Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Sep 2009
- Posts
- 30,505
- Location
- Dormanstown.
"Words"
-
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.
Nvidia Gameworks at Gamescom 2015
- Thread starter Gregster
- Start date
"Words"
All besides the point, the point fs123 was making is Mantle, All be it in a new form is now available to everyone.
And actually a DX12 like API on Linux is of interest to me, and a lot of others.
We also need an alternative to Microsoft and DX12.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Sep 2009
- Posts
- 30,505
- Location
- Dormanstown.
Except it's not. Vulkan's not Mantle as Mantle was. Which doesn't really matter anyway. We can all basically forget Mantle, AMD has.
Vulkan certainly has a place, but I fear it'll just do exactly the same as OpenGL.
I never said it wasn't interesting or wanted, I'm saying history is against it.
People just seem to get a raging erection for anything that AMD has had contact with, but 9/10 times it going nowhere.
It may have gone open source, AMD do that with failed projects that they can't leverage. The problem is it would be open source with AMD controlling everything about the API, putting Intel and Nvidia at the mercy of whatever whims and tricks AMD would inflict.
And that is why Nvidia publicly stated they would never touch Mantle with a barge pole. They would be much better served by simply developing their own API which would be much more successful since they have 75% or more of the market share.
Nvidia didn't do that thou, they simply supported Miscros with dX12 and develop middleware that abides by the DX standard so all GPU can make use of them, rather than segregating the GPU market like it was back in the 1990s by making vendor specific APIs.
You arguing Mantle is not Vulkan is again besides the point, the khronos Group made it very clean that Vulkan would not have been possible without Mantle, you can argue how much of Vulkan is Mantle or not untill your blue in the face, the khronos Group made a point of the fact that Mantle is in Vulkan and its Mantle that made it possible.
Last edited:
Permabanned
- Joined
- 4 Sep 2011
- Posts
- 6,661
- Location
- Durham
Just seen my two of my three most anticipated games of the next 6 month have gameworks in them. MGSV I knew about but Mirrors Edge I didnt. Hopefully I might get them both cheaper offa the MM now if they throw in ME with GPU's in the future
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Sep 2009
- Posts
- 30,505
- Location
- Dormanstown.
Save face for what? Did you know AMD as well as Nvidia worked to develop DX12 with Microsoft?
AMD and devs wanted a low level API to reduce overhead. I'm pretty sure once they knew DX12 was going to do what they wanted all along (presumably prompted by Mantle) they didn't continue with Mantle.
Khronos needed the help to compete quickly with DX12 hence the transfer to Vulkan, otherwise AMD did not have to give anything away.
It's obvious from posts here that the Nvidia crew hate Mantle since it's from AMD but surely you cannot deny that it has moved the industry forward.
It is not under a different name, Vulkan is very different to Mantle. Vulkan is based on OpenGl next, of which Nvida and others a developing together. AMD co to tied their failed Mantle, parts of which were ripped and to sue, Nvidia have cot I used code and IP, as have a load of others in the consortium.
nvidia were supporting Vulkan, I.e. GLNext long before Mantle ever came to exist. nvidia has always been a much bigger support of OpenGL than AMD.
Vulkan is a completely new API built on Mantle, the Khronos Group themselves said this.
https://youtu.be/EUNMrU8uU5M?t=12m57s
You are the type of guy who believes Apple invented the mp3 player, no doubt.
Give credit where credit is due and stop with the denial please. Khronos themselves have credited Mantle in all their press releases but you say different...
Soldato
- Joined
- 29 Aug 2010
- Posts
- 8,611
- Location
- Cornwall
This seems to be the opposite of "Mantle under a new name" type arguments...
AMD must have known Nvidia wouldn't support Mantle when they first thought it up. Most of us could have figured that out. It would've been stupid if Nvidia did. I can't believe AMD would've if the roles were reversed. So AMD developed Mantle knowing full well that it wasn't going to be completely cross-vendor (how Intel would react is sort of irrelevant for a gaming API at the current time).
Nvidia supporting a 3rd party controlled API is very different from supporting one controlled by your big rival. Nvidia may have known about DX12 by the time Mantle was being publicly talked about and that may have been their reason for not seeing the point in supporting it. Vulkan, as mentioned is different and Nvidia have had a lot to do with OpenGL in the past I believe, so no reason they wouldn't support its successor.
So, was Mantle responsible for Vulkan, I think it did play a large part, but I think there was more work to be done than renaming it.
But Mantle, like GameWorks wasn't this perfect piece of software that was open source for both vendors. However the position we're now in with Vulkan and DX12 can only be a good thing. So I think a rival to GameWorks would be a good thing, to keep both moving forwards. Having one unified library might stop innovation.
Still not entirely sure how Mantle/Vulkan fits into a GameWorks thread though...
No argument from me in any of that Googaly.
I agree there is no way Nvidia were ever going to support it, and AMD would not have supported it if it was Nvidia's.....
But at the end of the day AMD still made it, they still put the effort in and they did it knowing none-one else would support them in it, and then gave it away to someone who would and could use it to give us all something thats great.
This is a good thing and i don't know why some people insist on being so negative around the Mantle subject.
You know what, the Nvidia GeForce forum is full of people who its plain to see have quiet a lot of respect for AMD and Mantle. they have some pretty good and balanced conversations around the subject in there.
Whats gone wrong in here?
I see many threads on other forums, some that i have started myself and the conversations on the same subject matter can be worlds apart, that's why i read many different forums which gives a much better perspective of the subject matter.
Soldato
- Joined
- 29 Aug 2010
- Posts
- 8,611
- Location
- Cornwall
I honestly believe that's it's probably a case of it being 'them' that are praising AMD/Mantle. That's different to when you have AMD owners/fans praising it. It seems a lot less, I don't know, boastful. Doesn't feel like anyone's trying to 1-up you.
Get a group of non-Chelsea fans talking about Chelsea and the conversation is probably much more reasonable and balanced than it would be if you added a group of Chelsea supports to the same conversation.
No doubt on an AMD forum you could have discussions about ShadowPlay/GSync/GameWorks that wouldn't be as hate-filled as the ones on here either.
Mirror's Edge had Physx so it should be no shock to anyone and it was DICE saying that Mirror's Edges was to be a Mantle game.
Last edited:
It's not a big deal if they are using Gameworks. The only thing that is a performance killer in gameworks is the Hairworks and maybe physx. I don't see them using Hairworks much since your chracters head is never visible.
Mantle is no more so why would the devs use it? Mirrors edge should be DX12 now since it is essentially offers the same low level API benefit.
Last edited: