Read more.Quote:
The game update provides up to a 58 per cent boost in performance.
Printable View
Read more.Quote:
The game update provides up to a 58 per cent boost in performance.
Can't wait to see real people's comparisons posted around the web.
Only if that ffff game work properly :/
Kind of confused by this - because the examples seem to show the opposite. Should that have said "NOT bottlenecked"?Quote:
Andersson added that the best performance gains are observed when a game is bottlenecked by the CPU "which can be quite common even on high-end machines".
Origin only? Darn it. And that's one heck of a patch!Quote:
you'll have to download the Mantle update patch for Battlefield via your Origin PC client. The download is 1.23GB.
Darn (#2) Beta drivers only and cards other than mine.Quote:
Then you will need to get the AMD Catalyst 14.1 Beta drivers when they are released. Please note that only the following GCN cards will work for now: AMD Radeon R9 290X, R9 290, R7 260X and Kaveri APU.
Ah well, I'll wait until we can use non-beta drivers and - more importantly - it supports my old 7900 series card. :(
Odd. My 7970 is not listed as compatible, but shows a 25% increase in the slide ?
Any ideas when the 7900 series will be supported? Was looking forward to this but its a shame its only supported on the 200 series atm.
How so?Quote:
Originally Posted by crossy
Those three setups are quite obviously getting progressively more CPU bottlenecked. Aren't they?Quote:
With an AMD A10-7850K 'Kaveri' APU Mantle provides a 14 per cent improvement, on a system with an AMD FX-8350 and Radeon 7970 Mantle provides a 25 per cent boost, while on an Intel Core i7-3970x Extreme system with 2x AMD Radeon R9 290x cards a huge 58 per cent performance increase was observed
Are they? Maybe they are, and maybe they're not. Because they've decided to increase GPU power at the same time that CPU power is being ramped up, you can't tell what proportion of that increase is due to CPU v's GPU.Quote:
Originally Posted by cheesyboy
To me, better examples would have been (1) An APU-based system; (2) Same APU as #1 but with R9 290X; (3) Core i7 Extreme with the same R9 290X as #2. At least then you could have got a feeling for what's going to give the best "bang for the buck" with the new driver.
Then again, it's a free upgrade, so maybe I shouldn't complain too loudly? ;)
7900 cards are GCN so they should be compatible.
Yep, but whether AMD want to market it for a series they no-longer sell is another matter.Quote:
Originally Posted by wingtit
Good point! :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Phage
Anyone care to explain what's going on?
Urm, hate to disagree with you but that's not correct. Just went to AMD Radeon™ HD 7000 Series Graphics and it presented me with a list of places I could buy. And "Shop AMD" (on the same site) even gave me a nice long listing. Plus IF Mantle is this great "open" system, then it makes zero sense to exclude "last years models", even if for no other reason than the PR ammunition that this would surely give NVidia.Quote:
Originally Posted by kalniel
Actually wondering if it's worth trying to get another XFX 7970 DD-Black to Crossfire with the one I've got in here. Surely if they're "obsolete" then I might be able to get a good discount! ;) Would prefer an Asus card, because that XFX isn't the quietest when it gets busy.
Well BF4 is origin only so I would expect the patch to require origin :pQuote:
Originally Posted by crossy
That is an increase purely by optimising the workload on the cpu. When you use a compatible gpu you will get even better results e.g. 58%.Quote:
Originally Posted by Phage
Well, they do still sell: they've just been renamed:Quote:
Originally Posted by kalniel
7970 = R9 280X (Tahiti which is GCN 1.0)
7870 = R9 270X (Pitcairn which is GCN 1.0)
7790 = R7 260X (Bonaire which is GCN 1.1)
So far, only GCN 1.1 has mantle. Which means Bonaire, Hawaii and Kaveri.
Explain? No - I don't know the internal workings at AMD ;) But I can have a guess. Dice have obviously (unless they've made up their "benchmarks") got it working with a 7970, so the restriction seems likely to come from the AMD side. The initial support is via a beta driver, so presumably AMD are erring on the side of caution when releasing a public beta. Maybe there's a couple of new bugs with GCN 1.0 and the new driver that means they're not willing to release ir publically for those cards.Quote:
Originally Posted by crossy
Lovely selective testing. None of them can be compared to each other. And only one is running multilayer?
Cherry picked much?
Where is the A4-5300 with a 7970 to demonstrate the CPU bottleneck? Hell even the A10 + 7970?
The A10 doesn't gain much because its still very bandwidth limited by DDR3. Does it mean we see the opposite of what was said? They all improved. The A10 has far less cores to spread the workload. The i7 with its CrossFireX ends up with far greater scaling, maximising the GPUs potential.
I guess they were going for likely real life systems (i.e. some balance between CPU and GPU)- a low-spec rig (the APU), a mid-ranger (the FX/7970), and a top-end machine (the i7/two 290x).Quote:
Originally Posted by crossy
Off the top of my head, the x86 grunt of the 8350 is around twice that of the 7850k, and the i7 is getting on for twice the 8350.
Whereas the jump in GPU performance is way more than doubling each time (512 GCN cores in the APU, then 1792 in the 7970, and a combined 5632 in the two 290x's)
I have posted some more up to date info in this thread I started earlier today:
http://forums.hexus.net/pc-hardware-...e-numbers.html
So....why did my PC download the update when I use Nvidia? Did they not bother to run a check which card you are using? 1.2gb is a lot of space to use if it doesn't even affect me
Hmm, that seems like a good explanation - heck, it's probably as good as I'm likely to get at least.Quote:
Originally Posted by scaryjim
It's a conspiracy - EA/Dice are getting consideration from ISPs for "encouraging" people to upgrade their broadband.Quote:
Originally Posted by Traldera
(Joking of course)
The update includes the Mantle patch and other optimizations, its a patch for all that happens to have Mantle support.Quote:
Originally Posted by Traldera
Still no AMD driver ?
Yeah I was thinking that. Strange to release the patch with mantle but not give us the driver to play with it.
And no indication of when to expect them either. I wish they would get it together, I've lost count of the number of times AMD have announced that a driver update to resolve an issue or activate a feature is on the way and then having to wait sometimes up to three or four months before it becomes available, I have an FX8350 rig with a 290X card just waiting for this update so I can try it out.Quote:
Originally Posted by Phage
Yes, the excuse was that QA found an issue with the installer (maybe it messed up some of their test systems?). But Warsam71 did post a sticky on the AT forum.
So between that and some feed someone mentioned (Twitter?) it should be here today. But, Warsam71 also mentioned this:
"Furthermore, we’re giving the press time to exclusively test the beta driver while we implement the finishing touches on all the features you can expect from this driver."
So I could imagine it taking longer. Don't know how easy it is to antagonise the press, but usually they would let big websites have the beta first so they can write articles etc., so that may be big reason for the delay.
You also got some other stuff, new colours in the chat box, headshot notification on the kill screen, big welcome messages on servers etc. 1.2Gb is what 20 minutes on half decent BB? Considering you've needed to download knocking on 30Gb to play already its not that much.Quote:
Originally Posted by Traldera
I have a 50mbps cable internet service and downloading superfluous gigabyte-sized patches would still bother me, mostly for the waste of space my SSD can do without...Quote:
Originally Posted by herulach
Hope that HEXUS will make a full review of Mantle
Interesting quote on Ars (http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2014/0...3d-and-opengl/)
"and so Mantle performs the validation once, when the object is created, rather than once per frame. It also reduces the strictness of some of that validation, on the basis that developers will do the work at development time, rather than having to do it on end-user machines at run time."
because reducing error detection always goes well, *sigh*