TR Forums

http://www.anandtech.com/show/9036/amd-lays-out-future-of-mantle-changing-direction-in-face-of-dx12-and-glnext
also
http://www.pcper.com/news/Graphics-Cards/GDC-15-AMD-Mantle-Might-Be-Dead-We-Know-It-No-Public-SDK-Planned
and
http://www.pcworld.com/article/2891672/amds-mantle-10-is-dead-long-live-directx.html

As originally planned, AMD is transitioning Mantle application development from a closed beta to a (quasi) released product – via the release of a programming guide and API reference this month – however AMD’s broader plans to also release a Mantle SDK to allow full access, particularly allowing it to be implemented on other hardware, has been shelved. In place of that AMD is refocusing Mantle on being a “graphics innovation platform” to develop new technologies.

mantle was never an open api as nobody else could use it unless they released v1 of the sdk (which wasnt released)

Thie biggest change here is that any plans to make Mantle open have been put on hold for the moment with the cancellation of the Mantle SDK

so now mantle is a proprietary spec for amd only

Aaah, that should shut a few people up.

But not you unfortunately,which is a damn shame.

Mantle seem to have been a success even so it never became a public API.
Going forward we have Dx12 and Opengl next covering pretty well the PC industry, so Mantle can be kept as an internal API for AMD HW development.

Microsoft ignored us, OpenGL consortium had no spine... so all I can say is *** THANK YOU AMD *** for making it all happen.

I wouldnt be surprise if we see tech demo based on future version of Mantle to be later adopter much later, again, by Dx and OGL ...

Keep pushing the envelope AMD!!!

sschaem wrote:

Microsoft ignored us

except that DX12 was under development in its current form *before* Mantle was announced

Given that, it's basically dead.

Firestarter wrote:

except that DX12 was under development in its current form *before* Mantle was announced

Was it? We have heard nothing from Microsoft on the issue. Some parts of it may have been, but I highly doubt any serious effort was underway.

Honestly I see the NVIDIA fans and the AMD fans as a little ridiculous on this. Until I hear it straight from MS, I'm not assuming either side is entirely correct.

Savyg wrote:

Firestarter wrote:

except that DX12 was under development in its current form *before* Mantle was announced

Was it? We have heard nothing from Microsoft on the issue. Some parts of it may have been, but I highly doubt any serious effort was underway.

IMO, given that DX 11.1 was released quite a while ago, and that it's implausible that MS started from scratch and completed the DX12 spec + API beta in the few months since Mantle was announced, it's reasonable safe to say that yes, they started at the same time or before AMD.

Meadows wrote:

Aaah, that should shut a few people up.

Lol, not likely. Fanbois will be fanbois and damn the facts.

BTW, the title of the thread is a bit wrong. It should be:

mantle "open api" and sdk shelved - remains proprietary

morphine wrote:

IMO, given that DX 11.1 was released quite a while ago, and that it's implausible that MS started from scratch and completed the DX12 spec + API beta in the few months since Mantle was announced, it's reasonable safe to say that yes, they started at the same time or before AMD.

It's weird how many people think that development is directly tied to announcements...even with a rockstar engineering team, it takes a lot of time to get a product to market. As product complexity increases, man hours increase as well.

superjawes wrote:

It's weird how many people think that development is directly tied to announcements...even with a rockstar engineering team, it takes a lot of time to get a product to market. As product complexity increases, man hours increase as well.

Precisely, that's why I think that DX12 development had nothing at all to do with Mantle. The timeframes just don't look reasonable.

Whether or not Mantle directly affected DX12 development, the current situation is the best thing that could happen from a gamer's perspective. AMD's decision will stop forking game development, now future games will be DX12 optimized and gamers can reap the exact benefits of Mantle across all DX12 games.

I'd like to think that Mantle did put pressure on Microsoft to get its act together. DX11 has been around since Windows 7 launched six years ago, and Microsoft only began talking about DX12 a year after Mantle development had begun.

Savyg wrote:

Firestarter wrote:

except that DX12 was under development in its current form *before* Mantle was announced

Was it? We have heard nothing from Microsoft on the issue. Some parts of it may have been, but I highly doubt any serious effort was underway.

Honestly I see the NVIDIA fans and the AMD fans as a little ridiculous on this. Until I hear it straight from MS, I'm not assuming either side is entirely correct.

Why would you expect Msft to come out with information on DX12 before they even got into the details of Win10. I think it's clear that Msft wasn't going to release DX12 on Win7 or Win8/8.1 and details on Win10 were slim before Mantle was announced. So why is it hard to believe that work was underway inside Microsoft on Win10 and DirectX 12 before Mantle was announced. Even Nvidia says that's the case. Only AMD pretends otherwise and they have an invested interest in pushing Mantle as the BEST solution, but it seems that Intel and Nvidia don't believe it's good enough for them to use over DirectX12.

Nvidia would rather become bankrupt before using anything that AMD launched. They try their hardest to only use their own tech that will net them money and royalties. G-Sync anyone...

Now, if DX12 and the new OpenGL API actually solves the same problems as Mantle did, AMD is doing both the right and the smart thing in using it internally or for those that request it which is a way of trying to keep the market from splintering. Same with Freesync really. Hey, we wan't this functionality, but lets all use the same thing for compatibility reason. Where's Nvidia is more... use our stuff, compatibility be damned, as long as we get your monies. They do make good stuff, but it really annoys me that they make it just that much harder for consumers by choice instead of actually letting their products do the work.

Aphasia wrote:

G-Sync anyone...

Which is still the only tech available on the market as of today...

Well, Display makers basically hade to do a full new iteration of the chipsets to support the display-port spec, so taking an extra product in between their normal updates wasn't feasiable. Should be available in march accourding to the CES and TR article from January though.

http://techreport.com/news/27650/here-2 ... e-new-info

Right. But saying that nVidia wasn't playing nice with the competition isn't quite a fair statement since as of right now there is no available competition. We'll see whether ActiveSync works as well as gSync and then wait for nVidia to announce whether they will support if. If it does work well, and they say that they won't, then your statement would be true. Not enough information to make that claim yet though.

morphine wrote:

superjawes wrote:

It's weird how many people think that development is directly tied to announcements...even with a rockstar engineering team, it takes a lot of time to get a product to market. As product complexity increases, man hours increase as well.

Precisely, that's why I think that DX12 development had nothing at all to do with Mantle. The timeframes just don't look reasonable.

Comes from people who've never done professional programming (or likely programming ever). Microsoft does not just start coding. There's a ton of paperwork to do. Microsoft was too far along in the build process when they announced DX12 for Mantle to have had any sway at all.

A very old story from Joel on Software detailing his use of a development spec at Microsoft and being challenged on it before coding began.

Aphaisa wrote:

Well, Display makers basically hade to do a full new iteration of the chipsets to support the display-port spec, so taking an extra product in between their normal updates wasn't feasiable. Should be available in march accourding to the CES and TR article from January though.

As has been noted in other threads dedicated to the subject, it might not end up as "free" as people hope. At current it looks like the display controller vendors only built one type of controller out of their stable of products just to support this optional feature to make gamers happy. Anything with gamers in the name tends to attract a price premium. I will be pleasantly surprised if FreeSync is cheaper, but I fully expect it to charge a premium and might even match the same $150 premium as GSync. The market has already seen people are willing to pay the premium and that tends to entice companies to follow the money. At which point all the hub bub about it being "open and free" really kind of evaporates when their is no cost advantage.

Wild Thing wrote:

But not you unfortunately,which is a damn shame.

How rude!

End User wrote:

Wild Thing wrote:

But not you unfortunately,which is a damn shame.

How rude!

Yes, I missed that. Let's try to keep civil here.

Aphasia wrote:

Nvidia would rather become bankrupt before using anything that AMD launched. They try their hardest to only use their own tech that will net them money and royalties. G-Sync anyone...

Why yes, thank you... I'm quite happy with it.

Aphasia wrote:

Now, if DX12 and the new OpenGL API actually solves the same problems as Mantle did

It does, and is quite comparable in it's current state. http://www.anandtech.com/show/8962/the-directx-12-performance-preview-amd-nvidia-star-swarm/3 And maybe Nvidia new what was coming from DX 12 and decided not to waste resources solving the same issues that Microsoft was working on. Resources that a company struggling for a bigger share of the market (AMD is around 24% if I remember correctly) might have been better used on other projects.

Are you really sure about that. Getting a new API out and a good one at that together with some support for the devs is a good way to get dev support. If a bunch of games suddenly start supporting mantle and NVidia is stuck on DX11, you kindof get a pretty decent mindshare. And actually furthering the graphics community is never a waste, if perhaps not the most economical. Without those same incentives, open source would have a harder time. And from what the article on Anand said, Mantle 1.0 tech is part of Vulcan as well, even if the development from hear might be closed and only for initiated parties. I find AMD as a company to be way more open then both Nvidia and Intel at times, although Intel do a whole lot of research. But remember the x64 instruction set, that was AMD as well.

Ryu - As for monitormakers taking a premium out of the Freesync even if cost of adding it is that high, that is something you can't pin om AMD, while G-Sync can be pinned for the cost, because it requires extra hardware which NVidia is in sole control of. Freesync only requires that a certain subset of the displayport standards is follows, hence no royalties or chips, and they do the freesync certification for free as well. But yeah, it would be a shame if it would be to expensive just for the sake of it.

With regards to Mantle - guess well see on Thursday since they said something about having AMD tell us more on GRC on the 5th.

nanoflower wrote:

Why would you expect Msft to come out with information on DX12 before they even got into the details of Win10. I think it's clear that Msft wasn't going to release DX12 on Win7 or Win8/8.1 and details on Win10 were slim before Mantle was announced. So why is it hard to believe that work was underway inside Microsoft on Win10 and DirectX 12 before Mantle was announced. Even Nvidia says that's the case. Only AMD pretends otherwise and they have an invested interest in pushing Mantle as the BEST solution, but it seems that Intel and Nvidia don't believe it's good enough for them to use over DirectX12.

Because they announced the underpinnings of it (WDDM 2.0) YEARS ago. And yet, nothing happened.

Yes, that's part of DX12. But that doesn't mean DX12 was really in full development.

I am not choosing to believe one AMD guy or one NVIDIA guy on this issue. To me, the silence speaks for itself.

If I were MS, I would've waited until people were actually adopting DX11 in the first place to start work on it.

Not much point releasing DX12 if everyone's still using 9.

Savyg wrote:

If I were MS, I would've waited until people were actually adopting DX11 in the first place to start work on it.

Not much point releasing DX12 if everyone's still using 9.

That cuts both ways. Then game developers would just stick with DX9 because they would see less reason for moving onto DX11 to begin with. And arguably, DX12 fixes what's DirectX's top problem right now.

Woopididoo

morphine wrote:

That cuts both ways. Then game developers would just stick with DX9 because they would see less reason for moving onto DX11 to begin with. And arguably, DX12 fixes what's DirectX's top problem right now.

10 and 11 also had significant advancements for performance.

Though agreed, it does fix dx11's top problem.

Either way, whatever works. I was happy to see Mantle and I'll be just as happy to see the next DX and OGL.

Savyg wrote:

Firestarter wrote:

except that DX12 was under development in its current form *before* Mantle was announced

Was it? We have heard nothing from Microsoft on the issue. Some parts of it may have been, but I highly doubt any serious effort was underway.

Honestly I see the NVIDIA fans and the AMD fans as a little ridiculous on this. Until I hear it straight from MS, I'm not assuming either side is entirely correct.

Who cares? We have DX12 which makes a ton of improvements. I honestly don't give two craps who came up with it. It's better tech for everyone on Windows, which I use to play games, so that is awesome.

Savyg wrote:

If I were MS, I would've waited until people were actually adopting DX11 in the first place to start work on it.

Not much point releasing DX12 if everyone's still using 9.

So you want to be stuck in Xbox 360/PS3 land forever? (i promise i'm not picking on you, those are just the two things that stuck out to me)

DancinJack wrote:

So you want to be stuck in Xbox 360/PS3 land forever? (i promise i'm not picking on you, those are just the two things that stuck out to me)

You've known me what ten minutes then? I have been irritated about this since dx11 came out. for years.

Right now, fortunately, there are only a few major developers that haven't updated their ****.

Savyg wrote:

You've known me what ten minutes then? I have been irritated about this since dx11 came out. for years.

Right now, fortunately, there are only a few major developers that haven't updated their ****.

I don't quite understand what you're trying to get across here I guess? I was just saying that just because people don't necessarily use a newer tech, doesn't mean companies/people/whatever shouldn't develop and announce new technology.