Quick test: Battlefield 4 with AMD Mantle

AMD Mantle is without a doubt one of the most talked about projects of the winter. In short, it is about a new graphical interface with the primary purpose of reducing so-called overhead, unnecessary CPU cycles that hold back the graphics card.

► Read “AMD launches Mantle in beta”
► Read “AMD releases Catalyst 14.1 Beta 1.6 with Mantle”

One of the first games with technology support is Battlefield 4, and there is a lot of interest in possible performance gains. DICE and AMD mainly talk about improvements in processor-limited systems, but also some increases where the graphics card is the bottleneck.

To give a quick insight into how Mantle behaves, SweClockers loads the test rigs with the latest version of Battlefield 4. A total of six different platforms from Intel and AMD are tested, including the six-core Core i7-4960X and the APU model A10-6800K.

The procedure is largely identical to SweClocker’s major performance analysis of Battlefield 4 – at least 9 minutes of playing time at the Siege of Shanghai with plenty of action and multiplayer. Each test is run twice, partly with DirectX and partly with fresh Mantle. The driver used is AMD Catalyst 14.1 beta 1.6.

Due to the nature of Mantle, however, Fraps does not function as a performance tool, the values ​​are instead logged by the built-in Battlefield function “PerfOverlay.FrameFileLogEnable”. This means that the figures are not directly comparable with older values, but of course with each other.

1,920 × 1,080 pixels – High level of detail

First out, the standard resolution is 1080p with the level of detail increased to max. This paves the way for a situation where most of the limitation in optimal cases ends up on the graphics card.

With DirectX as an interface, certain trends can be seen. All three processors from Intel let the graphics card stretch its legs quite properly, while the AMD models hold back the performance all the more clearly.

When the interface is switched to Mantle, the differences are clear. The position between the processors is somewhat evened out, and all systems get nice performance gains. With Intel systems, the extra performance for values ​​around 90 FPS is enough, and even the last AMD A10-6800K can approach the 60 level on average.

The percentage gains are clearly visible in tabular form. When the Intel processors get their act together, the FPS meter speeds up by around 15 percent, which makes for higher performance. The AMD FX-8350 and A10-6800K pick out even better increases with improvements of about 25 percent, 15 percent and 35 percent, respectively, for the six-core 1100T.

1,920 × 1,080 pixels – Medium level of detail

When the level of detail is lowered a few notches to predefined media, the graphics card has less to do, which opens up for the processor as the primary limitation.

With DirectX as the selected interface, large differences can be seen between the platforms. Intel’s six-core worsting dominates at the top, and the APU solution AMD A10-6800K has clear problems to keep up with.

When Mantle is activated, the difference is clear. The six-core Core i7-4960X approaches 200 FPS, and all three Intel models park above 150 FPS on average. The AMD models also pick out nice performance gains, enough to land around 100 FPS for the FX-8350.

With reduced level of detail, Mantle allows Intel processors to take the turns significantly, which gives performance gains around a mighty 50 percent. The AMD models also feel good about the new interface with a 15-25 percent higher average.

Prestandaupplevelse

With the numbers in hand, it’s easy to see Mantle’s advantages. The interface provides nice performance enhancements in several modes and allows the graphics card to stretch its legs more often compared to DirectX. However, not everything is hassle-free all the way to the end product on the screen.

Although the averages are high, the test version of Mantle gives noticeable twitches and shorter freezes during the game sequences, something that does not happen with DirectX. The problems are clearly worst with the test’s AMD processors, but are also experienced periodically under Intel systems.

When it comes to graphics quality, it’s all the more difficult with statements. Due to the dynamic nature of Battlefield 4, the scenes are constantly changing, making exact comparative screenshots difficult. A cloud of smoke blowing past or the sun from another angle can simply make a big difference.

With that said, Mantle is generally perceived to have limited visibility with more fog at a distance compared to DirectX, something which according to Johan “repi” Andersson is a bug to be remedied. Battlefield 4 with Mantle is also experienced as having more problems with, for example, flashing textures and shadows compared to the same game under DirectX.

Last but not least, Mantle means noticeable instability. Where Battlefield 4 under DirectX rolls more or less smoothly for the editors, the game crashes much more often when Mantle is used. The result is both pure CTD situations and more obscure variants where the graphics freeze but the sound continues.

Summary and reflections

AMD Mantle is interesting in many ways and has the absolute opportunity to stir the GPU market. The interface provides noticeably higher performance in many modes, which is especially good news for users who are on slightly slower processors.

So far, however, support is limited, with Battlefield 4 as the only real title on the market. However, several developers promise to jump on the bandwagon, which opens up for a markedly broadened range of games later in the year.

However, the extra time is useful for AMD and other players behind Mantle. The interface is currently marked as beta, and it fits well with the experience. Although the FPS meter shows higher values, it is somewhat choppy and graphically strange compared to DirectX, which indicates that further optimizations are needed.

In summary, at the time of writing, Mantle during Battlefield 4 feels very much like a technology demonstration. The results are impressive, but lagging bugs make DirectX still feel more enticing. With new drivers and further updates of Battlefield 4 in the works, however, there is an excellent basis for an exciting graphics spring.