mantle vs dx11 in thief. AMD brings the hammer down

This topic is locked from further discussion.

#1 Posted by ionusX (25712 posts) -
#2 Posted by Gogoplexiorayo2 (112 posts) -

Impressive. If this happens in more games i will be really sad i bought a 780 ti.

#3 Posted by Klunt_Bumskrint (3380 posts) -
#4 Edited by AlexKidd5000 (1732 posts) -

That makes DirectX look so terrible lol.

#5 Posted by RevanBITW (535 posts) -

Too bad Thief sucks. lol

#6 Posted by PredatorRules (7049 posts) -

Nothing impressive except for the 290X

#7 Edited by Toxic-Seahorse (4076 posts) -

Nothing impressive except for the 290X

how is a 16FPS jump for the 290X not slightly impressive?

#8 Posted by FelipeInside (25031 posts) -

@PredatorRules said:

Nothing impressive except for the 290X

how is a 16FPS jump for the 290X not slightly impressive?

I think all these benchmarks and different performances only really matter at stupid high resolutions and max settings. Most people are around at 1680x1050 or 1920x1080 with normal settings.

#9 Posted by 04dcarraher (18921 posts) -

@PredatorRules said:

Nothing impressive except for the 290X

how is a 16FPS jump for the 290X not slightly impressive?

I think you missed the "except" part. 280x and below didn't see much of an improvement which means that the stock i7 cpu supplied the weaker gpus the data they needed just fine.

#10 Posted by blaznwiipspman1 (6028 posts) -

hey good to see you again ionusx, id knew youd be back. Mantle seems pretty awesome, can't wait for more games/benchmarks.

#11 Posted by mastershake575 (8344 posts) -

Thread about AMD = two AMD fanboys who hardly post come out of the woodworks to join the fun (one of whom promised to never use this site again).

Gotta love the AMD power

#12 Posted by wis3boi (30881 posts) -

@Toxic-Seahorse said:
@PredatorRules said:

Nothing impressive except for the 290X

how is a 16FPS jump for the 290X not slightly impressive?

I think all these benchmarks and different performances only really matter at stupid high resolutions and max settings. Most people are around at 1680x1050 or 1920x1080 with normal settings.

mantle has nothing to do with res and everything to do with taking work off the cpu and putting wasted gpu power to work. We need games like ArmA and Total War using mantle

#13 Posted by FelipeInside (25031 posts) -

@wis3boi said:

@FelipeInside said:

@Toxic-Seahorse said:
@PredatorRules said:

Nothing impressive except for the 290X

how is a 16FPS jump for the 290X not slightly impressive?

I think all these benchmarks and different performances only really matter at stupid high resolutions and max settings. Most people are around at 1680x1050 or 1920x1080 with normal settings.

mantle has nothing to do with res and everything to do with taking work off the cpu and putting wasted gpu power to work. We need games like ArmA and Total War using mantle

I know. My point is that people using lower settings won't notice a difference as much as people using higher settings, simply because the workload is less.

Also, people with slower CPUs will benefit more from it than people with high end.

#14 Posted by Gaming-Planet (13703 posts) -

inb4 Microsoft adopts mantle for DX12.

#15 Posted by ionusX (25712 posts) -

@mastershake575: and i see your still so slow on the uptake its like im moving at warp speed compared to you ( I've been back for weeks ). like seriously get with the program

#16 Edited by Toxic-Seahorse (4076 posts) -

@04dcarraher said:

@Toxic-Seahorse said:
@PredatorRules said:

Nothing impressive except for the 290X

how is a 16FPS jump for the 290X not slightly impressive?

I think you missed the "except" part. 280x and below didn't see much of an improvement which means that the stock i7 cpu supplied the weaker gpus the data they needed just fine.

I didn't miss it, I just misunderstood your post. I though you meant the only thing impressive was the 290x GPU, not the difference from DX to Mantle for 290x. I thought you were basically saying that mantle ins't impressive, but the 290x is. My bad. :) I see what you're saying though.

#17 Posted by quebec946 (1314 posts) -

mentlegen

#18 Edited by mastershake575 (8344 posts) -

@ionusX said:

@mastershake575: and i see your still so slow on the uptake its like im moving at warp speed compared to you ( I've been back for weeks ). like seriously get with the program

You've made like 10 post in pc hardware this month, two of which is this thread (sounds like coming out of the woodworks to me).

Coming out of the woodworks doesn't mean you are literally never here, it means you only come out when the time is right (in your case when you want to bash something you don't like, anytime there's anything positive or new about AMD, or if there's a quote you can purposely misinterpret for the purpose of starting an argument).

Seems like I am with the program. Your posting is predictable and funny considering you cried for weeks that you would never come back

#19 Posted by JangoWuzHere (15918 posts) -

Not impressed, why does the 270X perform worse on mantle then directx? I don't care about the high end cards, I'm a mid range person and this looks pretty lame to me.

#20 Posted by nicecall (428 posts) -

not much improvement, even the 290x is only 16 fps more... the other AMD cards are equal to directx. Wheres the comparison to nvidia cards, it means nothing unless compared to nvidia.

so basically mantle only benefits people who own the most expensive amd card you can buy... so its useless

#21 Posted by Grey_Eyed_Elf (3671 posts) -

You guys are missing the point... It was running on a downclocked 4770K.

Many reviews have pointed this out already. Look at the 2560x1600 benchmark where the CPU speed doesn't matter... What do you see? 2FPS difference.

Unless you have a 290X and a sub 3GHZ CPU running at 1280x720... Mantle is a amazing.

Here's another example of the CPU bottleneck... Notice how the DX 260X is beaiting the Mantle 260X?... Why because the underclocked 4770K doesn't bottleneck a 260X.

...

#22 Posted by Grey_Eyed_Elf (3671 posts) -

Also I would like to point out just how skewed these results are:

  • CPU was underclocked
  • Wasn't running on the highest settings

Here's a link to a performance review of Thief.

Skewed, bias, cherry picked, "paid"... Call it what you want but what those benchmarks aren't is truthful.

Who is going to...

  1. Buy a $500 GPU
  2. Underclock a CPU
  3. Run their game at medium settings

That site is a joke.

#23 Posted by ronvalencia (15109 posts) -

@ionusX said:

http://wccftech.com/mantle-api-directx-thief-benchmarks-direct3d-creamed/

basically at every level 290x + mantle beat out all other cominations + directx in everything that isnt multi-screen (no benchmarks)

From https://www.amd.com/us/press-releases/Pages/amd-demonstrates-2014mar20.aspx

"Full DirectX 12 compatibility promised for the award-winning Graphics Core Next architecture"

AMD's PR has claimed "FULL DirectX 12 compatibility" for their current GCNs.

NVIDIA has yet to claim "FULL DirectX 12 compatibility".

#24 Posted by Masculus (2800 posts) -

Those are some shitty results. The benefits only kicks in on GPUs with obscene power.

#25 Edited by ronvalencia (15109 posts) -

@Grey_Eyed_Elf said:

Also I would like to point out just how skewed these results are:

  • CPU was underclocked
  • Wasn't running on the highest settings

Here's a link to a performance review of Thief.

Skewed, bias, cherry picked, "paid"... Call it what you want but what those benchmarks aren't is truthful.

Who is going to...

  1. Buy a $500 GPU
  2. Underclock a CPU
  3. Run their game at medium settings

That site is a joke.

Your link used Catalyst driver 14.2 while while computerbase.de site used Catalyst driver 14.3.

Reference http://www.computerbase.de/2014-03/amd-mantle-thief-benchmarks/

computerbase.de reduced AA settings from SSAA (Super Sample AA) to FXAA.

#26 Edited by AlexKidd5000 (1732 posts) -

Honestly, who cares about directx and mantle? OpenGL delivers performance that puts DX11 to shame, and is already supported on every single OS, console, and mobile device in the world.

#27 Posted by ronvalencia (15109 posts) -

Honestly, who cares about directx and mantle? OpenGL delivers performance that puts DX11 to shame, and is already supported on every single OS, console, and mobile device in the world.

PS4 doesn't use OpenGL.

#28 Edited by AlexKidd5000 (1732 posts) -

@AlexKidd5000 said:

Honestly, who cares about directx and mantle? OpenGL delivers performance that puts DX11 to shame, and is already supported on every single OS, console, and mobile device in the world.

PS4 doesn't use OpenGL.

No, but what it does use is based on it.

#29 Posted by Horgen (109953 posts) -

Also I would like to point out just how skewed these results are:

  • CPU was underclocked
  • Wasn't running on the highest settings

Here's a link to a performance review of Thief.

Skewed, bias, cherry picked, "paid"... Call it what you want but what those benchmarks aren't is truthful.

Who is going to...

  1. Buy a $500 GPU
  2. Underclock a CPU
  3. Run their game at medium settings

That site is a joke.

It is done to prove that you can play well even if you have weaker CPU if you use Mantle. Most people do normally have the GPU as the bottleneck. So yes it is biased/skewed.

#30 Edited by ronvalencia (15109 posts) -
@Grey_Eyed_Elf said:

Also I would like to point out just how skewed these results are:

  • CPU was underclocked
  • Wasn't running on the highest settings

Here's a link to a performance review of Thief.

Skewed, bias, cherry picked, "paid"... Call it what you want but what those benchmarks aren't is truthful.

Who is going to...

  1. Buy a $500 GPU
  2. Underclock a CPU
  3. Run their game at medium settings

That site is a joke.

I benchmark the following numbers with MSI's 1030Mhz (gaming mode/normal mode/ out of the box)

1. 102.8 fps with Mantle, R9-290X, 4770K at 4.2 Ghz, max details, 1920x1080 without SSAA.

2. 73 fps with Mantle, R9-290X, 4770K at 4.2 Ghz, max details, 1920x1080 and with SSAA.

--------

3. 84 fps with DirectX, R9-290X, 4770K at 4.2 Ghz, max details, 1920x1080 and without SSAA.

4. 70 fps with DirectX, R9-290X, 4770K at 4.2 Ghz, max details, 1920x1080 and with SSAA.

--------

With MSI's 1040Mhz (factory overclock mode).

5. 103.6 fps with Mantle, R9-290X, 4770K at 4.2 Ghz, max details, 1920x1080 without SSAA.

6. 73.7 fps with Mantle, R9-290X, 4770K at 4.2 Ghz, max details, 1920x1080 and with SSAA.

#31 Edited by Horgen (109953 posts) -

You didn't include SSAA the last time... So it is kinda hard to compare.

#32 Edited by ronvalencia (15109 posts) -

@AlexKidd5000 said:

@ronvalencia said:

@AlexKidd5000 said:

Honestly, who cares about directx and mantle? OpenGL delivers performance that puts DX11 to shame, and is already supported on every single OS, console, and mobile device in the world.

PS4 doesn't use OpenGL.

No, but what it does use is based on it.

The PS4 doesn't use OpenGL, it has GNM (low level) and GNMX (high level wrapper).

Read http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-how-the-crew-was-ported-to-playstation-4

Read https://twitter.com/Wolfire/status/408656394271744000

"PS4 uses its own low-level rendering API called GNM, and a higher-level wrapper called GNMX. There is no OpenGL or DX support."

#33 Posted by blaznwiipspman1 (6028 posts) -

@nicecall said:

not much improvement, even the 290x is only 16 fps more... the other AMD cards are equal to directx. Wheres the comparison to nvidia cards, it means nothing unless compared to nvidia.

so basically mantle only benefits people who own the most expensive amd card you can buy... so its useless

you sound jelly

#34 Edited by not_wanted (1977 posts) -

You find that impressive? lol 16 fps for a R 290X when you have over 80 fps.

And only 5 fps for R 280X. lol Didn't they say they achieved 40% increase in Battlefield 4 with mantle?

#35 Posted by MlauTheDaft (3001 posts) -

"The exact test rig was not mentioned though I am pretty sure it was a i7-4770K (downclocked, no HTT) since they mention they same in later tests."

Seems kinda doctored. In that context, they could just as well have used a 2 GHz I5 (unspecified downclock, no HTT).