Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 33 to 48 of 52

Thread: NVIDIA responds to ATi's PhysX claims

  1. #33
    Moosing about! CAT-THE-FIFTH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Not here
    Posts
    31,841
    Thanks
    3,839
    Thanked
    5,131 times in 3,957 posts
    • CAT-THE-FIFTH's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Less E-PEEN
      • CPU:
      • Massive E-PEEN
      • Memory:
      • RGB E-PEEN
      • Storage:
      • Not in any order
      • Graphics card(s):
      • EVEN BIGGER E-PEEN
      • PSU:
      • OVERSIZED
      • Case:
      • UNDERSIZED
      • Operating System:
      • DOS 6.22
      • Monitor(s):
      • NOT USUALLY ON....WHEN I POST
      • Internet:
      • FUNCTIONAL

    Re: NVIDIA responds to ATi's PhysX claims

    Quote Originally Posted by MadduckUK View Post
    tbh..
    From this thread:
    http://forums.hexus.net/graphics-car...s-cards-2.html

  2. #34
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Slough
    Posts
    439
    Thanks
    40
    Thanked
    28 times in 24 posts
    • Main's system
      • Motherboard:
      • ASRock 939 Dual sata-2
      • CPU:
      • A64 X2 4200 @ 2.7Ghz
      • Memory:
      • 2Gb Corsair XMS DDR400 2-3-3-6
      • Storage:
      • Various discs all over the place
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Sapphire HD4870 512mb
      • PSU:
      • Antec NeoHE 550W
      • Case:
      • Antec P160
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 7 RC
      • Monitor(s):
      • BenQ FP241W
      • Internet:
      • BT "up to 8mbit" @ ~7mbit

    Re: NVIDIA responds to ATi's PhysX claims

    Nvidia and Ati bitching at each other. I'm shocked.

    Anyway, one bit of this little spat bugs me:

    The response from nvidia doesn't actually cover the issue at all.
    Quote Originally Posted by Nadeem Mohammad's response, 5th paragraph
    As is par for the course, this is yet another completely unsubstantiated accusation made by an employee of one of our competitors. I am writing here to address it directly and call it for what it is, completely false. NVIDIA PhysX fully supports multi-core CPUs and multithreaded applications, period. Our developer tools allow developers to design their use of PhysX in PC games to take full advantage of multi-core CPUs and to fully use the multithreaded capabilities.
    Why yes, it is true that you've built a physics API that supports all that, but the wording used doesn't actually answer the question about whether that support is always available.

    His team could have built the philospher's stone (and the rest of the post tries to make it sound like they have..) but marketing isn't going to let it out of the door if it can be used to show their products in a bad light.

    Just another day in the world of business.

  3. #35
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    WI, USA
    Posts
    293
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked
    4 times in 3 posts

    Re: NVIDIA responds to ATi's PhysX claims

    Quote Originally Posted by Hicks12 View Post
    But Rollo your being completely ignorant and saying its good business practice for Nvidia to lock physx away from people who have bought both an AMD and NVIDIA card..... Now all that does is mean the people who buy a spare low end nvidia card to process extra physx cant, so they dump Nvidia's cards and just stick with the underpriced AMD equivilants from now on.... HOW IS THIS GOOD BUSINESS SENSE??

    Can you atleast listen for once in your life man.. its getting tiresome.


    So you just implied that 3d Vision isnt worthwhile to you since you buy Ati cards (yet given nvidia for free!). Lol worthy.
    I guess I just know something about business Hicks12.

    Ever consider that:
    1. The margins on the low end cards you mention might be so low that the sale of high end cards, or mid range cards with a dedicated PhysX card, might offset the revenue lost on low end cards ATi owners might buy?
    2. Ever consider that people who see the videos comparing PhysX to normal on YouTube might be inclined to want PhysX enough to only buy a NVIDIA card? And that if they opened it up to ATi cards they might lose sales of high end cards?
    3. Ever consider that NVIDIA has no control or knowledge of what ATi is doing, so changes in their hardware or drivers might break PhysX drivers and leave NVIDIA with bad press for the tech they've ivested a lot of time and money in? At the GF100 deep dive they told us they had 6 years of labor invested into their work on Batman counting all the staff they had working on it form PhysX and 3d. When you make significant investments like that in a technology, the last thing you need is posts all over the forums "Damn you NVIDIA! When the Cat. v. XYZ was released, my game started crashing".

    Basically all the arguments you guys are putting forth amount to "We want NVIDIA to spend a lot of money and labor insuring ATi customers have a good experience with NVIDIA tech. We're willing to buy some $$75 NVIDIA cards in return for that".

    I think I have pretty good comprehension of the situation.

  4. #36
    WEEEEEEEEEEEEE! MadduckUK's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Lytham St. Annes
    Posts
    17,297
    Thanks
    653
    Thanked
    1,580 times in 1,006 posts
    • MadduckUK's system
      • Motherboard:
      • MSI B450M Mortar
      • CPU:
      • AMD Ryzen 5 3600
      • Memory:
      • 32GB 3200 DDR4
      • Storage:
      • 1x480GB SSD, 1x 2TB Hybrid, 1x 3TB Rust Spinner
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Radeon 5700XT
      • PSU:
      • Corsair TX750w
      • Case:
      • Phanteks Enthoo Evolv mATX
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 10 x64
      • Monitor(s):
      • Samsung SJ55W, DELL S2409W
      • Internet:
      • Plusnet 80

    Re: NVIDIA responds to ATi's PhysX claims

    Quote Originally Posted by Rollo View Post
    I guess I just know something about business Hicks12.

    Ever consider that:
    1. The margins on the low end cards you mention might be so low that the sale of high end cards, or mid range cards with a dedicated PhysX card, might offset the revenue lost on low end cards ATi owners might buy?
    2. Ever consider that people who see the videos comparing PhysX to normal on YouTube might be inclined to want PhysX enough to only buy a NVIDIA card? And that if they opened it up to ATi cards they might lose sales of high end cards?
    3. Ever consider that NVIDIA has no control or knowledge of what ATi is doing, so changes in their hardware or drivers might break PhysX drivers and leave NVIDIA with bad press for the tech they've ivested a lot of time and money in? At the GF100 deep dive they told us they had 6 years of labor invested into their work on Batman counting all the staff they had working on it form PhysX and 3d. When you make significant investments like that in a technology, the last thing you need is posts all over the forums "Damn you NVIDIA! When the Cat. v. XYZ was released, my game started crashing".

    Basically all the arguments you guys are putting forth amount to "We want NVIDIA to spend a lot of money and labor insuring ATi customers have a good experience with NVIDIA tech. We're willing to buy some $$75 NVIDIA cards in return for that".

    I think I have pretty good comprehension of the situation.
    chicken noodles and sause does not a stir fry make
    Quote Originally Posted by Ephesians
    Do not be drunk with wine, which will ruin you, but be filled with the Spirit
    Vodka

  5. #37
    Gundam Infinite's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Southport
    Posts
    1,647
    Thanks
    150
    Thanked
    122 times in 93 posts
    • Infinite's system
      • Motherboard:
      • MSI GD80
      • CPU:
      • Intel i5 750
      • Memory:
      • Kingston 16GB
      • Storage:
      • 120GB OCZ Agility 3
      • Graphics card(s):
      • GTX 460 SLI
      • PSU:
      • Corsair HX 650W
      • Case:
      • Silverstone TJ09B-W
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 7 Pro - 64-bit
      • Monitor(s):
      • Dell S2309W
      • Internet:
      • Infinity

    Re: NVIDIA responds to ATi's PhysX claims

    Quote Originally Posted by Rollo View Post
    <snip>... they had 6 years of labor invested into their work on Batman... <snip>

  6. #38
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Carlisle
    Posts
    4,121
    Thanks
    504
    Thanked
    368 times in 278 posts
    • matty-hodgson's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Abit IP35 Dark Raider
      • CPU:
      • Q6600 @ 4GHz (59'C Under a TRUE Black)
      • Memory:
      • 4GB OCZ DDR2 890MHz (5-4-4-15)
      • Storage:
      • Intel 80GB - Games. Intel 80GB - OS. 1TB Samsung - Storage.
      • Graphics card(s):
      • NVIDIA Zotac GTX 275: 728 Core, 1614 Shader, 1340 Memory
      • PSU:
      • Enermax MODU82+ 625w
      • Case:
      • Antec 300
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 7 x64
      • Monitor(s):
      • Samsung SM2343BW (2048x1152)
      • Internet:
      • Smallworld 4Mbps

    Re: NVIDIA responds to ATi's PhysX claims

    Quote Originally Posted by Rollo View Post
    they told us they had 6 years of labor invested into their work on Batman
    Yeah, but there's over 4000 years of work gone into Avatar. So 6 years suddenly seems like nothing.

  7. #39
    Senior Member ajones's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Hampshire
    Posts
    1,143
    Thanks
    64
    Thanked
    70 times in 53 posts

    Re: NVIDIA responds to ATi's PhysX claims

    Quote Originally Posted by Rollo View Post
    I guess I just know something about business Hicks12.
    Knowing a little of the semi conductor industry myself, I would suggest that either you know nothing about the business, or that you completely oblivious to the fact that there is always more than one way to do something.

    Back to the OP, we've discussed nVidia and PhysX already on numerous occasions. We've even had what we believe are representatives from nVidia and ATi comment directly to these forums. Stop dragging it back to the same old arguament and flame other members who just want to read a post about video cards without your spam in it.

  8. #40
    Gentoo Ricer
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Galway
    Posts
    11,048
    Thanks
    1,016
    Thanked
    944 times in 704 posts
    • aidanjt's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Asus Strix Z370-G
      • CPU:
      • Intel i7-8700K
      • Memory:
      • 2x8GB Corsiar LPX 3000C15
      • Storage:
      • 500GB Samsung 960 EVO
      • Graphics card(s):
      • EVGA GTX 970 SC ACX 2.0
      • PSU:
      • EVGA G3 750W
      • Case:
      • Fractal Design Define C Mini
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 10 Pro
      • Monitor(s):
      • Asus MG279Q
      • Internet:
      • 240mbps Virgin Cable

    Re: NVIDIA responds to ATi's PhysX claims

    Quote Originally Posted by Rollo View Post
    I don't know what business you are in, but usually what business involves is trying to differentiate your product so people will buy from you, not your competitor.
    You see, the technology industry require this little thing called... S T A N D A R D S.. to work with each other correctly.

    Where IT companies can truly differentiate their products is performance, stability, value, and standards completeness.

    Shoehorning in new features is interesting (assuming they're actually useful), but not at the expense of standards compliance.
    Quote Originally Posted by Agent View Post
    ...every time Creative bring out a new card range their advertising makes it sound like they have discovered a way to insert a thousand Chuck Norris super dwarfs in your ears...

  9. #41
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    WI, USA
    Posts
    293
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked
    4 times in 3 posts

    Re: NVIDIA responds to ATi's PhysX claims

    Quote Originally Posted by matty-hodgson View Post
    Yeah, but there's over 4000 years of work gone into Avatar. So 6 years suddenly seems like nothing.
    Hmmm. They put 6 years high priced labor into a game they don't make a dime off so their users would have a better experience- AA and PhysX.

    What did Intel, ATi, S3, and Matrox put into the game for their customers? What they put in seems like nothing because it was nothing.

  10. #42
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    WI, USA
    Posts
    293
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked
    4 times in 3 posts

    Re: NVIDIA responds to ATi's PhysX claims

    Quote Originally Posted by aidanjt View Post
    You see, the technology industry require this little thing called... S T A N D A R D S.. to work with each other correctly.

    Where IT companies can truly differentiate their products is performance, stability, value, and standards completeness.

    Shoehorning in new features is interesting (assuming they're actually useful), but not at the expense of standards compliance.
    In your opinion. I bought 3DFX cards for Glide, I bought ATi cards for Truform, and now I use NVIDIA cards for PhysX and 3d Vision. I don't care about standards, I care about my gaming experience.

  11. #43
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Carlisle
    Posts
    4,121
    Thanks
    504
    Thanked
    368 times in 278 posts
    • matty-hodgson's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Abit IP35 Dark Raider
      • CPU:
      • Q6600 @ 4GHz (59'C Under a TRUE Black)
      • Memory:
      • 4GB OCZ DDR2 890MHz (5-4-4-15)
      • Storage:
      • Intel 80GB - Games. Intel 80GB - OS. 1TB Samsung - Storage.
      • Graphics card(s):
      • NVIDIA Zotac GTX 275: 728 Core, 1614 Shader, 1340 Memory
      • PSU:
      • Enermax MODU82+ 625w
      • Case:
      • Antec 300
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 7 x64
      • Monitor(s):
      • Samsung SM2343BW (2048x1152)
      • Internet:
      • Smallworld 4Mbps

    Re: NVIDIA responds to ATi's PhysX claims

    Quote Originally Posted by Rollo View Post
    *snip* labor *snip*
    It's Labour. When on a British forum, you spell OUR way, the CORRECT way.

  12. #44
    Sublime HEXUS.net
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    The Void.. Floating
    Posts
    11,819
    Thanks
    213
    Thanked
    233 times in 160 posts
    • Stoo's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Mac Pro
      • CPU:
      • 2*Xeon 5450 @ 2.8GHz, 12MB Cache
      • Memory:
      • 32GB 1600MHz FBDIMM
      • Storage:
      • ~ 2.5TB + 4TB external array
      • Graphics card(s):
      • ATI Radeon HD 4870
      • Case:
      • Mac Pro
      • Operating System:
      • OS X 10.7
      • Monitor(s):
      • 24" Samsung 244T Black
      • Internet:
      • Zen Max Pro

    Re: NVIDIA responds to ATi's PhysX claims

    Nope, British spelling is not a requirement for posting on HEXUS matty.

    Not that it matters now
    (\__/)
    (='.'=)
    (")_(")

  13. #45
    Gentoo Ricer
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Galway
    Posts
    11,048
    Thanks
    1,016
    Thanked
    944 times in 704 posts
    • aidanjt's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Asus Strix Z370-G
      • CPU:
      • Intel i7-8700K
      • Memory:
      • 2x8GB Corsiar LPX 3000C15
      • Storage:
      • 500GB Samsung 960 EVO
      • Graphics card(s):
      • EVGA GTX 970 SC ACX 2.0
      • PSU:
      • EVGA G3 750W
      • Case:
      • Fractal Design Define C Mini
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 10 Pro
      • Monitor(s):
      • Asus MG279Q
      • Internet:
      • 240mbps Virgin Cable

    Re: NVIDIA responds to ATi's PhysX claims

    Quote Originally Posted by Rollo View Post
    In your opinion. I bought 3DFX cards for Glide, I bought ATi cards for Truform, and now I use NVIDIA cards for PhysX and 3d Vision. I don't care about standards, I care about my gaming experience.
    If nobody cared about standards we'd all still be using software raster rendings (see mesa software 'accel'). That *hurts* your gaming experience.

    After all, *nobody* but nobody, would reimplemented their game engine a few dozen times just to support every graphics/physics/audio library combination out there.

    You know, for a 'lead developer' in a 'software company', you really are hopelessly dense at sane software development practices.
    Quote Originally Posted by Agent View Post
    ...every time Creative bring out a new card range their advertising makes it sound like they have discovered a way to insert a thousand Chuck Norris super dwarfs in your ears...

  14. #46
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Carlisle
    Posts
    4,121
    Thanks
    504
    Thanked
    368 times in 278 posts
    • matty-hodgson's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Abit IP35 Dark Raider
      • CPU:
      • Q6600 @ 4GHz (59'C Under a TRUE Black)
      • Memory:
      • 4GB OCZ DDR2 890MHz (5-4-4-15)
      • Storage:
      • Intel 80GB - Games. Intel 80GB - OS. 1TB Samsung - Storage.
      • Graphics card(s):
      • NVIDIA Zotac GTX 275: 728 Core, 1614 Shader, 1340 Memory
      • PSU:
      • Enermax MODU82+ 625w
      • Case:
      • Antec 300
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 7 x64
      • Monitor(s):
      • Samsung SM2343BW (2048x1152)
      • Internet:
      • Smallworld 4Mbps

    Re: NVIDIA responds to ATi's PhysX claims

    Hip hip hooray!!

  15. #47
    Senior Member Hicks12's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Plymouth-SouthWest
    Posts
    6,586
    Thanks
    1,070
    Thanked
    340 times in 293 posts
    • Hicks12's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Asus P8Z68-V
      • CPU:
      • Intel i5 2500k@4ghz, cooled by EK Supreme HF
      • Memory:
      • 8GB Kingston hyperX ddr3 PC3-12800 1600mhz
      • Storage:
      • 64GB M4/128GB M4 / WD 640GB AAKS / 1TB Samsung F3
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Palit GTX460 @ 900Mhz Core
      • PSU:
      • 675W ThermalTake ThoughPower XT
      • Case:
      • Lian Li PC-A70 with modded top for 360mm rad
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 7 Professional 64bit
      • Monitor(s):
      • Dell U2311H IPS
      • Internet:
      • 10mb/s cable from virgin media

    Re: NVIDIA responds to ATi's PhysX claims

    Quote Originally Posted by Rollo View Post
    I guess I just know something about business Hicks12. - Are you kidding me? Get off your high horse for that comment, however if it was a joke then I take that back .

    Ever consider that:
    1. The margins on the low end cards you mention might be so low that the sale of high end cards, or mid range cards with a dedicated PhysX card, might offset the revenue lost on low end cards ATi owners might buy?

    Em yeh... that is why AMD and even Nvidia concentrate on selling low end cards, you get these sales from OEM's like Dell mostly and that is HUGE, you make a hell of a lot more money from selling loads at a lower amount than a handful at a huge amount, let me give you an example:

    Graphics card A is mid range, costs £100 and you make £20 profit on each.
    Graphics card B is high end, costs £300 and you make a profit of £70 for each.

    You have a potential sales market of say 100 units for GPU A and for GPU B you have 20... GPU A sales with provide £2000 profit, GPU B will get you £1400 profit... easy to see what ones better right?
    Sell at a lower margin but have gauranteed sales and more revenue overall.



    2. Ever consider that people who see the videos comparing PhysX to normal on YouTube might be inclined to want PhysX enough to only buy a NVIDIA card? And that if they opened it up to ATi cards they might lose sales of high end cards?

    I dont think anyones said that NVIDIA are wrong for locking Physx to their cards, as far as im concerned they paid for the company and spent the time developing it and that is THEIR advantage over AMD's cards so they shouldnt have to give it up. However, the problem lies when NVIDIA are locking people out who have BOUGHT an NVIDIA card and paid that premium to have Physx. People who buy a secondry card specifically for something like Physx tend to know what they are doing! So its up to them for reliability, NVIDIA isnt hurt by this but when the customer finds out that NVIDIA have stopped them from using a feature they paid money for then they get quite pissed off.

    You dont have Windows refusing to work just because you have apple itunes installed and use it instead of WMP Do you?? Intel doesnt block the use of NVIDIA graphics with its CPU's does it? No. This is anti competitive and damn right wrong to be quite honest, you dont seem to get this part of it though Rollo, Nvidia cant lose sales because the people are still buying the hardware! However Nvidia will lose sales in the future because its pissing people off and they just CBA with NVIDIA locking them out because they have a primary AMD GPU.

    Imagine if someone had a 5770 as primary GPU but wanted to have physx so bought say a 9600GSO (or what ever the stupid rebranded versions are) for it, and are not allowed to play it because of the AMD gpu. The 5770 is probably perfect for the customer needs so why should they spend out on a new £200+ GPU when they could get a cheaper one that does everything they WANT/NEED.




    3. Ever consider that NVIDIA has no control or knowledge of what ATi is doing, so changes in their hardware or drivers might break PhysX drivers and leave NVIDIA with bad press for the tech they've ivested a lot of time and money in? At the GF100 deep dive they told us they had 6 years of labor invested into their work on Batman counting all the staff they had working on it form PhysX and 3d. When you make significant investments like that in a technology, the last thing you need is posts all over the forums "Damn you NVIDIA! When the Cat. v. XYZ was released, my game started crashing".

    Hmm? Correct me if im wrong but didnt Nvidia get Physx like 1-2 years ago? Why would NVIDIA be working on developing Physx 6 years ago when they didnt support it? Aegia could of brought out a new update that could of broke support for Nvidia's cards, OH NOES???? Just shhh about the bull please honestly.

    Basically all the arguments you guys are putting forth amount to "We want NVIDIA to spend a lot of money and labor insuring ATi customers have a good experience with NVIDIA tech. We're willing to buy some $$75 NVIDIA cards in return for that".

    No we are not saying to Nvidia spend all of your money and time getting extras that some deem worth it and then give it away for free to the competition. We are however saying that Nvidia should be PROVIDING THE CUSTOMER WITH WHAT THEY PAY FOR, a person has no real interest in who provides what card as long as they get what they ask for.... They want a good performing gpu so get AMD as they are the best performance per buck card, they want the extras too so pay the extra development cost by buying a lower end card for a dedicated Physx card, now Nvidia subsidises the cost of all their R&D etc over their range dont they? So really the customer is paying Nvidia what they should but are not getting what they wanted, instead a useless overpriced card because the competitor is currently producing much better cards.



    I think I have pretty good comprehension of the situation.
    No I dont think you have a pretty good idea of the situation, i think your a complete plonker so far.
    Last edited by dave87; 24-01-2010 at 08:32 PM. Reason: Less of the personal insults ta!
    Quote Originally Posted by snootyjim View Post
    Trust me, go into any local club and shout "I've got dual Nehalem Xeons" and all of the girls will practically collapse on the spot at the thought of your e-penis

  16. #48
    jim
    jim is offline
    HEXUS.clueless jim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Location: Location:
    Posts
    11,450
    Thanks
    613
    Thanked
    1,642 times in 1,306 posts
    • jim's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Asus Maximus IV Gene-Z
      • CPU:
      • i5 2500K @ 4.5GHz
      • Memory:
      • 8GB Corsair Vengeance LP
      • Storage:
      • 1TB Sandisk SSD
      • Graphics card(s):
      • ASUS GTX 970
      • PSU:
      • Corsair AX650
      • Case:
      • Silverstone Fortress FT03
      • Operating System:
      • 8.1 Pro
      • Monitor(s):
      • Dell S2716DG
      • Internet:
      • 10 Mbps ADSL

    Re: NVIDIA responds to ATi's PhysX claims

    Quote Originally Posted by Hicks12 View Post
    No I dont think you have a pretty good idea of the situation, i think your a complete plonker so far.
    Well, as far as I'm concerned, if he doesn't respond in the next 48 hours, he agrees with your opinions.

    Let's see.
    Last edited by jim; 25-01-2010 at 09:52 AM.

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Who's waiting for Nvidia Fermi
    By handscombmp in forum Graphics Cards
    Replies: 179
    Last Post: 24-01-2010, 08:35 PM
  2. NVIDIA, MSI, and Lucid speak about Hydra delay
    By Rollo in forum Graphics Cards
    Replies: 139
    Last Post: 23-11-2009, 01:43 PM
  3. Would you like to ask NVIDIA a question?
    By Rollo in forum Graphics Cards
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 03-11-2009, 03:24 PM
  4. Video-editing with ATI-X1900 or Nvidia 7800GTX ?
    By Artic_Kid in forum Graphics Cards
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 14-03-2006, 04:25 AM
  5. NVIDIA to launch 'open driver'?
    By Steve in forum HEXUS News
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 18-08-2005, 09:17 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •