No Mantle on Xbox One

Page 4 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

MeldarthX

Golden Member
May 8, 2010
1,026
0
76
I figured that mantle was just a re-factoring of the low level work they'd done with consoles to simply fit on to the PC, it seems like a lot of work for them to do just for the PC platform from the ground up, so I think you're probably dead right there.

My concern isn't the consoles it's the PC, are AMD really going to keep up the work necessary to keep the drivers and the API working flawlessly across all of their cards and make sure implementation in various games work well?

What happens when the architecture changes? One thing I've brought up before is that the architecture is the way it is because it primarily caters to DirectX, what happens if MS make changes in DX requirements that make other architectures more efficient for newer features?

All of the issues that come with API and architecture evolving are going to keep piling on AMD as the years go on, I find it very hard to believe this will be something available for the long run, maybe as long as they can keep GCN up, then probably retired.

That we'll just have to see; but anything from GCN and up will be able to handling Mantle.

that means 7000+ and new R200 series - 6000 and below won't benefit from mantle as they are a different art..

I see GCN lasting easily as long if not longer than last art from AMD - specially since its programmable and very flexable.
 

0___________0

Senior member
May 5, 2012
284
0
0
You are mixing several things.
The XBox360 have optimizations that are closer to the metal than just what is allowed for the PC DX. Consoles have low level APIs.
Despite sharing the same name DirectX in the Console and DirectX in the PC are quite different.
APIs aren't built in game engines. You have the engine and then need a wrapper for each individual API.
Ryan Smith posted a simple graphic to show what he is talking about.
D3D_Relationships_575px.png
.
AMD didn't ported the low level API for the Xbox360 to the PC, did they? Just because it wasn't ported it doesn't mean it wasn't there in the XBox360.
Also the ATI Xenos is based on the R520 architecture, although it has some features only implemented in the R600 (most importantly unified shaders). Xenos was had far more differences compared to the HD2900 than the APU in the Xbone compared to the 7000 and up series.

I'm not really going to address anything here because you completely managed to misunderstand me and none of this actually contradicts me anyways. I never said there was no low level API on the consoles... I never said the graphics API on the PC was the same as the console, of course they're different.

I never said the absence of a port doesn't mean it's not there, I said that ATi had no API for the 360 since they don't make the API, MS does it. AMD Didn't make an API for the XB1 or use D3D source as a base. You're not getting my points.

The image from Ryan is pointless since he changed his stance after his assumptions were proven wrong. He said the API on the XB1 and PC was the same, I'm pointing out they're not and neither is Mantle a derivative of anything.

If you can't understand and address my post please don't respond. None of what you said is relevant to my discussion with Suby.
 

GaiaHunter

Diamond Member
Jul 13, 2008
3,697
397
126
Ryan Smith didn't change his stance.
Ryan Smith said the Mantle was the Xbone low level API ported to the PC, not that the Mantle was the low level API inside the Xbone.

I know this seem semantics but what this means is that AMD copied the xbone low level API, added developer tools, build a driver for it and allow it to work for the PC.

Obviously AMD can't force MS to call their low level APi Mantle even though the low level APi in Mantle is a clone of it.

MS builds whatever API they want, but a low level API needs to know the driver and architecture of the GPU and that is AMD turf.

AMD didn't create the low level API for XBone, they just copied it, called it Mantle and make it available for the PC.

Mantle running in the consoles is IRRELEVANT because a low level API like mantle but with a different name is already running in them.

People may prefer to not see the difference until the evidence hit their face. Its their choice. In the following months the evidence will be in our faces.

Or are you saying AMD can't copy the MS low level API that was developed to access AMD driver/hardware?
 
Last edited:

0___________0

Senior member
May 5, 2012
284
0
0
Ryan Smith didn't change his stance.
Ryan Smith said the Mantle was the Xbone low level API ported to the PC, not that the Mantle was the low level API inside the Xbone.

I know this seem semantics but what this means is that AMD copied the xbone low level API, added developer tools, build a driver for it and allow it to work for the PC.

Obviously AMD can't force MS to call their low level APi Mantle even though the low level APi in Mantle is a clone of it.

MS builds whatever API they want, but a low level API needs to know the driver and architecture of the GPU and that is AMD turf.

AMD didn't create the low level API for XBone, they just copied it, called it Mantle and make it available for the PC.

Mantle running in the consoles is IRRELEVANT because a low level API like mantle but with a different name is already running in them.

People may prefer to not see the difference until the evidence hit their face. Its their choice. In the following months the evidence will be in our faces.

Or are you saying AMD can't copy the MS low level API that was developed to access AMD driver/hardware?

No, Ryan explicitly stated that AMD "Develop the APIs... we're talking about AMD writing two APIs for the new consoles". He's saying AMD wrote what we call Mantle for the XB1 and then made minor changes to bring it to PC. You can't say that MS makes the API and agree with Ryan, that's contradictory. According to Ryan, a graphics API designed solely by AMD is present on the consoles, he's arguing they are effectively the same thing with Mantle on the PC, with just the necessary modifications for the different environments. MS even wrote their own DX driver, Mono, for their console. The 360 didn't even use a driver, MS handled communication with the hardware entirely on their own; ATi GPU in there too, AMD doesn't "have" to do anything. The vendors don't wrote software willy-nilly for Sony and MS. No evidence of AMD using their own GCN driver.

Ryan said Mantle is "the API, a direct copy". He's arguing Mantle was made for consoles and brought to PC as an afterthought. Of course they would be differences, but that's not the point and not what my conversation was about, so I have no idea why you keep harping about it.

MS's API is proprietary, it's intellectual property and they are entitled to the sole enjoyment thereof. AMD cannot take that and then use it commercially. Mantle was an in-house API made from scratch for PC in collaboration with DICE, this is all straight from AMD. It is not derived from anything on a console.

Mantle is not a port of D3D from the XB1.

EDIT: Found the quote from Ritchie, mantle "was developed entirely on PC".
 
Last edited:

GaiaHunter

Diamond Member
Jul 13, 2008
3,697
397
126
No, Ryan explicitly stated that AMD "Develop the APIs... we're talking about AMD writing two APIs for the new consoles". He's saying AMD wrote what we call Mantle for the XB1 and then made minor changes to bring it to PC. You can't say that MS makes the API and agree with Ryan, that's contradictory. According to Ryan, a graphics API designed solely by AMD is present on the consoles, he's arguing they are effectively the same thing with Mantle on the PC, with just the necessary modifications for the different environments. MS even wrote their own DX driver, Mono, for their console. The 360 didn't even use a driver, MS handled communication with the hardware entirely on their own; ATi GPU in there too, AMD doesn't "have" to do anything. The vendors don't wrote software willy-nilly for Sony and MS. No evidence of AMD using their own GCN driver.

Ryan said Mantle is "the API, a direct copy". He's arguing Mantle was made for consoles and brought to PC as an afterthought. Of course they would be differences, but that's not the point and not what my conversation was about, so I have no idea why you keep harping about it.

MS's API is proprietary, it's intellectual property and they are entitled to the sole enjoyment thereof. AMD cannot take that and then use it commercially. Mantle was an in-house API made from scratch for PC in collaboration with DICE, this is all straight from AMD. It is not derived from anything on a console.

Mantle is not a port of D3D from the XB1.

EDIT: Found the quote from Ritchie, mantle "was developed entirely on PC".

"As the supplier of the APUs in both the Xbox One and PS4, AMD is in a very interesting place. Both of these upcoming consoles are based on their GCN technology, and as such AMD owns a great deal of responsibility in developing both of these consoles. This goes not only for their hardware but also portions of their software stack, as it’s AMD that needs to write the drivers and AMD that needs to help develop the APIs these consoles will use, so that the full features of the hardware are made available to developers."


Also the MS low level API has to interface with AMD hardware/driver.
The low level API is the key and AMD hardware/driver is the lock.

There is no way MS can create a low level API without it being based on AMD specs.
Once you have the lock you can make a copy of the key.

In fact, even fo DirectX MS has to talk with Intel, AMD and NVIDIA.

http://www.legitreviews.com/find-amds-mantle-api-doesnt-need-next-gen-console-support_126361

Earlier today we brought you news that Microsoft would not be supporting AMD’s Mantle API on the Xbox One. We reached out to AMD for a comment to this as it didn’t exactly sound like a good thing. Just moments ago we got this statement from AMD:
“In the last few days, you may have seen a blog indicating that “other graphics APIs such as OpenGL and AMD’s Mantle are not available” on at least one of the next-generation consoles. Starting with our public introduction in Hawaii, we clearly stated that Mantle is designed for the PC platform, where it creates a development environment that is similar to what consoles already offer: low-level APIs, close-to-metal hardware access, and simplified development procedures versus that of a PC. PC gamers and developers deserve the benefits of this model as well, which is why devs like DICE approached us and requested a technology like Mantle. And the benefit of that technology is clear: improved performance for gamers through more efficient rendering.
So much of the work game developers are doing to prepare for the next generation of console gaming is already well-suited for the modern graphics architectures in AMD Radeon graphics cards. Though the door is open for non-PC platforms to support Mantle in the future, today Mantle is a continuum that allows developers to take advantage of that work on the PC.” - AMD PR
So, it appears that Microsoft not supporting AMD Mantle won’t cause the world to end. It is highly likely that even is console game developers don’t use the full Mantle API that they will be writing code that they will be optimizing code for AMD’s Graphics Core Next (GCN) in the first place and that should carry over when console games are ported over to the PC. This should play in AMD’s favor and Mantle lays the ground work for low-level access to hardware for game developers. AMD also said again that DICE approached them for this ability in the first place. The real question now is how many game developers will be fully using the Mantle API.

Read more at http://www.legitreviews.com/find-am...en-console-support_126361#AWgrGgtWzLmS8hOM.99
 

0___________0

Senior member
May 5, 2012
284
0
0
"As the supplier of the APUs in both the Xbox One and PS4, AMD is in a very interesting place. Both of these upcoming consoles are based on their GCN technology, and as such AMD owns a great deal of responsibility in developing both of these consoles. This goes not only for their hardware but also portions of their software stack, as it’s AMD that needs to write the drivers and AMD that needs to help develop the APIs these consoles will use, so that the full features of the hardware are made available to developers."


Also the MS low level API has to interface with AMD hardware/driver.
The low level API is the key and AMD hardware/driver is the lock.

There is no way MS can create a low level API without it being based on AMD specs.
Once you have the lock you can make a copy of the key.

In fact, even fo DirectX MS has to talk with Intel, AMD and NVIDIA.

http://www.legitreviews.com/find-amds-mantle-api-doesnt-need-next-gen-console-support_126361

You're just taking everything Ryan says an infallible gospel and failing to address the points I raise, primarily because they aren't disputable and are often just paraphrasings of what devs and AMD have said. Ritche Corpus said Mantle was developed entirely on the PC. Shoots the theory that it was ported from the XB1 to pieces. I never said MS didn't receive and use information about the hardware from AMD, but MS writes their own software, AMD doesn't design and put stuff onto the consoles. MS wrote their own driver, they don't need AMD's driver, they haven't in the past, no driver on the 360, and they don't need one now. AMD does not write the API's for the consoles.

Ryan said AMD wrote both of the graphics API's on the consoles. False.
Ryan said AMD took the low level API they wrote for the XB1 and made minor changes for it to run on the PC. False.

You can't substantiate with evidence what you're saying. A lot of it is easily disproved too. You're completely ignoring the original discussion about an API getting ported at this point and just talkig about AMD getting to put drivers that do whatever they want on MS's console. MS wrote the driver, the console doesn't even need to use a driver, no necessity for AMD do make something. Just drop this.
 

smackababy

Lifer
Oct 30, 2008
27,024
79
86
Arguments of what Ryan said aside: I think it is obvious AMD had a hand helping Sony and MS with their respective APIs, now with that information, we can extrapolate AMD probably took what they had done with both console makers and tweaked that to work on the PC. It was probably more using shared knowledge gained while working with the console API creation and saying "hey, this could work on PC. let's give it a try." and getting some developer (mostly DICE from the sounds of it) to get on board and help some more. But, that is really just my speculation of what happened.

The fact that people seem to think Mantle is on consoles (or would be until it was announced it wasn't on the Xbox One) shows just how every little they know about anything relating to consoles or APIs. Sadly, these are the same people who saw the AMD marketing slide and are screaming Mantle will make AMD cards run twice as fast in the same games and that engines can just enable it on the fly for Mantle cards.
 

Vesku

Diamond Member
Aug 25, 2005
3,743
28
86
MS would probably be able to keep AMD from implementing anything in Mantle that MS specifically developed while working with AMD on the XBox One. But AMD probably has the right to reuse things they learned and developed while working with MS, within reason. They certainly would have ran Mantle by their lawyers before having Dice bang away with it for BF4.

But I can't see how anyone would think that MS would embrace or even endorse a non-DirectX PC API. At least one they weren't putting their name behind.
 

0___________0

Senior member
May 5, 2012
284
0
0
I can accept that as a plausible theory, it's grounded in reality unlike almost everything else getting thrown around.

I don't pretend to know how the first iterations of Mantle came to be or what AMD used. They obviously have knowledge about a streamlined environment and API; but they didn't take D3D, which is the API on the XB1, and give it a different name and slap it onto the PC as Mantle. That's all I've been trying to say here. Ryan just happened to be the source of the rumor.
 

GaiaHunter

Diamond Member
Jul 13, 2008
3,697
397
126
I'm not taking Ryan as gospel.
Ryan may be wrong but what he is saying is plausible.
People are just acting as if it isn't, as if AMD had no access to the APIs, as if AMD can't copy the API, etc.

On the other hand Ryan had access to white papers that we didn't.
It is also crazy to believe that AMD wasn't involved in whatever APis the consoles use.

An API alone can't make a card work.

There is an AMD driver in the console.
A high level API like DX11 generally require AMD/Intel/NVIDIA to design their drivers to work with it.
A low level API is different - the low level API is the one designed to work with the driver.

Even if somehow MS wrote the driver without AMD, it created it based on the AMD white papers.
Additionally MS will have to put its own white papers about that driver and APi so developers can use actually use it. So AMD has access to it.
It isn't a secret.
 
Last edited:

0___________0

Senior member
May 5, 2012
284
0
0
I'm not taking Ryan as gospel.
Ryan may be wrong but what he is saying is plausible.
People are just acting as if it isn't, as if AMD had no access to the APIs, as if AMD can't copy the API, etc.

On the other hand Ryan had access to white papers that we didn't.
It is also crazy to believe that AMD wasn't involved in whatever APis the consoles use.

An API alone can't make a card work.

There is an AMD driver in the console.
A high level API like DX11 generally require AMD/Intel/NVIDIA to design their drivers to work with it.
A low level API is different - the low level API is the one designed to work with the driver.

They can't copy the API, it isn't lawful to do so. Do you know what intellectual property is? MS owns D3D. AMD can't take DX and do whatever they want with it anymore than they can with Windows.

Funny that you mention whitepapers, a lot of people got them, only Ryan perpetuated this idea that AMD wrote the API's in the consoles themselves and then used them in the PC. Mantle was a PC initiative, it did not come from a console, AMD's own words.

You're still wrong about the driver. You don't need a driver. You can write to the circular buffer without it, just like the 360 did. A driver is not necessary to control hardware, it's just one way in which you can do it. There's 0 evidence that AMD exclusively wrote a driver a for the XB1. MS created a DX driver. You're just ignoring facts.
 
Last edited:

GaiaHunter

Diamond Member
Jul 13, 2008
3,697
397
126
They can't copy the API, it isn't lawful to do so. Do you know what intellectual property is? MS owns D3D. AMD can't take DX and do whatever they want with it anymore than they can with Windows.

Funny that you mention whitepapers, a lot of people got them, only Ryan perpetuated this idea that AMD wrote the API's in the consoles themselves and then used them in the PC. Mantle was a PC initiative, it did not come from a console, AMD's own words.

You're still wrong about the driver. You don't need a driver. You can write to the circular buffer without it, just like the 360 did. A driver is not necessary to control hardware, it's just one way in which you can do it. There's 0 evidence that AMD exclusively wrote a driver a for the XB1. MS created a DX driver. You're just ignoring facts.

We not talking about D3D.
AMD doesn't need to create D3D - it already exists for windows.

No matter what you use, at some point you have machine language and assembly code.

The machine code of AMD hardware belongs to AMD and was created by AMD.
 
Last edited:

0___________0

Senior member
May 5, 2012
284
0
0
We not talking about D3D.
AMD doesn't need to create D3D - it already exists for windows.

No matter what you use, at some point you have machine language and assembly code.

The machine code of AMD hardware belongs to AMD and was created by AMD.

This is not true, AMD doesn't own the API or any software just because everything is eventually turned into machine code. All languages higher level than machine code are reduced to it for execution if it's been compiled, on every device, but that's completely irrelevant. This is just a standard Jaguar core, AMD already uses it in other products, doesn't give them ownership of software. This has nothing to do with Mantle anymore and is in the real of absurdity; leave it alone.
 
Last edited:

OCGuy

Lifer
Jul 12, 2000
27,224
37
91
So if Mantle was never going to be possible on Xbox, why is MS rejecting it?


http://semiaccurate.com/2013/10/16/microsoft-rejects-mantle/

Microsoft officially rejects Mantle

"In a bid to promote Direct3D as the only choice of graphics API for gaming, both for developers and the gamers, Microsoft is announcing that the Xbox One will only feature Direct3D support, and to quote them in full, “other graphics APIs such as OpenGL and AMD’s Mantle are not available on Xbox One.”
 

sontin

Diamond Member
Sep 12, 2011
3,273
149
106
Because the sa guy has no clue?!

Both consoles are closed plattforms. So Microsoft and Sony decide what they are supporting. And it's clear that they not use something they have no control over it...
 

OCGuy

Lifer
Jul 12, 2000
27,224
37
91
Because the sa guy has no clue?!

Both consoles are closed plattforms. So Microsoft and Sony decide what they are supporting. And it's clear that they not use something they have no control over it...

He is quoting M$....I am not a S|A fan, but a quote is a quote.
 

sontin

Diamond Member
Sep 12, 2011
3,273
149
106
MS is not rejecting it. They only clarified that Mantle is not supported by them.
 

GaiaHunter

Diamond Member
Jul 13, 2008
3,697
397
126
This is not true, AMD doesn't own the API or any software just because everything is eventually turned into machine code. All languages higher level than machine code are reduced to it for execution if it's been compiled, on every device, but that's completely irrelevant. This is just a standard Jaguar core, AMD already uses it in other products, doesn't give them ownership of software. This has nothing to do with Mantle anymore and is in the real of absurdity; leave it alone.

I didn't say they did own the APi or any software.
I said any low level APi or software will have to be built based on the hardware.

At some point that low level API and software are constrained by the hardware. Period.
If the hardware only speak german, you will have to make sure you are speaking german to it.
 

GaiaHunter

Diamond Member
Jul 13, 2008
3,697
397
126
So instead of six, it is a half dozen. Got it.

Actually that is exactly what it seems to be.

MS felt the need to say something about Mantle.

I guess it is because it is irrelevant and not threatening at all...
 

0___________0

Senior member
May 5, 2012
284
0
0
I didn't say they did own the APi or any software.
I said any low level APi or software will have to be built based on the hardware.

At some point that low level API and software are constrained by the hardware. Period.
If the hardware only speak german, you will have to make sure you are speaking german to it.
No, you said they own all machine code.

If they don't own the API then they can't take it from the XB1 and use it on the PC. It's protected software, MS owns it. Mantle was built from the ground up on PC, it's not a port of the API on the XB1. I think we're done here by now.
 

sandorski

No Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
70,677
6,250
126
Can we agree that GCN is GCN regardless of Platform?

As such, there is 1 set of Machine Code for the GCN component of every platform.
 

VulgarDisplay

Diamond Member
Apr 3, 2009
6,188
2
76
I think the important thing is that mantle supports d3d hlsl. Xbox does also. They don't need to have the exact same api on both platforms if they both speak the same language do they?
 

Imouto

Golden Member
Jul 6, 2011
1,241
2
81
It doesn't matter if MS doesn't want to support Mantle. The closer their approach is to the metal easier for developers to port to Mantle. If MS wants any performance out of the Xbone they must make a Mantle-like API for it which AMD can take advantage of with Mantle whether MS likes it or not. And same goes for Sony with the PS4.

I don't really know how can you spin and spin this when Xbone API, PS4 API and Mantle will look almost identical for developers and easy to port from one to another.
 

0___________0

Senior member
May 5, 2012
284
0
0
I don't really know how can you spin and spin this when Xbone API, PS4 API and Mantle will look almost identical for developers and easy to port from one to another.
Haven't spun anything, I haven't even said anything bad about Mantle, in fact if you read my comment in the other thread I thought it would be a good benefit for PC gamers and didn't defame it or AMD in any way. I own two GPU's manufactured by AMD, I'm only in this thread because I'm tired of hearing speculation and people running with it as fact all over the web. I actually intend acquire a 20nm GPU from AMD during my next upgrade cycle if things continue as they are now; don't presume to know anything about my positions on matters as trivial as vendor loyalty and such that are so ridiculously blown out of proportion in this sub forum.

It's kind of disgusting that someone only points out a falsehood and you can only respond with "It's spin." because you're partial to one company and they can do no wrong. I've said nothing about it having ill affects or not simplifying ports or anything; it's obviously more similar to what you work with on the consoles than our D3D. Spare me that waste of bandwidth about spin. "I really don't know" is exactly correct, you just don't know.