It's not as big of an issue as it might seem; most game engines have a well-designed layer of API abstraction anyway, so it's just a matter of implementing a new API backend and making sure it works properly. It's likely not a thing for small companies who write their own game engine and can't afford the QA necessary to add a new backend just for the sake of it.
Also note that Mantle is (supposed to be) HLSL compatible, which saves a lot of porting effort anyway.
(09-29-2013, 07:40 PM)neobrain Wrote: [ -> ]GX is just an API, so PCs can just support the API if they wanted, right? Guys, right? >_>
(in case you don't know, GX is the GC/Wii GPU API)
tl;dr: NV will never support Mantle, period.
Yes. That is right. If they want, they can support it. But they would never want. It's interesting that you're comparing an API designed for specific game consoles and an API that, currently not much details revealed, but potentially/probably can be used for both PC and also next gen consoles like PS4 and XBox One. It could make games ported from XBox One/PS4 to PC optimized for AMD cards (more specifically, cards that support Mantle).
Nvidia could come up with their own API of course but they have no support from XBox One/PS4. And as AnyOldName3 mentioned, if Nvidia did that, it would be difficult to gain support from game developers.
(09-30-2013, 01:10 AM)xemnas Wrote: [ -> ] (09-29-2013, 07:40 PM)neobrain Wrote: [ -> ]GX is just an API, so PCs can just support the API if they wanted, right? Guys, right? >_>
(in case you don't know, GX is the GC/Wii GPU API)
tl;dr: NV will never support Mantle, period.
Yes. That is right. If they want, they can support it.
No they can not, regardless of their will to do so. Just because you can hack shit together such that it works at crappy speed with a given API doesn't mean you can call the thing "supported".
(09-29-2013, 09:45 AM)AnyOldName3 Wrote: [ -> ]I read this in a (well cited) comment on a tech article which I can't remember the hosting organisation of.
I see. But I find it difficult to understand. Even if AMD wanted to work with Havok, that still was not a reason for them to refuse Nvdia's offer. And I don't understand why Nvidia offered that unless "offer" actually means "sell" the license to AMD. Also, they went so far as to modify their driver to not process Physx if it detected an ATI/AMD or non-Nvidia card in the system.
http://www.slashgear.com/nvidia-disables-physx-support-when-ati-gpu-is-installed-2558108/
(09-30-2013, 04:07 AM)xemnas Wrote: [ -> ] (09-29-2013, 09:45 AM)AnyOldName3 Wrote: [ -> ]I read this in a (well cited) comment on a tech article which I can't remember the hosting organisation of.
I see. But I find it difficult to understand. Even if AMD wanted to work with Havok, that still was not a reason for them to refuse Nvdia's offer. And I don't understand why Nvidia offered that unless "offer" actually means "sell" the license to AMD. Also, they went so far as to modify their driver to not process Physx if it detected an ATI/AMD or non-Nvidia card in the system.
http://www.slashgear.com/nvidia-disables-physx-support-when-ati-gpu-is-installed-2558108/
You can still use physx but it will be the cpu doing all the work.
I mean GPU Physx. CPU Physx has nothing to do with graphic cards.
(09-30-2013, 04:49 AM)DatKid20 Wrote: [ -> ] (09-30-2013, 04:07 AM)xemnas Wrote: [ -> ] (09-29-2013, 09:45 AM)AnyOldName3 Wrote: [ -> ]I read this in a (well cited) comment on a tech article which I can't remember the hosting organisation of.
I see. But I find it difficult to understand. Even if AMD wanted to work with Havok, that still was not a reason for them to refuse Nvdia's offer. And I don't understand why Nvidia offered that unless "offer" actually means "sell" the license to AMD. Also, they went so far as to modify their driver to not process Physx if it detected an ATI/AMD or non-Nvidia card in the system.
http://www.slashgear.com/nvidia-disables-physx-support-when-ati-gpu-is-installed-2558108/
You can still use physx but it will be the cpu doing all the work.
Maybe if you enjoy watching slide shows, instead of playing games
Its interesting that AMD Mantle announcement also coincides with Steam OS which also as interesting improvement.
Quote: In SteamOS, we have achieved significant performance increases in graphics processing, and we’re now targeting audio performance and reductions in input latency at the operating system level. Game developers are already taking advantage of these gains as they target SteamOS for their new releases.
http://store.steampowered.com/livingroom/SteamOS/
SteamOS paired with Mantle looks to be a well optimised operating
system , unsure how it will compete when 90% of Steam games are for Windows.
Steam OS is backed by OpenGL and is being developed closely with nVidia
There are still a number of roadblocks keeping most AAA devs out of linux. I really doubt that steamOS is going to get most of them on board. We'll still need to rely on streaming from a windows system (or dual booting) to run most AAA games.
ViperXtreme Wrote:Steam OS is backed by OpenGL and is being developed closely with nVidia
Please elaborate. Steam OS is a linux OS. As such it uses openGL because that's all there is on linux for hardware accelerated 3D rendering. Nvidia is further optimizing its linux openGL drivers in coordination with devs and valve as it always has but they have a bit more of an interest to do it this time. However these optimizations will effect all linux distros, not just steam OS. The term "backed by" doesn't really make sense here.