Nvidia, stop being a D word.
- Thread starter AlienALX
- Start date
AlienALX
Well-known member
OC3D gets mentioned a couple of times dude
I saw this video today and I actually really liked it. Although he is strongly against Nvidia, he supports everything with evidence, so it's a pretty respectable video. Kinda feel good that I went with AMD now
Yeah me too.
NeverBackDown
AMD Enthusiast
I saw this video today and I actually really liked it. Although he is strongly against Nvidia, he supports everything with evidence, so it's a pretty respectable video. Kinda feel good that I went with AMD now
I mean I've done that as well but hey look at my title lol
I won't support nvidia till they open up. Shady company practices, it's just like Apples ecosystem. If they started to play nice I'd reevaluate my opinion on them as a company (as in the ethics of the business not the hardware since that isn't the issue here)
I mean I've done that as well but hey look at my title lol
I won't support nvidia till they open up. Shady company practices, it's just like Apples ecosystem. If they started to play nice I'd reevaluate my opinion on them as a company (as in the ethics of the business not the hardware since that isn't the issue here)
You're right. My views towards Nvidia are slowly changing for the worst. Like you said, I think they may be going the Apple route, which really isn't good for the industry.
NeverBackDown
AMD Enthusiast
Yep it only slows the industry down if everyone stays closed source. Or even worse the closed source companies start putting out tech that only works with them it just makes everything more expensive for consumers
NeverBackDown
AMD Enthusiast
That statement could be considered fanboy dude, considering you use Nvidia(not saying you are, just pointing it out). The video was unbiased as one can get when arguing between the two. He uses facts to back up his argument which is more than anything else I've seen from anywhere
Sooo basically this video says all the good games are deliberately optimized for Nvidia and against AMD... and this is somehow supposed to make me prefer to switch to AMD... Well... it kinda has the reverse effect actually
Oh... and that too
Well... it kinda has the reverse effect actually Oh... and that too
Last edited:
barnsley
born in a.....
Nah, hes got more of a point then that. nVidia's closed off approach to everything is really screwing over everyone. They really are going to turn into Apple at this rate. While AMD could try harder (see the crap that is their laptop GPU drivers) in some cases I think all nVidia are doing at this rate is just locking things off, not actually innovating.
He's had equal amounts of nVidia and Radeon GPUs so I don't think he is a fan boy. He might just be a typical linux enthusiast.
Sooo basically this video says all the good games are deliberately optimized for Nvidia and against AMD... and this is somehow supposed to make me prefer to switch to AMD...
Oh... and that too
I don't know about all the 'good' games. Most big releases with Gameworks this year have been awful.
The best running games this year have either had both AMD and nVidia features or neither (mad max for example). If you only play a few games, then sure, I understand if you'd get one card over the other. Otherwise bang for buck has always been the most important thing imo.
I've never understood being loyal to either company as they both have so much wrong. AMD is spectacularly mismanaged (or potentially was, we'll see with Su) and nVidia is trying to become Apple for GPUs.
Unless your a GPU manufacturer or a reference whore being a fanboy of nVidia or AMD is silly after all they don't really deliver a full range of end solutions. If everyone made great PCB's and coolers for AMD cards then times might change, all I mean is, it's not the opinion of the consumer which dictates entirely whether they choose AMD or nVidia. Saying you owned more of one or equal amounts doesn't particularly give you a biased or neutral opinion either way, that's something dictated by experience and which solution persuaded you to part with money in the past.
The video guy seems retarded, his criticisms of nVidia are in part what has made them successful and gives them such controlled routes to the market (not dissimilar to apple, weird criticism), they aren't all bad things unless money is the most important factor in the world. I'd sooner pay more for a solution which was developed, implemented and tested by the original creator (like. G-Sync). From the titles i've played Gameworks seems great too, anything that gives the option to increase graphical fidelity is major win. Maybe AMD's alternative is better, maybe I just haven't heard of it because their marketing is terrible. Or maybe their marketing budget is tiny because they didn't sell anything due to the fact most of their solutions were below average despite developing some great GPU's.
If making money is being a then I doubt nVidia will stop any time soon.
JR
The video guy seems retarded, his criticisms of nVidia are in part what has made them successful and gives them such controlled routes to the market (not dissimilar to apple, weird criticism), they aren't all bad things unless money is the most important factor in the world. I'd sooner pay more for a solution which was developed, implemented and tested by the original creator (like. G-Sync). From the titles i've played Gameworks seems great too, anything that gives the option to increase graphical fidelity is major win. Maybe AMD's alternative is better, maybe I just haven't heard of it because their marketing is terrible. Or maybe their marketing budget is tiny because they didn't sell anything due to the fact most of their solutions were below average despite developing some great GPU's.
If making money is being a then I doubt nVidia will stop any time soon.
JR
Kilbane
Hagrid Look-A-Like
So I have managed to avoid commenting on this thread up till now. Any post like this will see fanboyism dragged into the forum yet again. JR23 has made some very valid points in his post which has lead me to add some things for people to consider.
Physx was originally created by Ageia many moons ago, they were bought out by Nvidia. Nvidia is responsible for allowing ALL PC's being able to implement Physx through CPU usage. Lets be honest here, if they wanted to, they could have kept it to only Nvidia GPU's like Ageia kept it to only their cards.
GPU acceleration of Physx was something they kept for Nvidia owners and rightfully so, as a business model, giving away your tech for free is not a clever move!
"But AMD create open source software" is always the argument here. Well good for AMD, yet the implementation and abilities of said software are in fact not that great. The usage of gameworks over any AMD opensource solution speaks volumes here. By keeping software closed to a set hardware, both money and therefore development can be increased. Gameworks has always pushed graphical fidelity beyond what is seen in most engines and software available without third party add ons.
Other gameworks additions such as hairworks rely heavily on tessalation and physx being able to produce the effect. Take Witcher 3 as an example, Physx is handled on the CPU only and tessalation on GPU. AMD cards are not very good at tessalation, this is not Nvidia's fault it is down to AMD to implement. 300 series and Fury cards are much better at tessalation than older cards, the reason for this is almost every game engine now uses tessalation to increase graphical fidelity.
But here is the kicker on this point, it was DX11 that introduced tessalation into the modern gaming experience. So we will blame Microsoft for developing an API that has features that one GPU manufacturer is better at than the other.
Gameworks doesn't break a gaming experience, pretty much every game that has gameworks features are able to be turned down or in fact off. Ultimately Gameworks is not exactly smooth on Nvidia cards either. The point of it is to make things look and react more lifelike. It amazes me that anyone can think that having higher polygon count and massive tessalation calculations could possibly NOT EFFECT PERFORMANCE, on either side of GPU's at that!
Don't take this as a fanboy statement for Nvidia, this was at most an argument to consider based on the views and apparent "Facts" that the video contains. I have owned, used and complained about both sides of the GPU war. Everything mentioned in this video effects performance of every card in existence, yes by relying on tessalation it effects one camp more than the other. But that is nothing to do with trying to make one side look worse than the other.
Physx was originally created by Ageia many moons ago, they were bought out by Nvidia. Nvidia is responsible for allowing ALL PC's being able to implement Physx through CPU usage. Lets be honest here, if they wanted to, they could have kept it to only Nvidia GPU's like Ageia kept it to only their cards.
GPU acceleration of Physx was something they kept for Nvidia owners and rightfully so, as a business model, giving away your tech for free is not a clever move!
"But AMD create open source software" is always the argument here. Well good for AMD, yet the implementation and abilities of said software are in fact not that great. The usage of gameworks over any AMD opensource solution speaks volumes here. By keeping software closed to a set hardware, both money and therefore development can be increased. Gameworks has always pushed graphical fidelity beyond what is seen in most engines and software available without third party add ons.
Other gameworks additions such as hairworks rely heavily on tessalation and physx being able to produce the effect. Take Witcher 3 as an example, Physx is handled on the CPU only and tessalation on GPU. AMD cards are not very good at tessalation, this is not Nvidia's fault it is down to AMD to implement. 300 series and Fury cards are much better at tessalation than older cards, the reason for this is almost every game engine now uses tessalation to increase graphical fidelity.
But here is the kicker on this point, it was DX11 that introduced tessalation into the modern gaming experience. So we will blame Microsoft for developing an API that has features that one GPU manufacturer is better at than the other.
Gameworks doesn't break a gaming experience, pretty much every game that has gameworks features are able to be turned down or in fact off. Ultimately Gameworks is not exactly smooth on Nvidia cards either. The point of it is to make things look and react more lifelike. It amazes me that anyone can think that having higher polygon count and massive tessalation calculations could possibly NOT EFFECT PERFORMANCE, on either side of GPU's at that!
Don't take this as a fanboy statement for Nvidia, this was at most an argument to consider based on the views and apparent "Facts" that the video contains. I have owned, used and complained about both sides of the GPU war. Everything mentioned in this video effects performance of every card in existence, yes by relying on tessalation it effects one camp more than the other. But that is nothing to do with trying to make one side look worse than the other.
Last edited:
AlienALX
Well-known member
Dude, when typing up stuff for the internet please space it out as it makes it much easier to read.
Ageia created Physx as a stand alone card, yes. However, when Nvidia took over after buying it they forced you to use an Nvidia GPU as your main card, unlike Ageia. Not only that but they stopped you enabling Physx on your Nvidia GPU if the first GPU in the equation was an AMD.
Thankfully GenL came up with the Physx mod but Nvidia bought Physx out purely to say "Look what we have !" and make extra sales. And that's all cool and dandy apart from one thing.. As soon as you do something like that you force gamers to make a choice and lose out on other technology. Running it on your CPU was usually not an option as it just absolutely tanked performance.
Then we were made to make another choice - 3D on Nvidia or pretty much not on AMD. All of the time you segregate things like this they just end up hurting the consumer and not helping. As I said, you always tend to lose out.
Same goes for Gsync and Freesync although this is actually worse because it forces you to buy a certain monitor, too.
It's all gay. At the end of the day I don't expect Nvidia to 'help' AMD but they could at least get their technologies straight so that the gamer gets everything and not just half.
Recently we have had a load of Gameworks titles. What has that done for gaming? made every forking AMD owner groan, knowing the game will run like total dog turd. In fact, it's made the Nvidia fans groan too given that most of them are broken mess.
Edit. If you disagree then please explain to me how these technologies have helped to progress graphics and gaming, given that pretty much all of them have been thrown in the bin and are no longer supported?
Ageia created Physx as a stand alone card, yes. However, when Nvidia took over after buying it they forced you to use an Nvidia GPU as your main card, unlike Ageia. Not only that but they stopped you enabling Physx on your Nvidia GPU if the first GPU in the equation was an AMD.
Thankfully GenL came up with the Physx mod but Nvidia bought Physx out purely to say "Look what we have !" and make extra sales. And that's all cool and dandy apart from one thing.. As soon as you do something like that you force gamers to make a choice and lose out on other technology. Running it on your CPU was usually not an option as it just absolutely tanked performance.
Then we were made to make another choice - 3D on Nvidia or pretty much not on AMD. All of the time you segregate things like this they just end up hurting the consumer and not helping. As I said, you always tend to lose out.
Same goes for Gsync and Freesync although this is actually worse because it forces you to buy a certain monitor, too.
It's all gay. At the end of the day I don't expect Nvidia to 'help' AMD but they could at least get their technologies straight so that the gamer gets everything and not just half.
Recently we have had a load of Gameworks titles. What has that done for gaming? made every forking AMD owner groan, knowing the game will run like total dog turd. In fact, it's made the Nvidia fans groan too given that most of them are broken mess.
Edit. If you disagree then please explain to me how these technologies have helped to progress graphics and gaming, given that pretty much all of them have been thrown in the bin and are no longer supported?
Mafia II looked good, Black flag looked good, Far Cry 4 looked good, Unity looked good, I enjoyed playing them all on various different nVidia and AMD setups where they all ran very well. Good times. GG PhysX and Gameworks.
G-Sync is epic, nVidia made it, I paid for it, from day 1 it worked really well and at the time there was no other adaptive sync solution. Then Free-Sync came along and slightly later got CF support and the range of available monitors expanded for both technologies. The competition made prices slightly more competitive and things have matured a lot since. Without the pressure from nVidia I don't think Free-Sync would be where it's at right now, AMD arguably developed a more competitive technology and that's great. The closed internal developed G-Sync got things going with a good complete solution and AMD followed it up with their open approach which after a sketchy start seems to be maturing well.
I don't doubt Crimson took a little inspiration from GeForce Experience as well so that certainly helped to develop things. They aren't constantly suing each other like children and don't publically seem to get involved in huge patent litigation. Overall I would say that working individually as competitors is helping both companies move forwards more productively than if they worked together or developed everything openly, that would just create lazy monopoly.
JR
Kilbane
Hagrid Look-A-Like
I apologise for my use of punctuation to separate my sentences rather than using new paragraphs to accentuate the change.
I have edited my previous post to allow you to read it more clearly.
Physx has changed gaming beyond a lot of other technologies.
The ability to include physics calculations as a separate part to the in game engine has pushed immersion within games to a higher level.
Both TressFX and Hairworks have added realism within gaming beyond just upping pixel count and textures.
Tessellation has added depth to 3D models.
Of course Nvidia are going to develop technologies that suit their strengths.
The reason they are used by software developers is down to the support offered by Nvidia to implement the code and the lack of other options available to replace the technologies.
Gameworks tiltles being bad are down to the developers not down to AMD or Nvidia.
Optimisation of games and more importantly, making games that are good, is solely down to the software developers.
As for Gsync and Freesync monitors being available only on selected models, can we expand this to other items of hardware?
How about that damn mITX case not supporting that ITX motherboard, damn manufacturers not allowing everyone to use everything together.
It all comes down to the same thing.
No matter what happens, something somewhere is created for the benefit of thye company trying to make money.
The choice is all down to the consumer to decide what they want.
Companies are producing hardware/Software to make money first and ultimately the consumer will lose out on certain features.
Sitting in forums etc. moaning about whether or not one company is better ethically than the other is irrelevant.
As a consumer and end user, we need to hope that competition remains from all parties involved.
This is the only thing that will push the gaming and hardware industries to produce what we, as a end user, want to see.
I have edited my previous post to allow you to read it more clearly.
Physx has changed gaming beyond a lot of other technologies.
The ability to include physics calculations as a separate part to the in game engine has pushed immersion within games to a higher level.
Both TressFX and Hairworks have added realism within gaming beyond just upping pixel count and textures.
Tessellation has added depth to 3D models.
Of course Nvidia are going to develop technologies that suit their strengths.
The reason they are used by software developers is down to the support offered by Nvidia to implement the code and the lack of other options available to replace the technologies.
Gameworks tiltles being bad are down to the developers not down to AMD or Nvidia.
Optimisation of games and more importantly, making games that are good, is solely down to the software developers.
As for Gsync and Freesync monitors being available only on selected models, can we expand this to other items of hardware?
How about that damn mITX case not supporting that ITX motherboard, damn manufacturers not allowing everyone to use everything together.
It all comes down to the same thing.
No matter what happens, something somewhere is created for the benefit of thye company trying to make money.
The choice is all down to the consumer to decide what they want.
Companies are producing hardware/Software to make money first and ultimately the consumer will lose out on certain features.
Sitting in forums etc. moaning about whether or not one company is better ethically than the other is irrelevant.
As a consumer and end user, we need to hope that competition remains from all parties involved.
This is the only thing that will push the gaming and hardware industries to produce what we, as a end user, want to see.
