Originally Posted by Blameless
Originally Posted by Moragg
BUT with tthe potential to be much more than just a gimmick.
Admittedly, the end result is similar in some respects.
Neither can add anything more than eye-candy or raw performance, because if any game-play capabilities potentially unique to them are utilized, game would sacrifice too much of a market.
That said, performance has a far more universal appeal, and far more marketing clout, than visual effects that many dismiss as trivial.
This was my understanding:
Devs want to make a really nice looking game, so use all the draw calls available on consoles.
When porting to DX they have to scrap lots of these because of the overheads. CPUs could not handle the load otherwise.
When porting to Mantle, most (all for good enough CPUs) of the draw calls can be kept, the game code just needs to be changed to work on PC and abstracted for various types of GCN cards.
So there is a big difference there - from what I've seen of PhysX it's mostly small things that get the benefit, such as explosions or hair, and to my eyes it stands out against the worse looking background. Mantle could make that background better - have more detailed characters, better buildings, rocks, vary things instead of copying +pasting (a trick used to draw lots of things that look similar to reduce draw calls).
So Mantle (if devs take advantage of this) could look better than the same game, same settings on an Nvidia card. On top of which the fps boost will be quite nice.