• 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.

***The Official Vulkan API Thread***

Martini1991 said:
So, it's basically potential and hope? :D
Click to expand...

Essentially, it has a lot of potential, considering that Imagination already has Vulkan code running on their OpenGL ES 3.1, PowerVR chips.

The Vulkan enabled version of source 2 is a good watch, Valve gave a sneak peak of DOTA2 running on it. The funny thing is that it was running on, Intel integrated, yet the performance was still superior to the current game. No random stutters or performance drops, etc.
 
Mauller said:
Essentially, it has a lot of potential, considering that Imagination already has Vulkan code running on their OpenGL ES 3.1, PowerVR chips.

The Vulkan enabled version of source 2 is a good watch, Valve gave a sneak peak of DOTA2 running on it. The funny thing is that it was running on, Intel integrated, yet the performance was still superior to the current game. No random stutters or performance drops, etc.
Click to expand...

Yeah, just goes to show that Vulkan isn't just Mantle by a different name, it was running on non-AMD hardware!

I can't say I have a lot of issues with Dota 2 performance as it is though.

It was nice to see, but I'm sure a lot of people would rather Valve spent their time on something other than re-writing the Dota 2 engine.
Mostly the people waiting on Half-Life 3, Team Fortress 3, Portal 3, Left 4 Dead 3, CS:Gone (or whatever they'll call it) or even Dota 3...
 
GoogalyMoogaly said:
Yeah, just goes to show that Vulkan isn't just Mantle by a different name, it was running on non-AMD hardware!

I can't say I have a lot of issues with Dota 2 performance as it is though.

It was nice to see, but I'm sure a lot of people would rather Valve spent their time on something other than re-writing the Dota 2 engine.
Mostly the people waiting on Half-Life 3, Team Fortress 3, Portal 3, Left 4 Dead 3, CS:Gone (or whatever they'll call it) or even Dota 3...
Click to expand...

Just because it wasn't running on AMD hardware doesn't mean it was mantle under the hood..

Amd have said in the past that Mantle supports all other hardware. Mantle has helped them get the ball running with vulcan and is the foundation of the api..
They even said this themselves..

We won't see another csgo, the game will just get updated to source 2 engine.
 
GoogalyMoogaly said:
Yeah, just goes to show that Vulkan isn't just Mantle by a different name, it was running on non-AMD hardware!

I can't say I have a lot of issues with Dota 2 performance as it is though.

It was nice to see, but I'm sure a lot of people would rather Valve spent their time on something other than re-writing the Dota 2 engine.
Mostly the people waiting on Half-Life 3, Team Fortress 3, Portal 3, Left 4 Dead 3, CS:Gone (or whatever they'll call it) or even Dota 3...
Click to expand...

I do not think that Mantle had any issues with running on alternate hardware to begin with, as long as the hardware had support for the mantle feature set, no different to how Directx works, etc. AMD would not have made an API that limited them to a single architecture, The driver still does a lot of Hardware Abstraction, just not all of the memory managment, etc that current API's perform.

Only reason for GCN only cards from amd, but Fermi onwards for nvidia with DX12 (if they do work, from apparent rumours of them not having all required features), is that they are fully programmable and have direct memory access capability. With the 6K series and under, AMD still had a large amount of fixed function hardware.

Also the current version of DOTA 2 is running on an early build of Source 2 :P
But i would like to see a Vulkan demo of source 2, considering how fantastic the Portal VR Demo looks.
 
shankly1985 said:
No your kidding yourself. It's been talked about a lot that Mantle could support other hardware.
http://www.dsogaming.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/Untitled11.jpg
Click to expand...

Pray tell how Mantle supported other hardware when the vendors that made that hardware had no access to Mantle! There is no actual evidence of anything other than GCN products ever supporting Mantle. AMD's PR slides aren't proof.

Forget that, why did Mantle need changing for Vulkan if it "supported" other hardware?

We get it, every line AMD give you, you'll take it hook line and sinker.

AMD can do no wrong and all that jazz.
 
Last edited:
Martini1991 said:
Pray tell how Mantle supported other hardware when the vendors that made that hardware had no access to Mantle! There is no actual evidence of anything other than GCN products ever supporting Mantle. AMD's PR slides aren't proof.

Forget that, why did Mantle need changing for Vulkan if it "supported" other hardware?
Click to expand...

Exactly. That's why Vulkan is working on Intel and Nvidia, they have access to the Vulkan SKD and can write drivers for it. They didn't have the chance (and probably never will) with Mantle.
 
Martini1991 said:
Pray tell how Mantle supported other hardware when the vendors that made that hardware had no access to Mantle! There is no actual evidence of anything other than GCN products ever supporting Mantle. AMD's PR slides aren't proof.

Forget that, why did Mantle need changing for Vulkan if it "supported" other hardware?

We get it, every line AMD give you, you'll take it hook line and sinker.

AMD can do no wrong and all that jazz.
Click to expand...

The majority of what changed, from what i have deduced and seen. Is the way you write code for the API. Rather than using Directx based HLSL, they are using their SPIR-V engine, as well as having pruned off GCN specific extensions, but the core of mantle is still there, the majority of the functions are named the same between Vulkan and Mantle, the only difference being the Namespace for them.
 
Mauller said:
The majority of what changed, from what i have deduced and seen. Is the way you write code for the API. Rather than using Directx based HLSL, they are using their SPIR-V engine, as well as having pruned off GCN specific extensions, but the core of mantle is still there, the majority of the functions are named the same between Vulkan and Mantle, the only difference being the Namespace for them.
Click to expand...

I don't buy it. If Mantle could have been so easily capable of Intel/Nvidia support, then there's no chance AMD wouldn't have been trying to throw it in the air at every opportunity that it is, and it's just Nvidia/Intel not supporting it. Rather than rejecting Intels advances.

Or, that they'd have given support to 6XXX.

There's obviously a spec that must be adhered to.
 
Martini1991 said:
And if it was just a case of being able to write drivers for Mantle as is, they'd have been allowed to. It's obviously not.
Click to expand...

You can't write drives without a well documented SDK and hardware documentation. You think Intel would have asked AMD for Mantle if they didn't think it could run on it?
 
Martini1991 said:
Pray tell how Mantle supported other hardware when the vendors that made that hardware had no access to Mantle! There is no actual evidence of anything other than GCN products ever supporting Mantle. AMD's PR slides aren't proof.

Forget that, why did Mantle need changing for Vulkan if it "supported" other hardware?

We get it, every line AMD give you, you'll take it hook line and sinker.

AMD can do no wrong and all that jazz.
Click to expand...

Then go and ask why the guys behind vulcan are plastering mantle all over it and thanking amd for it..
Not me who saying it and just passing on what is already well documented.
 
Martini1991 said:
I don't buy it. If Mantle could have been so easily capable of Intel/Nvidia support, then there's no chance AMD wouldn't have been trying to throw it in the air at every opportunity that it is, and it's just Nvidia/Intel not supporting it. Rather than rejecting Intels advances.

Or, that they'd have given support to 6XXX.

There's obviously a spec that must be adhered to.
Click to expand...

I mentioned the 6k series in an earlier post, it still had a large amount of "fixed function" hardware, which meant it did not have the general compute / fully programmable capabilities which were required.

There is a standard, the majority of modern hardware supports the majority of the required features, AMD mainly keeping it in house would be due to a number of reasons. Its not the same situation as with BETA software, when it comes to an API, you don't throw the beta out into the wild so anyone can use it, like people do with applications, API's need far more rigorous tuning and polishing first with a smaller base of users. (users being the developers etc)
 
Mauller said:
I mentioned the 6k series in an earlier post, it still had a large amount of "fixed function" hardware, which meant it did not have the general compute / fully programmable capabilities which were required.

There is a standard, the majority of modern hardware supports the majority of the required features, AMD mainly keeping it in house would be due to a number of reasons. Its not the same situation as with BETA software, when it comes to an API, you don't throw the beta out into the wild so anyone can use it, like people do with applications, API's need far more rigorous tuning and polishing first with a smaller base of users. (users being the developers etc)
Click to expand...

Still don't buy it.
If it was all kosher, we wouldn't see Mantle basically being shelved (Or that public SDK that AMD promised not actually arriving)
 
Martini1991 said:
Still don't buy it.
If it was all kosher, we wouldn't see Mantle basically being shelved (Or that public SDK that AMD promised not actually arriving)
Click to expand...

I believe it was not released as is and instead given to khronos, as was mentioned as a possibility in the past, for political reasons more than anything.

With nVidias past track-record of Proprietary peripherals and extentions, i don't see them wanting to touch mantle when it has amd's name massively associated with it. Hence Vulkan, khronos, etc.

But AMD are still developing the API "In house" and for "Select partners" if the reports are true, i don't think mantle will disappear, but it will stick around and hopefully keep Khronos and Microsoft on their toes when it comes to API updates.

So in the end, Mantle becomes released under another name and with a different interface (SPIR-V) and should get far greater hardware manufacturer acceptance, hence market-share.
 
GoogalyMoogaly said:
So are the Khronos group saying Vulkan is Mantle renamed or are they saying it's based on or inspired by Mantle?
Click to expand...

Just watching the video, but from this and other sources, it is looking like a lot of vulkan is based on the mantle spec. Parts looking like they are cut and shut, from a lot of the api calls using the same names, but with a different namespace.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom