AMD unveils "Mantle", an open graphics API that allows console like direct to metal optimization on
126 replies, posted
[IMG]http://static.techspot.com/images2/news/bigimage/2013-09-25_17-34-37.jpg[/IMG]
[IMG]http://static.techspot.com/images2/news/bigimage/2013-09-25_17-35-31.jpg[/IMG]
[IMG]http://www.abload.de/img/amd-a18ljsnc.png[/IMG]
[IMG]http://abload.de/img/amd-a19scs7n.png[/IMG]
[IMG]http://abload.de/img/glide210say.jpg[/IMG]
[QUOTE]At AMD's GPU14 Tech Day event in Hawaii, alongside the brand new Radeon R9 290X GPU, the company has also unveiled a new development model called 'Mantle'. As a combination of both API specifications and GPU drivers, Mantle will allow developers to fully unlock the graphics potential of the GCN architecture of the new (and likely the previous) Radeon series, through low-level high-performance drivers.
Battlefield 4 will be the first title to use Mantle, with the technology coming through a free update in December. Mantle brings greater control of the GPU and CPU to game developers, especially in the memory department, which will allow games to harness the full potential of graphics cards. This model will be more similar to what is found on consoles, where developers have huge control over what hardware they use in their games.
While the technology is still in early stages, EA says it will allow PC game developers to harness even more graphics power than ever before. Where possible, Mantle will be used instead of DirectX 11 on compatible AMD hardware, although it's still compatible with other rendering APIs. AMD claims Mantle enables nine times more draw calls per second than other APIs, which is a huge increase in performance.
We've been told at the GPU14 Tech Day event that the Mantle API is open, so theoretically Nvidia could purpose the technology in their GPUs. It should also make cross-development between PC and console games a lot easier, and also more incredible for those with a high-performance AMD GPU.
More information on Mantle will be available at the AMD Developer Summit in November.[/QUOTE]
[url]http://www.techspot.com/news/54134-amd-unveils-revolutionary-mantle-api-to-optimize-gpu-performance.html[/url]
I'll wait until I see results before believing much of anything.
EDIT:
Definitely. The marketing buzzwords/pictures in this are making me sick.
Proprietary graphics APIs... how did that work out for 3dfx, again?
[QUOTE=gman003-main;42311014]Proprietary graphics APIs... how did that work out for 3dfx, again?[/QUOTE]
wow its even in the title dude!! "an open graphics API"
The multi-platform support is pretty nice in theory, but I would much rather see them improve their Linux drivers or work with OpenGL. Unless the results for this are groundbreaking, which I'm highly skeptical of.
It will definitely be better than DirectX, but I want to know how it stacks up against OpenGL.
I know John Carmack said he wished AMD would make an API like this since they are in all three consoles. Looks like he got his wish
[QUOTE=Xion12;42311062][B]It will definitely be better than DirectX[/B], but I want to know how it stacks up against OpenGL.[/QUOTE]
Yes and no. It will be better as it is tailored to a certain GPU series. But it will be worse because it is tailored to a certain GPU series. DirectX isn't tailored like that for a reason, to allow for any vendor to use it and optimise it to their GPUs (within reason).
[QUOTE=Juniez;42311036]wow its even in the title dude!! "an open graphics API"[/QUOTE]
"Open" how? They may be providing full documentation, but I doubt they'll allow reimplementations (ie. they won't let Nvidia make their cards compatible).
If they wanted to make a fast, low-level API, they're already members of the OpenGL ARB (along with Nvidia, Intel, Imagination (the PowerVR guys), ARM, Qualcomm and others). They could have proposed something through that - either as changes to OpenGL, or as a new API entirely. The fact that they're focusing on how this API is designed not just for AMD cards, but for a specific AMD architecture, means I think even they will have to drop it in a few years.
[QUOTE=The Baconator;42310968][IMG]http://abload.de/img/amd-a19scs7n.png[/IMG][/QUOTE]
So I messaged a friend on steam this and his first response was to ping this image and say.
"So AMD finally acknowledges they have molten core tier drivers. Well I guess the first step to fixing a problem is to acknowledge that you have one."
[QUOTE=hexpunK;42311074]Yes and no. It will be better as it is tailored to a certain GPU series. But it will be worse because it is tailored to a certain GPU series. DirectX isn't tailored like that for a reason, to allow for any vendor to use it and optimise it to their GPUs (within reason).[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=gman003-main;42311075]"Open" how? They may be providing full documentation, but I doubt they'll allow reimplementations (ie. they won't let Nvidia make their cards compatible).
If they wanted to make a fast, low-level API, they're already members of the OpenGL ARB (along with Nvidia, Intel, Imagination (the PowerVR guys), ARM, Qualcomm and others). They could have proposed something through that - either as changes to OpenGL, or as a new API entirely. The fact that they're focusing on how this API is designed not just for AMD cards, but for a specific AMD architecture, means I think even they will have to drop it in a few years.[/QUOTE]
if the article is to be believed
[quote]We've been told at the GPU14 Tech Day event that the Mantle API is open, so theoretically Nvidia could purpose the technology in their GPUs.[/quote]
[QUOTE=Juniez;42311099]any gpu developer can implement this if they wanted to[/QUOTE]
Can they? I can't see any reason for AMD to create a new standard specifically for their devices, to ensure they are as powerful as possible. Just to let opponents implement it themselves and take that away from them. I mean, if that was the case why not just contribute more to OpenGL, seeing as they are quite prominent in the development of it.
Ah, with your edit that does make some sense. Though I still don't get the point of it, why not just optimise the shit out of OpenGL on their platform instead of adding more to the standards soup of computing?
[QUOTE=gman003-main;42311075]"Open" how? They may be providing full documentation, but I doubt they'll allow reimplementations (ie. they won't let Nvidia make their cards compatible).
If they wanted to make a fast, low-level API, they're already members of the OpenGL ARB (along with Nvidia, Intel, Imagination (the PowerVR guys), ARM, Qualcomm and others). They could have proposed something through that - either as changes to OpenGL, or as a new API entirely. The fact that they're focusing on how this API is designed not just for AMD cards, but for a specific AMD architecture, means I think even they will have to drop it in a few years.[/QUOTE]
source says it's open and it's just up to nvidia to implement it
[QUOTE=Shadaez;42311123]source says it's open and it's just up to nvidia to implement it[/QUOTE]
To be actually "open" you need to allow competitors to contribute to it, if it's just a specification you control and they can implement then it's not "open".
[QUOTE=hexpunK;42311119]Though I still don't get the point of it, why not just optimise the shit out of OpenGL on their platform instead of adding more to the standards soup of computing?[/QUOTE]
I wish i could find where John Carmack said he wanted this, but it's in one of his many hour long interviews, such as most recently the 2013 Quakecon interview. If Carmack says it was a good idea, maybe it is idk. His reasoning though was because consoles have AMD so it might not be applicable.
[editline]25th September 2013[/editline]
ok he just commented on it
[url]https://twitter.com/ID_AA_Carmack/status/383047595725037568[/url]
[QUOTE=Juniez;42311099]if the article is to be believed[/QUOTE]
OpenGL and Direct3D are already about as low-level as you can get while running effectively on any hardware design. Well, the non-legacy parts of OpenGL, at least, which they've mostly been purging lately.
So any lower-level API is likely to be quite dependent on a specific design pattern. Thus I would not expect Mantle support for, say, the VLIW5-based Radeon 6000 series (or the low-level 7000-series cards that are just rebadges of the last gen), let alone a significantly different architecture like Kepler.
It's likely to be another paradigm shift. Like from fixed function to programmable pipeline. It's often said that the whole thing is programmable but it really isn't, you still rely on the driver to handle memory, resources and state and shuffle the data around between pipeline stages. The resource thing is especially important, for example opengl and d3d both recently have support for sparse textures but if you actually had control over the memory and other things then it really wouldn't be necessary to have explicit support for this as yet another black box of state fiddling.
I want to see real world performance, and if it's only used in a few games then it's not really worth it.
[IMG]http://i.imgur.com/ZRgwxQl.jpg[/IMG]
Mantle on Steambox, I wonder
This is to be expected since their graphics chips are in the new consoles; didn't expect them to do it so soon though. Not as if people are losing out; if you've got the hardware you might as well get to use it.
[editline]26th September 2013[/editline]
[QUOTE=The Baconator;42311234][IMG]http://i.imgur.com/ZRgwxQl.jpg[/IMG]
Mantle on Steambox, I wonder[/QUOTE]
If the steambox uses mantle then it should stick around for a long time and be supported by a lot of games, meaning it should stick around for a while and enrich the whole pc gaming scene. Either way it's a lot more exciting than fucking physx.
[QUOTE=The Baconator;42311234][IMG]http://i.imgur.com/ZRgwxQl.jpg[/IMG]
Mantle on Steambox, I wonder[/QUOTE]
Not sure how Sony would... if they can implement it in the system through a patch / firmware / engine update then they're golden.
[QUOTE=The Baconator;42311234][IMG]http://i.imgur.com/ZRgwxQl.jpg[/IMG]
Mantle on Steambox, I wonder[/QUOTE]
And there is Nintendo still playing around with who knows what with their AMD stuff.
Adding the API to the consoles wouldn't be hard, they'd just need to push an OS update, and if they leave their current APIs in, it would give developers options. I can sort of see why AMD would want this, but just improving OpenGL/ DirectX on their platform would still feel a lot moor reasonable instead of a whole damn new specification.
Why are people saying putting this on consoles. Consoles don't need this since they have low level access anyways.
I think carmack means they'd be hostile to the steambox itself.
[QUOTE=gman003-main;42311075]If they wanted to make a fast, low-level API, they're already members of the OpenGL ARB (along with Nvidia, Intel, Imagination (the PowerVR guys), ARM, Qualcomm and others). They could have proposed something through that [/QUOTE]
But isn't that exactly the problem? Whenever AMD would want to implement a change they have to convince a committee - one made up of their competitors. I also don't see how Mantle will be any lower level than OpenGL already is but the freedom to iterate and implement quickly has got to be an advantage.
[QUOTE=Brt5470;42311371]Why are people saying putting this on consoles. Consoles don't need this since they have low level access anyways.
I think carmack means they'd be hostile to the steambox itself.[/QUOTE]
Yeah, they've always had low level access, but it was never uniform across all platforms before.
Looks like since they saw all the support Linux is getting that they might as well dominate that market as well by offering an alternative to OpenGL.
[QUOTE=subenji99;42311473]But isn't that exactly the problem? Whenever AMD would want to implement a change they have to convince a committee - one made up of their competitors. I also don't see how Mantle will be any lower level than OpenGL already is but the freedom to iterate and implement quickly has got to be an advantage.[/QUOTE]
OpenGL has mechanisms for that - anyone, technically even I, can create an extension to expose new functionality. Those may eventually be released as "standard" extensions after being reviewed by the ARB, or eventually incorporated into the language standard. But for quick iteration, extensions work.
Besides, by that argument Mantle is an even less attractive API to Nvidia and game developers, since they have even less control over it than AMD does over OpenGL.
Hahaha holy hell what does the title even mean to normal uninitiated people
[editline]e[/editline]
Some of the buzzwords in this thread read like horse_ebooks tweets
And then NVidia does like amd did with PhysX:
"No thanks don't want."
[QUOTE=Doomish;42311520]Hahaha holy hell what does the title even mean to normal uninitiated people
[editline]e[/editline]
Some of the buzzwords in this thread read like horse_ebooks tweets[/QUOTE]
On laymen terms:
"AMD makes thingies for developers to write fast code for AMD products! Competitors allowed to use too."
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.