Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Read my post, just said I already upgraded to a GTX 780upgrade already, 6xxx is so 2009.
lol
Well, there goes that, then. Guess I'm out of here, Mantle officially does nothing for me
Already upgraded my main rig to a GTX 780, anyway. The GPU bottleneck with an HD 6970 was too severe.
Point still stands, though. Anyone with a decent CPU probably isn't wooed right now.
that's what I was saying earlier...I currently have a 6 core CPU + GTX 580 (1920 x 1200)...the 580 is not the highest end GPU today but Mantle will be basically useless for me...and when I upgrade to Maxwell (or AMD's next refresh) then it'll be even more useless
Assuming you're playing mantle-optimized games, it's cool you can build a rig and save on the CPU costs, maybe dump them into a better GPU.
same here!... fricken staring at the clock right now.... tick tock tick tock tick tock
What gpu do you have?
Unfortunately, I'm willing to bet that Mantle adoption will not be as fast and as widespread as anyone would like, so you'd be shooting yourself in the foot as far as other games (especially cpu intensive games like Civ, Total War, etc.)
Well, that's unfortunate. This use case seemed to me to be the main draw for Mantle.AMD A10-7850K Kaveri APU), 4 cores @3.7 GHz
26.6 ms/f (37.6 fps)
23.3 ms/f (43 fps)
BF4 benchmarks are out, still waiting for more price for benchmark comparisons, more single gpu solutions, and more variation on cpus in that range.
1: Low-end single-player
AMD A10-7850K Kaveri APU), 4 cores @3.7 GHz
No GPU
720p Medium
Windows 7 64-bit
Singapore
26.6 ms/f (37.6 fps)
23.3 ms/f (43 fps)
14% faster
2: 64-player multi-player
AMD FX-8350, 8 cores @4 GHz
AMD Radeon 7970 3 GB
Ultra 1080p
Windows 8 64-bit
Siege of Shanghai
18.87 ms/f (52.9 fps)
15.08 ms/f (66.3 fps)
25.1% faster
3: Multi-GPU singleplayer
Intel Core i7-3970xExtreme, 12 logical cores @ 3.5 GHz
2x AMD Radeon R9
290x 4 GB
Ultra 1080p 4x MSAA
Windows 8 64-bit
South China Sea
13.24 ms/f (78.4 fps)
8.38 ms/f (121.5 fps)
58% faster
Well, that's unfortunate. This use case seemed to me to be the main draw for Mantle.
Don't ever plan on running dual-GPU. Too many issues (not to mention the added noise).
Doesn't look like Mantle will really benefit me. Oh well.
Not really, crossfire overhead isn't THAT bad.
I think what you meant to say is that adding additional GPU's gives you enough headroom that you might end up CPU limited again.
50% increase to what, though? No specifics are given.
If that's a 58% increase to MINIMUM framerate, that's significant.
If minimums are exactly the same, but maximum is higher (thus leading to a 58% in AVERAGE framerate), then it's still worthless to me.
Minimum FPS is the important metric, average can be artificially inflated and doesn't tell me anything.
Edit: Also, the article you linked agrees with the article I linked, here's an expert from the article you just linked:
What I'm seeing, over and over, is if you already have a fast CPU (or you're gaming at decently high resolution), Mantle does almost nothing.
Good to see that the gains per GPU with Mantle scale properly with crossfire.
Well, that's unfortunate. This use case seemed to me to be the main draw for Mantle.
You never know you maybe eating your own words
I wonder to what this could be attributed. Do you know what the scale is of that graph?Look at the graph they posted, it looks enormously smoother even if the raw gain isn't massive.
I really want to see the performance differences at higher than 1080p resolution, Since higher resolutions tend to be more gpu limited, doesn't that mean that mantle will be less of a boost there?
Are these people so disorganized they can't release something at the same time, even after it was delayed an entire month?
I wonder to what this could be attributed. Do you know what the scale is of that graph?
EDIT: I'm wrong, ignore me.
Without testing or experiencing for myself, I can tell you this test doesn't really mean anything to most gamers. You won't be able to tell a difference between 80FPS and 120FPS when you're actually playing the game, so a 50% performance increase doesn't really buy you anything here.
If that's the case, it would be useful to see how similarly-performing Intel and NVIDIA parts handle this scene.I know with the new drivers, they're supposed to move their frame pacing to "phase 2" (whatever that means).
The difference between 80 and 120 FPS is huge. Its the difference between running full light boost and not tearing and not being able to do it. What the heck is David talking about.