10 Things We Hate About Nvidia

It's unfortunate some of you disliked the headline of the article... or the article itself. I personally find Jay's insights interesting, giving us a broader view of Nvidia (the company) beyond our usual scope of consumer hardware.

Granted, the headline is a tad colorful and lighthearted (I even added the top image, which is not part of his original work -- personal homage to Heath Ledger, the best Joker ever).

I do think the article brings a good mix to our usual coverage and I was the one editing the article and vouching for it for TechSpot (headline included).
This is such a backhanded way to address criticism. It really does show, you dont value your reader's time or intelligence. This is the kind of slop we expect out of places like WCCFtech, not TechSpot. When you post articles slobbering all over Nvidia and how great they are, dont be surprised when all your reviews going forward will be tainted by your willingness to publish rags like this to the main page, defending them with your vouching.

For ****s sake, you couldnt even get the title right! There's only 8 sections in your "10 things we hate but not really LOL" title.
 
This is such a backhanded way to address criticism. It really does show, you dont value your reader's time or intelligence. ... When you post articles slobbering all over Nvidia and how great they are...

I'm the editor in chief and I'm saying upfront I decided this would be a good piece. That's not backhanded, that's being frontal about it.

I don't see slobbering anywhere either. Have you seen Nvidia sales and stock price? What the writer is saying (headline aside) where are the corporate/product/competition risks.

From the intro "we have a high degree of conviction that they will continue to lead in data center silicon for the foreseeable future .... Look for ways in which we could be wrong. In this case, we want to explore all the ways Nvidia might be vulnerable."
 
I'm the editor in chief and I'm saying upfront I decided this would be a good piece. That's not backhanded, that's being frontal about it.

I don't see slobbering anywhere either. Have you seen Nvidia sales and stock price? What the writer is saying (headline aside) where are the corporate/product/competition risks.

From the intro "we have a high degree of conviction that they will continue to lead in data center silicon for the foreseeable future .... Look for ways in which we could be wrong. In this case, we want to explore all the ways Nvidia might be vulnerable."
It's unfortunate that you dont like the way criticism is levied at you, or the content of said criticism. I'll explain this in simpler terms. When people dislike something you have created, and you respond with "it's unfortunate you dont like this", that is considered a backhanded way of dismissing criticism without acknowledging said criticism. It is deeply unpopular among internet communities. You clarifying that you like a piece does not change this fact. Hope this helps!

I have, in fact, seen Nvidia's sales and stock price. That does not make what was written competent. The article can be boiled down to "nVidia is great in this way, "x" competition/regulations\platform changes may change things, but it is not likely to stop nVidia from dominating" repeated 8 times. This "What the writer is saying [sic] where are the corporate/product/competition risks." boils down to Nvidia selling points that could have easily just been taken from the nvidia corporate website. There's nothing delving deeper into the subject. "In this case, we want to explore all the ways Nvidia might be vulnerable." Ok, great. So where is that? Are you referring to the bulletpoints of "nvidia great, competition not" as "exploration"?

Give me a break man. That is what we call "slop", the kind of thing an AI could wring out in 2 minutes and copy paste to a million different regurgitation sites. There has been no actual exploration or analysis of, well, anything beyond Nvidia's sales pitches.

You're free to disagree, as you said, you ARE the "Editor-in-chief". What gets posted to this site is your decision, and if you like this kind of content, then that's totally your right to not only like it but post it. Your community of readers, OTOH, is telling you that this is low effort garbage. They do not like it. This buzzfeed tier bingeable isn't what we expect from a technical website. This kind of parroting of nvidia talking points is very similar to what cost Toms Hardware their decade+ old reputation, resulting in them losing much of their support and turning into yet another regurgitation rag. We're telling you that this "the customer base doesnt know as well as I do" attitude is the exact same thing that big companies have done for the last decade, with disastrous results. I wont even touch the censorship issue. You're free to do with that information what you want, learn from it, dismiss it, regard me as a total imbecile, whatever man! If TechSpot gets labeled a biased site; or worse, a content mill, and ignored by the community at large, dont say we didnt warn you.
 
I personally hate that they bring awesome and fun tech like Nvidia Freestyle just to let it die, so now I know it exist but I can no longer use it :(
 
It's unfortunate some of you disliked the headline of the article... or the article itself. I personally find Jay's insights interesting, giving us a broader view of Nvidia (the company) beyond our usual scope of consumer hardware.

Granted, the headline is a tad colorful and lighthearted (I even added the top image, which is not part of his original work -- personal homage to Heath Ledger, the best Joker ever).

I do think the article brings a good mix to our usual coverage and I was the one editing the article and vouching for it for TechSpot (headline included).

IMO the headline could use toning down a bit but that's just me. I have limited time and will just proceed to something else but wanted to post in the comments to say as much. If it garners the views then it was successful but maybe next time backing off polarizing words like 'hate' might be better. And gives the headline writers more of a challenge to engage without provoking.
 
It's unfortunate some of you disliked the headline of the article... or the article itself. I personally find Jay's insights interesting, giving us a broader view of Nvidia (the company) beyond our usual scope of consumer hardware.

Granted, the headline is a tad colorful and lighthearted (I even added the top image, which is not part of his original work -- personal homage to Heath Ledger, the best Joker ever).

I do think the article brings a good mix to our usual coverage and I was the one editing the article and vouching for it for TechSpot (headline included).
Personally, I like the article, and I absolutely love testing your own thesis/convictions, but the headline means one goes into the article expecting to find 10 things the author dislikes and
1. There aren't even 10 things (there are 8 headings)
2. It is general commentary about the state of the industry and Nvidia's position in it, which I find interesting, but it isn't what the author hates about Nvidia.

It feels, as another commenter said, like bait and switch.
 
Last edited:
It's unfortunate that you dont like the way criticism is levied at you, or the content of said criticism. I'll explain this in simpler terms. When people dislike something you have created, and you respond with "it's unfortunate you dont like this", that is considered a backhanded way of dismissing criticism without acknowledging said criticism. It is deeply unpopular among internet communities. You clarifying that you like a piece does not change this fact. Hope this helps!

I have, in fact, seen Nvidia's sales and stock price. That does not make what was written competent. The article can be boiled down to "nVidia is great in this way, "x" competition/regulations\platform changes may change things, but it is not likely to stop nVidia from dominating" repeated 8 times. This "What the writer is saying [sic] where are the corporate/product/competition risks." boils down to Nvidia selling points that could have easily just been taken from the nvidia corporate website. There's nothing delving deeper into the subject. "In this case, we want to explore all the ways Nvidia might be vulnerable." Ok, great. So where is that? Are you referring to the bulletpoints of "nvidia great, competition not" as "exploration"?

Give me a break man. That is what we call "slop", the kind of thing an AI could wring out in 2 minutes and copy paste to a million different regurgitation sites. There has been no actual exploration or analysis of, well, anything beyond Nvidia's sales pitches.

You're free to disagree, as you said, you ARE the "Editor-in-chief". What gets posted to this site is your decision, and if you like this kind of content, then that's totally your right to not only like it but post it. Your community of readers, OTOH, is telling you that this is low effort garbage. They do not like it. This buzzfeed tier bingeable isn't what we expect from a technical website. This kind of parroting of nvidia talking points is very similar to what cost Toms Hardware their decade+ old reputation, resulting in them losing much of their support and turning into yet another regurgitation rag. We're telling you that this "the customer base doesnt know as well as I do" attitude is the exact same thing that big companies have done for the last decade, with disastrous results. I wont even touch the censorship issue. You're free to do with that information what you want, learn from it, dismiss it, regard me as a total imbecile, whatever man! If TechSpot gets labeled a biased site; or worse, a content mill, and ignored by the community at large, dont say we didnt warn you.
Whether or not I agree with some of your points is up in the air. But I do take issue with you using "we" and "the community" in much of your argument. No one elected you to represent us as a whole.

Apparently, I'm just too content in life to get to your level of outrage over an article that doesn't even approach the usual hot topics like politics, religion or human rights. Relax!
 
The article is fine, even pretty great. I applaud Techspot's attempts to diversify.

I'll do what Julio can't and point out that the problem is our current audience. Our guys really don't seem to care much for thoughtful. Long form stuff in general appears to be underappreciated (with a possible exception for nostalgia). Reviews are also met with disdain quite often, certainly if they don't conform 100% with the reader biases. Never mind the effort put into these things.

A lot of people seem to be mainly here for daily news that confirms their views that things are terrible, and people other than themselves are dumb, greedy, and whatever else happens to bother them at some point in time (woke!). They definitely are not looking for challenging takes, grey areas, or attempts at humor. They want to breeze through something, pile onto it with snarky one-liners, and move on.

Now, this is not exactly uncommon on the Internet. But there are still communities that somehow manage to reach escape velocity and climb out of the misery. And I hope Techspot can at some point manage to do the same!
 
Last edited:
At the end of the day, Nvidia is just doing business. And their practices are really not different from any company that grew too big and dominant.
 
This is a very bad headline since it's totally irrelevante to the content of the article, causing a unnecessary debate between readers and chef editor, causing chef editor to clarify since the beginning. It could be something like "NVIDIA, current possibilities and future threats".

Clickbait is normal nowadays but as a follower of this site since 2020, I hope that this will not become a trend on this site.
 
To be fair, NVIDIA stock would certainly take a massive hit if AI compute ends up the new 3d TV; it's the expectations of massive AI fueled sales propping up NVIDIAs share price. 20-30% hit over a year or two would be "reasonable" if the bottom falls out of AI. But NVIDIA can survive that.

The better question: Who *can't* survive if the AI bubble pops?
Nvidia have tons of buyers. Everything they make, is gone instantly. AI boom will continue for the next maaany years.

Absolutely nothing shows signs of AI stopping.

Both AMD and Intel spends tons of money to get competitive in AI, so if bubble pops, AMD and Intel loses tons of R&D funds, Nvidia already earned back the R&D costs of Hopper and Blackwell and just keeps dominating the market.

Also, Blackwell is a slot in upgrade. Fits right in DGX racks. Nvidia is not going to change this anytime soon. Which means that compainies that bought Hopper/Blackwell will buy Nvidia again next time. Companies upgrade much faster than gamers. Many of the Hopper buyers already ordered Blackwell.

The true magic behind Nvidias AI success is CUDA and their software stack in general. Everyone that actually knows anything about AI knows this too.

AMD and Intel has AI GPUs that can compete in a very limited number of tasks. Specific and cherrypicked ones. Overall tho, Nvidia is years ahead.

Nvidia is also years ahead on Gaming, Enterprise too.

Radeon Pro is a standing joke compared to Quadro for example. No CUDA, no sell.

Nvidia invented CUDA. Patented. Meaning AMD or Intel won't be able to use CUDA emulation without a lawsuit will come their way. ROCm is dead in the water.
 
This is a very bad headline since it's totally irrelevante to the content of the article, causing a unnecessary debate between readers and chef editor, causing chef editor to clarify since the beginning. It could be something like "NVIDIA, current possibilities and future threats".

Clickbait is normal nowadays but as a follower of this site since 2020, I hope that this will not become a trend on this site.

The headline is a play on the 1999 movie titled '10 Things I Hate About You', where it is directed at someone they are actually falling for. It's creative license, ffs.
 
Last edited:
This is such a backhanded way to address criticism. It really does show, you dont value your reader's time or intelligence.
Yet I've failed to see any critical post here containing even a shred of intelligence. If the best you can do is "we hate NVidia so you should too", don't expect to be taken seriously.
 
This is a very bad headline since it's totally irrelevante to the content of the article, causing a unnecessary debate between readers and chef editor, causing chef editor to clarify since the beginning. It could be something like "NVIDIA, current possibilities and future threats".

Clickbait is normal nowadays but as a follower of this site since 2020, I hope that this will not become a trend on this site.
Presumably you joined before THIS infamous email to Techspot from Nvidia.
NVIDIA's email to Walton had said that henceforward their review products would instead be allocated to other media outlets "that recognize the changing landscape of gaming and the features that are important to gamers and anyone buying a GPU today, be it for gaming, content creation, or studio and stream."
Funnily enough - It seems to have worked.
 
This is true until Quantum computing makes GPUs obsolete. :)

Sadly at the rate of things going, it's not going to happen. As much as I hate to say it, demand for AI will continue to grow, with it becoming more prevalent.

I hate it because to me AI is still just a fancy gimmick, and two because Nvidia is no longer focus on making gaming GPU's at a decent price.

Gaming will become/is already heavily dependent on AI. We already see it with the DLSS iterations, but if you look at the current definition of "AI"...isn't that what programing for games already does?
 
CUDA's lock on that market is no joke. I've done some work with neural networks in the past. I never used CUDA directly, I used tensorflow and associated utilities, and those DO support using other toolkits than CUDA. In theory. In practice....

Nvidia? Tensorflow has CUDA support out of the box. When I had a GTX650, the default tensorflow build had dropped support for the older CUDA version it supports; I could rebuild tensorflow with 1 build flag turned on and it worked fine. It was not massively faster than the CPU but did outrun it (compute model 3.0 is just missing too many features needed to run tensor/neural network stuff quickly, even a GTX750 is apparently massively faster. ) I now have a GTX1650 and there's nothing to set up on there, you install CUDA libs, you install tensorflow, everything works and it gives quite a huge speedup over the CPU.

AMD ROCm as shipped by AMD is built to only support the high end/data center GPUs -- it can be built from source to support others, but they also don't support sharing the GPU between graphical use and compute. I actually followed some instructions (which were insane, there were like 35 steps) to get a custom ROCm build with disabled GPU support re-enabled. It "ran" on the Ryzen 3450U I had at the time -- but it would not slice the GPU between graphics and compute work, and if a compute job ran more than about 10 seconds the in kernel graphics drivers assumed the GPU locked up and reset it. Which is sensible, usually if the GPU didn't respond to the graphics driver for 10 seconds it indeed has gone out to lunch; but I also found no way to disable this failsafe. So in practice tensorflow was not usable for any significant work.

Intel? I have a 11th gen Intel notebook; the NPU actually has kernel support, and there's some software support for that NPU; but it's capabilities are so weak I couldn't use it for anything (it supports processing "1D" data... I.e. linear audio.. and that's about it.) Last I looked, the GPU could do compute but was not actually useable with Tensorflow. That said, I *DO* see that Intel (just at the end of 2022) released a Tensorflow extension that is supposed to work with Intel GPUs. If so, to be honest I don't see Arc putting a big dent in Nvidia sales but at least you have an option there.
 
Last edited:
The headline is a play on the 1999 movie titled '10 Things I Hate About You', where it is directed at someone they are actually falling for. It's creative license, ffs.
Thanks. I never watched this movie (which is why I didn't get the joke the headline was making even though the editor clearly said it was a reference to some movie from 1999). And I'm not sure many other people here watched it either based on the reaction.

I'm sure the author and editor had fun putting this article together, you can see the joy that went into making it from the XKCD references and such. I quite enjoyed the article itself.

I guess the moral to the story is that, since this isn't Hard Drive or The Onion, most readers here, or at least the most vocal ones, are very particular about the expectations that are set when we read the headlines here.
 
Back