(DSOG via MaxPC) Nvidia Finally Officially Speaks About AMD’s Mantle

[Mand]

Nvidia's hardware PhysX - Has been proven to work with an AMD card as the primary video renderer and an Nvidia card performing the PhysX calculations. Yet Nvidia has chosen to completely disable hardware PhysX if it detects an AMD card in the system. That is closed.

AMD's Mantle - AMD has said that it will allow other vendors to utilize Mantle once it comes out of Beta testing sometime at the end of this year. They could have chosen to only allow Mantle to function on AMD cards, yet they have publicly stated that they will not do this. That is open.

It is not 'open source', but it is still 'open' to other platforms.

This is a distinction without a difference. Rather than having a technological prohibition preventing Nvidia from utilizing Mantle, AMD has resorted to a business prohibition preventing Nvidia from using Mantle. The end result is that Nvidia cannot use Mantle without extreme risk of getting screwed by AMD.

It is not "open" if AMD has sole control.

 

[WelshBloke]

I think that you're getting confused about the difference between open to use, and open to modify.
AMD could (and I have no idea of their plans) make this open for anyone to use whilst maintaining control (much like Microsoft does with DX). They could, I suppose, (but I very much doubt it) make it totally open source and release the source code into the wild. But we already have one totally open source API and that's been dying of "death by committee" for years, I'm not sure another one would do any better.

 

[Mand]

I think that you're getting confused about the difference between open to use, and open to modify.
AMD could (and I have no idea of their plans) make this open for anyone to use whilst maintaining control (much like Microsoft does with DX). They could, I suppose, (but I very much doubt it) make it totally open source and release the source code into the wild. But we already have one totally open source API and that's been dying of "death by committee" for years, I'm not sure another one would do any better.

Except Microsoft is not in the GPU business. They have no stake in hardware. And because of that position, both AMD and Nvidia can introduce new features that get included in DX.

Mantle is nowhere close to the same, because AMD makes the cards Mantle runs on. It would be business suicide for Nvidia to get on board with AMD's API as long as AMD has full control.

Just because the prohibition on Nvidia utilizing Mantle is financial rather than legal does not make it not present. Mantle is not open.

 

[SlowSpyder]

Except Microsoft is not in the GPU business. They have no stake in hardware. And because of that position, both AMD and Nvidia can introduce new features that get included in DX.

Mantle is nowhere close to the same, because AMD makes the cards Mantle runs on. It would be business suicide for Nvidia to get on board with AMD's API as long as AMD has full control.

Just because the prohibition on Nvidia utilizing Mantle is financial rather than legal does not make it not present. Mantle is not open.

If only Nvidia had a lawyer or two working for them that could draw up a contract that protects their interests, if they wanted to use Mantle...

Everything AMD has said is that it is open. Intel and AMD share technology because they have licensing agreements in place. I don't see any reason AMD and Nvidia couldn't do the same for Mantle if they wanted.

I understand why Nvidia might pass on this opportunity. But just because the source code isn't just a click on AMD's website for anyone to download and manipulate, that doesn't mean it isn't open.

Again, I think you're arguing semantics of what 'open' really means here more than anything.

 

[WelshBloke]

Except Microsoft is not in the GPU business. They have no stake in hardware. And because of that position, both AMD and Nvidia can introduce new features that get included in DX.

Mantle is nowhere close to the same, because AMD makes the cards Mantle runs on. It would be business suicide for Nvidia to get on board with AMD's API as long as AMD has full control.

Just because the prohibition on Nvidia utilizing Mantle is financial rather than legal does not make it not present. Mantle is not open.

Whether Microsoft is in the gpu business is irrelevant. Open does not just have the narrow meaning you were giving it.
It might well not be wise for Nvidia to get on board from a business Park, but again that doesn't mean that when AMD say that they will "open it up" they are being disingenuous.

Every software release ever has been described as "opening it up" when they go from a closed beta to an open beta to release. It doesn't mean that they give up any control, it just means that it's open for more people to use.

 

[Mand]

Whether Microsoft is in the gpu business is irrelevant. Open does not just have the narrow meaning you were giving it.
It might well not be wise for Nvidia to get on board from a business Park, but again that doesn't mean that when AMD say that they will "open it up" they are being disingenuous.

Every software release ever has been described as "opening it up" when they go from a closed beta to an open beta to release. It doesn't mean that they give up any control, it just means that it's open for more people to use.

Except that in this context, not giving up control means that a direct competitor can't make effective use out of it. Which was the whole alleged point of making it "open" in the first place.

 

[Noctifer616]

Except that in this context, not giving up control means that a direct competitor can't make effective use out of it. Which was the whole alleged point of making it "open" in the first place.

You mean like how right now DirectX doesn't support all the features of modern GPU architecture?

It took MS way too long to add tesselation support into DirectX despite hardware supporting it for years.

Neither the Khronos Group or Microsoft give a rats ass about graphics. They are slow in adding support for new features and don't seam to care about AMD or NVidia input at all.

How is AMD being in control of Mantle worse than Khronos Group or MS controlling it? AMD has a stake in GPUs, they want new feature support in the API as soon as possible. At least if NVidia has a new feature out that also AMD supports (which so far has always been the case) Mantle will support if sooner than DX or OpenGL.

 

[Mand]

I won't claim MS and Khronos are perfect, but do you really expect a fully proprietary situation like Mantle to be better?

 

[WelshBloke]

I won't claim MS and Khronos are perfect, but do you really expect a fully proprietary situation like Mantle to be better?

At the least just having the possibility of a third option seems to have given Microsoft a kick up the posterior.

 

[Noctifer616]

I won't claim MS and Khronos are perfect, but do you really expect a fully proprietary situation like Mantle to be better?

On top of Mantle having lower overhead and supports for multythreading it also has a higher feature support than DX and OpenGL. I am specifically talking about Asynchronous Compute, something Nvidia supports since Fermi and AMD since GCN, neither OpenGL or DirectX expose that hardware feature right now while Mantle does.

On top of that, it's very likely Mantle will have the same feature support as DirectX or better. So I don't see how Mantle can be bad for NVidia from a graphics feature perspective.

 

[ShintaiDK]

You mean like how right now DirectX doesn't support all the features of modern GPU architecture?

There isnt even a GPU yet with full DX11.2 support.

Neither the Khronos Group or Microsoft give a rats ass about graphics. They are slow in adding support for new features and don't seam to care about AMD or NVidia input at all.

How is AMD being in control of Mantle worse than Khronos Group or MS controlling it? AMD has a stake in GPUs, they want new feature support in the API as soon as possible. At least if NVidia has a new feature out that also AMD supports (which so far has always been the case) Mantle will support if sooner than DX or OpenGL.

Do you know how things was in the pre DX days? Is that what you want back?

DX and OpenGL takes longer time because its a unified standard by the ISV/IHVs. Rather than a single company setting the standard after whatever hardware they got today.

 

[Mand]

So I don't see how Mantle can be bad for NVidia from a graphics feature perspective.

Because it's in the control of their direct competitor. They can't take that risk.

 

[Noctifer616]

Because it's in the control of their direct competitor. They can't take that risk.

What risk? DX and Mantle already have support for the same features. What risk is there?

 

[BrightCandle]

The problem in my opinion is its a corruption of what open standard means. An open standard is something developed and improved by all interested parties and open to implementation to all. Mantle definitely is not maintained by anything more than one party, so its open to implement but the future versions are entirely in AMD's control with no input from others welcome. Thus its a propriety technology which others are free to implement, but not adapt or modify in anyway. That is presuming they do actually finally go forward with their plan to do that as currently its completely closed.

 

[Noctifer616]

Do you know how things was in the pre DX days? Is that what you want back?

You mean back when each graphics architecture was completely different and there were a lot more vendors?

Besides, how would it be the same when Mantle can work on all modern hardware just like DirectX 12 will?

 

[ShintaiDK]

You mean back when each graphics architecture was completely different and there were a lot more vendors?

Besides, how would it be the same when Mantle can work on all modern hardware just like DirectX 12 will?

Something you wanna prove?

 

[Noctifer616]

Something you wanna prove?

Why else would Intel show interested if it can't work on their hardware in the first place?

And it would be funny how DX 12 which is a low level API, just like Mantle, works on a wide range of hardware, but Mantle couldn't.

Also, it what if one day AMD changes GPU architecture? Are they going to scrap Mantle?

 

[ShintaiDK]

Why else would Intel show interested if it can't work on their hardware in the first place?

And it would be funny how DX 12 which is a low level API, just like Mantle, works on a wide range of hardware, but Mantle couldn't.

Also, it what if one day AMD changes GPU architecture? Are they going to scrap Mantle?

Seems Intel just called AMDs bluff. AMD was busy making up excuses why they couldnt see Mantle source.

I doubt Mantle got a future after DX12. Its not really worth sponsoring game after game when its suddenly "free".

 

[Noctifer616]

Seems Intel just called AMDs bluff. AMD was busy making up excuses why they couldnt see Mantle source.

I doubt Mantle got a future after DX12. Its not really worth sponsoring game after game when its suddenly "free".

HSA and Linux support should help Mantle stay relevant after DX 12 comes out.

 

[ShintaiDK]

HSA and Linux support should help Mantle stay relevant after DX 12 comes out.

HSA is still pretty much completely MIA. And Mantle on Linux? Is it demoed yet?

 

[Creig]

There isnt even a GPU yet with full DX11.2 support.

And yet earlier in this thread you stated:

Over 83% of the sold graphics capable hardware cant run Mantle. But they can run DX12.

So which is it?

 

[Stuka87]

Something you wanna prove?

AMD did state what hardware features were required. Basically, the vast majority of current GPU's will support it. For AMD it is GCN or newer. The VLIW4/5 cards do not support it as they are lacking some features.

http://wccftech.com/amd-mantle-api-require-gcn-work-nvidia-graphic-cards/

However AMD has stated until mantle goes GM (ie: version 1.0) it will not be available for others.

 

[Creig]

Seems Intel just called AMDs bluff. AMD was busy making up excuses why they couldnt see Mantle source.

Well, since AMD has already stated that they won't give access to Mantle until they feel it's ready to come out of Beta testing, we'll just have to wait and see if they follow through and allow Intel access. Until then, you can't prove that AMD was bluffing about or not.

 

[ShintaiDK]

And yet earlier in this thread you stated:



So which is it?

API support and full hardware support is 2 different things.

 

[ShintaiDK]

AMD did state what hardware features were required. Basically, the vast majority of current GPU's will support it. For AMD it is GCN or newer. The VLIW4/5 cards do not support it as they are lacking some features.

http://wccftech.com/amd-mantle-api-require-gcn-work-nvidia-graphic-cards/

However AMD has stated until mantle goes GM (ie: version 1.0) it will not be available for others.

If AMD did state what specific hardware features were needed. Then I assume you linked the wrong article.