AMD Offers Mantle For OpenGL-Next, Pushes Mantle To Workstations

[Filiprino]

Good news, both for computer games and workstations. AMD is trying to push Mantle for "professional" applications too.
Having Valve on board for OpenGL Next backs this move, as ATI (now AMD) has been a partner of Valve in the past, and well, AMD has some advertisement in Steam store.
Intel also wanted to get in touch with Mantle.
The only relevant company in the graphics hardware market that has not commited or at least show some interest for Mantle is NVIDIA which has stated that they won't embrace Mantle. But if the new OpenGL is Mantle with some other additions, in the end they'll be supporting it.

Now if AMD brings better OpenCL support and better Linux support..

[discordian]

"AMD will impose no restrictions, nor will it charge any licensing fees" from article.

And whats with the guys buying AMDs patents in a few years? (I kid)

I needed a good laugh for the day

If you really think AMD has never done anything good, you either don't keep up with the times, or have a very strange standard of good... even more so when you think NVIDIA can handle APIs well. For Linux.

I think VDPAU is a damn nice thing for one, I had to look up that the AMD one is called XvBA and am surprised is still alive considering how bad it compared.

Is this good or bad for Linux?

Having technical docs is always a good thing, you pick whats good and can fix whats bad. Would be only a bad thing if they hampered development by trying to force the standard or details of it into the future-thing-that-hopefully-wont-even-have-OpenGL-in-its-name.

[rikkinho]

when?

I needed a good laugh for the day

If you really think AMD has never done anything good, you either don't keep up with the times, or have a very strange standard of good... even more so when you think NVIDIA can handle APIs well. For Linux.

when amd do something good?

[Creak]

when amd do something good?

Well, first, AMD released their specs, NVIDIA didn't.
Then, AMD is helping and even working on the open source drivers, NVIDIA doesn't (or is beginning to see if it might be interesting for them...)
AMD shared their Mantle specs with OpenGL workgroup, NVIDIA didn't share anything.
AMD proposed an open graphical synchronization (a.k.a. FreeSync), while NVIDIA have their proprietary G-Sync.
AMD open drivers are better than NVIDIA's
Down side: AMD proprietary drivers are worst than NVIDIA's

Conclusion: AMD 5, NVIDIA 1.

[xeekei]

Well, first, AMD released their specs, NVIDIA didn't.
Then, AMD is helping and even working on the open source drivers, NVIDIA doesn't (or is beginning to see if it might be interesting for them...)
AMD shared their Mantle specs with OpenGL workgroup, NVIDIA didn't share anything.
AMD proposed an open graphical synchronization (a.k.a. FreeSync), while NVIDIA have their proprietary G-Sync.
AMD open drivers are better than NVIDIA's
Down side: AMD proprietary drivers are worst than NVIDIA's

Conclusion: AMD 5, NVIDIA 1.

I think you're being unfair. AMD's proprietary driver isn't lacking because their open source driver is kind of good, it's lacking because AMD can't be arsed to put any real effort into Linux. NVidia does, however, not in the way we want.

Doesn't change the fact that if you want a full graphical experience, you have to go NVidia today. At least on Linux.

FYI; I am an AMD fan, but I'm starting lose my patience.

[_SXX_]

AMD shared their Mantle specs with OpenGL workgroup, NVIDIA didn't share anything.

Nvidia don't have to share anything because they didn't created own proprietary graphics API in first place.
Also don't forget they put a lot effort in supporting of OpenGL and developers who using it.

[johnc]

Well, first, AMD released their specs, NVIDIA didn't.
Then, AMD is helping and even working on the open source drivers, NVIDIA doesn't (or is beginning to see if it might be interesting for them...)
AMD shared their Mantle specs with OpenGL workgroup, NVIDIA didn't share anything.
AMD proposed an open graphical synchronization (a.k.a. FreeSync), while NVIDIA have their proprietary G-Sync.
AMD open drivers are better than NVIDIA's
Down side: AMD proprietary drivers are worst than NVIDIA's

Conclusion: AMD 5, NVIDIA 1.

Bonus multiplier x100: NVIDIA's drivers actually work.

AMD 5, NVIDIA 100.

[rikkinho]

lolol

Well, first, AMD released their specs, NVIDIA didn't.
Then, AMD is helping and even working on the open source drivers, NVIDIA doesn't (or is beginning to see if it might be interesting for them...)
AMD shared their Mantle specs with OpenGL workgroup, NVIDIA didn't share anything.
AMD proposed an open graphical synchronization (a.k.a. FreeSync), while NVIDIA have their proprietary G-Sync.
AMD open drivers are better than NVIDIA's
Down side: AMD proprietary drivers are worst than NVIDIA's



Conclusion: AMD 5, NVIDIA 1.

hahahaha

amd drivers all garbage open or no open never work (i give up from amd because of this) who cares if they help the open driver if he don't work well
mantle? if mantle is like the old ggpu make by amd forget it

[jrch2k8]

hahahaha

amd drivers all garbage open or no open never work (i give up from amd because of this) who cares if they help the open driver if he don't work well
mantle? if mantle is like the old ggpu make by amd forget it

trolling much

[xtachx]

Well, first, AMD released their specs, NVIDIA didn't.
Then, AMD is helping and even working on the open source drivers, NVIDIA doesn't (or is beginning to see if it might be interesting for them...)
AMD shared their Mantle specs with OpenGL workgroup, NVIDIA didn't share anything.
AMD proposed an open graphical synchronization (a.k.a. FreeSync), while NVIDIA have their proprietary G-Sync.
AMD open drivers are better than NVIDIA's
Down side: AMD proprietary drivers are worst than NVIDIA's

Conclusion: AMD 5, NVIDIA 1.

NVidia drivers actually work. Now thats a strange concept for AMD I know, but they need to get that going first before making all kinds of APIs.