AMD proprietary API: Mantle

[Fottemberg]

True, nVidia can create its own API. But Intel? Another API for its own crappy iGPU? So the developers have to create 3 graphic engines for the same game?

I think that the VG developers will use Mantle for console graphic engines and AMD PC GPU, and the DirectX for nVidia and Intel GPU. I hope in Koduri.

[Iconyu]

All I've read about it points at low level access to GCN features. Please feel free to prove otherwise.

On paper, it does provide low level access, yes. And what's at that level? Hardware architecture. Which is completely different across GPU generations, not even talking about hardware manufacturers. This is why OpenGL and DirectX exist, and this is why they are "high level APIs", meaning abstraction from underlying architecture and hardware.

I don't think what you are trying to convey here is even possible.

If you're asking me to prove if Nvidia can even do it on this generation of their hardware, I'm not sure, but I am hopeful. If you're asking to prove they can create the hardware changes if it's impossible for current hardware to take advantage of the API, my answer is yes but only if they are willing to delay Maxwell.

As long as there is a driver in the equation and you know enough about the API Nvidia can use it. But I'd say if Mantle takes off, Nvidia's entire range up until now will be worthless unless they find a way to leverage the API.

This entire generation of GPU are built around being programmable, so it's not hopeless, tweaking the API could expose current Nvidia hardware correctly, but I don't think Nvidia can do the work before December if it is possible. Nvidia does have a low level API but it's for CUDA programming, this is the only reason I think it's possible.

But in all seriousness, how much fix function is left in these cores? Both companies have different API's in the form of StreamSDK and CUDA, from what I've seen of CUDA, it's powerful and flexible.

It's only access, it's not a new extension or a new set of instructions. A bypass of current API loads.

[LordEC911]

It's only access, it's not a new extension or a new set of instructions. A bypass of current API loads.

Yes, access to the underlying architecture which is very different between AMD and Nvidia.

[Iconyu]

Yes, access to the underlying architecture which is very different between AMD and Nvidia.

Aye but that's what the driver is for, you tell the card to do something, it goes through the API, then the driver and then it happens. The API and driver are still there, just a lot lighter in both cases. The simple stuff will be the same, there shouldn't be a need to play with it, but if you're after the jewels you should know the hardware before you start.

People that can code at that level will be able to handle two architectures, if not hire more people.

[DeathReborn]

True, nVidia can create its own API. But Intel? Another API for its own crappy iGPU? So the developers have to create 3 graphic engines for the same game?

I think that the VG developers will use Mantle for console graphic engines and AMD PC GPU, and the DirectX for nVidia and Intel GPU. I hope in Koduri.

Actually thanks to the cross licensing agreements between Intel & nVidia it wouldn't be too hard for them to work together to create a competing API that works just as well on both their architectures.

[Fottemberg]

Actually thanks to the cross licensing agreements between Intel & nVidia it wouldn't be too hard for them to work together to create a competing API that works just as well on both their architectures.

So ... what is the future of DirectX? XD

[LordEC911]

Aye but that's what the driver is for, you tell the card to do something, it goes through the API, then the driver and then it happens. The API and driver are still there, just a lot lighter in both cases. The simple stuff will be the same, there shouldn't be a need to play with it, but if you're after the jewels you should know the hardware before you start.

People that can code at that level will be able to handle two architectures, if not hire more people.

The API is built around GCN though, the driver is for the different implementations/performance of the GCN GPUs.

You are basically suggesting that Nvidia could take AMD's current driver, slightly modify it, and get the same performance as current Nvidia drivers.

[Iconyu]

The API is built around GCN though, the driver is for the different implementations/performance of the GCN GPUs.

You are basically suggesting that Nvidia could take AMD's current driver, slightly modify it, and get the same performance as current Nvidia drivers.

API are interface programs, you don't borrow someone else's driver, you learn how to use the API and write a driver for it.

Game talks to API, API talks to driver, driver talks to hardware.

If Nvidia can support the API, they ask AMD for certain changes to make it easier/possible, then they write a driver. They don't re-write an AMD driver, they just recognise what the API is asking for and tell the hardware to do it.

[MpG]

Honestly not quite understanding the "Open" part of this whole thing.

If there are massive performance gains to be had from this on AMD's architecture, that implies that something in the current API is exceptionally inefficient, so there's a lot of performance to be gained by (more) direct hardware access. And one presumes that Mantle was specifically designed to make it easier to get that access on AMD hardware. But there's absolutely no reason to expect that 1) Nvidia's weak points are the same, or 2) that AMD would have gone out of their way to make their API good at accessing Nvidia's hardware.

But I'm sure if Nvidia was to tell AMD where their weak points are, I'm sure AMD would be delighted to modify their software to help them out.

[N19h7m4r3]

I guess I should have bought that HD7950 on sale instead of the GTX 760 for Battlefield 4....FUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU

I might be picking up a 7950 within a week. just depends on what more details will be available on the r9 290

[Mechromancer]

I might be picking up a 7950 within a week. just depends on what more details will be available on the r9 290

Mantle is ONLY FOR GCN 2.0! Wait to buy an R9 290!!!!!!!!

[bill_d]

Mantle is ONLY FOR GCN 2.0! Wait to buy an R9 290!!!!!!!!

nope
http://www.rage3d.com/board/showpost...&postcount=621

[flopper]

Honestly not quite understanding the "Open" part of this whole thing.

Open means no license.
so Nvidia can either support it with hardware, create their own solution, or do something else.

If Mantle does big things for BF4 in december and Maxwell comes out and still are not reaching the 290 on BF4, I know then where the gaming community will go.

[i found nemo]

lol nvidia running gcn 2.0.. with that said they (nvidia) will opt to make their own softwear, or not bother with the attempt of making a new api specifically for their hardware.

[LightSpeed]

Anand

Interesting information. Especially if its indeed the Xbox One API.

[boxleitnerb]

http://www.pcgameshardware.de/Grafik...eld-4-1090085/

PCGH asked Raja Koduri about Mantle and its "openess". He replied that AMD doesn't see Mantle as an open standard like OpenCL or OpenGL. He also tried to brush aside comparisons with Glide but then stated: If a competitor were to approach AMD to make their own backend and drivers for Mantle, AMD would not dismiss them right away.

That doesn't sound very open to me. In the letter of the word it may be "open", but in the spirit, this thing is clearly proprietary since AMD has the final say over changes/features and who to admit (and who not) and there is no independent group involved in its inception and ongoing development. This leaves a very sour taste in my mouth, no matter the possible advantages.

[stuffme]

http://www.pcgameshardware.de/Grafik...eld-4-1090085/

PCGH asked Raja Koduri about Mantle and its "openess". He replied that AMD doesn't see Mantle as an open standard like OpenCL or OpenGL. He also tried to brush aside comparisons with Glide but then stated: If a competitor were to approach AMD to make their own backend and drivers for Mantle, AMD would not dismiss them right away.

That doesn't sound very open to me. In the letter of the word it may be "open", but in the spirit, this thing is clearly proprietary since AMD has the final say over changes/features and who to admit (and who not) and there is no independent group involved in its inception and ongoing development. This leaves a very sour taste in my mouth, no matter the possible advantages.

Well, I say nvidia can them self and all their proprietary cuda, physx. I hope that, nvidia the sleazebag company deserves everything that is coming. For so many year it has done nothing but slow down the progression of game physics and gpgpu prgramming.

[boxleitnerb]

Well, I say nvidia can them self and all their proprietary cuda, physx. I hope that, nvidia the sleazebag company deserves everything that is coming. For so many year it has done nothing but slow down the progression of game physics and gpgpu prgramming.

You realize that CUDA came before OpenCL? You also realize that it was the old consoles that are to blame since they do not support CUDA or OpenCL, thus could not have supported gpu physics either way?
Happy NV-bashing without thinking, that is what your post is.

You should redirect your criticism towards AMD who think it is a good idea to make a whole basically closed API right now.

[HKPolice]

LOL @ ppl who think Mantle could work on nVidia hardware

This is deja vu, when AMD released x64 extensions and forced Intel to cross licence it for their CPUs. If GCN & Mantle takes over the gaming industry, maybe nVidia will try to licence it
GCN has already conquered the console market for at least another 6-7 years, no reason why it can't take over the PC space since Mantle will make cross platform development SO much easier.

[kl0012]

LOL @ ppl who think Mantle could work on nVidia hardware

This is deja vu, when AMD released x64 extensions and forced Intel to cross licence it for their CPUs. If GCN & Mantle takes over the gaming industry, maybe nVidia will try to licence it
GCN has already conquered the console market for at least another 6-7 years, no reason why it can't take over the PC space since Mantle will make cross platform development SO much easier.

I don't see any parallels with x86-64. GPU is not supposed to be programmed "directly". Even OpenCL and CUDA provides level of abstraction (CUDA even can run on CPU). If Mantle can provide "big" bust in performance over standard APIs it just means that AMD OpenGL and DirectX drivers are not efficient enough. Any way I think it goes nowhere.

[Piledriver]

http://www.pcgameshardware.de/Grafik...eld-4-1090085/

PCGH asked Raja Koduri about Mantle and its "openess". He replied that AMD doesn't see Mantle as an open standard like OpenCL or OpenGL. He also tried to brush aside comparisons with Glide but then stated: If a competitor were to approach AMD to make their own backend and drivers for Mantle, AMD would not dismiss them right away.

That doesn't sound very open to me. In the letter of the word it may be "open", but in the spirit, this thing is clearly proprietary since AMD has the final say over changes/features and who to admit (and who not) and there is no independent group involved in its inception and ongoing development. This leaves a very sour taste in my mouth, no matter the possible advantages.

lol this is hilarious. Why on earth should AMD share his technology with Nvidia? Unlike Nvidia AMD have all type of partnerships, open projects and consortium. Did Physx left you a bad taste in your mouth? You know that thing that brought nothing to the table, just made games look worse o the competition by removing 10 year old effects like smoke to make Nvidia look better?

[gosh]

If there are massive performance gains to be had from this on AMD's architecture, that implies that something in the current API is exceptionally inefficient, so there's a lot of performance to be gained by (more) direct hardware access.

Abstraction has always performance impact. How much obviously depends on technology and the needs, but it can probably be enough to replace small parts to achieve the desired objective. I think one area where there are a lot to gain is if the game want to use more than one render thread. What I have read there is that DirectX isn't that effective and there has to be a lot of workarounds to adapt to take advantage of threads using DirectX (newer versions, older versions doesn't support threading)

[DeathReborn]

lol this is hilarious. Why on earth should AMD share his technology with Nvidia? Unlike Nvidia AMD have all type of partnerships, open projects and consortium. Did Physx left you a bad taste in your mouth? You know that thing that brought nothing to the table, just made games look worse o the competition by removing 10 year old effects like smoke to make Nvidia look better?

AMD may in the future have no choice but to share, regulators tend to stamp their feet when some coin could come their way (EU is prime example). AMD controls the console market now, if Mantle gives them the PC market as well then you can pretty much guarantee that regulators will stamp on AMD without much discussion. I'm not saying it's right or wrong, just how it will likely go if AMD play hardball too much.

[LordEC911]

You should redirect your criticism towards AMD who think it is a good idea to make a whole basically closed API right now.

Well why are you AMD bashing for absolutely no reason?
Did you forget that it was devs asking AMD to create this API?
They aren't forcing it down anyone's throat, which is drastically different from Nvidia's approach in similar situations.

AMD may in the future have no choice but to share, regulators tend to stamp their feet when some coin could come their way (EU is prime example). AMD controls the console market now, if Mantle gives them the PC market as well then you can pretty much guarantee that regulators will stamp on AMD without much discussion. I'm not saying it's right or wrong, just how it will likely go if AMD play hardball too much.

What exactly are "regulators" going to do? Absolutely nothing.

[Piledriver]

AMD may in the future have no choice but to share, regulators tend to stamp their feet when some coin could come their way (EU is prime example). AMD controls the console market now, if Mantle gives them the PC market as well then you can pretty much guarantee that regulators will stamp on AMD without much discussion. I'm not saying it's right or wrong, just how it will likely go if AMD play hardball too much.

What are you talking about, consoles had AMD and Nvidia to choose from, where's the monopoly? And let's wait for BF4 (frostbite engine games) to see how much performance mantle gives to AMD in real world compared to not mantle ready games before anointing AMD the pc market ruler.