LinkBack URL
About LinkBacksRead more.The new GPP could effectively mean AIBs will have to choose between AMD and Nvidia.
Read more.The new GPP could effectively mean AIBs will have to choose between AMD and Nvidia.
Ozaron (09-03-2018)
Well its more "gaming branded" devices than anything else - so what I gather is that you can offer AMD cards but in products not advertised towards gamers. Even people like Linus have mentioned gaming branding does mean you can charge a higher average selling price for the same parts.
Edit!!
What worries me though - is this just AMD graphics cards?? Would this all prevent AMD Ryzen based laptops using an IGP or even a Nvidia card from being advertised under gaming branding??
Last edited by CAT-THE-FIFTH; 09-03-2018 at 03:20 PM.
Good to see Hexus isn't afraid of ending up on Nvidias naughty list.
Surely it's the brand, not the being a partner? Ie the partner can be close to nVidia or AMD no problem, but the brand for nVidia has to be different. Ie Zotac vs Sapphire brands for the same AIB partner.Originally Posted by hexus
The crux of the issue with NVIDIA GPP comes down to a single requirement in order to be part of GPP. In order to have access to the GPP program, its partners must have its "Gaming Brand Aligned Exclusively With GeForce." I have read documents with this requirement spelled out on it.Basically,the crux of the matter,is HardOCP is saying ANY gaming related brand has to only use Nvidia - OEMs can equip non gaming branded devices with AMD cards,ie,those which are not targetted towards gamers.What is disturbing is that we have been told that if a company does not participate in GPP, those companies feel as if NVIDIA would hold back allocation of GPUs from their inventories. From all we have talked to, the issue of not allocating GPU inventories to non-GPP partners have not been spelled out contractually, but is rather done on a wink and a nod.
There is also no clarification if this also covers systems with AMD CPUs too,so will Nvidia endorse gaming systems using an AMD card,or will they be debranded??
Now,it also has another bigger issue - DIY graphics cards which we buy.
Companies sell higher end cards mostly as gaming devices - so does that mean OEMs like Gigabyte essentially now drop almost their entire range of AMD graphics cards outside those sold for media usage,ie,low end devices??
Or will it mean AMD powered cards get less access to the better cooling,features,etc of the gaming branded devices,ie,more basic reference ones??
Last edited by CAT-THE-FIFTH; 09-03-2018 at 03:44 PM.
Going to be fun to see the popcorn from this one. Intel got slapped by the FTC over very similar stuff.
I'm not surprised that NV is pulling this sort of lowdown stunt and threatening people by pulling preference/stock from those that dont play ball. They did it with AGEIA cards (physics was moved to gpus only and disabled if ATI/AMD cards were in the system). It was proved that it was purely a driver block as beta drivers worked fine with amd cards as primary and a 2ndary nv card for physx.
They've done it for "game optimising" apis which were also proved to "knobble" codepaths on competing cards. (this is really one that takes the cake given they begged MS to cut DX10 standards as NV cards could not do the original DX10 standards and resulted in the farce that was DX10 and then the later revisions to the standard)
Its just another bulling and anti-consumer push from NV. Forcing your partners to ONLY sell NV "gaming" cards and either pushing them to NOT sell AMD cards or sell as "unbranded" or differentiated cards is deliberate manipulation of the market.
Its just another in a long line of abuses that NV has pulled and will continue to pull.
:edit: and i do wonder if its partially aimed at Intel/AMD doing Apples new chips for macbooks (intel cpu with onboard amd gpu) It makes me laugh given that Nv pissed Apple off over bumpgate that apple posted a famous tech doc basically stating that Nv lied and failing macbooks were down to faulty Nv gpus.
As some have mentioned I'm fairly certain this is a less aggressive version of Intels anti-competitive practices.
Not solely with us? Then you don't get benefits that help you sell.
That's OK, because 'Sapphire' isn't related to 'Zotac'. On the other hand, I guess you couldn't use Zotac for nVidia, then Zotac-A for AMD.
Unless Nvidia basically says the holding company can only have one brand to sell gaming cards. That is what HardOCP is saying - ANY gaming brand. So no brand which advertises gaming. Zero.Zilch. You can call it what you want. Sell AMD cards for media usage,don't say they are for gaming.
People forget what happened to XFX - they decided to sell AMD/ATI cards and got dropped like a hot potato by Nvidia and that was because Nvidia prioritised what allocations their partners had with Fermi,forcing them to consider AMD/ATI in the first place.
It is also worrying if companies like Gigabyte end up selling more generic AMD reference cards,and then putting more effort into Nvidia ones as a result of this. Intel did the same thing with Atom,and Ultrabooks. They offered incentives on Atom so AMD had hardly any traction with their own equivalents and with the Ultrabook fund,they could only use certain stuff like unibody chassis,etc with Intel laptops.
It also has bigger implications for AMD CPUs too. Many gaming branded desktops/laptops have lower end Nvidia cards - IGPs like RR are getting close to them,and in the future if AMD actually integrates HBM2/cache to get over the bandwidth limitations,that would potentially mean entry level gaming systems running only an IGP since lower end cards look uneconomic.
So if that is the case,if Nvidia starts pushing incentives,ie,you can't get as many higher end cards,etc if you try to sell an AMD IGP based systems as entry level gaming,it might mean less effort with OEMs with AMD based systems.
The other aspect is when AMD gets more performance dGPUs out - will it be the same for companies like Dell?? Dell owns Alienware - so what happens there?? Nvidia won't allow AMD in Alienware desktops/laptops - so any AMD CPUs or dGPUs get pushed into lower tier Dell models only?? That has an impact on margins for AMD - it forces them to sell for less since their products will be in lower tier,lower margin products.
It also means AMD higher end products like their dGPUs see less exposure to consumers - almost all consumer prebuilts/laptops with high end cards tend to be gaming orientated systems.
Remember,even if AMD is going through a lean time now and mining is a big deal,there is no indication they won't be releasing more competitive dGPU products in the next two years,and that the dGPU market won't return to normal.
Nvidia is making a longterm play - not a short term one here.
The only spanner in the works,is whether Intel will decide to fight fire with fire since they have contracted AMD to make GPUs for them. They can outspend Nvidia if they feel strong enough about this.
It could turn messy and the fact is we all suffer as gamers if these two companies start duking it out!
Last edited by CAT-THE-FIFTH; 09-03-2018 at 04:55 PM.
mercyground (09-03-2018)
I don't think that's what nVidia are saying, from reading the article, but maybe I missed something. I think they're just saying that the same brand has to be unique, there's nothing saying partners have to be exclusively nVidia.
i ninja'd this from the HardOCP thread. I think it answers you nicely.
HardOCP talked to multiple people,and from what they have gathered it pretty much is Nvidia trying to own gaming brands per-se. Go back to what HardOCP said:
The crux of the issue with NVIDIA GPP comes down to a single requirement in order to be part of GPP. In order to have access to the GPP program, its partners must have its "Gaming Brand Aligned Exclusively With GeForce." I have read documents with this requirement spelled out on it.From what I gathered HardOCP made sure they consulted with lawyers before they published the article so they are pretty confident in their claims,and unless Nvidia comes out and says no 100% definitely we won't do what they claimed,then it will only add oil to the fire.What is disturbing is that we have been told that if a company does not participate in GPP, those companies feel as if NVIDIA would hold back allocation of GPUs from their inventories. From all we have talked to, the issue of not allocating GPU inventories to non-GPP partners have not been spelled out contractually, but is rather done on a wink and a nod.
Its rather cunning too - Nvidia cannot be accused of being anti-competitive since they are not stopping partners from selling AMD CPUs/GPUs in non-gaming branded products,which also as Linus said just happened to sell for more money than non-gaming branded products with the same parts. Like I said no Alienware products with an AMD dGPU(or even AMD CPU potentially) but just a Dell Inspiron.
Now consider the halo effect - more consumers see Nvidia in higher end products and will think AMD is just for cheap GPUs and CPUs,etc. It means even with the cheaper Dell Inspiron,someone might just get the Nvidia option anyway,even if AMD was a better fit for them.
The whole point of the Focus Group was to spread that crap - remember what Rollo used to say?? The whole of the Focus Group used to make those arguments,about quality,spending more,etc.
It also does not allay concerns,that companies will just make zero effort with their AMD dGPU products either - just release a few with reference coolers,and have a 100X Nvidia versions with every feature for every pocket.
Remember,I said a long play here - once Nvidia can lock in companies to using Nvidia dGPUs,then when AMD releases better dGPU products and even improved IGPs(which do compete with Nvidia lower end cards),it might start expanding to also include other parts of the AMD portfolio,ie,CPUs.
I can see why AMD is worried TBH.
OTH,it worries me just as much if Intel feels threatened and then retaliates by trying to lock out Nvidia on any competing products with their CPUs.
Intel has spent good money getting AMD to make a GPU for them,so they won't like it if Nvidia tries to screw with them indirectly too.
I want more choice,not less choice in the market!! Let the products speak for themselves!!
Sounds more to me like the school bully saying if you give him your pocket money then the other kids will continue talking to you/playing with you, or he might have to tell them not to.
I can't see any way that this can be about being nice, only about control.
As for Intel's practices, ignoring the academic subject of who won court cases or out of court settlements, I can't name a single Intel competitor who ended with their business intact.
It made me sad reading this.
I see where you're coming from, but I think nVidia do counter that when they say
And the example Kyle gives is specifically about brand:
Now imagine the RX480 launch.
No partners who had both AMD and Nvidia GPUs,ever sold anything part from a reference RX470/RX480 and sold multiple aftermarket GTX1060 cards.
Imagine if AMD launched a competitive range of of RX700 graphics cards which even fought the GTX3080TI in price/performance and even power consumption,but Alienware never stocked a single one of them,as they sell Nvidia cards and are pressured to not offer AMD options.
Instead you find a lower grade Inspirion system which might have an RX760 at best??
AMD launches the Zen3 APU,with HBM3/cache which gets over the bandwidth issue and makes lower end dGPUs look pointless. Asus wants to make an entry level gaming laptop and can't since Nvidia says no.
Hence Zen 3 APU ends up in bargain basement Asus laptops with a crappy screen,HDDs and a small battery.
Then at the same time average Joe/Jane gamer sees Nvidia in all the shiny products and ignores AMD(irrespective of price/performance) and just buys Nvidia.
If AMD had deeper pockets they might be able to fight this,but the problem is Nvidia can force this more on OEMs than AMD can,and AMD is far more thinly spread.
This is why AMD feels worried.
Its also worrying for us,since if AMD eventually just starts to give up,then we as gamers are screwed longterm. Technically speaking all they really need is a good IGP,and compute cards to sell with their servers and enough tech for consoles,etc. Gaming is no doubt nice revenue but if they can't compete then it might be prudent for them not to bother than chuck money down an endless pit TBH!
Last edited by CAT-THE-FIFTH; 10-03-2018 at 12:25 AM. Reason: Was repeating myself.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote