The AMD Mantle Thread

[GaiaHunter]

He writes exactly what I say. Server CPU, bandwidth, bandwidth and bandwidth.

Do you think Mantle will fix this? Even if you fix the draw calls for the CPU load, the network load, the server load. Then clients would still run like rubbish due to being GPU limited. BF4 for consoles is a nice example here. 900p and 720p on something between medium to low settings and the ability to dynamic downscale further. Everyone without SSDs would also suffer badly under the texture loadings.

That is up to what the developers can due with better access to memory, by decoupling the memory from the API object and by removing many of the buffers required.

Also, in GW2 they were given the OK by the suits to increase bandwidth traffic but your client will still crawl with max character limit (even at low model quality) in big battles with 30+ players.

So the problem is in the client side ability to load and render all those tons of characters.

 

[bystander36]

He states a bit of both as an issue. Only in WvW does he state major issues, however.

 

[VulgarDisplay]

Huh? I can't think of a mobile AMD APU that is even in the same ballpark as Iris Pro, and mobile doesn't have an awful lot of options in terms of memory anyway....

I'm trying to say that an AMD APU with GDDR5 or eDRAM like Iris Pro would likely be quite a bit faster than Iris Pro. I'm not saying that current AMD apu's are faster than Iris Pro. AMD's current APU's pretty much scale perfectly with memory speed indicating that they are severely bottlenecked.

They also don't cost around $600 just for the APU like the Iris Pro does.

 

[bystander36]

I'm trying to say that an AMD APU with GDDR5 or eDRAM like Iris Pro would likely be quite a bit faster than Iris Pro. I'm not saying that current AMD apu's are faster than Iris Pro. AMD's current APU's pretty much scale perfectly with memory speed indicating that they are severely bottlenecked.

They also don't cost around $600 just for the APU like the Iris Pro does.

Currently, the mobile Iris Pro is much faster than any desktop APU AMD has. I'm not so convinced it is entirely a memory bandwidth issue based on TH review testing memory. While memory helped, it didn't continue to improve past a certain point.
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/memory-bandwidth-scaling-trinity,3419-4.html

There was no difference between 2133mhz and 2400mhz.

The Iris Pro is not what is so expensive, it is that they put in on their most expensive CPU's, which have a history of being overpriced.

Things are likely to change, if Intel decides they want to compete in that market.

 

[GaiaHunter]

He states a bit of both as an issue. Only in WvW does he state major issues, however.

In open world PvE in places where the Living Story, World Boss Events and Scarlet Invasions are happening, you also get the same issue. Except no other players are trying to kill you, so it is less frustrating.

They sorted the issue of invisible enemies but many times they are just a name plate.

I don't know if mantle can sort this type of issues or not (GW2 is after all a DX9 game) but considering RTS also get performance to a crawl with big armies and what oxido demo was showing, maybe it can.

 

[3DVagabond]

Because it won't. Intel will benefit from all this Mantle stuff next year (or the next) when 20nm GPUs hit the market with a 60% or more performance increase and their CPUs see the usual 10/15% perf increase. If you want the highest end or a multi-GPU solution you will need an Intel CPU. That taking in mind that 1080p is still the preferred gaming resolution as I don't really see 1440p taking off now that we have the 2K candy in sight.

I don't see how any of that benefits Intel through Mantle in the context of APU/iGPU.

 

[3DVagabond]

I understood the post I was referring to as saying ms might put out an alternative low level API, or at least a much more efficient version of DX, as an alternative to mantle that would work with Intel and nVidia. That would clearly benefit both of them. Perhaps I misunderstood the post.

Maybe I've misunderstood?

M$ is going to create low level paths, like Mantle for Intel and nVidia? That would leave AMD out on their own with M$, Intel, and nVidia attacking them through low level DX optimizations. AMD might as well close up and go home now if that's going to happen. Somehow that scenario doesn't sound plausible to me.

 

[Arkadrel]

Currently, the mobile Iris Pro is much faster than any desktop APU AMD has.

Sleeping dogs: http://images.anandtech.com/graphs/graph6993/55283.png
Iris Pro 5200 (i7-4950 HQ) = 55.9 fps (~5% faster)
AMD Radeon HD 7660D (A10-5800k) = 53.2 fps

Bioshock-Infinity: http://images.anandtech.com/graphs/graph6993/55281.png
Iris Pro 5200 (i7-4950 HQ) = 45.2 fps (~13% faster)
AMD Radeon HD 7660D (A10-5800k) = 39.9 fps

Tomb Raider('13): http://images.anandtech.com/graphs/graph6993/55285.png
Iris Pro 5200 (i7-4950 HQ) = 67.1 fps (~43% faster)
AMD Radeon HD 7660D (A10-5800k) = 46.6 fps

Crysis 3: http://images.anandtech.com/graphs/graph6993/55290.png
Iris Pro 5200 (i7-4950 HQ) = 45.5 fps (~23% faster)
AMD Radeon HD 7660D (A10-5800k) = 36.8 fps

Grid 2: http://images.anandtech.com/graphs/graph6993/55296.png
Iris Pro 5200 (i7-4950 HQ) = 58.8 fps (~24% faster)
AMD Radeon HD 7660D (A10-5800k) = 47.1 fps

Overall: its between 5%-43% faster, in the lower res people will game at.
Mostly in the 20-25% range.

AMD has faster APUs than the 5800k.... ei the 6800k.
It would still be slower than the 5200 Iris pro, but not by huge amounts (ei not "much" faster).

The Iris Pro is not what is so expensive, it is that they put in on their most expensive CPU's, which have a history of being overpriced.

Things are likely to change, if Intel decides they want to compete in that market.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/6993/intel-iris-pro-5200-graphics-review-core-i74950hq-tested/19

Intel Core i7-4950HQ = $657 price (that was June 1, 2013)

AMD A10-5800k = ~129 $ on newegg (atm)

I think why GT3e was only on the most expensive models of CPUs was because its costs too much to put on the cheaper versions.

 

[bystander36]

Sleeping dogs: http://images.anandtech.com/graphs/graph6993/55283.png
Iris Pro 5200 (i7-4950 HQ) = 55.9 fps (~5% faster)
AMD Radeon HD 7660D (A10-5800k) = 53.2 fps

Bioshock-Infinity: http://images.anandtech.com/graphs/graph6993/55281.png
Iris Pro 5200 (i7-4950 HQ) = 45.2 fps (~13% faster)
AMD Radeon HD 7660D (A10-5800k) = 39.9 fps

Tomb Raider('13): http://images.anandtech.com/graphs/graph6993/55285.png
Iris Pro 5200 (i7-4950 HQ) = 67.1 fps (~43% faster)
AMD Radeon HD 7660D (A10-5800k) = 46.6 fps

Crysis 3: http://images.anandtech.com/graphs/graph6993/55290.png
Iris Pro 5200 (i7-4950 HQ) = 45.5 fps (~23% faster)
AMD Radeon HD 7660D (A10-5800k) = 36.8 fps

Grid 2: http://images.anandtech.com/graphs/graph6993/55296.png
Iris Pro 5200 (i7-4950 HQ) = 58.8 fps (~24% faster)
AMD Radeon HD 7660D (A10-5800k) = 47.1 fps

Overall: its between 5%-43% faster, in the lower res people will game at.
Mostly in the 20-25% range.

AMD has faster APUs than the 5800k.... ei the 6800k.
It would still be slower than the 5200 Iris pro, but not by huge amounts (ei not "much" faster).

That looks like much faster to me. I guess "much faster" can be interpreted however you like. And don't forget that the comparison was between a lower power mobile part compared to AMD's desktop APU. The difference is much bigger compared to their mobile parts.

And while on a mobile chip (the Iris Pro), it would be true about the lower resolution being used, but the higher resolution shows you what is actually faster on the GPU side of the chips. The low resolution suffers from some bottlenecking.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/6993/intel-iris-pro-5200-graphics-review-core-i74950hq-tested/19

Intel Core i7-4950HQ = $657 price (that was June 1, 2013)

AMD A10-5800k = ~129 $ on newegg (atm)

I think why GT3e was only on the most expensive models of CPUs was because its costs too much to put on the cheaper versions.

As it said, the Iris Pro added $90 to the total costs. It isn't the Iris Pro that makes it $657, it is the CPU it is on. And as you know, Intel just jacks the prices up on their highest end CPUs.

As soon as Intel decides to make a mainsteem gaming APU, they'll not have a difficult time at it.

 

[SiliconWars]

Actually the 4950HQ isn't their highest end CPU by far, and judging by the price difference between it and the faster 4800MQ (with 4600 graphics), Intel clearly prices Iris Pro graphics very highly.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/6993/intel-iris-pro-5200-graphics-review-core-i74950hq-tested/19

 

[bystander36]

Actually the 4950HQ isn't their highest end CPU by far, and judging by the price difference between it and the faster 4800MQ (with 4600 graphics), Intel clearly prices Iris Pro graphics very highly.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/6993/intel-iris-pro-5200-graphics-review-core-i74950hq-tested/19

What is a higher end mobile CPU? They consider it their highest end, even if they every so slightly lowered the clock rate. That may have been to meet a certain power requirement, which Iris Pro made harder to achieve. It isn't a lower end CPU.

 

[krumme]

Because it won't. Intel will benefit from all this Mantle stuff next year (or the next) when 20nm GPUs hit the market with a 60% or more performance increase and their CPUs see the usual 10/15% perf increase. If you want the highest end or a multi-GPU solution you will need an Intel CPU. That taking in mind that 1080p is still the preferred gaming resolution as I don't really see 1440p taking off now that we have the 2K candy in sight.



No they don't. They're already dumping cash into the Tegra brand hurting their financials and name big time. Q3 was 13% down in revenue and 40% down in profit YoY.

Thats why, as i wrote, they have to do it now. Also while amd is most vulnerable.
Nvidia is bleeding slowly. But right now they are financially far stronger than amd.
If they try to handle mantle the usual way with their pr bs, bribing and strong arm tactics to aib, developers and review sites it will not work. Because its not amd they are fighting.

They need to stop this snowball from rolling.

 

[Silverforce11]

What is a higher end mobile CPU? They consider it their highest end, even if they every so slightly lowered the clock rate. That may have been to meet a certain power requirement, which Iris Pro made harder to achieve. It isn't a lower end CPU.

If you keep on thinking its the CPU thats making Iris Pro super expensive, maybe you should compare the actual die sizes involved. Iris Pro and its Crystal Well is about the same die size as much more powerful discrete GPUs.

There's actually nothing to commend Intel for about Iris Pro, its simply and utterly brute forcing, by cramming heaps of die space at their problem, ie. poor graphics architecture and horrible perf/mm2. The only reason they even managed, is because they are ahead of everyone else at the time on nodes.

 

[ShintaiDK]

If you keep on thinking its the CPU thats making Iris Pro super expensive, maybe you should compare the actual die sizes involved. Iris Pro and its Crystal Well is about the same die size as much more powerful discrete GPUs.

There's actually nothing to commend Intel for about Iris Pro, its simply and utterly brute forcing, by cramming heaps of die space at their problem, ie. poor graphics architecture and horrible perf/mm2. The only reason they even managed, is because they are ahead of everyone else at the time on nodes.

The diesize itself is not a problem. R&D is. And unlike the CPU part, making a cache is rather cheap compared.

 

[bystander36]

If you keep on thinking its the CPU thats making Iris Pro super expensive, maybe you should compare the actual die sizes involved. Iris Pro and its Crystal Well is about the same die size as much more powerful discrete GPUs.

There's actually nothing to commend Intel for about Iris Pro, its simply and utterly brute forcing, by cramming heaps of die space at their problem, ie. poor graphics architecture and horrible perf/mm2. The only reason they even managed, is because they are ahead of everyone else at the time on nodes.

You just don't want to accept that Intel has a good APU. Of course it is large, it is both a CPU and GPU. It also uses a small fraction of the power that those discrete GPU's use. It is also not a cut down CPU.

 

[selni]

If you keep on thinking its the CPU thats making Iris Pro super expensive, maybe you should compare the actual die sizes involved. Iris Pro and its Crystal Well is about the same die size as much more powerful discrete GPUs.

There's actually nothing to commend Intel for about Iris Pro, its simply and utterly brute forcing, by cramming heaps of die space at their problem, ie. poor graphics architecture and horrible perf/mm2. The only reason they even managed, is because they are ahead of everyone else at the time on nodes.

It's definitely brute forcing the problem, but that's the name of the game. Rendering is a very parallel problem and brute force tends to work pretty well. Doing something like mantle is really interesting, but certainly not the easiest way to get more performance.

Obviously you'd also want an efficient architecture, but how you measure efficiency will be a pretty serious debate topic - AMD fans will argue perf/mm2 or perf/$, nVidia fans perf/watt, others will come up with bizarre metrics like perf/dB (???) they're mostly both right and wrong.

From what I recall they're making the crystallwell cache as a separate die on their older process node I think, so it might not be costing them that much. In any case Intel's costs and prices haven't been particularly closely related for a long time now anyway.

 

[Silverforce11]

You just don't want to accept that Intel has a good APU. Of course it is large, it is both a CPU and GPU. It also uses a small fraction of the power that those discrete GPU's use. It is also not a cut down CPU.

Its a comparative business they are in. "Good" needs to be measured against the competition. When the competition is able to make their own APU that runs so close to Iris Pro for nearly 1/5th the price.. "Good" is not the first term I think of to describe Iris Pro.

By die size, I am referring to Iris Pro only, not the CPU portion. It is massive and comparable to much more powerful discrete GPUs.

Herein lies the problem, who would folk out $650 for Iris Pro? I can only think of Apple die hards. Even then, a non-Iris Pro CPU + NV Optimus combo is cheaper and out performs it. It's simply too damn expensive for what it does.

Why do you guys think Intel aren't selling desktop Iris Pro CPUs??

 

[blackened23]

Because the mobile market is more lucrative? Honestly, AMD doesn't have a mobile APU that can compare to it. You're comparing desktop lga APUs to a mobile chip.

Iris Pro is the fastest integrated graphics in existence, so of course it's going to be expensive. The main competition to it right now are mobile dGPUs, but with Apple using the Iris Pro i'm sure intel is content to sell it at its current price.

 

[VulgarDisplay]

Because the mobile market is more lucrative? Honestly, AMD doesn't have a mobile APU that can compare to it. You're comparing desktop lga APUs to a mobile chip.

Iris Pro is the fastest integrated graphics in existence, so of course it's going to be expensive. The main competition to it right now are mobile dGPUs, but with Apple using the Iris Pro i'm sure intel is content to sell it at its current price.

We're comparing them because this is the mantle thread. It's all about the potential of Mantle to greatly increase the install base of computers capable of playing games.

How much of the increased speed Iris Pro sees in games is simply because of the VASTLY superior processor? If Mantle completely removes the lacking CPU performance as a bottleneck how much better could AMD's apu's be?

 

[bystander36]

Its a comparative business they are in. "Good" needs to be measured against the competition. When the competition is able to make their own APU that runs so close to Iris Pro for nearly 1/5th the price.. "Good" is not the first term I think of to describe Iris Pro.

By die size, I am referring to Iris Pro only, not the CPU portion. It is massive and comparable to much more powerful discrete GPUs.

Herein lies the problem, who would folk out $650 for Iris Pro? I can only think of Apple die hards. Even then, a non-Iris Pro CPU + NV Optimus combo is cheaper and out performs it. It's simply too damn expensive for what it does.

Why do you guys think Intel aren't selling desktop Iris Pro CPUs??

I realize it is expensive. Now. That does not mean they will always be expensive. They just decided to join in the APU race. They made a great first chip. Following typical Intel pricing, they priced it very high, but that doesn't mean that will always be the case.

Size of the die is only part of the equation. Some how, Intel made this large die, yet it barely uses power in comparison. Imagine how fast it would go if they actually designed for a much higher power usage?

Forget pricing, and just focus on the actual part. This is a preview of the future.

 

[monstercameron]

Because the mobile market is more lucrative? Honestly, AMD doesn't have a mobile APU that can compare to it. You're comparing desktop lga APUs to a mobile chip.

Iris Pro is the fastest integrated graphics in existence, so of course it's going to be expensive. The main competition to it right now are mobile dGPUs, but with Apple using the Iris Pro i'm sure intel is content to sell it at its current price.

I wouldnt call that "mobile," intel may market it as such it definitely isnt frugal relative to other intel and amd mobile chips.

with a power draw of 70-80W underload a 60WHr battery would die in about a half hour, hell even some desktop trinity parts use less power[they also have less performance] but to call that a mobile chip, [conspiracy] it just a strategy for intel to undermine AMD on mobile even more, like introducing the SDP metric [/conspiracy] is just misinformation.

 

[Carfax83]

your post says explicitly that ms is bringing the xbone api to windows. there is absolutely 0 indication of that in the link you posted.

is there a press release or other statement indicating the "porting the Xbox One's low level API to Direct3D in Windows"?; because it hasnt come up in this or any of the other mantle threads.

I can't believe you made me dig up the quote because you're too lazy to read the entire page

We’re also working with our ISV and IHV partners on future efforts, including bringing the lightweight runtime and tooling capabilities of the Xbox One Direct3D implementation to Windows, and identifying the next generation of advanced 3D graphics technologies.

 

[3DVagabond]

I can't believe you made me dig up the quote because you're too lazy to read the entire page

We’re also working with our ISV and IHV partners on future efforts, including bringing the lightweight runtime and tooling capabilities of the Xbox One Direct3D implementation to Windows, and identifying the next generation of advanced 3D graphics technologies.

Well, if they do that they'll be bringing AMD APU optimizations over, since that's what's in XBox1 and what would be comparable to Mantle.

 

[blackened23]

I wouldnt call that "mobile," intel may market it as such it definitely isnt frugal relative to other intel and amd mobile chips.

with a power draw of 70-80W underload a 60WHr battery would die in about a half hour, hell even some desktop trinity parts use less power[they also have less performance] but to call that a mobile chip, [conspiracy] it just a strategy for intel to undermine AMD on mobile even more, like introducing the SDP metric [/conspiracy] is just misinformation.

The Iris Pro is being used in the macbook pro portable...the most popular high end portable on the current market and the biggest seller (for high end).The macbook pro with Iris Pro has over 10 hours of battery life:

And here's the best part: even with all those pixels, the 13-inch MacBook Pro still lasted 10 hours, 7 minutes on the Verge Battery Test.

http://www.theverge.com/2013/10/30/5044874/13-inch-macbook-pro-with-retina-display-review-2013

The 15 inch macbook pro with Iris Pro lasted just under 10 hours of battery life:

http://www.theverge.com/2013/10/24/5024346/macbook-pro-with-retina-display-review-15-inch-2013

Endgadget tested over 11 hours of battery life with IRis Pro:

http://www.engadget.com/2013/10/29/macbook-pro-with-retina-display-review-13-inch-2013/

You brought the 30 minutes of Iris Pro battery life up. I guess that isn't the case. Look, I get the argument that Mantle will help raise the performance of AMD APUs. I am curious as to which AMD mobile APU has 10 hours of battery life, though, and then we can get a fair judgement of what the performance increase is come December. Do you feel that this will help propel an A4-1200 past Iris Pro in BF4? Just curious. Like I said, i'll reserve final judgement till then. I don't know. Maybe Mantle is the most amazing thing ever - I expect a big performance jump but I don't think it's realistic to expect miracles. Heck, if Mantle is the most amazing thing ever i'll be the first to praise it. We'll see.

 

[SiliconWars]

Jesus are you ever gonna stop? System power draw while gaming is at the 80-90W level, it's been tested. Iris Pro is simply a huge, fat bunch of EU's with eDRAM, it's far more like a discrete card than an APU.