Nvidia gets anti-competitive with unsavory GeForce Partner Program

[Rygar]

Stock price != Profit

Economics 101

For an investor, stock price going up generally means profit bud. Profit for the investor. Telsa hasn't made a dime yet in terms of profit. That hasn't stopped people from making a killing on the stock.

Economics 001

 

[Flebbert]

If and when this story goes from, "a report alleges" to "Federal Regulators are looking into Nvidia" maybe it will show up on some investment sites, which will be a big break for stock pickers looking to pick up Nvidia on the dip.

Kind of like the road-bump EA stock experienced during the Starwars Battlefront 2 saga. Did you look at those charts? I don't own any, but very profitable... regardless of the fact that they were repeatedly awarded the "Most Evil Company in America" title on every tech/gamer forum there is.

Kind of like the road-bump Intel stock had with the "spectre meltdown" or unfair practices against AMD.

If AMD is, in your mind, better than Nvidia at hardware, software, drivers, etc ALL AT A CHEAPER PRICE - then why are 75%+ players on Steam using Nvidia? AMD is not a bad company. I've invested in them as well. I just don't try to kid myself and pretend these two play in the same league.

All this is because of unfair competitive practices? Is that what you are telling yourself?

AMD isn't better than Nvidia, they are both guilty of pulling crap like this in the past.

Nvidia did a really great marketing job of convincing the world that AMD make rubbish products and they did a a lot of that by sending expensive cards free to tech reviewers, sponsoring reviews etc etc etc. Which to be honest they all do.

The problem that generally occurs is that AMD get criticized for not having a competitive product and labeled as cheap crap (which to be fair bulldozer was) but when they have something come to market that is pretty great (Ryzen) they get punished for not having the fastest CPU in the world for $1 with a free car.

They are destined to be the company that can never WIN and no mater what they release people will always buy Nvidia and Intel.........

Note: Have a 1080TI because I was disappointed with Vega 64 but reality is it would have suited my needs and cost a whole lot less.

 

[Rygar]

AMD isn't better than Nvidia, they are both guilty of pulling crap like this in the past.

Nvidia did a really great marketing job of convincing the world that AMD make rubbish products and they did a a lot of that by sending expensive cards free to tech reviewers, sponsoring reviews etc etc etc. Which to be honest they all do.

The problem that generally occurs is that AMD get criticized for not having a competitive product and labeled as cheap crap (which to be fair bulldozer was) but when they have something come to market that is pretty great (Ryzen) they get punished for not having the fastest CPU in the world for $1 with a free car.

They are destined to be the company that can never WIN and no mater what they release people will always buy Nvidia and Intel.........

Note: Have a 1080TI because I was disappointed with Vega 64 but reality is it would have suited my needs and cost a whole lot less.

I agree they both are to blame for this. I do give AMD credit for Ryzen and I would be much more likely to buy an AMD CPU than I would an AMD GPU - now that they have Ryzen. I am quite happy with my de-lidded i7-7700k at 5.0 Ghz though as clock speed, currently, is much more important to gaming than is the number of cores.

When AMD can beat or equal the equivalent of a 1080ti, hopefully without the heat issues most of their cards have even in aftermarket form, people will change from Nvidia to AMD. Problem is everything AMD can do, Nvidia can do better. Even if they do release a new GPU that smokes the current Nvidia king, you can pretty much bet Nvidia will release something better immediately. That's why Nvidia always wins and AMD always loses. I'm not saying that cant change, but the 8-ball says not likely.

The best part for investors though is Nvidia has grown farrrr beyond its original gaming footstep. AMD as an investment isn't bad, it's just very slow, although rumors of a possible outside company acquiring them has made it move a bit recently.

 

[Evernessince]

For an investor, stock price going up generally means profit bud. Profit for the investor. Telsa hasn't made a dime yet in terms of profit. That hasn't stopped people from making a killing on the stock.

Economics 001

You contradicted yourself.

"stock price going up generally means profit bud"

"Telsa hasn't made a dime yet in terms of profit"

and yet Tesla's stock price keeps going up.

Hmm, methinks your generalizations are incorrect. Economics 001 isn't even a thing. It's like your the 2nd guy in the bar going "Oh yeah well I'm super duper smarts!".

All this is besides the point that this whole stock BS is a scarecrow argument. You have yet to respond on point and I'm sure it's because you can't retort. It's a typical argument used when someone can't counter-argue on the whole and must try and distract by constantly taking an argument else where.

You took the argument from

"Intel and AMD team up and try to shut Nvidia out of the gaming laptop market. Nvidia works to shut AMD even further out of the desktop GPU market (which Intel isn't in) and then reacts defensively to protect itself in the gaming laptop market by providing monetary incentives to partners. This is business as usual for all three companies."

to stocks after I disproved your 'There is no evidence claim' and your 'This was a defensive move by Nvidia claim'. Both are obviously and blatantly false statements and that's proven since you keep changing the subject to get away. Aside from the fact that you try to brush this off as "business as usual" when it is clearly not. If it was it wouldn't have made headlines everywhere.

It's a good thing you admitted to being an Nvidia investor though. You are here because you want to spread pro Nvidia propaganda to control the damage and line your own pockets. Why should anyone listen to you when you are so obviously self invested? Investors coming to a forum and pretending to act in other's self interest, that's morally and ethically pathetic.

Your comment of admission

"I got in on Nvidia when it was $116.00/s. Thanks for the investing tip."

AMD isn't better than Nvidia, they are both guilty of pulling crap like this in the past.

Nvidia did a really great marketing job of convincing the world that AMD make rubbish products and they did a a lot of that by sending expensive cards free to tech reviewers, sponsoring reviews etc etc etc. Which to be honest they all do.

The problem that generally occurs is that AMD get criticized for not having a competitive product and labeled as cheap crap (which to be fair bulldozer was) but when they have something come to market that is pretty great (Ryzen) they get punished for not having the fastest CPU in the world for $1 with a free car.

They are destined to be the company that can never WIN and no mater what they release people will always buy Nvidia and Intel.........

Note: Have a 1080TI because I was disappointed with Vega 64 but reality is it would have suited my needs and cost a whole lot less.

Stop trying to appease that guy, he's a Nvidia investor. He admitted so himself. His opinion is going to be inherently stinted.. AMD have NEVER pulled monopolistic practices like this before. If you can provide proof of such I'd like to see it. You are guilty of doing what you just accused others of doing, AMD steps the slightest bit out of line and everyone gives them crap for it. Nvidia lies about the specs of it's cards and everyone gives it a pass but if AMD so much as mis-markets their video cards everyone's up in arms. Both things are bad but saying they are both equal is absolutely false equivalence.

 

[Flebbert]

For an investor, stock price going up generally means profit bud. Profit for the investor. Telsa hasn't made a dime yet in terms of profit. That hasn't stopped people from making a killing on the stock.

Economics 001

You contradicted yourself.

"stock price going up generally means profit bud"

"Telsa hasn't made a dime yet in terms of profit"

and yet Tesla's stock price keeps going up.

Hmm, methinks your generalizations are incorrect. Economics 001 isn't even a thing. It's like your the 2nd guy in the bar going "Oh yeah well I'm super duper smarts!".

All this is besides the point that this whole stock BS is a scarecrow argument. You have yet to respond on point and I'm sure it's because you can't retort. It's a typical argument used when someone can't counter-argue on the whole and must try and distract by constantly taking an argument else where.

You took the argument from

"Intel and AMD team up and try to shut Nvidia out of the gaming laptop market. Nvidia works to shut AMD even further out of the desktop GPU market (which Intel isn't in) and then reacts defensively to protect itself in the gaming laptop market by providing monetary incentives to partners. This is business as usual for all three companies."

to stocks after I disproved your 'There is no evidence claim' and your 'This was a defensive move by Nvidia claim'. Both are obviously and blatantly false statements and that's proven since you keep changing the subject to get away. Aside from the fact that you try to brush this off as "business as usual" when it is clearly not. If it was it wouldn't have made headlines everywhere.

It's a good thing you admitted to being an Nvidia investor though. You are here because you want to spread pro Nvidia propaganda to control the damage and line your own pockets. Why should anyone listen to you when you are so obviously self invested? Investors coming to a forum and pretending to act in other's self interest, that's morally and ethically pathetic.

Your comment of admission

"I got in on Nvidia when it was $116.00/s. Thanks for the investing tip."

AMD isn't better than Nvidia, they are both guilty of pulling crap like this in the past.

Nvidia did a really great marketing job of convincing the world that AMD make rubbish products and they did a a lot of that by sending expensive cards free to tech reviewers, sponsoring reviews etc etc etc. Which to be honest they all do.

The problem that generally occurs is that AMD get criticized for not having a competitive product and labeled as cheap crap (which to be fair bulldozer was) but when they have something come to market that is pretty great (Ryzen) they get punished for not having the fastest CPU in the world for $1 with a free car.

They are destined to be the company that can never WIN and no mater what they release people will always buy Nvidia and Intel.........

Note: Have a 1080TI because I was disappointed with Vega 64 but reality is it would have suited my needs and cost a whole lot less.

Stop trying to appease that guy, he's a Nvidia investor. He admitted so himself. His opinion is going to be inherently stinted.. AMD have NEVER pulled monopolistic practices like this before. If you can provide proof of such I'd like to see it. You are guilty of doing what you just accused others of doing, AMD steps the slightest bit out of line and everyone gives them crap for it. Nvidia lies about the specs of it's cards and everyone gives it a pass but if AMD so much as mis-markets their video cards everyone's up in arms. Both things are bad but saying they are both equal is absolutely false equivalence.

I like this video from AdoredTV: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-0LSZJyA0F8

It provides examples of a number of companies including the big three that have "cheated", determining which "cheat or lie" is the worst is always hard and I generally think that if a company thinks they can get away with it they will. The more money they have the riskier they tend to be as money makes people feel powerful and safe.

There is a lot still to be confirmed around the current issue but partners not willing to go on record normally would mean that Nvidia are strong arming (either with official policy or behind closed doors) and partners are worried about the repercussions from Nvidia.

As I mentioned above AMD unfortunately will be the company that can never WIN because of the label "cheap", "rubbish" etc which is a shame really. It shows the influence that marketing really has. Nvidia have influenced what people think of AMD a lot but AMD have to take some of the blame to with rubbish products in the past.

Lisa Su is a great engineer and will do a lot for AMD, Raj was never meant to build a powerful GPU for high end gaming, it is obvious now this was really designed for workstation compute and super thin / power efficient devices.

 

[Jules Mark]

You seem angry bro... maybe less Redbull?

The funny thing is you compare Nvidia to EA or Martin Shkrelli. Do you even know what Pharma bro is going to jail for, cause it sure isn't for raising the price of Daraprim (Greed). Look it up. He may have drawn the ire of investigators by pissing all over our elected representatives, but they busted him for a 100% unrelated fraud.

Nvidia has consistently released amazing cards, wiping the floor with AMD and the recent 1080ti released for the same price as the previous 980ti. I have been a customer of Nvidia for far longer than I've been an investor. They make the best products, far and away the best software/drivers. added things like easy recording and instant replay. I made the mistake of buying an R9-280x and while the card was fine, the drivers were always crap. Nvidia and AMD aren't even playing in the same league. Varsity and JV.

In no way, shape or form does Nvidia compare - in customer appreciation - to EA or Martin Shkrelli. So your comparison is pointless.

Do I advocate for people like Shkrelli? No. Do I believe this article from Techspot 100%? No.
You have 0 proof. An unnamed source from an unnamed partner. If you are going to go on the record and accuse a company as large as Nvidia of "illegal' practices, a little more is required than simple he said, she said imho.

Ask yourself this: Why is AMD shopping this story around to... wait where am I... Techspot? Why isn't AMD "shopping" this story to Federal Regulators? Why is this not reported anywhere else than... Techspot? Did they just get the Wall Street Scoop of the year?? Doubtful.

Sound like a NVDA shareholder to me.

 

[Jules Mark]

Oh BTW Rygar, AMD isn't in the same boat as Intel, Nvidia as you would like to mention.

AMD is part of HSA Foundation, who dedicate to OPEN and FREE standards, something which you obviously have no clue.

 

[rudragod]

This looks like a total non-story. The whole article relies on this: "which Bennett read but decided not to publish. This component states that GPP partners must have their “gaming brand aligned exclusively with GeForce”." which is clearly a direct contradiction of Nvidia's published statement.
So we have an unsupported claim by a news generator (aka agent provocateur) versus a published statement from Nvidia. I think the first thing any investigation (or even a reputable tech blog), would do is find out if the unsupported claim is in fact correct.

It is not a contradiction....

They claim the partners can continue to sell and promote products from anyone, but in reality, it is a clear manipulative statement to let themselves be seen as good and benevolent, while they really aren't. The statement is stated in such a way, as if the partners can continue to sell and promote gaming products from anyone just as well. But this is not a reasonable thought. Since the gaming brand must be used exclusively with Geforce, they are no longer allowed to sell and promote products from anyone that right now would use the same gaming brand.

In other words... Joining the program means that AMD can no longer be advertised as a gaming product at all under the popular gaming brands. nVidia would definitely want the whole ROG gaming brand by Asus, the whole Gaming brand by MSI, the whole AORUS + Windforce brand by Gigabyte, all for themselves. AMD's cards would have to be sold under Radeon only, practically.
Even more striking.... That also means no more motherboards with those brands. Taking Asus as an example, it would mean that AMD and Intel are restricted to the inferior Prime brand compared to ROG, making nVidia seem better than the rest, while in reality they are simply restricting their competition from being built in conjunction with quality components.

And what would happen with other peripherals? No more ROG laptops that does not have an nVidia GPU in it. Even ROG Mice are out of the picture, despite nVidia having to do nothing with that market.

This looks like a total non-story. The whole article relies on this: "which Bennett read but decided not to publish. This component states that GPP partners must have their “gaming brand aligned exclusively with GeForce”." which is clearly a direct contradiction of Nvidia's published statement.
So we have an unsupported claim by a news generator (aka agent provocateur) versus a published statement from Nvidia. I think the first thing any investigation (or even a reputable tech blog), would do is find out if the unsupported claim is in fact correct.

It is not a contradiction....

They claim the partners can continue to sell and promote products from anyone, but in reality, it is a clear manipulative statement to let themselves be seen as good and benevolent, while they really aren't. The statement is stated in such a way, as if the partners can continue to sell and promote gaming products from anyone just as well. But this is not a reasonable thought. Since the gaming brand must be used exclusively with Geforce, they are no longer allowed to sell and promote products from anyone that right now would use the same gaming brand.

In other words... Joining the program means that AMD can no longer be advertised as a gaming product at all under the popular gaming brands. nVidia would definitely want the whole ROG gaming brand by Asus, the whole Gaming brand by MSI, the whole AORUS + Windforce brand by Gigabyte, all for themselves. AMD's cards would have to be sold under Radeon only, practically.
Even more striking.... That also means no more motherboards with those brands. Taking Asus as an example, it would mean that AMD and Intel are restricted to the inferior Prime brand compared to ROG, making nVidia seem better than the rest, while in reality they are simply restricting their competition from being built in conjunction with quality components.

And what would happen with other peripherals? No more ROG laptops that does not have an nVidia GPU in it. Even ROG Mice are out of the picture, despite nVidia having to do nothing with that market.

calm down
for NVIDIA, asus will use ASUS ROG republic of Gamer name
For AMD, asus will use ASUS ROM Republic of Miner name
LOL

 

[NightAntilli]

calm down
for NVIDIA, asus will use ASUS ROG republic of Gamer name
For AMD, asus will use ASUS ROM Republic of Miner name
LOL

Even though it's obvious that you're joking, even this has its implications. ROG is a well established brand already, ROM is not. So it would put AMD at an unfair disadvantage against nVidia.

 

[Theinsanegamer]

AMD isn't better than Nvidia, they are both guilty of pulling crap like this in the past.

Nvidia did a really great marketing job of convincing the world that AMD make rubbish products and they did a a lot of that by sending expensive cards free to tech reviewers, sponsoring reviews etc etc etc. Which to be honest they all do.

The problem that generally occurs is that AMD get criticized for not having a competitive product and labeled as cheap crap (which to be fair bulldozer was) but when they have something come to market that is pretty great (Ryzen) they get punished for not having the fastest CPU in the world for $1 with a free car.

They are destined to be the company that can never WIN and no mater what they release people will always buy Nvidia and Intel.........

Note: Have a 1080TI because I was disappointed with Vega 64 but reality is it would have suited my needs and cost a whole lot less.

So you go on about how nvidia's marketing convinced everybody AMD was garbage, then you yourself admit to buying an nvidia GPU, despite the AMD model suiting your needs and being far cheaper, because it was "disappointing".

Talk about torpedoing your own argument.

AMD has consistently disappointing in the last 4-5 years, with a couple bright spots thrown in. This is why AMD has a reputation for being garbage. They dropped the ball with the 300, 400, and 500 lines, they dropped the ball with VEGA, bulldozer was just an abomination that tanked their reputation across both the mobile and desktop industries and cost them what server market they had, ece. The 700 and x200 series were great, but even then the writing was on the wall that AMD didnt know what it was doing, with the 200 series full of rebrands.

Sounds to me like it wasnt just nvidia's marketing that convinced people AMD was garbage, with was AMD taking that marketing as gospel and consistently finding new ways to screw up. Heck, it wasnt until late 2016 that they finally started fixing some of the long standing issues with their drivers, and there are still some long term bugs that have yet to be fixed.

AMD has some good products now, ryzen and raven ridge are what AMD should have been doing years ago. Now the question becomes 'will AMD release new, consistently better generations, or is this another athlon 64/phenom II situation where the replacement generation will suck?'. And AMD has nothing in the GPU pipeline, vague promises with NAVI are all we have, VEGA has failed to make a significant impact, and nvidia controls the high end market.

"Nvidia has consistently released amazing cards"

Drink enough kool-aid or just too young to remember pre-700 series cards?

"They make the best products, far and away the best software/drivers"

Nvidia's drivers aren't "far and away the best" by any means. They are good but so are AMDs. If by software you meant GameWorks, it it utter trash. You aren't even trying to appear unbiased here.

Funny enough, I am old enough to remember back to the geforce 4 days. Pre 700, you had the 600 series, which were quite competitive with the 7000 line and didnt carry AMD's at the time abysmal driver support. You had the 500 series, which ran unopposed in the high end because AMD rested on their laurels with the 5000 series and rebranded them for the 6000s, caught completely off guard with the 580. The 400 series was hot trash (literally) and promptly got smashed by AMD's 5000 line. The main reason the 5000 series didnt do better? Drivers. AMD's 5000 driver support was abysmal, this was a time when you had to regularly switch catalyst versions depending on what game you had, and god help you if you had crossfire. Nvidia and SLI were a godsend by comparison.

does AMD have a not-so-accurate reputation? Perhaps. There are a lot of people who remember when AMD's drivers were horrible, as this only fixed itself near the end of 2016 IIRC. That reputation was earned by AMD, and the only way to get rid of it will be several consistent generations of fantastic support.

Given VEGA, I dont see that happening.

 

[atari1980]

Funny enough, I am old enough to remember back to the geforce 4 days. Pre 700, you had the 600 series, which were quite competitive with the 7000 line and didnt carry AMD's at the time abysmal driver support. You had the 500 series, which ran unopposed in the high end because AMD rested on their laurels with the 5000 series and rebranded them for the 6000s, caught completely off guard with the 580. The 400 series was hot trash (literally) and promptly got smashed by AMD's 5000 line. The main reason the 5000 series didnt do better? Drivers. AMD's 5000 driver support was abysmal, this was a time when you had to regularly switch catalyst versions depending on what game you had, and god help you if you had crossfire. Nvidia and SLI were a godsend by comparison.

The AMD Radeon 5870 was a revelation for me, prior to that I was always buying nvidia, from a Geforce 2 MX 400, to the 4400 ti, then the 6600, the underperforming 7800 GS at the GTX price, to my short lived 8800GTX and 8800GT (remember the bumpgate?).

Then I got the 280 GTX, which was overheating after 30 seconds in Crysis. It was ruled defective and had to wait about a month for a replacement (the 280 GTX were all recalled). Annoyed, I decided to replace it by a 260 FTW.

The drivers from nvidia were horrible, buggy and sluggish, also had to switch from WHQL to Beta all the time for new games.

To me the AMD drivers were a lot less bloated, more responsive, and switching screen didn't need 20 clicks and 30 seconds.

Every new drivers the 5870 got better. I havent looked back since then, my 290 still serves me well, overclocks like a champ (+125mhz on core) and is still getting better with newer drivers. Got the 5870 at release and didn't need to change until 2 years ago for the 290. Both of them are reference and are still in use/working. Can't say that with nvidia, all of them died (except the MX400 and the 6600) and none were overclocked.

To me nvidia is all marketing and software gimmicks that tends to break every other games until they resolve it but with a scaled back performance on the game that used that gimmick.

 

[atari1980]

Forgot to mention. I also got an nforce 750 based (evga FTW - $$$$) motherboard.

Which was supposed to be one of the 'best' motherboard out there. The fastest chipset money could buy at the time.

But it had a corruption problem (the 780 chipset was even having data hdd corruption),I would watch some video on youtube and it would freeze my computer, then reset, everytime. it never was resolved - only mitigated somehow, how ? by adding latency (which then defeated the purpose of this chipset). you can look it up, it was a pretty well documented hardware flaw, and nvidia was really slow to respond, with a software 'fix' that slowed it's chipset .

I really tried to like nvidia. They may have great engineering on paper, but the execution was quite poor and buggy for most of their products, cheap components, cheap materials on the gpu itself.

Like I said, marketing and gimmicks (and lots of money).

 

[Evernessince]

So you go on about how nvidia's marketing convinced everybody AMD was garbage, then you yourself admit to buying an nvidia GPU, despite the AMD model suiting your needs and being far cheaper, because it was "disappointing".

Talk about torpedoing your own argument.

AMD has consistently disappointing in the last 4-5 years, with a couple bright spots thrown in. This is why AMD has a reputation for being garbage. They dropped the ball with the 300, 400, and 500 lines, they dropped the ball with VEGA, bulldozer was just an abomination that tanked their reputation across both the mobile and desktop industries and cost them what server market they had, ece. The 700 and x200 series were great, but even then the writing was on the wall that AMD didnt know what it was doing, with the 200 series full of rebrands.

Sounds to me like it wasnt just nvidia's marketing that convinced people AMD was garbage, with was AMD taking that marketing as gospel and consistently finding new ways to screw up. Heck, it wasnt until late 2016 that they finally started fixing some of the long standing issues with their drivers, and there are still some long term bugs that have yet to be fixed.

AMD has some good products now, ryzen and raven ridge are what AMD should have been doing years ago. Now the question becomes 'will AMD release new, consistently better generations, or is this another athlon 64/phenom II situation where the replacement generation will suck?'. And AMD has nothing in the GPU pipeline, vague promises with NAVI are all we have, VEGA has failed to make a significant impact, and nvidia controls the high end market.



Funny enough, I am old enough to remember back to the geforce 4 days. Pre 700, you had the 600 series, which were quite competitive with the 7000 line and didnt carry AMD's at the time abysmal driver support. You had the 500 series, which ran unopposed in the high end because AMD rested on their laurels with the 5000 series and rebranded them for the 6000s, caught completely off guard with the 580. The 400 series was hot trash (literally) and promptly got smashed by AMD's 5000 line. The main reason the 5000 series didnt do better? Drivers. AMD's 5000 driver support was abysmal, this was a time when you had to regularly switch catalyst versions depending on what game you had, and god help you if you had crossfire. Nvidia and SLI were a godsend by comparison.

does AMD have a not-so-accurate reputation? Perhaps. There are a lot of people who remember when AMD's drivers were horrible, as this only fixed itself near the end of 2016 IIRC. That reputation was earned by AMD, and the only way to get rid of it will be several consistent generations of fantastic support.

Given VEGA, I dont see that happening.

At least you are willing to admit that AMD's reputation is somewhat unearned, of which I can agree with. AMD's marketing department has always been a huge headache for them, over promising. They did it with Bulldozer and Vega. Not that it was as bad as some of things Nvidia's done though.

 

[Flebbert]

AMD isn't better than Nvidia, they are both guilty of pulling crap like this in the past.

Nvidia did a really great marketing job of convincing the world that AMD make rubbish products and they did a a lot of that by sending expensive cards free to tech reviewers, sponsoring reviews etc etc etc. Which to be honest they all do.

The problem that generally occurs is that AMD get criticized for not having a competitive product and labeled as cheap crap (which to be fair bulldozer was) but when they have something come to market that is pretty great (Ryzen) they get punished for not having the fastest CPU in the world for $1 with a free car.

They are destined to be the company that can never WIN and no mater what they release people will always buy Nvidia and Intel.........

Note: Have a 1080TI because I was disappointed with Vega 64 but reality is it would have suited my needs and cost a whole lot less.

So you go on about how nvidia's marketing convinced everybody AMD was garbage, then you yourself admit to buying an nvidia GPU, despite the AMD model suiting your needs and being far cheaper, because it was "disappointing".

Talk about torpedoing your own argument.

AMD has consistently disappointing in the last 4-5 years, with a couple bright spots thrown in. This is why AMD has a reputation for being garbage. They dropped the ball with the 300, 400, and 500 lines, they dropped the ball with VEGA, bulldozer was just an abomination that tanked their reputation across both the mobile and desktop industries and cost them what server market they had, ece. The 700 and x200 series were great, but even then the writing was on the wall that AMD didnt know what it was doing, with the 200 series full of rebrands.

Sounds to me like it wasnt just nvidia's marketing that convinced people AMD was garbage, with was AMD taking that marketing as gospel and consistently finding new ways to screw up. Heck, it wasnt until late 2016 that they finally started fixing some of the long standing issues with their drivers, and there are still some long term bugs that have yet to be fixed.

AMD has some good products now, ryzen and raven ridge are what AMD should have been doing years ago. Now the question becomes 'will AMD release new, consistently better generations, or is this another athlon 64/phenom II situation where the replacement generation will suck?'. And AMD has nothing in the GPU pipeline, vague promises with NAVI are all we have, VEGA has failed to make a significant impact, and nvidia controls the high end market.

"Nvidia has consistently released amazing cards"

Drink enough kool-aid or just too young to remember pre-700 series cards?

"They make the best products, far and away the best software/drivers"

Nvidia's drivers aren't "far and away the best" by any means. They are good but so are AMDs. If by software you meant GameWorks, it it utter trash. You aren't even trying to appear unbiased here.

Funny enough, I am old enough to remember back to the geforce 4 days. Pre 700, you had the 600 series, which were quite competitive with the 7000 line and didnt carry AMD's at the time abysmal driver support. You had the 500 series, which ran unopposed in the high end because AMD rested on their laurels with the 5000 series and rebranded them for the 6000s, caught completely off guard with the 580. The 400 series was hot trash (literally) and promptly got smashed by AMD's 5000 line. The main reason the 5000 series didnt do better? Drivers. AMD's 5000 driver support was abysmal, this was a time when you had to regularly switch catalyst versions depending on what game you had, and god help you if you had crossfire. Nvidia and SLI were a godsend by comparison.

does AMD have a not-so-accurate reputation? Perhaps. There are a lot of people who remember when AMD's drivers were horrible, as this only fixed itself near the end of 2016 IIRC. That reputation was earned by AMD, and the only way to get rid of it will be several consistent generations of fantastic support.

Given VEGA, I dont see that happening.

I don't think you understand my point, if anything I am an example of exactly what has occurred with Nvidia and AMD.

I bought into the I need to have the fastest crap from Nvidia and AMD over sold what they were going to release....

 

[Evernessince]

Long Interview with PCWorld authors and GPP expose author

 

[NightAntilli]

 

[wizardB]

So what you're saying is it's business as underhandedly as usual for Nvidia, they've been one of the most dishonest companies in tech forever. Since their days of buying 3DFX and basically ripping the guts out of one of the best companies of the time, frame rates that are only high because they don't render the complete scene and every other scam they've pulled over the years why should we expect better from the dirtbags that run that outfit.

 

[bohemond1099]

This looks like a total non-story. The whole article relies on this: "which Bennett read but decided not to publish. This component states that GPP partners must have their “gaming brand aligned exclusively with GeForce”." which is clearly a direct contradiction of Nvidia's published statement.
So we have an unsupported claim by a news generator (aka agent provocateur) versus a published statement from Nvidia. I think the first thing any investigation (or even a reputable tech blog), would do is find out if the unsupported claim is in fact correct.

It is not a contradiction....

They claim the partners can continue to sell and promote products from anyone, but in reality, it is a clear manipulative statement to let themselves be seen as good and benevolent, while they really aren't. The statement is stated in such a way, as if the partners can continue to sell and promote gaming products from anyone just as well. But this is not a reasonable thought. Since the gaming brand must be used exclusively with Geforce, they are no longer allowed to sell and promote products from anyone that right now would use the same gaming brand.

In other words... Joining the program means that AMD can no longer be advertised as a gaming product at all under the popular gaming brands. nVidia would definitely want the whole ROG gaming brand by Asus, the whole Gaming brand by MSI, the whole AORUS + Windforce brand by Gigabyte, all for themselves. AMD's cards would have to be sold under Radeon only, practically.
Even more striking.... That also means no more motherboards with those brands. Taking Asus as an example, it would mean that AMD and Intel are restricted to the inferior Prime brand compared to ROG, making nVidia seem better than the rest, while in reality they are simply restricting their competition from being built in conjunction with quality components.

And what would happen with other peripherals? No more ROG laptops that does not have an nVidia GPU in it. Even ROG Mice are out of the picture, despite nVidia having to do nothing with that market.

AMD would have XFX though! As far as I know they exclusively do AMD?

 

[NightAntilli]

AMD would have XFX though! As far as I know they exclusively do AMD?

Sure. They have XFX, Sapphire, and now also Asrock.

 

[WolfMonster]

NVidia will continue to dominated the graphic card business. AMD can hardly compete vega cards could hardly compete with
nvidia's cards that were over a year old.

Nothing you said here has anything whatsoever to do with this story, you're just fishing for somebody to take this obvious troll bait.

Agreed. We all know that while Vega, sadly didn't touch GTX1080Ti (or the Titans) it did put a ton of pressure on the GTX1080 and GTX1070 so much so NVidia released the GTX1070Ti (with strict rules about not overclocking and surpassing the 1080 series.) So while NVidia still holds the fastest/most powerful it still has felt a lot of heat from AMD.

 

[WolfMonster]

Debunked? one person replied and misinterpreted everything they replied to.

I think my initial post is clear enough for them to re-read and understand that, saving me time in not having to reply to each case.

Seriously?

They can sell whomever's GPUs they want: which is non-exclusivity. Apparently for the GPP, this is true of NON GAMING CARDS ONLY. This makes their statement misleading... a half-truth. A half-truth is not the whole truth; it's more of a lie than the truth.

My thoughts on GPP.

1: Exclusivity

1a) GPP isn't exclusive at all
Conclusions:
- No downsides
- Improved efficiency of Nvidia graphics cards duo to improved co-operation between Nvidia and GPP partners.

Improved efficiency to the levels NVidia will allow.

- Consumer is more informed as to which add-in card and system partners are set up to make the best Geforce Graphics cards.

They can't determine now what cards use what GPUs?

Evidence for: Nvidia Publically says "The program isn't exclusive".

Evidence showing one strickly can not work with both Nvidia and AMD, none.

1b)GPP Partners can still make Graphics cards with other companies but the gaming brand they use with Nvidia GPUs can only be used with Nvidia GPUs under the Geforce brand.

Explain please HOW there is no evidence, when you state clearly that there is? You yourself state that the Gaming monikers have to be exclusive. That goes against non-exclusivity.

Conclusions:
- Seems fair since the reputation of the Graphics cards using Nvidia GPUs is tied to the reputation of the gaming brand.
It would seem unfair if the ROG brand using Nvidia GPUs for years were then to be used with AMD GPUs.
If ROG got a good reputation from the efficiency of the Nvidia GPUs it could then use that reputation to boost AMD GPU sales by using the same brand.
Keeping Geforce brand with Nvidia GPUs makes it more transparent. The AIBs and OEMs can still be consistent with the brand name used with AMD GPUs, in fact they are more likely to do so now, helping transparency.

As already stated. ROG belongs to Asus, GeForce belongs to NVidia. AMD and their AiBs don't and can't use GeForce as it's tradmarked. Asus, MSI, ASRock, Gigabyte, everyone else, cannot use the name GeForce when it comes to computer parts as NVidia, will under the law, have a legal right to sue them for trademark infringement. The only way they can is if a NVidia GeForce part is on the part.

ROG gets its reputation, not from NVidia, but from the build quality, and the cooling solutions, not the specific chip on-board.

-Unhealthy if the AIBs & OEMs are only allowed one gaming brand each and that has to be aligned with either Nvidia or not.
Of course then their brand with AMD just has to not call itself a gaming brand, but its still bad. Either way there are zero hardware or software limitations, only branding.

You IGNORE PhysX forced to use only NVidia GPUs: if one isn't present, it forces CPU use, which loads down the CPU.
You IGNORE GodRays
You don't fully acknowledge HairWorks' impact.
You IGNORE GameWorks

Evidence:
Nvidia: "This transparency is only possible when NVIDIA brands and partner brands are consistent."

Nvidia: "They see the benefit of keeping brands and communication consistent and transparent."

ALLEGEDLY-> Kyle: "its partners must have its "Gaming Brand Aligned Exclusively With GeForce." <- ALLEGEDLY

This allegation wasn't just pulled out of his hat, it was obtained from those who did speak anonymously. (which in reality IS different than "off the record") Disreputable websites do cash on on that technique, but reputable ones won't cover false info that way.

He doesn't prove this, he has no facts to back it up and has no on the record interviews.
Its an unsubstantiated claim from someone who claims his "lawyers have signed off on going forward", who claims to have "read documents with this requirement" that is "the The crux of the issue with NVIDIA GPP"
and yet he does not provide any documents to prove it. It is within his own interests to share any facts or on the record information he has and yet he hasn't shared any, it is also within his interests to leak new information and
get his article views. So Kyles claim may be untrue.

You're expecting full disclosure, despite potential penalties (legal or business) to having it. There are also no facts to back up what has been said off the record isn't factual either. HardOCP and TechSpot are not exactly known for shoveling out fake news either.

2: Transparency:

2a) Who is part of GPP?
No offcial answer yet.

IMO: Nvidia are probably waiting until AIBs + OEMs are no longer joing "fast" before making a public announcement of them all together for the sake of clarity and fairness. It puts less pressure on the OEMs and AIBs to decide quickly.
This would explain why the people Kyle approached couldn't talk about it, yet. There is probably a non disclosure agreement until the announcement.

(though Nvidia should probably have stated they would announce who is part of the GPP later so that witch-Hunt Journalists couldn't try to pressure them like Kyle is)

In the case where Nvidia are withholding an announcement until partners stop joining "fast" (which makes perfect sense to me and is common practise).
The OEMs & AIbs in the GPP would have agreed to not leak any information on this until after Nvidia have made an announcement.

-This would make things more transparent then they were before GPP since AIBs & OEMs were working with Nvidia & AMD but the consumers were never told how they were co operating or how closely.

You really think this "transparency," which has yet to materialize, is all about who is working with who and in what ways?

-This seems like the first formal announcement of who is helping who, how and by how much rather than all of it being done under the table away from the consumers eyes.
-If they do announce the GPP partners it should be more clear what versions of GeForce Graphics cards to buy. Tranparency incoming I would guess.


2b) GPP providing transparency on how Nvidia and its partners co-operate.
Conclusions:
- Should improve the quality of GeForce graphics cards.
- This may help consumers have more clarity on the specs of the different GeForce Graphics cards from the different GPP partners
- Perhaps different AIBs & OEMs will specialise in different areas giving the consumer more effective choice within the GeForce line-up

Evidence:
Nvidia "GPP partners will get early access to our latest innovations, and work closely with our engineering team"


Nvidia "full transparency into the GPU platform and software they’re being sold"



I am seeing a lot of people reacting to this story with hate or distrust towards Nvidia after reading from Kyles article.
Kyles article included no on the record interviews or facts. Please think critically yourselves and form your own opinions. Imo Kyle was unprofessional and biased and seemingly his biases have effected others.

Kyles own conclusion negates his own article.

Kyle: "Before we go any further, in the effort to be as transparent as possible, we need to let you know that AMD came to us and presented us with "this story." AMD shopped this story with other websites as well.
However, with the information that was presented to us by AMD, there was no story to be told, but it surely pointed to one that was worth looking into. There needed to be some legwork done in collecting facts and interviews."

He then goes on to collect zero facts and zero on the record interviews to back any facts up.

Then he proceeds to present us with "this story" However, with the information that was presented to us by (Kyle), there was no story to be told. But then he tells us anyway since his aligned biases with AMD (or possibly money).

Feel free to check through yourselves for on the record interviews and proven facts.

All Kyle's statement really suggests is there wasn't enough there to directly run with it, but enough to warrant further investigation before running with it.

Next up, the Monopoly argument:
Consumers don't like monopolies.

Nvidia have 85% of the gaming GPU market.

GPP can't be blamed for Nvidia having 85% of the GPU market. Nvidia have had ~85% of the market before GPP existed.

OEMs & AIBs are already putting themselves in a disadvantageous position if they do not co operate with the manufacturer of 85% of the sold GPUs, GPP doesn't really change that.


Since Nvidia take up 85% of the market, that means that 85% of the graphics cards may be improved by the increased efficiency of co-operation from GPP.
So statistically for GPU hardware this is probably good news, no?

No, the GPP cannot be blamed for NVidia's Dominance, but it is a power play designed to squeeze out other existing and potential players from the Gaming market

My responses to the remaining arguments against Nvidia ive seen:


"Nvidia should invest a tonne of money into making better products":
In fairness Nvidia have already invested a tonne of money into making better products. That is why they make the best GPUs and why "aspects of their technology are ahead of the nearest competitor"


Hair works cripples AMD GPUs:
The Hair works argument seems fair. Was there any game that did not let one turn Hair works off?

Yeah, NVidia has invested a ton of money into making better products. But just like Intel, they haven't been motivated to make greater pushes on the consumer front. AMD scared them a bit when Vega squarely outperformed the 1070 and compared with the 1080 so much they released the 1070Ti with explicit rules to NOT overclock it and ruin the market share of the 1080.

AMD clearly concerned/shopping the story:
Well of course. 85% vs 10%, AMD trying to tarnish the reputation of their competitor.

Competition is healthy. With 85% vs 10% Id say competition is not healthy in the GPU market. If your meant in general, yes I agree, hence why consumers don't like monopolies.

Nvidia "let" AMD optimize graphics in PUBG despite Nvidia being partners with PUBGs developers and Nvidia having more money. Which is some evidence for them allowing competitive fairness despite having the means to prevent it more.
Which is extra relevant since PUBG is hugely popular and is a large part of the market gap between Nvidia and AMD.

To insinuate that NVidia "let" AMD collaborate for PUBG on a game engine already optimized for NVidia, is to say that NVidia, was throwing them a bone; that they have that much monopolistic control over them, the developers and/or publishers, that they might as well own them. Also, how is AMD supposed to let the world know of underhanded and illegal practices of competitors? If they make the claims, and those claims are ignored AND the claims are true, you and I, the consumer, will suffer for it. If they are false, well, it makes AMD look bad to cry wolf.


NOTE: if I misinterpret what you're saying, rephrase, don't regurgitate, as regurgitation won't lead to another interpretation.

 

[Ebikeric]

I thought about going back to Nvidia for my next graphics card but not any more... Play it fair big guy!

 

[NightAntilli]

 

[wizardB]

I have bought nothing but Gigabyte motherboards to build systems, I guess since they feel it's best to do this I think I'll find a company with more sence.

 

[NightAntilli]

I have bought nothing but Gigabyte motherboards to build systems, I guess since they feel it's best to do this I think I'll find a company with more sence.

Indeed. It's already obvious that MSI and Gigabyte are in on this. Asus will likely also be confirmed...

For me it's no nVidia (but I already did that), no MSI products, no Gigabyte, and when Asus is confirmed, no Asus either. That includes everything, including mice, laptops, keyboards, monitors, routers... I'll stick to Asrock for motherboards, and there are still enough other graphics card brands to choose from.