What you think of AMD mantle?

[Deleted member 219079]

What you think of AMD mantle?
Good about it: I heard it uses all CPU cores, which is awesome. Also heard it uses low level thing, guess it's good
Bad about it: silly to make it like AMD vs NVidia thingy.

Link for you interested

edit: also it could be amd vs ms, because wouldn't it replace directX?

 

[chobibo]

I don't think it will replace DirectX.

 

[Deleted member 219079]

I don't think it will replace DirectX.

oh, then i've understood something wrong...

 

[chobibo]

No. I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm just stating my opinion on the matter.

 

[Deleted member 219079]

No. I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm just stating my opinion on the matter.

oh, you mean it like that. I thought you were talking about directx and mantle are not same kind of libraries or whatever they're, and they won't "cross" one another.

of course it wouldn't get as popular as directx, microsoft will just release new version of dx that takes automatically use of every core and so on, making mantle useless.

 

[Dr Super Good]

This is basically AMD throwing low punches at Nvidia to try and knock them out from their dominance of the PC GPU market.

The reason people will use it is due to the platform architecture differences on the console compared to the PC. PC based APIs like OpenGL and Direct3D are poorly designed to take advantage of shared memory arcitectures (where the main memory is used for both CPU and GPU) and instead is built around separate memory pools (where sending from CPU to GPU is a costly and slow operation). This language will allow developers the ability to micro optimize to take advantage of this more easily.

Additionally since all consoles use the same GPU, it is worth while micro optimizing to take specific advantage of it.

This language will have virtually no penetration on the PC as there is little that can be micro optimized as there are too many different configurations of GPU and that CPU GPUs are so much more powerful than Console ones that such high levels of optimization are not required.

Let us not forget AMD will just try and plain blow it out of proportion with marketing nonsense.

 

[The_wand_mirror]

It seems a little desperate, the rx 200 series doesnt really seem be alot better than the 7000 series same as it was with 6000 compared to 5000. In my case I could just buy another 7950 for ~200 euro and run crossfire giving me 7990-like performance. So if you have a decent 7000 card i see no reason switch just yet.

Anyway, rumors say that a single r9 280x(or 290 i dont know anymore) ran Battlefield 4 at 60fps stable on three screens (5670*1080) but if I look at the benchmarks from other games it doesnt appear to be all that great and I wonder if the whole mantle this is really going to make that much of a difference in the end.

I also heard a rumor that the gtx 680 was supposed to be the Titan, so imagine that performance for the price of ~500. But then they saw that AMD wasn't up to par and just lowered the specs of the series so they could make the titan their flagship. So I don't know if this is true but if it's true I am curious to see the next Nvidia series.

 

[Dr Super Good]

I also heard a rumor that the gtx 680 was supposed to be the Titan, so imagine that performance for the price of ~500. But then they saw that AMD wasn't up to par and just lowered the specs of the series so they could make the titan their flagship. So I don't know if this is true but if it's true I am curious to see the next Nvidia series.

It is all based on production yield of the chips used. Monster cards like Titan have absolutely horrendous yield which is why there are Titan based cards out there that are considerably weaker. Only the fully working chips made it to become Titans, chips with defects became lesser series of cards.

 

[The_wand_mirror]

It is all based on production yield of the chips used. Monster cards like Titan have absolutely horrendous yield which is why there are Titan based cards out there that are considerably weaker. Only the fully working chips made it to become Titans, chips with defects became lesser series of cards.

lol I actually also heard that but it sounded kinda weird to me. How does that even work I don't know exactly how these chips are made but its not like one could come out better or something could it? It that case it really sounds like baking

 

[Dr Super Good]

How does that even work I don't know exactly how these chips are made but its not like one could come out better or something could it? It that case it really sounds like baking

You cannot get "better" than the designed perfect. You can however get worse where many parts of the chip do not work at all (defective).

These defects can be caused by a number of reasons. A mal-alignment error between manufacturing processes combined with manufacturing tolerances might cause it on the very complicated structures (unlikely as they design for this). More often it is caused by defects in the actual materials used.

A single particle of dust is enough to break a large part of a chip if present during manufacturing. This is why facilities that produces integrated circuits spend over 1/3 of their energy filtering the air the components are produced in.

 

[chobibo]

Does that mean those units sold still have defects, but are not exceeding a value, or are they perfectly manufactured without defects?

 

[Dr Super Good]

Does that mean those units sold still have defects, but are not exceeding a value, or are they perfectly manufactured without defects?

They are defective within a tolerable amount. Just their defects are so small that every unit of the chip is functional so it performs at the designed level. If it is more perfect it may or may not have a longer functional life and may or may not support a higher clock rate (beyond designed limits) but it will still perform the same under designed conditions.

Cheaper, less perfect, chips may vary greatly as to what part of them is disabled. If you have an 32 processing unit chip yet only 30 processing units are needed then you can have defects in up to any 2 processing units and the chip will still fulfil its designed specification.

That said, I have no idea what happens to the chips which are more perfect than required but still imperfect. For example, a chip with 31 functional processing units. Does it still have 1 disabled and sold as a 30 unit one? Or do they just leave 31 functional units and give a lucky buyer a better than specified chip? Or do they disable the least perfect one, leaving the chip with 30 more perfect functional units?