挑战DirectX地位！Mantle API游戏实测
　　【PConline 评测】2014年上半年，显卡虽然有双芯顶级旗舰产品线的刷新，但架构并没有进化，整体来说还是不温不火。除了架构的性能竞争，还一直宣传Mantle这一秘密武器，宣城支持Mantle的性能会有质一般的提升。听起来似乎像当年的，那么实际它们有没有区别呢？是否会重复当年PhysX的尴尬状况呢？下面，我们从对比中找出答案吧。支持Mantle的著名休闲游戏：《植物大战僵尸：花园战争》　　我们都知道现在显卡厂商与游戏厂商的联系越来越密切，所以游戏的偏向性越来越明显。以往的PhysX就是NVIDIA针对游戏的物理视觉体验进行的优化，但是到了今天NVIDIA基本都不提了是因为PhysX只是改变游戏的物理粒子动作而对画质、帧数有明显的提升，所以玩家并不买账。&Mantle概述　　似乎AMD吸取了NVIDIA的教训，旗下的Mantle技术直接提升到3D API的层面，也就是与有着同等的地位，这与PhysX作为驱动程序的一个功能有着明显的区别。目前支持Mantle的可玩的大型游戏有《男友4》、《神偷4》　　简单来说，Mantle允许游戏开发者利用GCN架构的原生语言进行开发，带来了更深层次的硬件优化。对于支持Mantle API的游戏，可以绕过DX API直达硬件底层。做到减小开销，从而性能获得提升，实现从底层直接访问资源。3DAPI上，DirectX成为了Mantle的劲敌　　既然Mantle充当API的角色，那么与DirectX相比，支持Mantle的游戏性能比DirectX会否提升呢？马上进入今天的对比测试。在测试之前，我们来简单介绍下参与测试的产品。参与测试的R9 270显卡　　首先是AMD阵营中的中端产品，R9 270，保留R9 270X的规格，但比R9 270X更低的频率，更低的功耗以及更低的价格，让它具备甜点级产品的潜质。虽然它本质上是上一代架构的马甲产品，但是软件上支持Mantle等众多特性，让它具备更强的潜力。AMD R9 270显卡 参数规格对比显卡AMD R9 270XAMD R9 270AMD R7 260XNVIDA GTX660核心代号PitcaimPitcaimBonaireGK106制作工艺28纳米28纳米28纳米28纳米核心面积212mm2212mm2160mm2221mm2晶体管数量2.8B2.8B2.08B2.54B流处理器128012801024960ROPs32321624纹理单元80805680显存容量2GB GDDR52GB GDDR52GB&GDDR5&&2GB GDDR5&显存位宽256bit256bit128bit192bit核心频率1050Hz955MHz1100Hz980MHz显存频率5600MHz5600MHz5000MHz6008MHz供电接口6pin6pin6pin6pin　　由于今天重点进行Mantle以及DirectX两个不同API的对比，所以我们对纵向测试对比并不重点解读。作为R9 270的对手，我们选用了GTX660作为阵营作为数据对比的参考。
键盘也能翻页，试试“← →”键
DIY硬件图赏
DIY论坛帖子排行
最新资讯离线随时看
聊天吐槽赢奖品<div id="click_content_aid_
<div id="favrite_content_aid_
微软DirectX 12性能预览：比Mantle、DX11强在哪？
微软DirectX 12性能预览：比Mantle、DX11强在哪？
11:52&&|&&作者：
&&|&&关键字：,,,,
DX12的帧时间测试及总结最后的测试是记录DX12、DX11及Mantle下的帧时间对比。GTX 980在四核CPU下的帧时间R9 290X在四核CPU下的帧时间对比不论是GTX 980还是R9
290X显卡，DX11下的帧时间都要高于DX12下的，这意味着DX12性能比DX11高得多。而在AMD显卡上，Mantle的帧时间表现跟DX12基本一致。原文这里也制作了多个视频，不过还是需要爬墙，有兴趣的读者自行去观看吧。总结：总结这里就长话短说，DX12还没有最终完成，相关的功能、开发者支持等还要等微软在GDC
2015大会上公布，这里的测试还是初步的，是DX12的开始而非结束。微软和合作伙伴们希望设计一种跨硬件平台但依然底层的全新API，最终他们做到了，DX12在CPU效率及多线程上有着惊人的提升。
1.5.2.6.3.7.4.8.DX12的帧时间测试及总结
本文读者还喜欢
不过随后的更新中，Intel也发来了他们的解释，认为GT3e核显性能不行是因为Oxide的游戏代码太旧了，还是去年10月份的，最新的代码中整体性能好多了，与GT3e应有的表现一致。那只是Intel在解释为什么GT3e的测试成绩会比GT2还差。
并非在解释为什么所有测试的Intel核显在DX 12下相比DX 11没有大幅提升。
A卡N卡独显能够依靠DX 12极大幅提升性能，是因为他们本来就没有达到极限，在现在的DX 11下受限制了。
AMD核显也能够依靠DX 12大幅提升性能，虽然受内存带宽等问题导致提升幅度不如独显，但依然很可观。
Intel核显依靠DX 12只能极小幅度提升性能，是因为现在Intel核显在DX 11下的表现已经是极限了。技术讨论 赞我觉得是
英特尔驱动程序没有为演示优化,顶多增加了新的API兼容而已(英特尔显卡驱动一直都这德性
也有一种可能是,演示程序并没有为英特尔显卡优化
如果他们通力合作,或许情况会有所改观
然后英特尔这些方面并不积极,更别说对方能有什么配合
而相反,英伟达和AMD都很在乎他们的图形芯片在DX12上的表现,尽管AMD之前表现不尽人意引用之前的原文:
不过有点意外的是，低画质测试中APU与Core i3依然有不小的差距，尽管相比DX11有改善，但还是不怎么好看。AnandTech找到了问题所在，原来是这个Demo在低画质时的批量计数（batch counts）比中高档画质少得多，只有20K，而后者分别是55K和90K，此时CPU不再因为大量的批处理（batch submission）而成为性能瓶颈。
DX12提升了APU的效率,但顶多追到I3屁股,没有所述那么理想
你原话中&但是DX12后，微软使用了类似馒头的技术消除了CPU的瓶颈&-----显然是过分夸张,根本不可能&消除&附上CPU部分原文连接http://www.expreview.com/38917.html
其一,你言语间的描述都都有点含糊,而且存在很多矛盾
你描&是因为现在Intel核显在DX 11下的表现已经是极限了&,
那么英特尔官方解释相关代码过旧正好否定你的观点
其二,你描述&微软使用了类似馒头的技术消除了CPU的瓶颈，使得APU能够和GT2,GT3e一决高下&
,但该网站实际测试中看到的结果依然是I3吊打APU的CPU部分
从上述论点来看,你的言论似乎都带主管臆测性质
你的结论&核显已经没有潜力可以继续榨取，自然就不行了。&本身就存在很多疑问,夸张的言辞不能掩饰实际表现中的不理想
我认为,英特尔表现不好是他自身优化问题,但AMD并没有你口中陈述得那么理想,尽管有提升,还是不如对手,CPU部分和GPU部分都只能位居老二首先，这些楼中楼只有三楼是我发的。其余的楼不是我发的。这位叫管家黑月的人很可笑把所有游客混淆为一人。
其次，很明显Intel的核显无论是帧数还是帧生成时间在DX 11下都输给AMD的核显，你却说成“AMD无论是CPU和GPU都输给了Intel”，你还能更无耻点吗？
而且，在DX 12下，这个差距被拉得更大了，你又说成是游戏代码优化得不好的，呵呵，那是怪谁呢？
那么说Intel核显秒天秒地秒空气你满意了吗？其实Intel核显是全世界最强显卡，只是游戏代码都优化不好罢了。手动斜眼我也是醉了，大概这位黑月管家兄弟真以为是只有一个人在回他帖子，呵呵。诶嘿嘿,因为中午很无聊嘛= =先入为主实在不好意思&其次，很明显Intel的核显无论是帧数还是帧生成时间在DX 11下都输给AMD的核显，你却说成“AMD无论是CPU和GPU都输给了Intel”，你还能更无耻点吗？&
我哪一句这样说了??????
&我认为,英特尔表现不好是他自身优化问题,但AMD并没有你口中陈述得那么理想,尽管有提升,还是不如对手,CPU部分和GPU部分都只能位居老二&
都不如对手,位居老二,还不懂吗?
GPU输给英伟达,CPU输给英特尔诡辩而已。APU是个整体、corei是这样、tegra也是这样；
你的狡诈对比是在拿1个正常人的身高体重去分别跟1个肥胖患者比体重、跟1个消瘦病患者比身高，从而得出你需要的黑结论-----1个正常人的体重比肥胖患者低，那他是不正常的，这个正常人的身高还比不过同体重的消瘦病患者的，那他是不正常的。
你如果不是智力或者常识都有问题就是个用心阴险恶毒行为狡诈下流的人渣。“但是DX12后，微软使用了类似馒头的技术消除了CPU的瓶颈，使得APU能够和GT2,GT3e一决高下”，我擦，意思是DX12之前APU不够资格和GT3e甚至GT2一较高下吗？
游客：现实如此混乱可见有些厂商、产品的过度营销产生的效果到了何种严重的程度，很多人都着道了；
是DX11时作为整体配了irisPro的APU
和AMD的APU打显得CPU优势突出，
到了DX12时 intel那配irisPro的APU的CPU优势就没多少用了---因为AMDAPU的CPU足以让其GPU充分发挥无瓶颈了
大家的讨论能否有些数据或者引用证据而不是在那自说自话
现实如此混乱可见有些厂商、产品的过度营销产生的效果到了何种严重的程度，很多人都着道了；
是DX11时作为整体配了irisPro的APU
和AMD的APU打显得CPU优势突出，
到了DX12时 intel那配irisPro的APU的CPU优势就没多少用了---因为AMDAPU的CPU足以让其GPU充分发挥无瓶颈了
（你可匿名或登录后发表评论。没有帐号可，或使用和直接登录）
读书是为了心平气和地跟某些人讲道理，健身是为了让某些人心平气和地跟你讲道理，可惜我读书少，脾气也不小。
扫一扫右边的二维码
关注超能网微信账号
1000元买哪部手机？
现在市面上有哪些智能音箱可选？
直击双十一低价，买！
NVIDIA Max-Q笔记本导购Civilization: Beyond Earth CrossFire with Mantle SFR: Not Actually Broken!
on October 24,
Yesterday after an all-day session of benchmarking on Wednesday, we published our initial performance results for . As can often be the case with limited testing, we ran into a problem and were unable to find a solution at the time. In short, while there was a lot of talk about how developers Firaxis had spent some effort to improve latency using a custom Split-Frame Rendering (SFR) approach with Mantle on CrossFire configurations, we were unable to produce anything that corroborated that story. Emails were sent, but it took half a day before we finally had the answer: enabling SFR actually requires manual editing of the configuration file. Oops.
We could ask why manual editing of the INI file is even necessary, and there are other user interface items that would be nice to address as well as I
of the original Benchmarked article. But that&#39;s all water under the bridge at this point, so let me issue a public apology for not having the complete information yesterday.
I&#39;ve updated the text of the original article (and added a discussion of minimum frame rates in case you missed that), but since many people have potentially read the article already and are unlikely to revisit the subject, I wanted to post a separate Pipeline to update everyone on the true performance of CrossFire with Mantle and SFR. But before we get to that, let me also take this opportunity to provide some of the additional information from Firaxis and AMD on why SFR matters. Firaxis has a couple
on the subject (including one highlighting the ), and here&#39;s the direct quote from AMD&#39;s marketing folks:
With a traditional graphics API, multi-GPU (MGPU) arrays like AMD CrossFire are typically utilized with a rendering method called &alternate-frame rendering& (AFR). AFR renders odd frames on the first GPU, and even frames on the second GPU. Parallelizing a game&s workload across two GPUs working in tandem has obvious performance benefits.
As AFR requires frames to be rendered in advance, this approach can occasionally suffer from some issues:
Large queue depths can reduce the responsiveness of the user&s mouse input
The game&s design might not accommodate a queue sufficient for good MGPU scaling
Predicted frames in the queue may not be useful to the current state of the user&s movement or camera
Thankfully, AFR is not the only approach to multi-GPU. Mantle empowers game developers with full control of a multi-GPU array and the ability to create or implement unique MGPU solutions that fit the needs of the game engine. In Civilization: Beyond Earth, Firaxis designed a &split-frame rendering& (SFR) subsystem. SFR divides each frame of a scene into proportional sections, and assigns a rendering slice to each GPU in AMD CrossFire configuration. The &master& GPU quickly receives the work of each GPU and composites the final scene for the user to see on his or her monitor.
If you don&t see 70-100% GPU scaling, that is working as intended, according to Firaxis. Civilization: Beyond Earth&s GPU-oriented workloads are not as demanding as other recent PC titles. However, Beyond Earth&s design generates a considerable amount of work in the producer thread. The producer thread tracks API calls from the game and lines them up, through the CPU, for the GPU&s consumer thread to do graphics work. This producer thread vs. consumer thread workload balance is what establishes Civilization as a CPU-sensitive title (vs. a GPU-sensitive one).
Because the game emphasizes CPU performance, the rendering workloads may not fully utilize the capacity of a high-end GPU. In essence, there is no work leftover for the second GPU. However, in cases where the GPU workload is high and a frame might take a while to render (affecting user input latency), the decision to use SFR cuts input latency in half, because there is no long AFR queue to work through. The queue is essentially one frame, each GPU handling a half. This will keep the game smooth and responsive, emphasizing playability, vs. raw frame rates.
Let me provide an example. Let&s say a frame takes 60 milliseconds to render, and you have an AFR queue depth of two frames. That means the user will experience 120ms of lag between the time they move the map and that movement is reflected on-screen. Firaxis& decision to use SFR halves the queue down to one frame, reducing the input latency to 60ms. And because each GPU is working on half the frame, the queue is reduced by half again to just 30ms.
In this way the game will feel very smooth and responsive, because raw frame-rate scaling was not the goal of this title. Smooth, playable performance was the goal. This is one of the unique approaches to MGPU that AMD has been extolling in the era of Mantle and other similar APIs.
When I first read the above, my initial reaction was: &This is awesome!& I&#39;ve always been a bit leery of AFR and the increase in input latency that it can create, so using SFR to avoid the issue is an excellent idea. Unfortunately, it requires more work and testing to get it working right, so most games simply stick with AFR. Ironically, while reducing input latency is never a bad thing, it honestly doesn&#39;t matter nearly as much in a turn-based strategy game like Civilization: Beyond Earth. What we&#39;d really love to see is use of techniques like SFR to reduce input latency on games from genres where input latency is a bigger deal & first-person games like Crysis, Battlefield, Far Cry, etc. and third-person games like Batman, Shadow of Mordor, Assassin&#39;s Creed, etc. being prime examples. With that said, let&#39;s revisit the subject of Civilization: Beyond Earth and CrossFire performance, with and without Mantle:
Our graphing engine doesn&#39;t allow for sorting on multiple criteria, otherwise I might try sorting by average + minimum frame rate. Regardless, you can see that across the range of options the CrossFire Mantle SFR support is now doing what we&#39;d expect and improving frame rates. But it&#39;s not just about i as the above commentary notes, improving input latency is also important. We aren&#39;t really equipped to test for input latency (that would require a very high speed camera as well as additional time filming and measuring input latency), but the minimum frame rates definitely improve as well.
What&#39;s interesting is that CrossFire without Mantle (which uses AFR) has higher average FPS in many cases, but the minimum frame rates are worse than with a single GPU. The two images above show why this isn&#39;t necessarily a good thing.&We haven&#39;t tested SLI performance, but I have at least one source that says SLI performance is similar to CrossFire AFR: higher average FPS but lower minimum FPS. It&#39;s entirely possible that driver updates will improve the situation with D3D, but for now CrossFire with Mantle SFR definitely scores a win over Direct3D AFR as it provides for a smoother gaming experience.
Let&#39;s look at the above charts in a different format before we continue this discussion.
We can see that even with just two GPUs splitting the workload, our CPU has apparently become a bottleneck with the R9 290X. Average frame rates still show an increase going from 4K Ultra to QHD Ultra to 1080p Ultra to 1080p High, but when we look at minimum FPS we&#39;ve apparently run straight into a wall. For the R9 290X with Mantle, CrossFire effectively tops out with a minimum FPS of roughly 65FPS while a single GPU hits a lower minimum of around 50FPS without Mantle, and regular CrossFire on the 290X (i.e. without Mantle) has a minimum of 45FPS. Again, there are likely some optimizations that could be made in both drivers and the game to improve the situation, but it wouldn&#39;t be too surprising to find that Mantle and SFR with three or four GPUs doesn&#39;t show much of an increase over two GPUs.
I do have to wonder how applicable the above results are to other games. Last I checked, Mantle CrossFire rendering on Sniper Elite 3 was basically not working, but if other software developers can use Mantle to effectively implement SFR instead of AFR that would be nice to see. But didn&#39;t we have SFR way back in the early days of multiple GPUs? Of course we did! 3dfx initially called their solution SLI & Scan Line Interleave & and had each GPU rendering every other line. That approach had&problems with things like anti-aliasing, but there are many other ways to divide the workload between GPUs, and both AMD (formerly ATI)&and NVIDIA have done variations on SFR in the past.
The problem is that when DirectX 9 rolled around and we started getting programmable shaders and deferred rendering, at some point synchronization issues cropped up and basically developers were locked out of doing creative things like SFR (or geometry processing on one GPU and rendering on another). The only thing you can do with multiple GPUs using Direct3D right now is AFR. That may change with Direct3D 12, but we&#39;re still a ways out from that release. Basically,&AFR is the easiest approach to implement, but it has various drawbacks even when it does work properly.
Of course there are other&potential pitfalls with doing alternative workload splitting like SFR. They can&require more work from the CPU, and as you add GPUs the CPU already creates a potential bottleneck. AMD informed us that the engine in Civilization: Beyond Earth is actually extremely scalable with CPU cores, so while we&#39;re testing with an overclocked i7-4770K, AMD said they even saw a 20% improvement in performance (with Mantle) going from hex-core Ivy Bridge-E to octal-core Haswell-E with R9 290X CrossFire. There are apparently other cases where certain hardware configurations and game settings can result in an even greater improvement in performance thanks to Mantle (e.g. the 50% increase in minimum frame rates on the R9 290X at our 1080p High settings).
The bottom line is that if you have an AMD GPU, games like Civilization: Beyond Earth can certainly benefit. Maybe Direct3D 12 will bring similar options to developers next year, but in the meantime, congrats to both AMD and Firaxis for shining the light on the latency subject once again. NVIDIA made some waves with similar discussions when they , but the topic of latency and jitters is definitely important & and don&#39;t even get me started on silliness like capping frame rates at 30FPS by default (cough, The Evil Within, cough).
Post Your Comment
to comment.
djscrew - Sunday, October 26, 2014 -
eddman - Friday, October 24, 2014 -
That Directx CF minimum FPS looks suspicious to me. You sure it&#39;s not a game bug?
JarredWalton - Friday, October 24, 2014 -
It&#39;s just a frame rate pacing issue -- I&#39;ve added two images to show what&#39;s going on. Basically the AFR frame times are all over the place compared to the Mantle and single GPU frame times.
eanazag - Friday, October 24, 2014 -
This ends up being akin to the SSD consistency performance. Hence, there is value in Mantle. What would really be cool would be to see what the CPU was up to at the same time. The sad part is Jarred&#39;s electricity bill probably spiked this month from testing the 290X in CF.
whyso - Friday, October 24, 2014 -
You can&#39;t compare Mantle vs. DX without looking at Nvidia as well. Where are the nvidia frame time charts?
JarredWalton - Friday, October 24, 2014 -
I don&#39;t have an SLI configuration yet, so I can&#39;t test it. Single GPU frame times are fine, but this was specifically looking at CrossFire D3D vs. Mantle. (FWIW, a colleague at another web site is reporting rather jittery frame times on SLI -- hopefully not as bad as D3D CF, though.)
TheJian - Monday, October 27, 2014 -
The SLI isn&#39;t that important here, heck just thrown in a SINGLE 980/970.
Nobody is using either SLI or CF.
I say nobody when it is less than 3% of the public (according to steam&#39;s surveys).
Mind you, that is a percent of that 3% that runs above .
So it&#39;s more important (to 97% of us anyway) to at least show the single 980/970 in the charts ALWAYS.As others have said, you need to show the other side (SLI or not, some may not have read the other story).
IF NV+DX11 is beating them already who cares about this then?
If not, show that.
That is why they need to be in there, even if just single cards, to answer the question of DX11 on NV vs. everything you&#39;re showing from AMD.You already have the results from there, just add them.
From that article the bottom 1% doesn&#39;t mean much and you saw no problems in the game.
Comic you say the bang for buck winner is 290x because it can be had for under $400.
You can get the 970 for $330.
Bang for buck winner should be the one who wins in many games not just this one, and the 970 topples 290x in a lot of stuff.Especially where most of us play (below , only 3% above that).
IN many cases 970 beats 290x by quite a lot, but even if 290x won much of it by 10% you&#39;d have a hard time claiming it was the bang for buck champ (costing 10% more it should be winning by 10% in EVERY game, mantle or not).
This isn&#39;t even counting the OCing that can be done on 970/980 or the noise (as even you pointed out in the link above) that 280/290 pound out.And FWIW, very few of us run SLI or CF as I already noted, as it&#39;s a percentage of the 3% that run above ...LOL.
Concentrating on SLI/CR is writing an article for an audience the size of a percent of 3% of the public (so like 1.5% of us overall?) ;)
Judging the amount of games using mantle that show AMD victories, I&#39;ll take a 970 to go please...ROFL.
Then again, I&#39;ll be waiting for the 20nm versions which should make an already power sipping maxwell that much better, but you get the point.
That AMD portal costs you guys a lot of objective journalism IMHO.
Navvie - Monday, October 27, 2014 -
This is comment of the year.
ZeDestructor - Monday, October 27, 2014 -
I&#39;m waiting for big Maxwell on 20nm, at which point I&#39;ll grab a pair for
gaming :)/me is in the 0.33% ^_^
Copyright & 2018. All rights reserved.
Don't have an account?
Remember Me
We’ve updated our terms. By continuing to use the site and/or by logging into your account, you agree to the Site’s updated}