AMD unveils "Mantle", an open graphics API that allows console like direct to metal optimization on
126 replies, posted
[QUOTE=Doomish;42311520]Hahaha holy hell what does the title even mean to normal uninitiated people[/QUOTE]
It means your accelerator pedal is cabled directly to the throttle valve rather than passing a signal to the ECU
I wish I knew half of what people here are saying.
Please don't rate me dumb.
I think you're all missing one important detail:
AMD thinks the center of the earth is made of gamecubes
Guy's its going to be awesome, I was at an NDA Conference and the way they described it and our steambox discussion which I dunno if thats still NDA but Valve and AMD have communicated can't say much more.
[thumb]http://u.cubeupload.com/cubemanpro/201309241631311561.jpg[/thumb]
[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]
Jargon isn't buzzwords if it's used correctly like in here.
i'm kind of interested in how they're pushing 9 times the amount of dcalls. then again i have no idea how their architecture works
i hope games like halo can take advantage of using the mantle so we can finally get them on our SteamC's
at least they had the courtesy to support HLSL instead of making some new shit
Im waiting to see it in action before i judge it.
[QUOTE=MacD11;42312052]Im waiting to see it in action before i judge it.[/QUOTE]
lol it's not like it's going to be some major graphical change. all it means is a (hopefully much) more optimized version of BF4
[QUOTE=gman003-main;42311501]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.[/QUOTE]
However, as capable as opengl is, at the end of the day, it's still a general purpose graphics API and not one that's made specifically for games. That's why Direct3D has always been the more popular choice. It's just more suitable for games than general purpose API's.
[editline]25th September 2013[/editline]
I swear most of you linux guys are like richard stallman, even if you don't see it. Just because something is free or open, it doesn't mean it's an attractive option for devs. The most attractive features for devs are ease of use and how much time it's going to save them (by either having pre-written game specific routines, data structures, object classes, etc or by reducing the time they need to spend optimizing the game).
Too lazy to paraphrase so im just gonna copy paste:
[QUOTE]In general, Direct3D is designed to virtualize 3D hardware interfaces. Direct3D frees the game programmer from accommodating the graphics hardware. OpenGL, on the other hand, is designed to be a 3D hardware-accelerated rendering system that may be emulated in software. These two APIs are fundamentally designed under two separate modes of thought.
As such, there are functional differences in how the two APIs work. Direct3D expects the application to manage hardware resources; OpenGL makes the implementation do it. This tradeoff for OpenGL decreases difficulty in developing for the API, while at the same time increasing the complexity of creating an implementation (or driver) that performs well. With Direct3D, the developer must manage hardware resources independently; however, the implementation is simpler, and developers have the flexibility to allocate resources in the most efficient way possible for their application.[/QUOTE]
This could very well become the next big thing for games (if it delivers on its promises).
If the 290x really is way cheaper than a Titan and really can play modern maxed out games at a 4K resolution then damn, AMD are on the ball here.
[QUOTE=aydin690;42312176]However, as capable as opengl is, at the end of the day, it's still a general purpose graphics API and not one that's made specifically for games. That's why Direct3D has always been the more popular choice. It's just more suitable for games than general purpose API's.
[editline]25th September 2013[/editline]
I swear most of you linux guys are like richard stallman, even if you don't see it. Just because something is free or open, it doesn't mean it's an attractive option for devs. The most attractive features for devs are ease of use and how much time it's going to save them (by either having pre-written game specific routines, data structures, object classes, etc or by reducing the time they need to spend optimizing the game).
Too lazy to paraphrase so im just gonna copy paste:
This could very well become the next big thing for games (if it delivers on its promises).[/QUOTE]
So what makes OpenGL not a "game API" but Direct3D a "game API"?
Direct3D can be run in software too, no idea what that has to do with anything.
I like how the Frostbite logo changed throughout the years.
[T]http://images5.alphacoders.com/400/400338.jpg[/T]
They completely shattered it.
so can someone explain wthat this means to a dumb idiot like me
[editline]26th September 2013[/editline]
[QUOTE=Doctor Dave;42312365]I like how the Frostbite logo changed throughout the years.
[T]http://images5.alphacoders.com/400/400338.jpg[/T]
They completely shattered it.[/QUOTE]
thats what dubstep does to logos
[QUOTE=TheDecryptor;42312363]So what makes OpenGL not a "game API" but Direct3D a "game API"?
Direct3D can be run in software too, no idea what that has to do with anything.[/QUOTE]
The fact that it was created with the sole purpose of being used in games makes it a 'game api'. Also, i don't know any graphical software that uses direct3d. Care to name a few?
[editline]25th September 2013[/editline]
[QUOTE=Vedicardi;42312378]so can someone explain wthat this means to a dumb idiot like me[/QUOTE]
The code that runs directly on the gpu.
[QUOTE=aydin690;42312489]The fact that it was created with the sole purpose of being used in games makes it a 'game api'. Also, i don't know any graphical software that uses direct3d. Care to name a few?[/QUOTE]
I think the last non-game app that I used that didn't use Direct3D was Crafty (A HL2 map viewer), every other utility or so has used Direct3D.
Firefox uses Direct3D for drawing web pages too.
Whoa wait does that mean BF4 will run on some shitty 7770 better than on my 580?
[QUOTE=qwerty000;42312566]Whoa wait does that mean BF4 will run on some shitty 7770 better than on my 580?[/QUOTE]
what about me with my 5770 :v:
[QUOTE=qwerty000;42312566]Whoa wait does that mean BF4 will run on some shitty 7770 better than on my 580?[/QUOTE]
I'm pretty sure they said Nvidia could use the API too.
[QUOTE=Scot;42312682]I'm pretty sure they said Nvidia could use the API too.[/QUOTE]
But Nvidia would have to implement that in hardware first (I think). Mantle is already built into AMD's 7xxx cards. So theoretically, you could see mid-range AMD 7xxx cards beating much beefier Nvidia cards.
holy shit
[QUOTE=Scot;42312347]If the 290x really is way cheaper than a Titan and really can play modern maxed out games at a 4K resolution then damn, AMD are on the ball here.[/QUOTE]
The die size isn't as big as Titan's, so I'd imagine AMD would make it cheaper, unless it really is a good deal better.
[QUOTE=Pandamobile;42312694]But Nvidia would have to implement that in hardware first. Mantle is already built into AMD's 7xxx cards. So theoretically, you could see mid-range AMD 7xxx cards beating much beefier Nvidia cards.
holy shit[/QUOTE]
I can't really see nvidia letting them get away with that, they'll no doubt take mantle and apply it their own way. they're pretty good at what they do.
What is happening D:
First nvidia says that they will be nicer to linux by releasing documentation.
Now this? Feels like the hardware developers feel like they need to rape the console market this generation to get a headstart against M$ and Sony
[QUOTE=Scot;42312682]I'm pretty sure they said Nvidia could use the API too.[/QUOTE]
yeah
only on newest cards I bet
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;42312742]I can't really see nvidia letting them get away with that, they'll no doubt take mantle and apply it their own way. they're pretty good at what they do.[/QUOTE]
I hope Nvidia just accepts the standard that AMD sets. If AMD and Nvidia are running different APIs, devs will have to optimize for them differently.
[QUOTE=Pandamobile;42312694]But Nvidia would have to implement that in hardware first (I think). Mantle is already built into AMD's 7xxx cards. So theoretically, you could see mid-range AMD 7xxx cards beating much beefier Nvidia cards.
holy shit[/QUOTE]
Does this mean i'm going to have to buy BF4 to justify my 7970?
[QUOTE=TheDecryptor;42312540]Firefox uses Direct3D for drawing web pages too.[/QUOTE]
Pretty sure firefox uses azure api and html5 canvas.
[editline]26th September 2013[/editline]
Gecko does have hardware acceleration support for direct3d but that just means if a 3rd party web game/apps uses direct3d, then firefox can use your gpu for it.
[B][I]gfx.direct2d.disabled[/I] [Boolean][/B] (turn it on/off)
[B][I]layers.prefer-d3d9[/I] [Boolean][/B] (change it from Direct3D10 to dx9)
[B][I]layers.prefer-opengl[/I] [Boolean][/B] (If this preference is set to True then OpenGL rendering mode will be implemented. However Direct3D is native to Windows and much faster, so this option should generally not be changed from its default of False.)
Guess I'll wait and see. BF4 doesn't even interest me much.
[QUOTE=aydin690;42312831]Pretty sure firefox uses azure api and html5 canvas.
[editline]26th September 2013[/editline]
Gecko does have hardware acceleration support for direct3d but that just means if a 3rd party web game/apps uses direct3d, then firefox can use your gpu for it.
[B][I]gfx.direct2d.disabled[/I] [Boolean][/B] (turn it on/off)
[B][I]layers.prefer-d3d9[/I] [Boolean][/B] (change it from Direct3D10 to dx9)
[B][I]layers.prefer-opengl[/I] [Boolean][/B] (If this preference is set to True then OpenGL rendering mode will be implemented. However Direct3D is native to Windows and much faster, so this option should generally not be changed from its default of False.)[/QUOTE]
The only thing right here is that you can make Firefox use OpenGL (Which is disabled by default because outside of Nvidia/AMD, OpenGL support is spoty, which is also why most games use Direct3D, not because it's necessarily better, but because Microsoft have better support from cheap hardware makers).
"Azure" Is just their name for the internal mapping of system drawing APIs, on Windows 7 Azure uses Direct2D, on XP it uses Cairo, on OS X it uses Quartz, etc.. Firefox doesn't "use" <canvas> either, it implements it.
Either way, it uses Direct3D to show page contents if possible, otherwise it falls back to software compositing, even WebGL is implemented on top of Direct3D.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.