News - AMD exec says NVIDIA neglecting gamers

[macbeth1959]

What a gas!!! Out of the boardroom into the playground!

I can't wait for the new SL-Fire standard after the headmisstress forces them to shake hands (they can still blame each others code for every graphics glitch) - diversity is PC; diversity is wonderful!!!

[Rollo]

Originally Posted by Dave Baumann

And not just in the market, but also heavily seeded to developers. Bear in mind that all the DX11 demos and code samples coming from commerical ISV's at the moment are coming as a direct result of our engagement with the ISV's.

Of course, we were "bearing in mind" before that every DX9 SM3 game was developed on NVIDIA hardware because your firm took about 18mos to bring it to market.

So that pendulum swings both ways, and depends on the month you're speaking.

Your firm brought a product to market a few months earlier by making very minor (comparatively) revisions to your last generation. NVIDIA is bringing a new architecture to market that will solidify their dominance in the development/workstation market, establish their dominance in the server farm market, and best your product in the gaming market in both features and performance.

Is that worth a quarter of missed sales while you couldn't meet demand due to 40nm issues, early revision yields?

Time will tell, and not much more time at that.

[Biscuit]

Originally Posted by Rollo

Your firm brought a product to market a few months earlier by making very minor (comparatively) revisions to your last generation. NVIDIA is bringing a new architecture to market that will solidify their dominance in the development/workstation market, establish their dominance in the server farm market, and best your product in the gaming market in both features and performance.

Is that worth a quarter of missed sales while you couldn't meet demand due to 40nm issues, early revision yields?

Time will tell, and not much more time at that.

And in the meantime while waiting AMD have been twiddling their thumbs?
And the early yields for the fermi chips have been fantastic yes?
Better it in features and performance but how about the cost in relation to the improvement?
At least ATI admitted they where having problems with their products and didnt just throw them into the market and deny the issue all together (he says as he patiently waits for the GPU in his laptop to die... again).

Gimmi a break man, the two companies have as many similarities as differences so the arrogance doesnt fly here.

[Rollo]

Originally Posted by Biscuit

Agreed in part... we do need evidence for any further progression but Rollos points have been pretty blindly biased. The number of people i have seen explain the principle of direct x only for it to be repeatedly ignored and the same replies given over and over.

Thing is i dont think a lot of the people on ATIs side are actually ATI fanboys, most of us are just neutral. I dnt understand how people blindly back NVidia, refuse to accept the quality of competitors products are and completely ignore anything negative said towards NVidia.

Its difficult to take anyone like that seriously and im pretty sure a lot of people are having quite a laugh sneering at them.

I don't doubt the quality of ATi's products, last two gens have been solid. Two before that were lame, but the two before that were solid. I usually end up buying at least one sample of their stuff, last was a 4850. I had a x1800, X1900, X800XT PE, Radeon 64 VIVO, Radeon 32, a MAXX, a Rage Fury, one of the AIWs somewhere in there, etc- so it can't be said I don't give ATi a chance. I buy their products.

These days they can't meet my needs, I'm a high end gamer. I have a Dell 3007WFP- HC on one box, and 3d Vision on the other. ATi can't supply me with stereo, or PhysX, so I use NVIDIA. Not to mention I need to transcode video because I travel for work.

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

A member of the "Nvidia Users Group" being impartial!!

The world has more chance of Nick Griffin supporting multiculturalism!!

[Leki]

Originally Posted by CAT-THE-FIFTH

I wonder what will happen when Lucid enters the fray with their Hydra 200?? Will AMD and Nvidia try screw them over in some way??

Originally Posted by Leki

well i cant see why ATI would want to screw with them because its not like them and in the end it should let them sell more ATI cards.

I'm sure nvidia might try something dodgy though since they dont want gamers to use any other cards with there own, and also i think nvidia get some SLI licencing fee from motherboard makers which i'm sure they wont want to lose.

Seems i was right....

semiaccurate.com/2009/11/04/nvidia-crushes-msis-lucid-based-board/

^^^ cant post as link due to anti-spam, just add www and a dot before the start of the url

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

Originally Posted by Leki

Seems i was right....

semiaccurate.com/2009/11/04/nvidia-crushes-msis-lucid-based-board/

^^^ cant post as link due to anti-spam

http://www.semiaccurate.com/2009/11/...d-based-board/

Sigh!! Nvidia strikes again!! I was really hoping this technology would move forward!!

[Zhaoman]

Originally Posted by Rollo

Of course, we were "bearing in mind" before that every DX9 SM3 game was developed on NVIDIA hardware because your firm took about 18mos to bring it to market.

So that pendulum swings both ways, and depends on the month you're speaking.

Your firm brought a product to market a few months earlier by making very minor (comparatively) revisions to your last generation. NVIDIA is bringing a new architecture to market that will solidify their dominance in the development/workstation market, establish their dominance in the server farm market, and best your product in the gaming market in both features and performance.

Yes the pendulum swings both ways, I understand this has always been the case with ATi and nVidia (both have been guilty of dirty tactics before and performance and optimisations vary with the seasons) but right now we are talking about nVidia's apparent sly tactics and dealings so it is their turn to come up with answers. This is the topic of discussion. We are not discussing history here we are addressing the issues in the present.

Talking about minor revisions to your last generation, what do you call the 8800GTX, 9800GTX and GTX250, oh and the 8800GT and 9800GT. Improving on a previous proven generation's architecture followed by a die shrink is a logical technique for advancing tech and there is nothing wrong with that. Even when the same product has clearly been rebranded with a new sticker.

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

Originally Posted by Zhaoman

Yes the pendulum swings both ways, I understand this has always been the case with ATi and nVidia (both have been guilty of dirty tactics before and performance and optimisations vary with the seasons) but right now we are talking about nVidia's apparent sly tactics and dealings so it is their turn to come up with answers. This is the topic of discussion. We are not discussing history here we are addressing the issues in the present.

Talking about minor revisions to your last generation, what do you call the 8800GTX, 9800GTX and GTX250, oh and the 8800GT and 9800GT. Improving on a previous proven generation's architecture followed by a die shrink is a logical technique for advancing tech and there is nothing wrong with that. Even when the same product has clearly been rebranded with a new sticker.

Don't start about the naming scheme for their notebook parts:

http://www.notebookcheck.net/Mobile-...ist.844.0.html

The naming scheme seems to have no baring with the desktop parts!! The GTX260M basically has nothing to do with the GT200 series as it is basically an 8800GT based on the G92 core.

Lets look at the renaming in more detail
1.)8800GTS 320MB and 8800GTS 640MB - G80 core(65nm,96 shaders,384mb bit memory access)
2.)8800GTS 512MB - G92 core(65nm,128 shaders,256 bit memory access) to 9800GTX(same core) to 9800GTX+(65nm and 55nm,same core) to GTS250(55nm,same core)
3.)8800GT -G92 core (65nm,112 shaders.256 bit memory access) to 9800GT(65nm and 55nm,same core) to GT240(same core for OEM)
4.)8800GS -G92 core(65nm,96 shaders,192 bit memory access) to 9600GSO(same core) to 9600GSO G94 core(48 shaders,256 bit memory access)

There are some other rebrands around but I cannot be bothered to list them all.

[mercyground]

Must say this little wrinkle appearing sadly doesnt surprise me.

And its yet another reason to distrust NV.

Stop lying. Stop covering things up. Start fixing your engineering issues. Get a product out.

Right now you are not giving me ANY reasons to buy your cards nor to recommend laptops with your gfx in.

[Rollo]

Originally Posted by CAT-THE-FIFTH

Don't start about the naming scheme for their notebook parts:

http://www.notebookcheck.net/Mobile-...ist.844.0.html

The naming scheme seems to have no baring with the desktop parts!! The GTX260M basically has nothing to do with the GT200 series as it is basically an 8800GT based on the G92 core.

Lets look at the renaming in more detail
1.)8800GTS 320MB and 8800GTS 640MB - G80 core(65nm,96 shaders,384mb bit memory access)
2.)8800GTS 512MB - G92 core(65nm,128 shaders,256 bit memory access) to 9800GTX(same core) to 9800GTX+(65nm and 55nm,same core) to GTS250(55nm,same core)
3.)8800GT -G92 core (65nm,112 shaders.256 bit memory access) to 9800GT(65nm and 55nm,same core) to GT240(same core for OEM)
4.)8800GS -G92 core(65nm,96 shaders,192 bit memory access) to 9600GSO(same core) to 9600GSO G94 core(48 shaders,256 bit memory access)

There are some other rebrands around but I cannot be bothered to list them all.

Meh. ATi rebrands their parts as well to bring them in line with current gen, it's not exactly an unknown practice. It's for sure not an unethical practice.

It says right on the box what the core and memory configuration is, not like companies are trying to hide what product they're selling and duping people. Who buys products without reading what they're buying anyway?

[aidanjt]

Originally Posted by Rollo

Meh. ATi rebrands their parts as well to bring them in line with current gen, it's not exactly an unknown practice. It's for sure not an unethical practice.

The difference is, AMD hasn't been riding off the R600 core design and renaming and packaging it as something new, with each die shrink. When AMD go from r7xx to r8xx, that means they've changed the core design. When nVidia went from g1xx to g2xx we all just rolled our eyes and said "Sigh, not again" almost in unison.

It's one thing to re-market your cards and pop them in to where they fit in the current generation line-up, it's quite another to re-market your GPU chips.

AMD have a brand swanking new DX11 card out the door which has had some significant improvements over it's predecessor (which is a decent card in it's own right), and nVidia are having yield problems even building engineering samples. See which strategy is working?

[cleaverlch]

Why even bother arguing with someone who is known to only say how great nvidia is?

Who buys products without reading what they're buying anyway?

Joe does, since they don't have a clue what the box says.

[Kombatant]

Originally Posted by Rollo

Who buys products without reading what they're buying anyway?

Just about 90% of the population Once I was in a store, and I actually had to explain to someone that a 8800 was faster than a 9400. Why? Because "hey, 9400 is bigger!"

Claiming that nVIDIA is doomed right now because it hasn't got DX11 parts out is as silly as claiming ATI was doomed when nVIDIA had the clear lead. Also, companies will always glorify their advantages and downplay their disadvantages. "Hey, I have HDR+AA, you don't!" "Hey, I have PhysX!" "Hey, I have 3Dc!" etc etc. Ring any bells? As I said in another forum, it's all business; nVIDIA has made investments they need to capitalize on them. Now all we need is someone to actually think about the consumer

[Biscuit]

Originally Posted by Leki

Seems i was right....

semiaccurate.com/2009/11/04/nvidia-crushes-msis-lucid-based-board/

^^^ cant post as link due to anti-spam, just add www and a dot before the start of the url

Doesn't surprise me one bit but i am extremely dissapointed. NVidia = Money Whores and nothing more tbh. Yes they are a business and they need t make profits thats the idea etc but they are extremely cut throat about it.

[Rollo]

Originally Posted by cleaverlch

Why even bother arguing with someone who is known to only say how great nvidia is?



Joe does, since they don't have a clue what the box says.

I guess Joe is in trouble with every tech company then and should perhaps consult with his friend Melvin.

The ATi 5770 and 5750 are both considerably slower than the 4890, which costs the same as the 5770. Poor Joe! He might buy a 5770 thinking he's getting a great deal on next gen software and find all his games run slower.

Or what if Joe buys an ATi 4550 thinking its a big upgrade over his 3870 only to find it's a crippled version of it with less of everything?!

Hopefully Joe doesn't buy an AMD Phenom 9500 instead of a 965.

Point being, Joe needs to understand what he's buying, because almost every market in the world has examples of newer models with less performance, or lower performing models with higher numbers, or just renamed models offering the same performance.

The fact that the same basic G80 arch was suitable for competition with ATi through their 2900>3800>4850 gens is more a testament to how poor ATi's engineering is in comparison than a reflection on NVIDIA.

It's been noted here "ATi is innovating!". Not really.

The 5870 is the same lousy VLIW arch ATi has been selling since the 2900, with the addition of much needed TMUs and ROPs. Why do I say "lousy VLIW arch"? Does it seem odd to anyone else it takes 1440 ATi stream processors in a 5850 to finally best the GTX285 with 240 stream processors?

Lot's of efficiency going on there, only takes 5X as many ATi SPs to offer comparable performance.

The changes and improvements in the Fermi make the changes from 4870 to 5870 look like the difference in the 800GT and 9800GTX+ comparatively. It wasn't a huge leap from DX10.1 to DX11, and EyeFinity is just a driver trick that gives users the ability to stop worrying about things like whether they can actually see the difference in 4X and 8XAA, and gives them the ability to wonder if they can actually forget about the 2" thick opaque black bars running through their field of vision.

All this is sort of off topic though- what's being discussed here is whether or not ATi has a right to expect Eidos to write AA just for them given NVIDIA had already given them code to provide it for over half of their market.

Or if the code NVIDIA wrote is fair game for ATi to use because it's based in DX10 calls.

Or if ATi has the right to lock out users from DX11 games because their development was begun on ATi cards.

The answers are no, no, and no. It's NVIDIA's IP, same as PhysX. The fact it uses DX is irrelevant.

If DX11 being started on ATi cards should be locked out, get ready to lose access to 90% of games on the market today ATi guys. ATi took a year and a half to bring SM3 to market, and beyond that TWIMTB is the predominant dev assist in the market today.