The AMD Mantle Thread

[Stuka87]

I guess under the new definition of "optimized", which is "dumbed down".


Up is down, down is up!

How is BF4 dumbed down? It was developed on PC's first. Dice has said this over and over. Please explain how it has been dumbed down on PC? It has features and visuals the consoles do not. Same went for BF3.

Arma 3 is a joke. A horribly written game that requires top end hardware to run 10 year old visuals. I LOVE the idea of the game, but it runs horribly on everything. No excuse to not be multi-threaded in the year 2013.

 

[GaiaHunter]

What is more important is that mantle lets to port the OPTIMIZATIONS of consoles to PCs.

So the code is optimized instead of developers not optimizing it because PC SPECS ARE BEEFIER and can brute force it.

What is best, poorly optimized games that require killer hardware to run at playable frame rats or optimized games that will run at the frame rates the beefier specs should allow for?

 

[OCGuy]

The problem is, is that that is not going to happen. Unfortunately most games we get on PC have been console ports, and it will likely stay that way. If Mantle makes it easier for devs to port to PC (and/or the other way around), maybe the games won't be horribly unoptimized, and we may even get some games that were console exclusives, which is a win in my book.

Unfortunately AMD would go out of business along with NVidia if this eutopian dream panned out that way.

Consoles are locked into the hardware for almost a decade, and we already ahead of them. So why would we ever need to purchase new hardware from here on?

AMD's CPUs are tanking, they don't net out a whole lot on consoles....their GPU division has been a bright spot, and they paid handsomely for it. I don't think they want to kill it off quite yet.

 

[Carfax83]

Trying to call Battlefield 3 and now Battlefield 4 anything other than some of the most cutting-edge PC games is laughable. I guess Crysis 3 is also not one of the best examples of tech on the PC as well because it's also on console ? Man those are some sour grapes.

There are literally only two or three games that rival Battlefield 3 and 4 in visuals and technology on the PC. This Mantle initiative sure has ruffled some feathers...

Yeah I have to agree. DICE has always been a tech leader in gaming, and the Battlefield series reflects that. Crytek is another one.

 

[Kenmitch]

What is more important is that mantle lets to port the OPTIMIZATIONS of consoles to PCs.

So the code is optimized instead of developers not optimizing it because PC SPECS ARE BEEFIER and can brute force it.

What is best, poorly optimized games that require killer hardware to run at playable frame rats or optimized games that will run at the frame rates the beefier specs should allow for?

In this case it all depends on ones video card choice.

Those with GCN see no evil with it as it doesn't hurt NVidia cards performance. Just gives GCN a performance boost is all.

Those with NVidia cards see it as evil as it helps GCN cards performance. Don't even realize it won't effect them at all.

Brute force isn't the way of the future.

Software needs to be optimized to take advantage of todays hardware as the performance jumps from generation to generation are not like they used to be.

 

[GaiaHunter]

There's a reason Direct3D/OpenGL became the standard and hardware specific APIs died. People cheering this announcement solely based on claims of increased performance are being short sighted.

Lets talk more about those times.

How many hardware graphics companies did you have then?
TLI, ATI, NVIDIA, 3dfx, Matrox, S3, 3Dlabs, Rendition, Artx, etc.

Look the link for a list of defunct companies.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_defunct_graphics_chips_and_card_companies

How many games shared the same engine?
Very few.

How many game developers developed for different platforms?
Less than today.

Different times, lets see what the market says.

 

[thilanliyan]

Unfortunately AMD would go out of business along with NVidia if this eutopian dream panned out that way.

You're saying Mantle makes things WORSE than they already are? I disagree.

Why would people suddenly stop buying video cards? Even something like a 7850 is "good enough", but it doesn't stop people from buying higher end cards to get better performance. The same will hold true even with Mantle IMO.

And assuming the quality of console ports on PC goes UP, that would mean there are potentially more PC gamers as well as people buying the PC versions of games instead, leading to more video card sales. IMO, of course, and that is probably a best case scenario, but definitely possible.

Personally I hope this is a step towards having a choice whether to run Windows or not for PC gaming needs.

 

[Zanovar]

Interesting times ahead.i wonder what nvidias response to this will be,api war?

 

[mindbomb]

Interesting times ahead.i wonder what nvidias response to this will be,api war?

the rumor is they are heavily involved in valve's rumored opengl sequel to the source engine.

so, if this is true, it looks like nvidia is betting on opengl, amd betting on mantle.
direct x seems to be losing it's iron grip on graphics since no one is buying windows 8.

 

[Creig]

Unfortunately AMD would go out of business along with NVidia if this eutopian dream panned out that way.

Consoles are locked into the hardware for almost a decade, and we already ahead of them. So why would we ever need to purchase new hardware from here on?

AMD's CPUs are tanking, they don't net out a whole lot on consoles....their GPU division has been a bright spot, and they paid handsomely for it. I don't think they want to kill it off quite yet.

I see. So if Mantle were to become popular, AMD would go out of business because they would have become TOO successful?

?????

What do you think Mantle is running on? Oh, right. AMD hardware.

Talk about putting a negative spin on a positive development.

 

[HurleyBird]

Unfortunately AMD would go out of business along with NVidia if this eutopian dream panned out that way.

Consoles are locked into the hardware for almost a decade, and we already ahead of them. So why would we ever need to purchase new hardware from here on?

AMD's CPUs are tanking, they don't net out a whole lot on consoles....their GPU division has been a bright spot, and they paid handsomely for it. I don't think they want to kill it off quite yet.

Firstly, that's just absurd reasoning. I guess Intel should have put both themselves and AMD out of business with Nehalem then?

Secondly, even with Mantle we aren't even close to the power we need for 4K, 4K eyefinity, 4K 3D, 120hz, etc.

And if Mantle works so good that it grants AMD a monopoly position, you don't think devs would further push graphics on the PC past what the consoles can achieve?

 

[OCGuy]

I see. So if Mantle were to become popular, AMD would go out of business because they would have become TOO successful?

?????

What do you think Mantle is running on? Oh, right. AMD hardware.

Talk about putting a negative spin on a positive development.

I'm not sure how you are judging positive/negative on something that hasn't even seen the light of day yet.....

However, it isn't the actual API that could be the long-term problem. It is the continued dumbing down of PC games, and anything that makes it easier for a console-first developer to port a game to a PC, contributes to that process. Everything developed to run on old hardware = no need for new discreet GPUs = bye bye.

You can scream from the rooftops that it is about AMD getting a couple FPS boost in a random benchmark that will be forgotten a week later, but it doesn't make it so.

I personally don't see this leading anywhere, much like DX10.1. You can go back and read the predicted demise of all competition...actually it is very similar to the mantle discussion.

I love being on this board during GPU releases. If you predict that an unreleased product is going to bring down Microsoft and Nvidia, nobody calls you on it.

Investors heard about this yesterday before we did......any news on what the stockholders think about this M$-slaying announcement?

 

[Shivansps]

Low-Level programing and hardware compatibility cant be more far away from each other.

Even if Nvidia and Intel adopts Mantle, that will just means each one will have diferent optimisations = you need to make 3 diferent versions for your game, each one optimised for each brand.
There is way to much diffenrence in the arquitectures, optimised for AMD whould likely means it will run slower for Nvidia than it whould run using DX or OpenGL.
Also, i having a hard time to imagine how they could archive such low level optimizacion with so diferent video cards(and im talking about AMD cards alone), its not to same thinking you have 1000SP and 20ROP/TMU, than having 500SP, 10 ROP/TMU... Mantle have to already have abtractions on it to allow that.

To put things simple, abstraction layers are there for a reason, and low-level optimisation on consoles its also possible for a reason.

Also, if programmers really needed high speed implementation of DX API they whould not keep using DX9, even today there are several DX9 titles about to be launched, we know that DX10/11 its faster, OpenGL its even faster, but no, DX9 its still alive.

Ill reserve final the judgment until i see the results, if any, (I fully expecting BF4 to be biased), there can be some advantages on CPU usage, but thats its not the main concern today, no on pc at least.

 

[cmdrdredd]

Nope, AMD will own a big part of the gaming market, namely XB1, PS4 and the share of PCs with GCN cards.

A game coded for mantle as far as i understood would not have to be ported at all to run on a PC with a GCN GPU. The port to D3D then is only required for NV cards and older AMD cards.

Console developers don't give a crap about PC. Never have, never will. It will still need to be ported...it just makes it easier to do. Cause you know on PC not everyone is using AMD cards, there's people sitting on two 780s and such.

 

[Cloudfire777]

I have a few questions to you guys that swallowed everything AMD say raw:

- Why do you trust a company, that repeatedly boasted their Bulldozer architecture, yet turned out to be really bad?

- If Mantle, or this API is so awesome, why havent anyone else been developing something else than DX earlier? DX have been with us for ages. Why not Intel? Why not Nvidia? Why no mention from other PC game developers that have been developing games for a gazillion years? Why no mention from those game developers thats been using a different API, similar with "coding to the metal" when they have been making a game for PS3 or Xbox 360? They should have experience with this right.

- If one assume Mantle or something similar would give some boost/benefits, how much time not to mention money, need AMD to pay the game developers to make them code with Mantle since they obviously is not going to skip DX?

 

[Arkadrel]

- If Mantle, or this API is so awesome, why havent anyone else been developing something else than DX earlier? DX have been with us for ages. Why not Intel? Why not Nvidia? Why no mention from other PC game developers?

Because for along time the differnt consols have all used differnt architecture's, and porting them to a new API that only a small amount used doesnt make sense.

The beauty of this mantle stuff is that its the same architecture thats already inside the PS4 and Xbox1, and the optimisations they code for those consols will translate into code usable for the pc too now. This is all just speculation atm, but it makes sense.

- If one assume Mantle or something similar would give some boost/benefits, how much time not to mention money, need AMD to pay the game developers to make them code with Mantle since they obviously is not going to skip DX?

Nothing really probably... because they ll already be optimiseing for it, when they develop consol games, those same optimisation will be reused for mantle on pc.

Thats the cool thing about AMD getting all the consols and useing the same architecture in all of them.

 

[Carfax83]

Also, if programmers really needed high speed implementation of DX API they whould not keep using DX9, even today there are several DX9 titles about to be launched, we know that DX10/11 its faster, OpenGL its even faster, but no, DX9 its still alive.

That's one thing I don't get either. One of the effects of DX9 was that the main rendering thread used only one CPU core, so this limited the amount of draw calls and thus scene complexity.

But DX11 fixed many of those issues. How many draw calls does a game like Crysis 3, that has highly detailed environments have?

I've played Crysis 3, and I couldn't detect any of the symptoms associated with DX9 games, such as object pop in and poor CPU utilization, which is presumably due to having the rendering thread run on a single core.. Crysis 3 uses my 3930K VERY well, and my GPUs have excellent utilization.

So is API really that much of a hindrance to the point where it's better to just dump it completely?

 

[Cloudfire777]

Because for along time the differnt consols have all used differnt architecture's, and porting them to a new API that only a small amount used doesnt make sense.

The beauty of this mantle stuff is that its the same architecture thats already inside the PS4 and Xbox1, and the optimisations they code for those consols will translate into code usable for the pc too now. This is all just speculation atm, but it makes sense.



Nothing really probably... because they ll already be optimiseing for it, when they develop consol games, those same optimisation will be reused for mantle on pc.

Thats the cool thing about AMD getting all the consols and useing the same architecture in all of them.

There is obviously a reason why consoles and PCs use different APIs. Im pretty sure consoles use a dumbed down API to make best use of the weaker hardware, where the API have less graphical control to make it as fluent as possible but sacrifice graphics.

PCs on the other hand use DX because it have vastly bigger support for textures, audio and stuff like that, which have been improved and improved over 10s of years. Optimize speed im pretty sure have been on their agenda for quite some time.

I have really difficult seeing that Mantle, will trump a well established system used exclusively for games since the dawn of day.

 

[Skurge]

I have a few questions to you guys that swallowed everything AMD say raw:

- Why do you trust a company, that repeatedly boasted their Bulldozer architecture, yet turned out to be really bad?

- If Mantle, or this API is so awesome, why havent anyone else been developing something else than DX earlier? DX have been with us for ages. Why not Intel? Why not Nvidia? Why no mention from other PC game developers that have been developing games for a gazillion years? Why no mention from those game developers thats been using a different API, similar with "coding to the metal" when they have been making a game for PS3 or Xbox 360? They should have experience with this right.

- If one assume Mantle or something similar would give some boost/benefits, how much time not to mention money, need AMD to pay the game developers to make them code with Mantle since they obviously is not going to skip DX?

All of your questions have been answered earlier in this thread. AMD GPU division does not equal CPU division, nobody has developed it cause nobody has ever had same architecture in the 2 best selling consoles and PCs. Next gen consoles have about 1million pre-orders so far and will sell tens of millions in the 1st 2 years. So GCN will be the most comon GPU arch around.

That should answer your questions.

Also, I'm pretty amazed people thing Easier coding will make the crappy port situation worse. So BF4 will look and perform better, have less bugs and people are unhappy about that?

Also lol at calling BF3/4 a port.

 

[cmdrdredd]

I have a few questions to you guys that swallowed everything AMD say raw:

- Why do you trust a company, that repeatedly boasted their Bulldozer architecture, yet turned out to be really bad?

- If Mantle, or this API is so awesome, why havent anyone else been developing something else than DX earlier? DX have been with us for ages. Why not Intel? Why not Nvidia? Why no mention from other PC game developers that have been developing games for a gazillion years? Why no mention from those game developers thats been using a different API, similar with "coding to the metal" when they have been making a game for PS3 or Xbox 360? They should have experience with this right.

- If one assume Mantle or something similar would give some boost/benefits, how much time not to mention money, need AMD to pay the game developers to make them code with Mantle since they obviously is not going to skip DX?

1) people believe marketing words
2) They have wanted to but the problem is not everyone runs the same hardware. You cannot get low level access unless every system is the same. This is why consoles have been able to do this for a while now already. On a PC a majority of the market doesn't have the correct GPU (GCN) so it's not going to benefit them. To me this feels like AMD couldn't bring a card to beat the GTX 780 so they need to try convincing developers to use this new API so their cards can have better performance. It's not wrong to do, but this creates problems. Developers will have to do more work. Instead of just doing a DX11 version and calling it good, they would have to do Mantle + DX11. I shouldn't say have to because no developer has to use mantle. It is likely they will be pressured to do so but many probably will not use it.
3) That's hard to say. I don't know and I doubt anyone here does, the specifics of developer relations for gaming evolved. To be perfectly honest this seems like something DICE pushed in order to make it easier to port their work between consoles. Which is ok and cool, but now AMD has to sell the other 99% of the industry that it's worth it. How do you convince Capcom, Konami, Naughty Dog (which sony owns BTW and likely won't touch anything PC so they remain exclusive), 343 industries (Halo devs who similar to Naughty Dog are owned by a console maker), Namco, Sega, Activision, UbiSoft (who has some deal with Nvidia already), Rockstar, Level 5, Square-Enix etc. that using mantle is to their benefit? Most of these developers only have a minor appreciation of PC and some of them don't care at all and never will. Outside of EA, specifically DICE and their frostbite engine nobody has signed on with this.

 

[Stuka87]

There is obviously a reason why consoles and PCs use different APIs. Im pretty sure consoles use a dumbed down API to make best use of the weaker hardware, where the API have less graphical control to make it as fluent as possible but sacrifice graphics.

PCs on the other hand use DX because it have vastly bigger support for textures, audio and stuff like that, which have been improved and improved over 10s of years.

I have really difficult seeing that Mantle, will trump a well established system used exclusively for games since the dawn of day.

You could not be further from the truth. I am going to assume you do not have development experience based on what you have said.

Coding to the metal gives you *FAR* more control, in every way. It lets you take advantage of features that the higher level (DX/OpenGL) do not support. It also lets you directly manage memory, which will be more efficient as the memory management of DX has its on inherent issues. These issues are not design flaws, memory fragmentation will happen when you have something managing memory for you (as is true with .NET for instance).

DX has gotten more efficient, but any time you use a higher level API, there is significantly more overhead.

Yes consoles have less horse power. But there is a reason they can do the level of graphics that they can with such little hardware. This is the same reason Glide back in the 90's blue the doors off OpenGL and DirectDraw.

 

[StrangerGuy]

What is more important is that mantle lets to port the OPTIMIZATIONS of consoles to PCs.

So the code is optimized instead of developers not optimizing it because PC SPECS ARE BEEFIER and can brute force it.

What is best, poorly optimized games that require killer hardware to run at playable frame rats or optimized games that will run at the frame rates the beefier specs should allow for?

Because people here has an irrational desire for ever more GPU power solely for the sake of more GPU power, regardless of overall cost/benefit. I for one would rather see my $215 7950 last as long as possible.

 

[24601]

http://tech.slashdot.org/story/13/04/12/1847250/amd-says-there-will-be-no-directx-12-ever

It all makes sense now. AMD stonewalling the development of DirectX 12 by saying they won't make any cards that support any proposed DirectX 12 standard because they want to milk GCN for the 5-10 years the PS4 and Xbone are projected to last.

 

[cmdrdredd]

Because people here has an irrational desire for ever more GPU power solely for the sake of more GPU power, regardless of overall cost/benefit. I for one would rather see my $215 7950 last as long as possible.

Heh...I'd rather see 4k come along and force these companies to give me 60fps on it with more power. That's just me.

http://tech.slashdot.org/story/13/04/12/1847250/amd-says-there-will-be-no-directx-12-ever

It all makes sense now. AMD stonewalling the development of DirectX 12 by saying they won't make any cards that support any proposed DirectX 12 standard because they want to milk GCN for the 5-10 years the PS4 and Xbone are projected to last.

Where does it say that? All I see is some guy at AMD claiming there will be no new DX version. I would love for MS to come out and say "oh here guys, DX12...write your own plug-in if you want for direct hardware access etc." cause the way this comes off is very d-bagish.

 

[Cloudfire777]

1) people believe marketing words
2) They have wanted to but the problem is not everyone runs the same hardware. You cannot get low level access unless every system is the same. This is why consoles have been able to do this for a while now already. On a PC a majority of the market doesn't have the correct GPU (GCN) so it's not going to benefit them. To me this feels like AMD couldn't bring a card to beat the GTX 780 so they need to try convincing developers to use this new API so their cards can have better performance. It's not wrong to do, but this creates problems. Developers will have to do more work. Instead of just doing a DX11 version and calling it good, they would have to do Mantle + DX11. I shouldn't say have to because no developer has to use mantle. It is likely they will be pressured to do so but many probably will not use it.
3) That's hard to say. I don't know and I doubt anyone here does, the specifics of developer relations for gaming evolved. To be perfectly honest this seems like something DICE pushed in order to make it easier to port their work between consoles. Which is ok and cool, but now AMD has to sell the other 99% of the industry that it's worth it. How do you convince Capcom, Konami, Naughty Dog (which sony owns BTW and likely won't touch anything PC so they remain exclusive), 343 industries (Halo devs who similar to Naughty Dog are owned by a console maker), Namco, Sega, Activision, UbiSoft (who has some deal with Nvidia already), Rockstar, Level 5, Square-Enix etc. that using mantle is to their benefit? Most of these developers only have a minor appreciation of PC and some of them don't care at all and never will. Outside of EA, specifically DICE and their frostbite engine nobody has signed on with this.

I agree with almost everything you said here. :thumbsup:
There will be some major difficulties getting other developers on board here. Delays, money and frustration is what comes to mind.
Major AA titles take a few years to create. Doing two APIs at the same time, means hiring bigger staff, which AMD would have to pay since they are the only ones that use this system. Unless they make Nvidia pay for using it, but that will be the day when hell freeze over. I think Nvidia would rather make their own version instead.

Except, I still have difficulty believing that a brand new API will trump a well established and well polished system like DX right now. Perhaps several years down the line.


Yes I dont know a lot of the software side, thats why Im asking questions