Xbone used Mantle.
He said Mantle was the Xbone low level API brought to the PC.
That is a very important difference.
Why would they be? One is written by MS and the other by AMD?
That is like asking "How do you know DirectX and OpenGL aren't the same or very similar.
Starting to seem less and less likely we'll see companies who aren't paid to use it use it.
Starting to seem less and less likely we'll see companies who aren't paid to use it use it.
Except the api on the xb1 is dx11+ except streamlined and optimized for the system's locked hardware. So does this simply mean that dx11 will have optimizations built in now? Not really
First and foremost, for the Xbox One we finally have an official name for the consoles version of Direct3D along with some confirmation of some general details about the API. The Xbox One’s version of the API is being called Direct3D 11.x – X as in Xbox, not an algebraic X – and as expected it’s a superset of Direct3D 11.2. Microsoft doesn’t go into further detail on what else that superset contains, but traditionally we’d expect to see further API calls that are specifically designed to take advantage of the underlying APU, including of course the low-level programming constructs to do close to metal programming and fully exploit quirks such as the console’s 32MB of eSRAM.
Furthermore it’s interesting to note that Microsoft also took the time to specifically mention API overhead in a high-level context, and that they’ve been doing a lot of work to chip away at said overhead for the Xbox One. This is fairly similar to how Microsoft is said to have approached Direct3D for the 360, being able to exploit the fixed platform to remove some of the overhead from abstraction while maintaining the functionality of the high level API functions.
(...)
Finally, in an unexpected move, Microsoft also used the blog to quickly address the subject of AMD’s Mantle API, specifically saying that the Xbox One doesn’t support it nor OpenGL. The fact that Mantle isn’t supported comes as no surprise – Xbox One already has its own low level constructs versus the still in development Mantle – but we weren’t expecting Microsoft to comment on the matter since they aren’t involved in the development of Mantle. Though this unfortunately doesn’t shed any further light on the big question of just what Mantle adopts from the low-level programming constructs in Direct3D 11.x.
Perhaps, perhaps not. Actually considering even NV's sponsored buddy Ubisoft is "interested" I'd actually say it's to the contrary.
Either way, it's way to early to call it. The viral anti-mantle push has began before it has even seen the light of day.
In the end I won't be surprised if it ends up as a paid feature, but it's certainly early to be calling that. If there are actually massive performance gains, or even if it's just easy to use, I could see it becoming more widespread. If it is powerful, expect NV to implement a "similar" feature.
The name of the XBone API is DX11.X, not DX11.1, 11.2, 11.3, etc.
It's rather simple since GCN in consoles and PC's are basically the same. The consoles have low level access to GCN and there will be optimizations and uses that will be available on the consoles that aren't available through high level PC API. You have the code that uses the low level access on the consoles, this code and how it works will be very similar to what will be available on mantle. The time spent porting it over will be minimal compared to the time to create and upkeep that same code on the consoles. You are just getting more out of what is already there, with very little extra effort. You are just going to waste all the time and effort you put into getting more performance because you don't want to spend a little extra time porting the code over. Just sounds like a waste
And you still need to code for DX because GCN cards are not 100% or even 80% of the PC market.
OK...but the xb1 still uses directx like I said.