AMDs Mantle

[spaceelf]

Paid OS-tied updates are the same as free open API spec releases? Riiiight.

We're talking about Vista onward either way.  11.1 and 11.2 aren't terribly relevant yet.

 

It's not so much about driving OS sales so much as the work required to backport WDDM.

[vcfan]

Simple, the "thickness" of the abstraction. In much the same way as low vs high level programming languages.

it could be as thin as mantle can be. the low level API wouldn't be converted to existing HAL calls. The HAL would be updated itself.

LL API-> LL HAL calls -> Driver -> Hardware

[Athernar]

We're talking about Vista onward either way.  11.1 and 11.2 aren't terribly relevant yet.

 

It's not so much about driving OS sales so much as the work required to backport WDDM.

 

I could understand with DirectX 10/Vista, with latter releases however it's most certainly an artificial limitation.

 

Really at the end of the day, if Microsoft don't want to take the time to backport stuff that's fine. But if that's the position they're going to take, we should look elsewhere for our APIs.

 

it could be as thin as mantle can be. the low level API wouldn't be converted to existing HAL calls. The HAL would be updated itself.

LL API-> LL HAL calls -> Driver -> Hardware

 

There is no doubt either DX or OGL could be as thin, but currently they're not. OpenGL lacks the momentum currently and DirectX is Windows-tied, and as mentioned above - they don't particularly care for backporting.

 

If Mantle is a short fad that dethrones DirectX for long enough so that OpenGL can get itself into shape, then so be it. All I'm really interested in is a cross-platform API that isn't tied to Microsoft's latest OS.

[Max Norris]

Paid OS-tied updates are the same as free open API spec releases? Riiiight.

Some of those "free API spec releases" require OS updates too. Paid, free, it's still a required OS update. You said it was "driving" Windows sales, but I've yet to see any game that actually requires anything higher than 10, and that's a pretty small selection at that. How is that driving anything when nobody's actually forcing you to do it, Microsoft or third party? It's still just pissing in the wind to bash Microsoft, it really still doesn't matter as DirectX, OpenGL, Mantle.. it's all covered.

[vcfan]

There is no doubt either DX or OGL could be as thin, but currently they're not. OpenGL lacks the momentum currently and DirectX is Windows-tied, and as mentioned above - they don't particularly care for backporting.

 

If Mantle is a short fad that dethrones DirectX for long enough so that OpenGL can get itself into shape, then so be it. All I'm really interested in is a cross-platform API that isn't tied to Microsoft's latest OS.

so if the LL DX addition gets released,and mantle is in its current state, and NVidia isn't on board, what do you suppose are its chances? I would personally say it would be dead.  mantle has a tiny window of opportunity, with massive amounts of things to accomplish. I say,good luck AMD.

[Athernar]

Some of those "free API spec releases" require OS updates too. Paid, free, it's still a required OS update. You said it was "driving" Windows sales, but I've yet to see any game that actually requires anything higher than 10, and that's a pretty small selection at that. How is that driving anything when nobody's actually forcing you to do it, Microsoft or third party? It's still just ****ing in the wind to bash Microsoft, it really still doesn't matter as DirectX, OpenGL, Mantle.. it's all covered.

 

Are you being intentionally obtuse again? I think I was quite clear the issue was Microsoft tying DirectX releases to new Windows releases and refusing to backport. Not that updates are required, that argument doesn't even make any sense.

 

so if the LL DX addition gets released,and mantle is in its current state, and NVidia isn't on board, what do you suppose are its chances? I would personally say it would be dead.  mantle has a tiny window of opportunity, with massive amounts of things to accomplish. I say,good luck AMD.

 

Microsoft's modus operandi is releasing DirectX updates with their OS releases, so at the very least we won't see anything out of Microsoft until 8.2 or 9, so I think timeframe wise AMD are fine.

 

The pivotal question in my opinion is the perf impact Mantle will have when it's in the hands of PC gamers. If Mantle can capture focus as the next big thing for "moar fps", then I think NVidia will likely bow to consumer pressure - that is if they don't support it beforehand.

[vcfan]

Microsoft's modus operandi is releasing DirectX updates with their OS releases, so at the very least we won't see anything out of Microsoft until 8.2 or 9, so I think timeframe wise AMD are fine.

 

The pivotal question in my opinion is the perf impact Mantle will have when it's in the hands of PC gamers. If Mantle can capture focus as the next big thing for "moar fps", then I think NVidia will likely bow to consumer pressure - that is if they don't support it beforehand.

 

isnt 8.2(or 8.5) supposed to be released sometime by spring 2014? thats a small window,like i said.

[Max Norris]

Are you being intentionally obtuse again? I think I was quite clear the issue was Microsoft tying DirectX releases to new Windows releases and refusing to backport.

Yes, we got that.. I'm just trying to get you to show an example where it actually matters. For the third time... name a game that requires DirectX 11 or higher.

 

Not that updates are required, that argument doesn't even make any sense.

Sure it does. Let's say, just for the sake of argument, that my preferred OS of choice is Ubuntu 10.04. I don't want to switch to a different OS and I hate what they did with the desktop in later versions and I don't want to deal with questionable ports as my software may not work with it, so I'm staying there. You know, mirroring "they can pry Windows __ out of my cold dead hands, I'm sticking with XP." Now suppose I want the latest OpenGL. Oh, I can't, I need to update the OS first because my video card drivers don't support this old version of the OS or the display server. Oh look, forced upgrades and no backports.

[Athernar]

isnt 8.2(or 8.5) supposed to be released sometime by spring 2014? thats a small window,like i said.

 

Mantle already has some pretty impressive support today, factoring in cross-platform potential I don't think it's all too tight. All it really needs is that initial memetic "wow" factor.

 

Yes, we got that.. I'm just trying to get you to show an example where it actually matters. For the third time... name a game that requires DirectX 11 or higher.

 

Sure it does. Let's say, just for the sake of argument, that my preferred OS of choice is Ubuntu 10.04. I don't want to switch to a different OS and I hate what they did with the desktop in later versions and I don't want to deal with questionable ports as my software may not work with it, so I'm staying there. You know, mirroring "they can pry Windows __ out of my cold dead hands, I'm sticking with XP." Now suppose I want the latest OpenGL. Oh, I can't, I need to update the OS first because my video card drivers don't support this old version of the OS or the display server. Oh look, forced upgrades and no backports.

 

So download the latest sources and build updated packages yourself. Problem solved.

 

Really, your attempts to make the two seem comparable are quite disingenuous. I'm done responding to you.

[+Red King Subscriber²]

New Hardware -> New Windows OS -> New DX API -> Newer more hardware intensive games ->would not run on older hardware if MS ported it back

Ergo, The argument against DX does not work :)

[Athernar]

New Hardware -> New Windows OS -> New DX API -> Newer more hardware intensive games ->would not run on older hardware if MS ported it back

Ergo, The argument against DX does not work :)

 

First flaw in your "logic", games being more hardware intensive has nothing to do with supporting newer API revisions. Compare two games across either end of a console generation for proof of this.

 

Second flaw, remember Microsoft's recently touted Tiled Resources? Exclusive to Windows 8.1 as part of DirectX 11.2, hardware from late 2012 is capable of supporting the technique. Meanwhile, OpenGL has ARB_sparse_texture in 4.4, runs on any OS with supporting hardware once you update your drivers.

 

So yeah, the argument does very much work.

[spaceelf]

I could understand with DirectX 10/Vista, with latter releases however it's most certainly an artificial limitation.

Is it?  What if WDDM 1.2/1.3 require the DWM? Not only is the DWM different in 8, it's also not required for Vista or 7.  Suddenly there's either forcing Vista and 7 users to use the DWM, breaking compatibility, or chopping up parts of the spec making it two different specs.

 

I'm not saying it does, but it's very possible.

[Max Norris]

So download the latest sources and build updated packages yourself. Problem solved.

That's assuming that everything required will actually build properly on that old version of the OS, or won't break existing packages. Besides, you're reaching.. it's just an example of having to upgrade OS's to get newer things. And again.. so what? See below.

 

Really, your attempts to make the two seem comparable are quite disingenuous. I'm done responding to you.

Since after asking you three times for an example where it actually matters you've yet to respond, yea, I'd probably just shut up too.

[HoochieMamma]

For the third time... name a game that requires DirectX 11 or higher.

 

 

Crysis 3? I know it wouldn't even run unless you had a DX11 card.

 

edit: Saints row 4 as well from the looks on it.

[Athernar]

Is it?  What if WDDM 1.3 requires the DWM? Not only is the DWM different in 8, it's also not required for Vista or 7.  Suddenly there's either forcing Vista and 7 users to use the DWM, breaking compatibility, or chopping up parts of the spec making it two different specs.

 

I'm not saying it does, but it's very possible.

 

Ultimately the details of it being purely artificial or pseudo-artificial (I.e. intentionally architecting it in a way that precludes porting) isn't really relevant. Microsoft could have taken steps Vista-onwards to accommodate backports.

 

As with my previous post's example, OpenGL is certainly capable of bringing capability to previous OSes, why can't DirectX too?

[PGHammer]

Actually required an API version is hugely different from requiring a certain OS version...

Not from a hardware POV.  User POV, yes - hardware POV, not at all.

 

From the POV of the hardware (not the user) what OS is being run is irrelevant - otherwise any attempt to reverse-engineer APIs to be OS-neutral (or even hardware-neutral) would be doomed to failure.

 

Yes - true OS-neutrality when it comes to low-level APIs has been rather difficult - however, how much of that is due to attempts to keep the OS as closed to such reverse-engineering (primarily to protect intellectual property) as possible?

 

Designing of an API must take security into consideration, as there is always property rights that have to be taken into consideration.  (That is still true of even OpenGL - how much of OpenGL's lack of progress can be traced to security concerns?)

[+Red King Subscriber²]

First flaw in your "logic", games being more hardware intensive has nothing to do with supporting newer API revisions. Compare two games across either end of a console generation for proof of this.

 

Second flaw, remember Microsoft's recently touted Tiled Resources? Exclusive to Windows 8.1 as part of DirectX 11.2, hardware from late 2012 is capable of supporting the technique. Meanwhile, OpenGL has ARB_sparse_texture in 4.4, runs on any OS with supporting hardware once you update your drivers.

 

So yeah, the argument does very much work.

People upgrade hardware and operating systems. It is a non issue. Those that don't are not gamers - they are businesses.

 

Having any graphics API support obsolete operating systems makes no sense. Outside of anti-closed source advocates, the idea of say, DX11.2+ on 98/2000/XP/Vista/7 does not make sense.

 

I am alright with Mantle providing incentive to improve DirectX as long as it is DirectX on Windows 9.

 

I just hope that by the time I muster the courage to do graphics in Windows, it won't be a wasted investment.

Edited November 17, 2013 by _Alexander

[Athernar]

People upgrade hardware and operating systems. It is a non issue. Those that don't are not gamers - they are businesses.

 

Having any graphics API support obsolete operating systems makes no sense. Outside of anti-closed source advocates, the idea of say, DX11.2+ on 98/2000/XP/Vista/7 does not make sense.

 

I am alright with Mantle providing incentive to improve DirectX as long as it is DirectX on Windows 9.

 

I just hope that by the time I muster the courage to do graphics in Windows, it won't be a wasted investment.

 

Go on then, give me one good technical explanation as to why supporting DirectX 11.2 on Vista/7 does not make sense.

 

Oh wait, you can't because there isn't one. Oops!

 

Well, unless of course you want to admit DirectX is fundamentally flawed and OpenGL is the better API.

[+Red King Subscriber²]

Go on then, give me one good technical explanation as to why supporting DirectX 11.2 on Vista/7 does not make sense.

 

Oh wait, you can't because there isn't one. Oops!

 

Well, unless of course you want to admit DirectX is fundamentally flawed and OpenGL is the better API.

O.o

 

It is 2013? It is wasted effort to add features to dead operating systems?

I don't even know what else to say. Same exact reasons why software and hardware up their requirements.

This may be off topic as "either you are on cutting edge or your are a problem" is too 'meh'

 

Can't say anything about Mantle, but OpenGL is not better than DirectX on Windows.

Needless to say this is not programming experience bases, but gaming experience based.

[PGHammer]

Paid OS-tied updates are the same as free open API spec releases? Riiiight.

 

 

Simple, the "thickness" of the abstraction. In much the same way as low vs high level programming languages.

The thickness (or lack thereof) may not be relevant if competitors (such as nVidia or Intel in the case of Mantle) don't pick up on the API due to either perception/reality that it favors AMD hardware (whether it actually does or not) or simply to muddy the water by throwing in a competing API that is tied to THEIR hardware - wasn't that, in fact, precisely  the reason why Wayland ran aground? (Wayland was perceived to favor Intel hardware - specifically, their integrated GPUs on Sandy Bridge and later; hence AMD and nVidia both balking at supporting it.  Notice i'm not saying that the perception was even true; however, the balk, on the part of both companies, is there.)

[Athernar]

O.o

 

It is 2013? It is wasted effort to add features to dead operating systems?

I don't even know what else to say. Same exact reasons why software and hardware up their requirements.

This may be off topic as "either you are on cutting edge or your are a problem" is too 'meh'

 

Can't say anything about Mantle, but OpenGL is not better than DirectX on Windows.

Needless to say this is not programming experience bases, but gaming experience based.

 

If 7 is dead, so is 8/8.1. Since they're largely the same tech.

 

Either way, if OpenGL can bring support for "Tiled Resources" to current and older Windows OSes with nothing more than driver update, then it is clearly the superior API.

 

So I guess that means you're supporting a "dead" API?

 

The thickness (or lack thereof) may not be relevant if competitors (such as nVidia or Intel in the case of Mantle) don't pick up on the API due to either perception/reality that it favors AMD hardware (whether it actually does or not) or simply to muddy the water by throwing in a competing API that is tied to THEIR hardware - wasn't that, in fact, precisely  the reason why Wayland ran aground? (Wayland was perceived to favor Intel hardware - specifically, their integrated GPUs on Sandy Bridge and later; hence AMD and nVidia both balking at supporting it.  Notice i'm not saying that the perception was even true; however, the balk, on the part of both companies, is there.)

 

Uh, I don't know what you've been reading lately but Wayland has hardly "ran aground". If anything after the whole Mir debacle it's stronger than ever, and we're beginning to see first light on stable Wayland-supporting DEs. I also highly doubt AMD or NVidia are particularly concerned about a potential performance bias towards Intel IGPs. (Not to mention there isn't anything they can't fix by contributing patches)

 

Since it's the game devs who have called for Mantle in the first place, NVidia would be wise to play the long game and jump on board, even if their support is brief. Dethroning DirectX is in the interests of both hardware vendors.

[123456789A]

Pretty sure the Nintendo 64 was capable of 150,000 per second.

[Pupik]

Pretty sure the Nintendo 64 was capable of 150,000 per second.

I'm not sure how true is that about that N64 capability, but the article said 100k calls per frame. Not second.

[PGHammer]

If 7 is dead, so is 8/8.1. Since they're largely the same tech.

 

Either way, if OpenGL can bring support for "Tiled Resources" to current and older Windows OSes with nothing more than driver update, then it is clearly the superior API.

 

So I guess that means you're supporting a "dead" API?

 

 

Uh, I don't know what you've been reading lately but Wayland has hardly "ran aground". If anything after the whole Mir debacle it's stronger than ever, and we're beginning to see first light on stable Wayland-supporting DEs. I also highly doubt AMD or NVidia are particularly concerned about a potential performance bias towards Intel IGPs. (Not to mention there isn't anything they can't fix by contributing patches)

 

Since it's the game devs who have called for Mantle in the first place, NVidia would be wise to play the long game and jump on board, even if their support is brief. Dethroning DirectX is in the interests of both hardware vendors.

 

Only if developers (outside of the usual anti-closed-source suspects) pick up on it AND consoles support it.

 

Right now, you have three target API types for gaming developers - console-type APIs, DirectX, and Source.  Right now, console APIs and DirectX are similar enough that the same development tools can target both - and that is without the Mantle API.  Source, while platform-neutral, has replaced DirectX as the lowest-denominator API for game developers - however, the only reason to target Source is to target those that want no part of Windows 7 or newer technologies; however, from a numbers standpoint, it makes more sense to target MOBILE development than the Source Engine (as an API) - that doubtless explains the rise in mobile game development compared even to traditional PC game development, especially among independent gaming developers.  Unless SteamOS succeeds, Source is going to remain a niche target - it may find itself falling even further behind mobile-OS APIs, such as iOS and Android, if SteamOS bombs.

 

Look at multi-platform games just over PS3/XB360/PC and now PS4/XB1/PC - what differences are there in terms of development or even targeted hardware?  The differences between consoles and PCs have shrunk massively with "next-gen"  and the remaining differences are due entirely to the nature of the display targets.  In fact, expect FAR more data to back up that point this week and next, as the five day window between NFS Rivals on PS4 and PC goes away (this week), and the one week window between PC and XB1 (same game) goes away next week.  Two consoles and the PC - yet the differences are down to nitpicks - and that is without Mantle.  (While Frostbite 3 supports Mantle, there is no evidence that Mantle was used for Rivals - despite DICE being involved with both games, and both games using the same engine.  If Mantle was NOT used in NFS Rivals, then Mantle itself may not even be relevant for multi-platform development; Frostbite 3 and similar game engines, including CryENGINE, however, may be more relevant than API targeting.)

[spaceelf]

there is no evidence that Mantle was used for Rivals

http://techreport.com/news/25651/mantle-to-power-15-frostbite-games-dice-calls-for-multi-vendor-support

See this page?  It's a happy page!  We would all be lucky to be as happy as it is.  (No points if you don't get the reference.)

 

So yes, Mantle won't be with Rivals at launch, but it is most definitely coming to it.