Black Octagon
Golden Member
- Dec 10, 2012
- 1,410
- 2
- 81
Mantle is also beneficial on certain systems containing powerful CPUs, e.g.s, those running multiple high-end GPUs in Crossfire.
Mantle was AMDs attempt to solve a very personal problem. It has been completely overshadowed and forgotten, especially in this thread.
What, you might ask.
APU performance.
Mantle boost performance most on weak CPUs and can do this very well. This is by design and it does this pretty well. AMD bet their future on APUs. They are really potent graphics bolted onto weaker x86 cores. AMD needed a solution if they wanted to make their APUs shine and thus mantle was born.
Instead of marketing Mantle for what it is (a way to prop up their weak x86 cores), the focus shift to how terrible DX is.
The reality is that DX performance on strong CPUs is not that bad at all. Even mantle offers little improvement here. But on the weak slower cores on AMD APUs, it can really make a difference.
I see people talking out their behinds calling DX a failure and how much better AMD done with mantle. They really dont have a clue what they are talking about. You just cannot compare to two like so. DX is an API that spans across hundreds of different hardware and that was the goal always. All in all, it has done a great job. But if you focus on one architecture alone could you get more performance? I sure would hope so.
So I think the conversation should be on why mantle is really here. AMD set out to solve a very specific problem and I think Mantle does that rather well. I just find it very interesting how well it has been spun and how readily people adopt the misdirection. It is not about how much DX sucks, it was really about squeezing more performance out of their APUs. Once you realize this then you will understand some of the more puzzling aspects. Like why AMD would really want to keep mantle around even after DX12 is out. And you will know the answer when someone asks, "do you think intel will ever support mantle?"
Answer, "No"
Its not gonna happen. I promise
Amds center focus was to unlock their apus.
So to 3d,
99% of all games are console ports. Ports that were never limited by draw calls. With this in mind, it seems unlikely things would have ever been different.
I am glad that mantle has come and that the industry is thinking differently. It does open doors for a better future. So the effect is much greater than the original goal.
Just look at what it does for their apus. It has a massive effect, this isnt by accident. Do people really think this? That amd sit around in a room one day and decided to spend millions making an api just because they thought M$ sucked? Then this crazy byproduct was massive performance gains on their apus? Wow
Mantle puts the same picture on the screen as dx. It is just a totally different way to get there. One that is very well suited for their apus. It prevents a lot of back and forthwhich in bandwidth limited and not so powerful cpu cases it has massive returns. This is by design, not accidental. Mantle was never created as an attack on m$. that is crazy.
Amd bet the farm on their apus and obviously this is very very important to them. Mantle helps them shine a lot brighter. To anyone who cant see they are strongly connected, i am in disbelief
Yeah, that explains why BF4 Mantle has been in beta for such a long time and still isn't finished. Because it's soooo easy. :awe:Mantle makes the game development process easier not harder.
Whether they chose to or not is irrelevant to my point. When you use Mantle, you're coding for GCN. This is completely unlike DX12 or any other derivative before it.Yes they can but chose not to, which was a smart call.
Try looking at the date-stamp at the bottom-left of the slides. AMD didn't even have a graphics division at the time they were made.Perhaps its a myth that dx12 started in 2006.
Oh yes, an API that ties you to GCN/AMD with zero backwards compatibility with hardware and 10,000s existing games. Where do I sign up for this "amazing" API?If what you say is true than thank the gaming gods that amd has made a competing api that is better than anything Microsoft has released so far in less than 2 years.
There's absolutely no evidence of MS being pushed by Mantle. Again, steps were being taken to lower overhead back in 2006. Why do you think Vista completely overhauled the graphics driver stack? If anything, you could say Mantle was pushed by DirectX.You are acting like Microsoft's stranglehold on PC gaming features is a good think. AMD had single handedly forced Microsoft to innovate and if they can continually force Microsoft to innovate because they can add features at will it is a great thing.
There's nothing lame about a vendor-neutral API that reduces overhead and allows any IHV to target it without restriction or licensing, while providing full backwards compatibility.I still find it hilarious that people don't see how lame the unveiling of dx12 has been.
Please provide proof of this claim.DX11 multithreading traded better core scaling for increased driver overhead.
And? The whole point of WDDM is a tighter coupling between DirectX and the driver stack. That's how it was designed.DX11 MT is almost entirely done within the drivers.
You'd might have a valid point if DX12 was out and did what it promises.There's nothing lame about a vendor-neutral API that reduces overhead and allows any IHV to target it without restriction or licensing, while providing full backwards compatibility.
I find this ridiculous.There's absolutely no evidence of MS being pushed by Mantle. Again, steps were being taken to lower overhead back in 2006. Why do you think Vista completely overhauled the graphics driver stack? If anything, you could say Mantle was pushed by DirectX.
Do you have any benchmarks showing this "massive effect" with APU gaming? According to this very recent article link, mantle has a very minimal effect on gaming on an apu. I am sure if you paired the APU with a powerful discrete card, you would see large improvements, but I dont know why you would buy an APU if you were going to pair it with a powerful discrete card, considering their relatively anemic cpu performance.
Now I know you comprehend what a beta is.Yeah, that explains why BF4 Mantle has been in beta for such a long time and still isn't finished. Because it's soooo easy. :awe:
You would have to have seen Mantle source and DX12 source to know how similar or different they are. People in the industry have lead us to believe they are very similar.Whether they chose to or not is irrelevant to my point. When you use Mantle, you're coding for GCN. This is completely unlike DX12 or any other derivative before it.
This is not direct to metal. There is a driver and abstraction layer.Again, if you think coding for a piece of hardware at the metal layer is so great, you must think DOS was the best OS ever made.
You'd might have a valid point if DX12 was out and did what it promises.
Relevance to the quoted statement: Mantle makes the game development process easier not harder?Now I know you comprehend what a beta is.
There's some similarity given AMD copied Microsoft's DirectX HLSL, which again makes the claim that Mantle is forcing Microsoft's hand laughable.You would have to have seen Mantle source and DX12 source to know how similar or different they are. People in the industry have lead us to believe they are very similar.
Try an elementary Google search of "DOS device driver" and VxD.This is not direct to metal. There is a driver and abstraction layer.
Given every version prior achieved that, what evidence do you have that version 12 won't?You'd might have a valid point if DX12 was out and did what it promises.