AMD signs up 40 development studios for Mantle

[humbug]

The same could be said for every game made by the 40 development studios being talked about in this thread (which is also a lot of noise).

The point I'm making is its against Microsoft's interests to release a console like API for the PC because PC gaming gets in the way of their more profitable Console ECO system.

The only reason they are now making a lot of noise about "a new API" is because 'with the rivals they now have' they may loose the monopoly control they have enjoyed upto now.

 

[Marine-RX179]

I can't see why they'd do it as well as DirectX 12 either. Don't see what's in it for them.

Because unlike Nvidia, AMD sell CPU as well. dx's inefficiency hurt their CPU sales.

Had dx been more efficient and the FX CPUs was able to consistently push 60fps, it doesn't matter if Intel was pushing 100-120fps, it would had been overkill more msot people (especially those who don't want to spend more money than they need to) would have considered them buying AMD CPUs instead at the lower price, as most of them game on 1920 res 60Hz monitor, rather than 120Hz monitor.

The dx12 may or may not have been in development before Mantle, but nobody can honestly say for certain had Mantle not came along that MS would have considering about reducing the CPU overhead and low level access.

If dx12 can reduce CPU overhead, overtaking Mantle's effectiveness to the point of AMD has no hope of competiting with them in the future, then AMD would probably consider retiring Mantle...but until then, I think Mantle would be here to stay.

I honestly think AMD bringing out Mantle is a good thing, as it forces MS to put in more effort into improving the efficiency of dx. MS had monoploy on API for PC gaming for too long...even if they released dx with poor efficiency, people would have no choice but to use it, as there is no other better alternative available. So I disagree with people arguing that AMD is trying to replace dx with Mantle, but rather it's serve as dual purposes of improving gaming experience for games that support it, as well as keeping MS from slacking off on improving dx...it's a win win scenerio to them. Even if Nvidia users can't use Mantle, they would benefit from the higher standard of dx that MS are forced to bring out.

 

[humbug]

What you have to remember is Mantle is not just an "AMD creation" it was / is a joint venture between Game Developers and AMD.

 

[Gregster]

I do chuckle when reading "DX11 is a pile of junk". You have a 'universal API' that caters for 80% or so (purely guessing) of gamers with discrete GPUs and previous to that, you have DX10 and DX9 to cater for the 100% of gamers on PC. Sure it could be better and sure Microsoft sat back too long with DX11 but to call it a pile of junk is massively harsh.

Now when we look at Mantle, we have it in 2 games (at present) and I read so much "Not working for me" or "Crossfire still doesn't work in Thief" but Mantle is the saviour.... Wake up people please. If you have anything questionable to say about Mantle though, you get jumped on and lambasted for being a green fanboy.

 

[humbug]

I do chuckle when reading "DX11 is a pile of junk". You have a 'universal API' that caters for 80% or so (purely guessing) of gamers with discrete GPUs and previous to that, you have DX10 and DX9 to cater for the 100% of gamers on PC. Sure it could be better and sure Microsoft sat back too long with DX11 but to call it a pile of junk is massively harsh.

Now when we look at Mantle, we have it in 2 games (at present) and I read so much "Not working for me" or "Crossfire still doesn't work in Thief" but Mantle is the saviour.... Wake up people please.

You have a £500 CPU and no GPU that can run Mantle, so in fairness you have no right "chuckling" at people who actually know from experience what they are talking about.

 

[Gregster]

You have a £500 CPU and no GPU that can run Mantle, so in fairness you have no right "chuckling" at people who actually know from experience what they are talking about.

Don't be pathetic Humbug.

 

[Kaapstad]

I do chuckle when reading "DX11 is a pile of junk". You have a 'universal API' that caters for 80% or so (purely guessing) of gamers with discrete GPUs and previous to that, you have DX10 and DX9 to cater for the 100% of gamers on PC. Sure it could be better and sure Microsoft sat back too long with DX11 but to call it a pile of junk is massively harsh.

Now when we look at Mantle, we have it in 2 games (at present) and I read so much "Not working for me" or "Crossfire still doesn't work in Thief" but Mantle is the saviour.... Wake up people please.

DX11 is actually faster than Mantle on very high end setups under the right conditions so to say it is junk would not be accurate.

Also Mantle with 4 x 290Xs at 4K settings is totally unplayable due to graphics glitches where as DX11 is very playable and glitch free.

Mantle does bring some very real benefits but it will be a very long time before it is a viable alternative to DX11 which has to be all things to all people under all conditions.

 

[jh30uk]

By that time DX12 will be here and in meantime more Nvidia magic drivers I hope.

Edit, just noticed thread is purely a mantle thread but the "DX11 is junk" comment caught me, I am out.

If he had said DX10, then yea.

 

[GoogalyMoogaly]

Because unlike Nvidia, AMD sell CPU as well. dx's inefficiency hurt their CPU sales.

Had dx been more efficient and the FX CPUs was able to consistently push 60fps, it doesn't matter if Intel was pushing 100-120fps, it would had been overkill more msot people (especially those who don't want to spend more money than they need to) would have considered them buying AMD CPUs instead at the lower price, as most of them game on 1920 res 60Hz monitor, rather than 120Hz monitor.

The dx12 may or may not have been in development before Mantle, but nobody can honestly say for certain had Mantle not came along that MS would have considering about reducing the CPU overhead and low level access.

If dx12 can reduce CPU overhead, overtaking Mantle's effectiveness to the point of AMD has no hope of competiting with them in the future, then AMD would probably consider retiring Mantle...but until then, I think Mantle would be here to stay.

I honestly think AMD bringing out Mantle is a good thing, as it forces MS to put in more effort into improving the efficiency of dx. MS had monoploy on API for PC gaming for too long...even if they released dx with poor efficiency, people would have no choice but to use it, as there is no other better alternative available. So I disagree with people arguing that AMD is trying to replace dx with Mantle, but rather it's serve as dual purposes of improving gaming experience for games that support it, as well as keeping MS from slacking off on improving dx...it's a win win scenerio to them.

I still don't see why Nvidia or Intel would want in on Mantle? All that sounds like why AMD like Mantle, but they're already in so I obviously wasn't talking about them.

 

[Kaapstad]

You have a £500 CPU and no GPU that can run Mantle, so in fairness you have no right "chuckling" at people who actually know from experience what they are talking about.

Using an intel hexcore won't change the fact that there is only 2 games that will run with Mantle and even then CF does not work properly.

Could you or someone else give us the actual release dates of the next 3 games that will use Mantle as this should be a point to take into account if someone was thinking about buying an AMD card.

 

[humbug]

Don't be pathetic Humbug.

Why the aggression? its right, you with no experience have no basis laughing at those with experience.

 

[PhysicsMan94]

Haha, "DX 11 junk", give me a break.

DirectX is an impressive API given that it has to cater for almost every single hardware combination on the market - the performance from it is perfectly acceptable and there are very few issues. Also it has been the driving force behind basically every PC game for the past 10+ years - that's a pretty big deal, and far from "junk".

 

[humbug]

Haha, "DX 11 junk", give me a break.

DirectX is an impressive API given that it has to cater for almost every single hardware combination on the market - the performance from it is perfectly acceptable and there are very few issues. Also it has been the driving force behind basically every PC game for the past 10+ years - that's a pretty big deal, and far from "junk".

The I will rephrase it, "DX11 runs like Junk compared with Mantle"

 

[Gregster]

Why the aggression? its right, you with no experience have no basis laughing at those with experience.

There is no aggression but to say someone has no opinion because he uses a £500 CPU is pathetic and go and read my last post again (I will quote it for you).

I do chuckle when reading "DX11 is a pile of junk". You have a 'universal API' that caters for 80% or so (purely guessing) of gamers with discrete GPUs and previous to that, you have DX10 and DX9 to cater for the 100% of gamers on PC. Sure it could be better and sure Microsoft sat back too long with DX11 but to call it a pile of junk is massively harsh.

Now when we look at Mantle, we have it in 2 games (at present) and I read so much "Not working for me" or "Crossfire still doesn't work in Thief" but Mantle is the saviour.... Wake up people please. If you have anything questionable to say about Mantle though, you get jumped on and lambasted for being a green fanboy.

Where on earth am I laughing at people with lesser CPUs? Stop being a drama queen and debate like a gown up.

 

[Kaapstad]

Haha, "DX 11 junk", give me a break.

DirectX is an impressive API given that it has to cater for almost every single hardware combination on the market - the performance from it is perfectly acceptable and there are very few issues. Also it has been the driving force behind basically every PC game for the past 10+ years - that's a pretty big deal, and far from "junk".

+1

Mantle is a long way off being able to offer the same coverage.

2 Mantle games available - both broken in their own way (this does not mean Mantle is the cause though).

 

[PhysicsMan94]

The I will rephrase it, "DX11 runs like Junk compared with Mantle"

Au contraire, Mantle gives some good performance increases yes, but nothing I've seen has blown me away and the gains do not come anywhere near to the theoretical improvements in framerate that should arise due to less overhead (900% being the theoretical maximum IIRC, whereas I've seen gains in minimum frame rate of up to 150%).

 

[Marine-RX179]

I do chuckle when reading "DX11 is a pile of junk". You have a 'universal API' that caters for 80% or so (purely guessing) of gamers with discrete GPUs and previous to that, you have DX10 and DX9 to cater for the 100% of gamers on PC. Sure it could be better and sure Microsoft sat back too long with DX11 but to call it a pile of junk is massively harsh.

Now when we look at Mantle, we have it in 2 games (at present) and I read so much "Not working for me" or "Crossfire still doesn't work in Thief" but Mantle is the saviour.... Wake up people please. If you have anything questionable to say about Mantle though, you get jumped on and lambasted for being a green fanboy.

I was not talking about Mantle itself, I was just pointing out the the likely reasoning behind AMD bringing out.

Regardless of if MS did or didn't not putting enough effort on dx, the reality of the situation is that dx IS holding back AMD CPUs to the level that many people would rather pay the price premium to buy Intel CPUs instead...and that's a FACT.

AMD couldn't do much about that (dx), but what they could do was taking matter into their own hands, and investing in developing a mean to make games uses the CPU more efficiently- to solve a problem which they are facing; yet bringing out Mantle, people accuse them of trying segment the market, and seeing Mantle as an eyesore wanting to see it get buried the sooner the better.

I don't know how Mantle will improve (or not) in the future, but I simply don't understand why people can't just relax and adapt the "let it roll and see how it goes" approach.

 

[Final8y]

Because unlike Nvidia, AMD sell CPU as well. dx's inefficiency hurt their CPU sales.

Had dx been more efficient and the FX CPUs was able to consistently push 60fps, it doesn't matter if Intel was pushing 100-120fps, it would had been overkill more most people (especially those who don't want to spend more money than they need to) would have considered them buying AMD CPUs instead at the lower price, as most of them game on 1920 res 60Hz monitor, rather than 120Hz monitor.

The dx12 may or may not have been in development before Mantle, but nobody can honestly say for certain had Mantle not came along that MS would have considering about reducing the CPU overhead and low level access.

If dx12 can reduce CPU overhead, overtaking Mantle's effectiveness to the point of AMD has no hope of competing with them in the future, then AMD would probably consider retiring Mantle...but until then, I think Mantle would be here to stay.

I honestly think AMD bringing out Mantle is a good thing, as it forces MS to put in more effort into improving the efficiency of dx. MS had monopoly on API for PC gaming for too long...even if they released dx with poor efficiency, people would have no choice but to use it, as there is no other better alternative available. So I disagree with people arguing that AMD is trying to replace dx with Mantle, but rather it's serve as dual purposes of improving gaming experience for games that support it, as well as keeping MS from slacking off on improving dx...it's a win win scenario to them. Even if Nvidia users can't use Mantle, they would benefit from the higher standard of dx that MS are forced to bring out.

Well said.

 

[Gregster]

I was not talking about Mantle itself, I was just pointing out the the likely reasoning behind AMD bringing out.

Regardless of if MS did or didn't not putting enough effort on dx, the reality of the situation is that dx IS holding back AMD CPUs to the level that many people would rather pay the price premium to buy Intel CPUs instead..and that's the fact.

AMD couldn't do much about that (dx), but what they could do was taking matter into their own hands, and investing in developing a mean to make games uses the CPU more efficiently- to solve a problem which they are facing; yet bringing out Mantle, people accuse them of trying segment the market, and seeing Mantle as an eyesore wanting to see it get buried the sooner the better.

I don't know how Mantle will improve (or not) in the future, but I simply don't understand why people can't just relax and adapt the "let it roll and see how it goes" approach.

I also feel AMD were looking at their CPUs when making Mantle and seeing the improvements it brings to older/slower CPUs, they have done a fantastic job. And prior to Mantle, DX was slow to move on, so in that respect, AMD did well again and not just for AMD users, as I would be looking to swap out my CPU at some stage but with DX12 mentioning a lesser CPU overhead, this could mean I can keep this CPU and just go GPUs.

I said it before and I say it again, I see Mantle as a good thing and I would love to see that performance across the board and the new nVidia 337.50 drivers give SLI users a massive gain, maybe DX12 will give AMD/nVidia/Intel big gains and less CPU overheads across the board as well.

DirectX is an impressive API given that it has to cater for almost every single hardware combination on the market - the performance from it is perfectly acceptable and there are very few issues. Also it has been the driving force behind basically every PC game for the past 10+ years - that's a pretty big deal, and far from "junk".

Agreed.

 

[AlamoX]

square enix financial results are better than expected, where even Thief made sales fairly well, although it was a piece of crap game, which shows that Mantle has quiet the impact on the marketing of game and generating buzz about the game longer and on a wider spectrum of media.