They didn't test mantle themselves. So they were told by AMD. Where else would they get the information, AMD told them 45% and then they say they were told it was more in line with 10% in GPU limited situations. Of course you can twist the words in the article however you want, much like some AMD fans indicated that EA/DICE wasn't paid 8 million dollars for Mantle When 2700+ google search results seem to state that they did.
You can hope for 45%. That's cool. But the chances of that happening, except in excessively cherry picked situations which won't happen in real world gaming? I don't know. Kaveri's pre-launch hype doesn't exactly inspire optimism either. Like you said. AMD have lied before. Right? AMD marketing slides are purposed for hype. Not truth.
Anyway, i'm just saying, 45% is probably not real world. If it's 10 % performance gain for free, if that's what happens as per hardware.fr, that is still respectable.
And that was with DirectX, which explains their desire to use Mantle."No unexpected stalls due to shader creation"
Unless it's Nixxes themselves doing the port (Deus Ex HR !!)
They didn't test mantle themselves. So they were told by AMD. Where else would they get the information, AMD told them 45% and then they say they were told it was more in line with 10% in GPU limited situations. Of course you can twist the words in the article however you want, much like some AMD fans indicated that EA/DICE wasn't paid 8 million dollars for Mantle When 2700+ google search results seem to state that they did.
You can hope for 45%. That's cool. But the chances of that happening, except in excessively cherry picked situations which won't happen in real world gaming? I don't know. Kaveri's pre-launch hype doesn't exactly inspire optimism either. Like you said. AMD have lied before. Right? AMD marketing slides are purposed for hype. Not truth.
Anyway, i'm just saying, 45% is probably not real world. If it's 10 % performance gain for free, if that's what happens as per hardware.fr, that is still respectable.
Great find!You all should view the Nixxes slideshow:
http://www.slideshare.net/DevCentral...atsman#btnNext
Gets Mantle specific at slide 17.
New Star Swarm footage and coverage on Engadget!
http://www.engadget.com/2014/01/14/oxide-star-swarm-real-time-strategy-mantle-demo/
In the upper left corner of the video, you will see a note when the engine is using Mantle, and when it is using DirectX.
Mantle naysayers have to feel pretty embarrassed after this
Not really, turning off motion blur seemed to make them run similarly. I usually just turn motion blur off automatically in games because I hate it.
That motion blur would indicate a GPU effect that is getting a massive performance increase in Mantle, and not CPU?
Kind of the opposite of what people are expecting. That engine looks impressive for a movie to play out in real time, but there is so much stuff going on how the hell do you play that?
object != batchWell go notice the numbers of objects of aprox 5k. Remember the apu13 demonstration with was it 50k or 70k?
Not really, turning off motion blur seemed to make them run similarly. I usually just turn motion blur off automatically in games because I hate it.
object != batch
New Star Swarm footage and coverage on Engadget!
http://www.engadget.com/2014/01/14/oxide-star-swarm-real-time-strategy-mantle-demo/
In the upper left corner of the video, you will see a note when the engine is using Mantle, and when it is using DirectX.
They didn't disable motion blur on Mantle though.
Also, Mantle had some pretty nasty dips too, so it looks to me like they pulled no punches with this benchmark. :|
I wonder what it's doing special that makes motion blur worth a 90% hit in performance. :hmm: