Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Intel Expresses Interest In AMD's Mantle API

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Originally posted by blackiwid View Post
    but if that would be nvidia it would be good to be sceptical,
    Why you bring nvidia in this topic?

    Originally posted by blackiwid View Post
    but with amds past, we can be pretty shure and we have no reason to doubt it.
    AMD was never very strong on the Software Side.


    Originally posted by blackiwid View Post
    or where in the history of amd they made false claims or what did they not open up?
    The OpenGL Implementation and OpenCL Implementation are still horrible. I dont hear from new specs for the AMD hardware since long time and source code is not a documentation. Or its now possible to write a driver driver from scratch without looking at the current foss driver?


    Originally posted by blackiwid View Post
    But another question are here just only nvidia users that want to rant against amd? I see so much sceptism and reaction 5 minutes after I postet that 3 ansers against it?
    Btw: I'm a AMD Fanboy ...

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by volca View Post
      AMD's attitude does not make much sense - they are locking the specs of that API against GCN with no intention for input from other architectures. This gives me only mild hopes of any further Mantle adoption. It is not like AMD going to intel and nvidia and saying, hey D3D sucks a huge ass, GL sucks two smaller asses, let's implement an API that will suck less.
      How does it not make sense? It's aparently a very low level API, much closer to the hardware then OpenGL/Direct3D which means that the code would be very architecture dependent.

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by Kivada View Post
        How does it not make sense? It's aparently a very low level API, much closer to the hardware then OpenGL/Direct3D which means that the code would be very architecture dependent.
        No, No, No and No. Its still Hardware independent.

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by log0 View Post
          But it is AMDs API, so they are free to do with it whatever they want. I just wish they would stop calling it open.
          No. Look back at AMDs openness in HW and SW, Bullet Physics, GDDR3/4/5, Code XL, HSA and all the things that made it into DP Standard, it is more likely to get something truly open from AMD instead from Nvidia, which in the past has not really done something truly open.

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by log0 View Post
            Mantle is not used on consoles, no idea where this bs comes from. It is Windows/GCN only.
            Consoles have been using Mantle like APIs to squeeze every last drop of performance out of them since forever ago. The language that they are using isn't exactly the same as Mantle as it is even more specific as the language is made for that exact model of GPU used in the consoles who while Mantle has to work across all GCN based GPUs.

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by _ONH_ View Post
              No. Look back at AMDs openness in HW and SW, Bullet Physics,
              Do you looked what there happened? They got some Tools for free ... The OpenCL Code is still not done and didn't find usage in commercial games.

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by Kivada View Post
                Consoles have been using Mantle like APIs to squeeze every last drop of performance out of them since forever ago. The language that they are using isn't exactly the same as Mantle as it is even more specific as the language is made for that exact model of GPU used in the consoles who while Mantle has to work across all GCN based GPUs.
                And Java differs from C++ although both are programming languages. And you point is?

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by _ONH_ View Post
                  No. Look back at AMDs openness in HW and SW, Bullet Physics, GDDR3/4/5, Code XL, HSA and all the things that made it into DP Standard, it is more likely to get something truly open from AMD instead from Nvidia, which in the past has not really done something truly open.
                  No what?

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by Kivada View Post
                    How does it not make sense? It's aparently a very low level API, much closer to the hardware then OpenGL/Direct3D which means that the code would be very architecture dependent.
                    Higher level doesn't mean architecture dependent. For example, I've seen PHP scripts more dependent to a platform than some C++ code. Even if Mantle is low level, It still able have an abstraction layer. OpenGL is not low level because they implemented a lot and lot of feature and function that you can't necessarily control and bloats up the whole rendering possessing. Just take a look at OpenGL 2, it was very, very high level, but there was no way you could control how the pipeline worked.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Okay so first thing, the older AMD hardware, if I could quote Wikipedia here:
                      AMD's Graphics Core Next is a RISC SIMD architecture; it replaces the elder VLIW SIMD architecture, which was present since the Radeon HD 2000 Series.
                      The reason they did that had to do with limitations like not being able to make something like mantle. So I'm assuming that it doesn't have to be GCN cores, but have the same architecture or at least have something that can be compatible with it. The reason why I can see Intel wanting to do this is AMD is basically doing all the work with marketing and developing mantle. (Of course developers are working on incorporating it as well which is a huge factor in market adoption)

                      Unless Intel likes having to do the software/driver end on their graphics, getting it compatible with OpenGL and all that, then being compatible with Mantle makes sense.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Originally posted by przemoli View Post
                        "vaporware" in conjunction with games mean "non existing"

                        Now explain to us, what BF4 and Thief 4 do in that "vaporware" mode? Do all computations on CPU? Lie, and use DX instead?

                        (Ridicule intended)
                        couldn't care less since i wasn't talking about games. your ridicule simply missed the fact. i meant vaporware in so claimed "open" approach. so far i'm yet to see one thing about their so called new open standard holding any ground (not counting performance here). so, yea... vaporware

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          As an exclusive Linux gamer, I hope Mantle fails quickly, because Mantle really hurts Linux more than anything else.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Originally posted by sarmad View Post
                            As an exclusive Linux gamer, I hope Mantle fails quickly, because Mantle really hurts Linux more than anything else.
                            Except that it wouldn't if it comes to Linux.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Originally posted by sarmad View Post
                              As an exclusive Linux gamer, I hope Mantle fails quickly, because Mantle really hurts Linux more than anything else.
                              Why do you say that? It may be the first major graphics API that we don't have to play catch-up on compared to other OSes. As of this moment, AMD could be working with their OSS driver devs to get patches ready for a Mantle Gallium state tracker (to be released with version 1.0) for all we know. And since it's an open API (and Intel has already expressed some interest), I'm sure AMD would be happy to help Intel integrate it into their classic driver.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Originally posted by dimko View Post
                                The ones who gonna win are game engine developers.

                                Engine that supports both openGL and Mantle is gonna ripe the financial awards. Unigine for example already is able to use DX and OGL.

                                I guess auto detection of type of driver, like AMD + Intek vs Nvidia is possible; OGL in second case and Mantle in first one.

                                This is getting more interesting, now that Intel seem to be interested. If that's the case, Mantle has a chance.

                                IMHO indies will stick with OGL. Indies games don't milk all the juices out of hardware anyway.
                                Agree, game developers may get tired of API wars and choose to use some well-supported game engine rather than developing their own.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X