Originally posted by efikkan
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
AMD Reportedly Plans To Bring Mantle To Linux, Calls Mantle An Open-Source API
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by jimbohale View PostI love how you guys are talking all this about mantle yet not even the specification has been released to the public. You're literally basing this off of graphics AMD has released which mean absolutely nothing. I don't know about you but I don't like to speculate on unreleased and unproven technologies.
Also they have working drivers and a few games running on it.
Comment
-
Originally posted by grndzro View PostMantle also reduces API calls.
If a company were making a cross platform title with only OGL the work to optimize for both AMD, and Nvidia, and PS4, And XB1, and Linux would be about the same as making a cross platform title for Mantle/Nvidia OGL/PS4/XB1/Linux. That way they only need to worry about Nvidia performance on OGL.
Besides MS is bringing DX12 to XB1. And Mantle porting to XB1(DX12) will be painless. So for only a bit more work a company will get great AMD support, Linux support (eventually) and AMD Steambox support (eventually)
AMD has recently released a blog post and a white paper on Mantle API and guess what? Mantle can be ported to DX12 with relative ease.
This might lead to NV supporting Mantle because it will be available on Linux/Steambox and porting Mantle to DX12 will be practically effortless. This would give devs 1 main API Mantle/DX12 to support everything at the highest performance levels.
Mantle>PS4 is also a pretty easy port. On top of that Mantle might come to both PS4 and XB1. Mantle wouldn't be dissapearing anytime soon.
http://www.dualshockers.com/2014/03/...-both-further/
Mantle only offers marginal performance gains for high-end CPUs, so there are few reasons to support Mantle except the free advertisement from AMD.
Don't expect support from Nvidia anytime soon, unless Mantle seriously take of... (I doubt it)
Comment
-
Originally posted by Kraut View PostThere did published infos on the principle framework. For example: http://www.amd.com/Documents/Mantle_White_Paper.pdf (Interessting stuff starts at page 5-6)
Also they have working drivers and a few games running on it.
Comment
-
Originally posted by efikkan View PostMantle only offers marginal performance gains for high-end CPUs, so there are few reasons to support Mantle except the free advertisement from AMD.
Comment
-
Originally posted by efikkan View PostWith Direct3D 12 arriving and OpenGL already supporting more low overhead optimizations than Mantle, why would lots of game developers spend lots of resources creating a new rendering pipeline for Mantle when it's easier to adopt the new features of OpenGL or Direct3D? Implementing the driver support is not too hard, but redesigning game engines requires a lot of effort. (Remember poorly done ports perform poorly)
What you fail to see is that Mantle not only allow low overhead, but more importantly it reduce the number of entry point drastically in comparison to OpenGL (see http://stackoverflow.com/questions/2...eady-available for list of currently exported functions). This is the most compelling point for Mantle. In OpenGL there can be more then 20 ways to do the same thing, some with low overhead, some faster than other, but it all depends on the driver, ie on some driver one combination will be the fastest and on another it can an entirely different combination. This is the most problematic aspect of OpenGL the size of the API and the lack of consistency accross different implementation.
If you want a single example to prove how bad the number of entry point is for OpenGL just look at OpenGLES, this is the reason why no embedded GPU vendor is eagger to make a full GL driver even if their hardware has the capabilities. The OpenGL API is just too big.
Comment
-
Originally posted by jimbohale View PostI love how you guys are talking all this about mantle yet not even the specification has been released to the public. You're literally basing this off of graphics AMD has released which mean absolutely nothing. I don't know about you but I don't like to speculate on unreleased and unproven technologies.
And there are other tests with people who have beefy CPUs where there is very little effect if any.
I say that in the first case the CPU and the GPU are very close as far as bottlenecks go, but then when you add that 290X, it's the CPU that's bottlenecking.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Filiprino View PostThat's the biggest problem against Mantle. Users who play games usually have a higher performant CPU, and Mantle doesn't bring much to the table when you're using high performant CPUs. But probably it would bring benefits to the power consumption.
BTW, the power consumption will actually slightly increase, since the GPU spend less cycles idling.
Comment
-
Originally posted by efikkan View PostYes, most people with a decent desktop computer have an i5 with 3+ GHz, and Mantle is not going to give a huge difference here. And when games utilize DirectX 12 or new OpenGL features the benefits of Mantle will disappear.
BTW, the power consumption will actually slightly increase, since the GPU spend less cycles idling.
Do you honestly think supporting OS locked DX12/OGL is a better deal than supporting Mantle/OGL? You are crazy.
Comment
-
Originally posted by efikkan View PostYes, most people with a decent desktop computer have an i5 with 3+ GHz, and Mantle is not going to give a huge difference here. And when games utilize DirectX 12 or new OpenGL features the benefits of Mantle will disappear.
BTW, the power consumption will actually slightly increase, since the GPU spend less cycles idling.
And now that I think about it, if Mantle is low overhead then it may free up resource from the CPU to run other type of tasks: physics, input/output, random generation algorithms, sound processing and others.
Comment
Comment