Huh? You keep acting as if AMD paying DICE is a bad thing. Yes, we know for a fact they did.
I'm not so sure about this. Mantle looks like it will go a long way to removing the CPU bottleneck on lower end processors. This will help AMD more than Intel. What Mantle very well could do is minimize the need for the higher end Intel processors (AMD doesn't appear to care for the high end CPU market anymore).
Short version, Mantle will probably help AMD's APU products shine, and make the diminishing returns slope much steeper for high end CPUs.
I wondered about that. If an 8 core AMD cpu is fast enough to not be a bottleneck with multi GPU setups, then why not just buy one of those and save some cash? I know I would. Then I could feel good about AMD again and have an all AMD rig. But I think this getting a little crazy and going way too far. I don't see it happening to be honest.
How much money changed hands?
The deal also gives AMD the right to use Battlefield 4 to showcase the Mantle technology and various hardware products over the next year.
These sort of partnerships are nothing new, but with an $8 million price tag, it might be one most lucrative one to date.
About $8,000,000.00 went to EA, which DICE received part of to start working on Mantle early:
http://bf4central.com/2013/10/amdamd-paid-ea-5-million-battlefield-4-deal/
But again, other than pointing it out to make sure nobody takes marketing statements from people who have an inherent interest in the product seriously, who cares?
...According to our sources, AMD paid EA up to $8 million for the rights to use Battlefield 4 to promote its hardware products.
...Part of the deal included AMD giving Battlefield 4 developer DICE early access to the new Mantle API technology.
So the slide from last week was a lie? That would be two slides in a week from AMD that weren't true.....!
The reason Mantle will not take off beyond its initial honeymoon is because at first it will not support Intel, or NV. Who is going to spend all of that time for a DX alternative when less than 35% of the total GPU market, and less than 27% of the CPU market use AMD hardware? And an even smaller percentage use GCN?
AMD isn't giving you more cores. They are creating more cores in an attempt to separate themselves from Intel in the only way they can. They failed to keep up in performance, so they are attempting to present users with something they think they need. If they could compete with Intel in straight performance, they probably wouldn't be selling 8 core chips.
The other possible reason AMD would push for more cores is simply to try and get the dev's to use more cores. Of course this is also not some saintly gesture. They just want their CPU's to compete in the only way they know how to get them to compete.
Intel is just giving us what we want and not things we don't want or need.
The practice of paying a dev to use your features isn't wrong, but it does make you question how good it really is, if you have to pay them to use it.
Who told you that Mantle wil not work on Intel CPU..??
Please do cite your sources.
Who gives.
8m is nothing for the most important engine launched with bf4. If anyone thinks 3 times 8 at 24m is going to get you the 3 engines of importance they need to look at the balance sheets of everyone involved.
Clearly its about anything else but this symbolic amount.
I quoted CPU share because that includes APU share. Mantle will not work on Intel APUs at launch, it is in the AMD slides.
Plus who told you that FX-8350 is 8 Core..??
It is infact a 4 core just like Intel's i7. You think it is 8 cores because of AMD's stupid MODULE marketing and because they use CMT vs Intel's SMT(Hyper threading).
AMD's Adam Kozack isn't as optimistic as some here, which is why I think AMD isn't releasing any hard numbers. In fact if Oxide can reach 10%, it would be more than internal data suggests to AMD :
"AMD's Mantle API, developed with the help of EA's DICE, is designed to push frame rates higher and improve graphics fidelity. Pair it with Kaveri, and the hope is for near-perfect renderings.....
That's the idea, of course, and Kozak for one is keeping his forecasts on a more even keel.
"Personally my expectations are low," he said of a Mantle-plus-Kaveri combo. "But there is an Oxide demo here and they are seeing substantial speed-ups, beyond what anyone internally has guessed at. I'm optimistic it's going to be more than the 5% I'm hoping for and more towards the double digits."
http://www.techradar.com/news/compu...after-nvidia-graphics-with-kaveri-apu-1199636
He is talking frame rates because he was at a frame-rate demo of Kaveri, which is different than the vague "performance" or whatever other terms the marketing slides use that cant be measured.
In the end, frame rates are what reviewers will write about, and what people will judge it on.
AMD's Adam Kozack isn't as optimistic as some here, which is why I think AMD isn't releasing any hard numbers. In fact if Oxide can reach 10%, it would be more than internal data suggests to AMD :
"AMD's Mantle API, developed with the help of EA's DICE, is designed to push frame rates higher and improve graphics fidelity. Pair it with Kaveri, and the hope is for near-perfect renderings.....
That's the idea, of course, and Kozak for one is keeping his forecasts on a more even keel.
"Personally my expectations are low," he said of a Mantle-plus-Kaveri combo. "But there is an Oxide demo here and they are seeing substantial speed-ups, beyond what anyone internally has guessed at. I'm optimistic it's going to be more than the 5% I'm hoping for and more towards the double digits."
http://www.techradar.com/news/compu...after-nvidia-graphics-with-kaveri-apu-1199636
He is talking frame rates because he was at a frame-rate demo of Kaveri, which is different than the vague "performance" or whatever other terms the marketing slides use that cant be measured.
In the end, frame rates are what reviewers will write about, and what people will judge it on.
I quoted CPU share because that includes APU share. Mantle will not work on Intel APUs at launch, it is in the AMD slides.
Bwhahahaha, did you get that off AMDZone?
Take HT off the i7 and you've got an i5, take 2 module off the 8350 and you've a 4350.
Do I need to link a review that shows how badly the 4350 gets steamrolled by the i5 in multithreading?
As JF AMD so elegantly explained, it's like 85 85 85 85 85 85 85 85 for the FX and 110 110 110 110 for the i7, the only problem was that JF AMD left out that problematic detail of AMDs 85 equaling Intels 45.
Disgruntled AMD fans came up with the idea that it was only really a four core chip, that was of course after reviewers were baffled by the 8150s atrocious performance.
Becuse when you take off HT off i7 you get an i5 that is still a true quad core.
FX 4350 is a dual core with AMD's HT.
This is a problem with how AMD chas designed its Bulldozer Architecture. They haven't created a part that is just 4 cores with no shared resources..Each module of FX 4350 still shares its resources..
I linked the thread in my first post where there is a lot of discussions going on about CMT.
And if I am wrong or delusional than if proven wrong, I am pretty ready to apologise for my mistakes.
Provided people are not screaming Bwahahhaha that is.
You're delusional and have already been proven wrong, you just can't accept it because it will shatter the delusions you're using as a coping mechanism.
If the 8350 was a true quad with an HT like addition it wouldn't be a disaster in single threaded performance. The SMT tax explains why it isn't a beast in MT.
The technologies at their core are fundamentally different, go read something would you? Intel forces two threads down the same core, AMD has a dedicated integer core for each module with a shared FPU.
Similarly, if AMD doesn't pay the dev to use their features then the dev's will stick to what they have been previously using because, you know there is no $$$ incentive in trying something new.
Dev's usually don't care if something is good or bad, they care about the money. If someone is paying them to use something that is bad, they will not willingly move to a 'better' alternative, because the loose money.
But, if the 'better' alternative also comes with money, then maybe they can think about it.
Watch the Mantle video where the devs talk about it. Mantle is something they've been wanting for a long time. This is the 21st century where everything has a price. Nothing is done simply because it's better. There has to be an angle and money has to change hands. This doesn't mean that game Devs are just in it for the money. EA is just in it for the money. There are devs that strive to be the best. Who want their games to be the best.