- Status
You're 100% right, I was going off totally wrong info :$
As far as Mantle goes, I wouldn't be mad if it died off completely as long as it spurred competition to have a better engine to replace DX. OGL doesn't seem to be that engine, and DX is just getting kind of bloated at this point. But, of course, backwards compatibility is a huge factor, otherwise we wouldn't be on Windows or using x86 really....
ASM-coder
Member
- Jan 12, 2014
- 193
- 0
- 0
Same goes for any solution to a problem. If nVidia tries to solve stuttering
and screen tears with monitor synchronization, no efforts will be made in the
game/api/GPU to fix the root problem. Mantle is trying to fix the cause, nVidia is trying to fix the symptom.
Never going to happen. Neither Nvidia or Intel have any desire to do anything as a standard or to move the industry forward - it's all about gaining a leg-up over the competition for them. It's clear with their latest moves that Nvidia is more interested in warping DX and OGL to their own agenda too, what with GameWorks and now these new extensions for OGL.
It's high time AMD fought fire with fire, and Mantle is how they should be doing it.
I dont really care that much. What matters is the effect for me.
Physx is nothing but marketing and gaining monopoly advantages using mostly useless effects that no dev could ever care for if they had to pay themselves. I have a gamer nv notebook and i dont care the slightest for that physx nonsense. And therefore it fails and is fading away.
Mantle is also about getting monopoly, lots of marketing, but its far more developer driven. The platform is 50% of the future gaming market - the consoles. The benefit is games that can transform the rts genre and give a boost to fps. Its build into the engines and resuable. I want those new rts games and the boost for my bf4. Therefore it gets tons of traction.
As for gsynch. Fine. Those who want to pay for that in a tn 120hz monitor can just do that. No need for me as an mantle enthusiast to go pissing and whining in the gsynch thread. If people want gsynch thats just super they can buy it then. Choises is good.
Stop spouting inaccurate nonsense about PhysX. Yeah, it's fading away, so much so that it's been integrated in a major next gen 3D Engine, used in several MMOs including the upcoming Everquest Next, and is featured in AAA titles like the Witcher 3, CoD Ghosts, AC IV etc..
Yeah, it's definitely going the way of the dodo
Why do people keep acting as though Mantle will ever be used by the consoles? The consoles have their own lower level API (lower than Mantle) as their hardware is fixed. It makes no sense for the consoles to use Mantle in that regard, as it has much more abstraction than needed...
The only cross platform support I would expect from Mantle is on Linux, Steam OS..
Stop spouting inaccurate nonsense about PhysX. Yeah, it's fading away, so much so that it's been integrated in a major next gen 3D Engine, used in several MMOs including the upcoming Everquest Next, and is featured in AAA titles like the Witcher 3, CoD Ghosts, AC IV etc..
Yeah, it's definitely going the way of the dodo
Why do people keep acting as though Mantle will ever be used by the consoles? The consoles have their own lower level API (lower than Mantle) as their hardware is fixed. It makes no sense for the consoles to use Mantle in that regard, as it has much more abstraction than needed...
The only cross platform support I would expect from Mantle is on Linux, Steam OS..
*sighs* people need to realise; no Mantle will not be used on the consoles; but the code; the low level code; specially on the PS4 - translate almost perfectly over to Mantle....
Want to take a guess which is the lead development console right now? PS4- and only would change to Xbox1; if they overtake PS4 - Xbox 360 didnt outsell PS3 - took them awhile to catch up but the PS3 and took over as the lead platform from 360.
PS4 is lead platform and I don't see that changing.......not one bit - all that low level code easily translating over with Mantle. You don't think devs won't use that?
what do you all think about this article
http://www.psu.com/forums/showthrea...the-creator-of-FXAA-dishes-on-PS4-s-potential
not directly related to mantle, but highlight GCN feature hardware on console
if that's what mantle bring to PC , is other vendor have the same type of capabilities in their hardware (current/in dev) ?
http://www.psu.com/forums/showthrea...the-creator-of-FXAA-dishes-on-PS4-s-potential
not directly related to mantle, but highlight GCN feature hardware on console
if that's what mantle bring to PC , is other vendor have the same type of capabilities in their hardware (current/in dev) ?
Right, and how on Earth would you even know this? Have you examined Mantle code personally and compared it to the PS4's API?
Even if what you said is true, what benefit would it confer to PC gaming, which has no fixed hardware specs?
Some guys have - slides 31 and 36
http://www.slideshare.net/DICEStudio/mantle-for-developers
And slide 26 here -
http://www.slideshare.net/DevCentra...ief-with-new-amd-technology-by-jurjen-katsman
The point being that games developed for consoles are basically already set up perfectly for multithreading and GCN anyway, making the final Mantle elements a breeze to implement. A DX "port" will need more work - this is why the devs want it to go away.
Last edited:
this_is_what_nvidia_fans_actually_believe.jpg
Nvidia has been caught doing shady stuff with the x86 version of physix:
- used only one thread
- used x87 fpu instructions (stuff from before the pentium mmx) instead of MMX-SSE-SSE2-SSE3-SSE4-AVX which were all available at the time
http://techreport.com/news/19216/physx-hobbled-on-the-cpu-by-x87-code
I bet that a proper version of physix with 4-8+ threads and SIMD extensions enabled could work just fine or even outperform a gpu.
Since it's closed source we can be pretty sure that Nivida still has means to slow down the x86 version in more subtle ways.
Mantle troubles me because I remember the days of Glide and every 3d chip vendor having proprietary apis, it sucked back then to have anything different than a 3dfx card and I'm not looking for a day when you'll be forced to have amd hardware to play with everything enabled.
Closed standards are bad for consumers and for the industry.
The Nvidia guys will defend this just like the Intel guys do, that AMD is free to develop their own version kf PhysX.
For what its worth ICC pulls the same stunt and won't allow AMD processors to run SSE code even if the chip supports it ( http://www.swallowtail.org/naughty-intel.shtml)
Howhere on those slides implies that, if you have ever programmed anything you should know it.
How you know that? do you know you are talking about something that cant be done unless it was planned on both sides in that way from scratch and still be very difficult? why on earth Sony whould help to have better ports to pc?
Stop it already, you are missinforming.
Last edited:
ASM-coder
Member
- Jan 12, 2014
- 193
- 0
- 0
I think "this now translates easily to the PC" is almost exactly what he was saying. No implications needed.
Mantle uses the Direct 3D (DIRECT X) High Level Shader Language. That's the reason why everyone is claiming that the ports are going to be so "portable" from console to PC with mantle.
That's also probably a pretty good reason why it's so little work (relatively) converting over from the Direct X version.
That's also probably a pretty good reason why it's so little work (relatively) converting over from the Direct X version.
man, if you can just copy&paste code it whould say it, what the slides are trying to say its that mantle gives you similar features and control, meaning you are likely to be able to do the same things you do with the console api, that does not mean anything more, you still need to do the work, no code sharing and no the same performance either, its really crazy claiming you can share code like that with consoles apis, and even more crazy to claim it when no SDK are released and even if they where, you cant really go and download PS4 SDK to compare it.
Now, DX to Mantle its another thing, and you can see they said it directly about sharing DX shader code.
Last edited:
What they are trying to say is that a lot of the same principles used for console optimization will be very similar. Implementation, however, is a complete unknown at this point.
The main problem is no matter how easy it is to go from console to Mantle, you still have to do a DX version of the game (otherwise, you're getting a tiny fraction of the available PC market). What is there to entice developers away from just doing a DX port at this point?
You don't need to copy and paste code for it to be very similar especially if they use the same programming languages. If both have similar hardware and hardware access, both will be doing similar or the same things to get the graphics on the screen. You will even be able to reuse your HLSL code.
Performance and visual effects.
If Mantle gives additional performance over DX, then this means that Mantle would allow the developers to sell their game to a broader audience since more people's computers would then meet the minimum recommended hardware specs. Higher performance would also allow people who already meet the minimum DX recommended hardware specs to increase the level of visual effects while maintaining acceptable framerates.
there were reasonable explanations for both of those. It was always possible to multithread, people just didn't bother because it was difficult. More developer negligence rather than nvidia conspiracy. x87 was used because the code they got from ageia was optimized with it, and ageia used it ostensibly because the original xbox had poor sse performance or perhaps it was still plausible to use an athlon xp when they started it.
Last edited:
How can so many still not get this?
- Heavily multithreaded rendering
- Asynchronous compute
- That's where the complexity is (meaning with DX)
- This now translates easily to the PC (meaning with Mantle)
It's almost a direct copy - you're talking about AMD x86 CPU and AMD GCN GPU in the console and in the (AMD) PC. How much different can it be? WHY would it be so different?
The reason it's so hard under DX is because DX can't deal with multithreading properly and doesn't know what to do with compute either so it just mashes it all together in a single thread, causing the game to stall. Mantle - and the consoles - has separate queues so compute can run simultaneously with graphics, with no chance of either stalling the other.
Devs will start to take advantage of this feature in consoles very soon, and it will transfer to Mantle very easily. It will probably need cutting out of the DX version, or will be cut due to time/difficulty.
- Heavily multithreaded rendering
- Asynchronous compute
- That's where the complexity is (meaning with DX)
- This now translates easily to the PC (meaning with Mantle)
It's almost a direct copy - you're talking about AMD x86 CPU and AMD GCN GPU in the console and in the (AMD) PC. How much different can it be? WHY would it be so different?
The reason it's so hard under DX is because DX can't deal with multithreading properly and doesn't know what to do with compute either so it just mashes it all together in a single thread, causing the game to stall. Mantle - and the consoles - has separate queues so compute can run simultaneously with graphics, with no chance of either stalling the other.
Devs will start to take advantage of this feature in consoles very soon, and it will transfer to Mantle very easily. It will probably need cutting out of the DX version, or will be cut due to time/difficulty.
Last edited:
r3pshow
Member
- May 3, 2012
- 43
- 0
- 0
Hey!
Have you guys seen this! http://www.nordichardware.se/CES2014/vi-spelar-mantle-versionen-av-bf4-i-eyefinity-pa-en-laptop.html
it's a BF4 "mantle demo" on 5760x1080 at high settings and getting 30FPS stable of a "m290X". from a laptop :O !
Have you guys seen this! http://www.nordichardware.se/CES2014/vi-spelar-mantle-versionen-av-bf4-i-eyefinity-pa-en-laptop.html
it's a BF4 "mantle demo" on 5760x1080 at high settings and getting 30FPS stable of a "m290X". from a laptop :O !
I guess I'm confused. How can you take features that were designed to work on consoles, port them to Mantle, and then not be able to implement them on any other API for PC, when the XBox One uses DX 11.x and PS4 uses OGL?
If they work on both of those two separate APIs, then they should be able to be made to work on DX whatever version on PC. Granted, perhaps not as efficiently, but still work.
Now, if there are specific routines or functions enabled only by GCN hardware, great. But there are ways to deal with that with current APIs. Direct X games, and developers that code for them seem to be able to have capability queries figure out if you can run TressFX/MLAA/FXAA/TXAA whatever... just fine. Similarly, with current coding, if I decide I don't want to run or my hardware can't efficiently support one of those features, it doesn't shunt me into a completely unoptimized code path running a separate game build. (well unless you are talking about DX version builds, but that's somewhat different)
I'm still struggling, because the "This enables visuals millions of times way ahead of consoles" and "This is the same capability set and code as the consoles, so faster and cheaper ports!" flags seem to be switched and reswitched depending on what logic or questions get asked. I can't soo how it can be both, but the frantic pace of posting in this thread means that both sets of statements aren't in proximity long enough for most people to try and compare.
Sigh. I should probably just stop trying to force it to make sense and wait for the benchmarks. The sheer volume of information being slung about though makes me wonder what sorts of repercussions this is all likely to have, if only on the fate of civil discussion.
If they work on both of those two separate APIs, then they should be able to be made to work on DX whatever version on PC. Granted, perhaps not as efficiently, but still work.
Now, if there are specific routines or functions enabled only by GCN hardware, great. But there are ways to deal with that with current APIs. Direct X games, and developers that code for them seem to be able to have capability queries figure out if you can run TressFX/MLAA/FXAA/TXAA whatever... just fine. Similarly, with current coding, if I decide I don't want to run or my hardware can't efficiently support one of those features, it doesn't shunt me into a completely unoptimized code path running a separate game build. (well unless you are talking about DX version builds, but that's somewhat different)
I'm still struggling, because the "This enables visuals millions of times way ahead of consoles" and "This is the same capability set and code as the consoles, so faster and cheaper ports!" flags seem to be switched and reswitched depending on what logic or questions get asked. I can't soo how it can be both, but the frantic pace of posting in this thread means that both sets of statements aren't in proximity long enough for most people to try and compare.
Sigh. I should probably just stop trying to force it to make sense and wait for the benchmarks. The sheer volume of information being slung about though makes me wonder what sorts of repercussions this is all likely to have, if only on the fate of civil discussion.
DX and OpenGL on the PC don't have the hardware access that they do on the consoles.
ASM-coder
Member
- Jan 12, 2014
- 193
- 0
- 0
Here is the possible virtuous cycle that I see.
-Mantle is released on BF4.
-Performance is better on GCN cards.
-Gamers upgrade to new GCN cards or APUs
-Gamers buy an Oxide game or Thief because they want to see what else is
possible with their new card.
-Other game developers see the possibilities, and implement Mantle
in the next project. Maybe release a Mantle patch for an existing game.
(as long as they see a possible new revenue stream)
-More gamers buy GCN cards.
-Intel investigates
-More games are released with Mantle options.
-Games get better and faster and smoother.
-Intel adds Mantle support(or licenses it)
-More cards have mantle
-nVidia stays nVidia.
-Etc.
Here is the "certain" viscous cycle that a lot of others see.
-Mantle is released on BF4.
-Performance is better on GCN cards.
-Gamers upgrade to new GCN cards or APUs
-nVidia releases their own API
-Intel releases their own API
-Game makers get confused.
-All games from here forward are a convoluted mess of multiple
API code, and gamers lose.
The first option is a possibility in my mind. Or else the benefits are
minimal, gamers ignore it, and it goes away. I like it that AMD
is trying this. Gamers might benefit. The other multi-API,
end of PC gaming scenario is just FUD. I don't see it happening
-Mantle is released on BF4.
-Performance is better on GCN cards.
-Gamers upgrade to new GCN cards or APUs
-Gamers buy an Oxide game or Thief because they want to see what else is
possible with their new card.
-Other game developers see the possibilities, and implement Mantle
in the next project. Maybe release a Mantle patch for an existing game.
(as long as they see a possible new revenue stream)
-More gamers buy GCN cards.
-Intel investigates
-More games are released with Mantle options.
-Games get better and faster and smoother.
-Intel adds Mantle support(or licenses it)
-More cards have mantle
-nVidia stays nVidia.
-Etc.
Here is the "certain" viscous cycle that a lot of others see.
-Mantle is released on BF4.
-Performance is better on GCN cards.
-Gamers upgrade to new GCN cards or APUs
-nVidia releases their own API
-Intel releases their own API
-Game makers get confused.
-All games from here forward are a convoluted mess of multiple
API code, and gamers lose.
The first option is a possibility in my mind. Or else the benefits are
minimal, gamers ignore it, and it goes away. I like it that AMD
is trying this. Gamers might benefit. The other multi-API,
end of PC gaming scenario is just FUD. I don't see it happening
- Status
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 21K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter