AMD Mantle API [updating]

[ams]

What exponential growth in ultramobile?

Try reading what I said. I said that ultra mobile graphics performance is increasing exponentially. The TAM and total unit shipments for ultra mobile products is also increasing each and every year, even as the rate of growth slows in certain areas (such as high end smartphones, although the rate of growth is likely increasing for more moderately priced smartphones).

How many of them are using GT 610's and 620's? AMD's worst Trinity is at least comparable to those.

Remember that I said Intel CPU's + NVIDIA GPU's is by far the preferred choice for Windows PC gamers who use discrete graphics. Intel simply builds better and more power efficient CPU's than AMD. For pre-built systems with Intel CPU's + discrete GPU's, NVIDIA is now used more than 90% of the time. AMD's purchase of ATI sealed it's fate in the sense that pre-built systems with Radeon graphics are now largely restricted to systems with AMD CPU's and not Intel CPU's. The ironic thing is that, even with all the back and forth posturing some years ago between NVIDIA and Intel, these two companies are now on friendly terms again, and expect to be more collaborators than competitors moving forward.

 

[jimbo75]

Fucking wrong, people are busy playing League of Legends, Valve games and such on their laptop with Intel graphics.
Millions upon millions gamers.

Well sure but Mantle isn't going to affect them negatively regardless. It could have a profound effect on their next laptop choice however, and the quality of their experience.

 

[ams]

Well sure but Mantle isn't going to affect them negatively regardless. It could have a profound effect on their next laptop choice however, and the quality of their experience.

Well no, because there will be so many games made moving forward where they don't bend over backwards to accomodate the IHV-specific Mantle. In the future, energy efficiency and ultra mobile technology will be super important, and Intel ultra-low power CPU's and NVIDIA ultra-low power GPU's are way ahead of AMD's CPU's and GPU's in that regard.

 

[Albuquerque]

Fucking wrong, people are busy playing League of Legends, Valve games and such on their laptop with Intel graphics.
Millions upon millions gamers.
That's maybe afterall one of the reason for AMD's APU strategy, Intel sells tons of its own APUs and people use them because it's what's available on the cheap laptops.

There's nothing wrong with this statement when the context is limited to only what you've written.

However, the context is Mantle as a tool to accelerate demanding video games -- games that need LOTS of draw calls, games that need features even more advanced than what DX can provide natively.

This isn't league of legends that we're talking about, no more than it's candy crush or farmville.

Mantle has nothing to do with casual games, it has everything to do with high performance gaming which is simply not done on Intel IGP's and very-low-end discrete boards. When we are talking about games that are draw-call limited and need even more features than the existing incumbent (DIrect3D) API can provide, we're talking about enthusiast class hardware.

There are only two players in that battle, and you (and AMS) know it.

 

[Dave Baumann]

For pre-built systems with Intel CPU's + discrete GPU's, NVIDIA is now used more than 90% of the time.

Errr, what? Go and check your "facts".

 

[Albuquerque]

Well no, because there will be so many games made moving forward where they don't bend over backwards to accomodate the IHV-specific Mantle.

Ok. So? There are so many games that don't need an NV or AMD graphics card, and only more and more moving forward.

Again, OK. So?

 

[ams]

Errr, what? Go and check your "facts".

Look again at what I said. I said for pre-built systems with "Intel" CPU's inside and discrete graphics inside, NVIDIA is used > 90% of the time (whereas pre-built systems with "AMD" CPU's almost exclusively use AMD graphics inside).

 

[Dave Baumann]

Look again at what I said. I said for pre-built systems with "Intel" CPU's inside and discrete graphics inside, NVIDIA is used > 90% of the time (whereas pre-built systems with "AMD" CPU's almost exclusively use AMD graphics inside).

I read what you said, and I'm saying check yours "facts". This is a fallacy.

 

[jimbo75]

Remember that I said Intel CPU's + NVIDIA GPU's is by far the preferred choice for Windows PC gamers who use discrete graphics.

That doesn't necessarily mean they are getting gaming-level performance. Most Intel CPU sales are celeron/pentium level and most Nvidia sales are GT 620 level. The target PC market for console devs comes in quite a long way above that. Why do you think consoles last so long anyway?

Intel simply builds better and more power efficient CPU's than AMD. For pre-built systems with Intel CPU's + discrete GPU's, NVIDIA is now used more than 90% of the time.

It doesn't really matter how much you shift the percentages around, the facts are quite clear. At best, Nvidia holds 16.1% of the PC market. That can be 100% of Intel's sales for all anyone cares but it's still only 16.1% overall.

AMD's purchase of ATI sealed it's fate in the sense that pre-built systems with Radeon graphics are now largely restricted to systems with AMD CPU's and not Intel CPU's.

While maintaining a larger share of the PC gamer market than both, yes.

 

[ams]

I read what you said, and I'm saying check yours "facts". This is a fallacy.

A fallacy? It is totally logical that most system builders today that offer Intel CPU's would want to pair them with NVIDIA GPU's when offering discrete graphics. On the other hand, it is also totally logical that most system builders today that offer AMD CPU's would want to pair them with AMD GPU's when offering discrete graphics.

 

[jimbo75]

A fallacy? It is totally logical that most system builders today that offer Intel CPU's would want to pair them with NVIDIA GPU's when offering discrete graphics. On the other hand, it is also totally logical that most system builders today that offer AMD CPU's would want to pair them with AMD GPU's when offering discrete graphics.

It's your 90% figure that is being questioned.

 

[Malo]

Mantle has nothing to do with casual games, it has everything to do with high performance gaming which is simply not done on Intel IGP's and very-low-end discrete boards. When we are talking about games that are draw-call limited and need even more features than the existing incumbent (DIrect3D) API can provide, we're talking about enthusiast class hardware.

There are only two players in that battle, and you (and AMS) know it.

This seems to me the main point of Mantle which a lot of folks seem to be missing.

 

[ams]

While maintaining a larger share of the PC gamer market than both, yes.

Once again, that is incorrect. You don't even understand the very graph that you keep posting in this thread. That graph shows integrated + discrete graphics. So if you break it down to only discrete graphics, NVIDIA has > 60% market share. And if you break it down to only integrated graphics, Intel has even more, >> 60% market share (something in the neighborhood of > 80% market share).

 

[jimbo75]

Once again, that is incorrect. You don't even understand the very graph that you keep posting in this thread. That graph shows integrated + discrete graphics. So if you break it down to only discrete graphics, NVIDIA has > 60% market share. And if you break it down to only integrated graphics, Intel has even more, >> 60% market share.

What you didn't get yet is that the majority of Nvidia's "discrete" sales are the same kind of low level performance as AMD's APU's.

You also seem to keep missing the rather obvious point that no game dev gives a damn about Intel IGP's. None of them are thinking "oh my god we can't go with Mantle because we don't want to upset the huge Intel IGP gaming community".

So, if you take a "quality gaming" experience from that chart, AMD is likely to be around half of the PC user base, right now. It's going to multiply at a huge rate over the coming years.

 

[ams]

It's your 90% figure that is being questioned.

Whether it is 80% or 85% or 90+% doesn't really change the point that NVIDIA GPU's today are the clear and overwhelming choice when it comes to pre-built systems with Intel CPU's inside.

 

[BRiT]

Whether it is 80% or 85% or 90+% doesn't really change the point that NVIDIA GPU's today are the clear and overwhelming choice when it comes to pre-built systems with Intel CPU's inside.

Nor does it change the situation that you're pulling numbers straight out of your ass and trying to represent it as fact. Come off it. Stop making shit up.

This post was approved by 100% of the forum.

 

[Malo]

A fallacy? It is totally logical that most system builders today that offer Intel CPU's would want to pair them with NVIDIA GPU's when offering discrete graphics. On the other hand, it is also totally logical that most system builders today that offer AMD CPU's would want to pair them with AMD GPU's when offering discrete graphics.

Dell Optiplex desktops are 90% Intel processors and there are no Nvidia discrete options whatsoever across the whole line. The only options when upgrading from IGP are AMD cards.

Or is Dell not a big enough system builder for you?

 

[Albuquerque]

Whether it is 80% or 85% or 90+% doesn't really change the point that NVIDIA GPU's today are the clear and overwhelming choice when it comes to pre-built systems with Intel CPU's inside.

Your 80%, 85% and 90% are still wrong. As of August 2013:

Here's a hint: add in boards for AMD don't sell in the same quantities of NVIDIA -- granted. But given the math of how many Intel CPU's ship, there's no mathematical way that even 80% is correct. This is total add-in board sales, which includes stuff like NewEgg and Amazon.

The burden of proof is now on YOU to show your "facts" that contradict all the rest of the information we currently have.

 

[Lightman]

A fallacy? It is totally logical that most system builders today that offer Intel CPU's would want to pair them with NVIDIA GPU's when offering discrete graphics. On the other hand, it is also totally logical that most system builders today that offer AMD CPU's would want to pair them with AMD GPU's when offering discrete graphics.

Not sure where you live, but in Europe what you said is incorrect. There are many PC's sold with Intel + AMD solutions and it's very similar in the land of laptops.
Also there are plenty of Mac's with AMD graphics and the new Dustbin Pro base config even uses 2 FirePros.
Admittedly there are more OEM systems with Intel+nVidia on the shelves but my general feeling is that the ratio is far from 90% and more towards 60%-70% range.

 

[ams]

What you didn't get yet is that the majority of Nvidia's "discrete" sales are the same kind of performance as AMD's APU's.

That is incorrect. Today, low end discrete graphics make up a relatively small % of market share for NVIDIA, and certainly nothing close to a "majority".

You also seem to keep missing the rather obvious point that no game dev gives a fuck about Intel IGP's.

Intel Iris Pro already outperforms AMD integrated graphics in some games. The performance of Intel integrated graphics is also increasing at a much faster rate than AMD integrated graphics.

So, if you take a "quality gaming" experience from that chart, AMD is likely to be around half of the PC user base.

Nope. High quality gaming would be NVIDIA discrete graphics or AMD discrete graphics, and AMD is nowhere near half the user base. Choice of CPU is somewhat important to gaming too, and Intel is the overwhelming and preferred choice there too.