DirectX 12 vs. Mantle, Power Consumption

Although the bulk of our coverage today is going to be focused on DirectX 12 versus DirectX 11, we also wanted to take a moment to also stop and look at DirectX 12 and how it compares to AMD’s Mantle. Mantle offers an interesting point of contrast being that it has been in beta longer than DirectX 12, but also due to the fact that it’s an even lower level API than DirectX 12. Since Mantle only needs to work on AMD’s GPUs and can be tweaked for AMD’s architectures, it offers AMD the chance to exploit their GPUs in a few additional ways that a common, cross-vendor API like DirectX 12 cannot.

Star Swarm - Direct3D 12 vs. Mantle (4 Cores) - Extreme Quality

With 4 cores we find that AMD achieves better results with Mantle than DirectX 12 across the board. The gains are never very great – a few percent here and there – but they are consistent and just outside our window of variability for the Star Swarm benchmark. With such a small gain there are a number of factors that can possibly explain this outcome – better developed drivers, better developed application, further benefits of working with a known hardware platform – so we can’t credit any one factor. But it’s safe to say that at least in this one instance, at this time, Star Swarm’s Mantle rendering path produces even better results than its DirectX 12 path on AMD cards.

Star Swarm - Direct3D 12 vs. Mantle (2 Cores) - Extreme Quality

On the other hand, Mantle doesn’t seem to be able to accommodate a two-core situation as well, with the 290X seeing a small but distinct performance regression from switching to Mantle from DirectX 12. Though we didn’t have time to look at an AMD APU for this article, it would be interesting to see if this regression occurs on their 2M/4C parts as well as it does here; AMD is banking heavily on low-level APIs like Mantle to help level the CPU playing field with Intel, so if Mantle needs 4 CPU cores to fully spread its wings with faster cards, that might be a problem.

Star Swarm CPU Batch Submission Time (4 Cores) - D3D vs. Mantle - Extreme Quality

Diving deeper, we can see that part of the explanation for our Mantle performance regression may come from the batch submission process. DirectX 12 is unexpectedly well ahead of Mantle here, with batch submission taking on average a bit more than half as long as it does under Mantle. As batch submission times are highly correlated to CPU bottlenecking on Star Swarm, this would imply that DirectX 12 would bottleneck later than Mantle in this instance. That said, since we’re so strongly GPU-bound right now it’s not at all clear if either API would be CPU bottlenecked any time soon.

Update: Oxide Games has emailed us this evening with a bit more detail about what's going on under the hood, and why Mantle batch submission times are higher. When working with large numbers of very small batches, Star Swarm is capable of throwing enough work at the GPU such that the GPU's command processor becomes the bottleneck. For this reason the Mantle path includes an optimization routine for small batches (OptimizeSmallBatch=1), which trades GPU power for CPU power, doing a second pass on the batches in the CPU to combine some of them before submitting them to the GPU. This bypasses the command processor bottleneck, but it increases the amount of work the CPU needs to do (though note that in AMD's case, it's still several times faster than DX11).

This feature is enabled by default in our build, and by combining those small batches this is the likely reason that the Mantle path holds a slight performance edge over the DX12 path on our AMD cards. The tradeoff is that in a 2 core configuration, the extra CPU workload from the optimization pass is just enough to cause Star Swarm to start bottlenecking at the CPU again. For the time being this is a user-adjustable feature in Star Swarm, and Oxide notes that in any shipping game the small batch feature would likely be turned off by default on slower CPUs.

Star Swarm CPU Batch Submission Time (4 Cores) - Small Batch Optimization

Star Swarm - Direct3D 12 vs. Mantle (4 Cores) - Small Batch Optimization

If we turn off the small batch optimization feature, what we find is that Mantle' s batch submission time drops nearly in half, to an average of 4.4ms. With the second pass removed, Mantle and DirectX 12 take roughly the same amount of time to submit batches in a single pass. However as Oxide noted, there is a performance hit; the Mantle rendering path's performance goes from being ahead of DirectX 12 to trailing it. So given sufficient CPU power to pay the price for batch optimization, it can have a signifcant impact (16%) on improving performance under Mantle.

Star Swarm System Power Consumption (6 Cores)

Finally, we wanted to take a quick look at power consumption among cards and APIs. To once again repeat what we said earlier, Star Swarm is an imperfect, non-deterministic benchmark, and coupled with the in-development status of DirectX 12 everything here is subject to change. However we thought this was interesting enough to include in our evaluation.

As expected, the increased throughput from DirectX 12 and Mantle drive up system power consumption. With the CPU no longer the bottleneck, the GPU never gets a chance to idle and video card power consumption ramps up to full load.

GPU Scaling Mid Quality Performance
Comments Locked

245 Comments

View All Comments

  • damianrobertjones - Saturday, February 7, 2015 - link

    ??? Eh? The computer, with DX12, is working harder AND offering better results.
  • bitcrazed - Saturday, February 7, 2015 - link

    Windows 7 will remain in broad use in businesses for a while yet, but given that Win10 will be a free upgrade for everyone else means that we should see far faster upgrades to Win10 than prior OS'.

    Put it this way - who here with a gaming rig or a machine they game on regularly is going to say - "No, I don't want a free upgrade to this new fangled Win10 + DX12 nonsense - I prefer to play my games at 10 fps and to gradually fade into obscurity"?
  • TheinsanegamerN - Sunday, February 8, 2015 - link

    Gamers also seem to upgrade at a much faster rate. windows 8+8.1 make up 30% of steam windows users, while they only make up 12% of the general market. given that its FREE, windows 10 will probably become very popular very quickly.
  • wolrah - Saturday, February 7, 2015 - link

    Why would you say that? Windows 10 will be a free upgrade for anyone on a DX11 compatible system and so far has been a great OS to use. At the moment there's literally no reason not to upgrade.

    If Microsoft doesn't screw it up and the users aren't change-hating morons about it, Windows 7 and 8 should be fading memories in a year or two as far as the gaming community is concerned. Corporate users will still be themselves and be slower to upgrade, but corporate users' relevance to new gaming APIs is minimal.
  • aliquis - Monday, February 9, 2015 - link

    Another stab at Valve and their SteamOS.

    OpenGL NG is quite a bit away and this will likely make Linux lag behind Windows in gaming again. For now.

    Also with Xbox for Windows 10 I assume they may have some competition (which is likely why they wanted to migrate to Linux in the first place, because app-stores on any OS have become the standard.)
  • eanazag - Monday, February 9, 2015 - link

    I'd like to see an integrated graphics version of this. Intel and AMD APU. If you're feeling fiesty, an AMD APU with a second card in Crossfire.

    Question I would have in an APU related article. With APUs, does it now make even more sense to go with higher bandwidth RAM? Some suggestions for the CPUs: AMD 7850K (duh), AMD A-6, AMD A-8, Haswell (Intel 7, 5, and 3 plus a crappy Pentium), AMD Kabini (top sku), and the Crystalwell Pro.

    I think this has big mobile implications. I'd like to see a choice of a performance cap at 30-60 fps and the remainder of what's left on the table delivered in less heat and longer battery life.
  • SparkySamza - Tuesday, February 10, 2015 - link

    what do you mean under windows 10; are you talking about windows 7 or even windows 8.1 ?
  • tviceman - Friday, February 6, 2015 - link

    Ryan I appreciate the depth and analysis of all your reviews. Anandtech is always my first stop for analysis of new video cards and tablets. That said, the continued tardiness of the GTX 960 review, as well as the lack of any 970 memory performance investigations is really disheartening. Especially the 960, since it's now 2 weeks today since the NDA was lifted.

    Keep up the analysis, and hire extra help if needed. ;)
  • Stuka87 - Friday, February 6, 2015 - link

    Uhm, they had an article on the 970 memory issues:

    http://anandtech.com/show/8935/geforce-gtx-970-cor...
  • tviceman - Friday, February 6, 2015 - link

    They did have an article, but they didn't do any extensive investigations into performance when going over 3.5gb but staying within 4gb.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now