-
Competitor rules
Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.
Are Valve and AMD about to ruin PC gaming?
- Thread starter LtMatt
- Start date
But it is written to only use the GCN architecture, so just how are Nvidia suppose to implement it.
Well one of us is wrong and it might very well be me, but I was under the impression that this set of instructions that make up this API are written exclusively to use AMD's GCN structure, it just wont work with another graphics vendors architecture.
Soldato
- Joined
- 5 Sep 2011
- Posts
- 12,879
- Location
- Surrey
No use crying over spilt milk. Although my opinion is that whilst what AMD is doing is definitely welcome. Valve are barking up the right tree. It would seem that for the most part both companies are trying to tackle the same issues. As much as it's great that there are companies trying to steam ahead (no pun intended), you can't ignore the elephant in the room. That one that leaves sour taste in PC gamers mouths...
Piracy. I'm definitely pro Mantle. I think a new angle is exactly what the industry needs. DirectX ands limitations with regards to draw calls specifically means effectively, due to being a niche market we've been living in the dark ages whilst owning already massively powerful hardware.
Opening that gate up might bring in some agreeable performance advantages. But whether it will bring in any new technologies that will really make it worth while compared to what DirectX already offers? I think the bleak truth is DirectX is likely here to stay. The PC gaming industry will always be on the slow burner, it won't die. But amazing graphics will always remain a niche market that won't be broken till there is enough people on board who can both afford to, and pay for the games they're using it on. Whether that been by choice or because there is DRM in place that doesn't ruin the users experience. Steam OS might be on to something, but it also might be dead in the water.
Piracy. I'm definitely pro Mantle. I think a new angle is exactly what the industry needs. DirectX ands limitations with regards to draw calls specifically means effectively, due to being a niche market we've been living in the dark ages whilst owning already massively powerful hardware.
Opening that gate up might bring in some agreeable performance advantages. But whether it will bring in any new technologies that will really make it worth while compared to what DirectX already offers? I think the bleak truth is DirectX is likely here to stay. The PC gaming industry will always be on the slow burner, it won't die. But amazing graphics will always remain a niche market that won't be broken till there is enough people on board who can both afford to, and pay for the games they're using it on. Whether that been by choice or because there is DRM in place that doesn't ruin the users experience. Steam OS might be on to something, but it also might be dead in the water.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 29 Aug 2010
- Posts
- 8,551
- Location
- Cornwall
Also, while only a minor point, Mantle doesn't support AMD GPUs, it supports a sub-set of AMD GPUs.
If you don't have an AMD GPU in the 7700-7900 series, a re-brand of one of those or a 290(X) then my understanding is Mantle wont support it.
Most stuff around Mantle is currently speculation (or hype). I think we'll need to wait and see what impact Mantle has and it could take some time for the affect to really be felt.
If you don't have an AMD GPU in the 7700-7900 series, a re-brand of one of those or a 290(X) then my understanding is Mantle wont support it.
Most stuff around Mantle is currently speculation (or hype). I think we'll need to wait and see what impact Mantle has and it could take some time for the affect to really be felt.
You're right.
The only way Nvidia could implement this is if they had access to the source code and added their own low-level code to it, which isn't going to happen as it is not open like people are saying. So much misinformation and people not knowing what they're talking about, driving me mad, no time to respond to it all.
Permabanned
- Joined
- 4 Sep 2011
- Posts
- 6,661
- Location
- Durham
Also only dice and EA have any workings with it. Im going to reserve judgement on mantle until more game devs are using it. I have a feeling the games Nvidia work with wont be using mantle anytime soon
You may well be right on that, but there are a couple of things to consider. The first is that though BF4 will serve as an example of Mantle's potency, it won't necessarily be the benchmark for what it offers.
What makes Mantle different from similar technology branches that we've seen come and go is not so much the technology itself, but the timing and most importantly, it's positioning within the development world.
Having software that enables console-esque 'to the metal' coding that shares DNA with not one of, but both leading console platforms which themselves share the same architecture as AMDs PC components places Mantle in a position where it has the potential to dominate.
Consider it from a developer's perspective. You've got your console version of the games up and running sweetly and you want to 'port' to PC or vice versa. Mantle offers you an almost direct end to end solution for coding, because it is basically how the games have already been developed. There is no requirement for a middleware solution when it comes to your renderer or any crappy API overheads to worry about. And not only that but it'll work with something akin to 30% of the current PC installed base of 'gaming' systems which already use a GCN AMD GPU.
That is something unique and utterly unheard of and AMDs position as the technology vendor for Microsoft and Sony, along with its strong position within in the enthusiast gaming market for GPUs is something that needs to be considered before dismissing this as just another in a line of technologies that get thrown aside due to low adoption or consumer interest.
Carmack: Microsoft, Sony May Be Hostile to AMD's Mantle
http://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-mantle-api-xbox-one-playstation-4-john-carmack,24434.html
I don't know if Mantle is designed for consoles. It maybe PC only.
Time will tell how things play out I guess.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 33,188
Console gamers don't buy consoles because they are faster or frankly anywhere near PC performance, they buy them because they don't want PC's, I actually don't think Sony would give a flying **** about it, MS will but only because it threatens DX and Windows gaming lock in long term not because it will fight with consoles.
Fact is probably at least twice as many, maybe many times more 360/ps3's were sold in the year leading up to the new gen than high end gpu's from amd/nvidia. There are people who want a cheap(ish) and very simple box and those who want a PC. Mantle has the potential to give PC gamers, well AMD gamers better value for money when they upgrade, nothing more or less.
A very small number of people would buy a PC because a few games(to start with) are maybe 20-40% faster than they were before over a console.
THe consoles didn't even sell particularly well in the first year or two, sales went up over time while they dropped further behind PC performance..... very clearly PC gaming performance/capability and console sales haven't been remotely linked ever before and no reason they would be now.
It's not like Sony sold 50mil ps3's the first year then were only selling 5mil a year after PC's gained a significant performance advantage. PS3 sales increased as the performance gap between console/pc's emerged.
Fact is probably at least twice as many, maybe many times more 360/ps3's were sold in the year leading up to the new gen than high end gpu's from amd/nvidia. There are people who want a cheap(ish) and very simple box and those who want a PC. Mantle has the potential to give PC gamers, well AMD gamers better value for money when they upgrade, nothing more or less.
A very small number of people would buy a PC because a few games(to start with) are maybe 20-40% faster than they were before over a console.
THe consoles didn't even sell particularly well in the first year or two, sales went up over time while they dropped further behind PC performance..... very clearly PC gaming performance/capability and console sales haven't been remotely linked ever before and no reason they would be now.
It's not like Sony sold 50mil ps3's the first year then were only selling 5mil a year after PC's gained a significant performance advantage. PS3 sales increased as the performance gap between console/pc's emerged.
If this was two separate questions then the answer would be simple:
Valve: No because their not going to get enough support, with the aforementioned benefit of consoles/windows releases nobody will be interested in a "weak but cheap" O/S, they may as well run Ubuntu and Steam for Linux, it would limit them just as much.
AMD: No because their copying something 3DFX did 15 years ago, and it failed then for the same reasons it will today.
------
However because this is just one question it throws it open, what AMD and Valve are doing directly benefit one another, AMD's actions weaken Direct3D and as a result weaken Windows which helps Valve, Valves actions weaken Windows and also Direct3D which helps AMD. Although they will be competing with each other they have a common enemy in D3D and this attack from multiple sources could hit Microsoft harder than people are expecting.
It's a closed source API designed for GCN, AMD are using the word "open" because anyone (Nvidia/Intel/etc) are free to license the technology, and because people will think they mean "open source".
http://www.dsogaming.com/news/mantl...k-not-an-open-standard-like-opencl-or-opengl/
https://linustechtips.com/main/topi...ot-open-source-compatible-only-with-amd-gpus/
Last edited:
Glide got off to a good start as it was the first API and gave 3DFX a big boost, however once Ati/Nvidia got their OpenGL implementation sorted that countered it and Glide ended up becoming one of the nails in 3DFX's coffin. API's like OpenGL and Direct3D which were supported on any card just had an edge over a propriety API that only worked on one manufacturer's cards, S3's Metal API and PowerVR's API suffered the same fate.
If you were writing a game would you prefer to write it via an API that worked on every modern card, or would you like to do that and then also rewrite it with an API that only works on HD7xxx and newer AMD cards? it's a lot of extra effort for developers for little reward which is why universal API's became so popular.
Last edited:
Well this is the sticky situation DirectX is in. While 99.9% of traditional GPUs (what the average PC enthusiast would recognise) support DX of some flavour, that's only under Windows and not universally. Windows is very much not the only viable OS any more.
Calling the PC fragmented and that it is an issue is a big pointer to how little the Article writer understand about what makes a pc a freaking Personal Computer. Some unification isn't bad but i dont want to end up with 1 API and 1 OS. I want choices based on what i want to do. Creative work have had those options, Servers have had those options, Gaming not so much and that has to change. I think having an alternative to Windows for gaming is very important and something that is Linux based would be awwsome. This is why i think Mantle is a good move for AMD and potentially a very good move for the rest of us as it gives us the options to give on other platforms besides windows once Mantle is released for said platform and it forces to some extend the competition to follow suit which is again a good thing for the end user.
They just had to pay nVidia a license fee on every gpu sold that would support it. There are no details yet as to Mantle being truly open or if its also behind some sort of license wall(i hope not)
Last edited: