exposing nVidia's latest ploy

[RCoon]

lol

Use multiquote instead of double posting. Alternatively, instead of "lol", use the thanks button perhaps?

 

[anubis44]

I have always said if nvida/intel gave 2 fucks about amd they would price them out of existence
if they dropped the 970 to say ~250.00
if intel dropped the price of the 4670k to ~180.00
it would be over for AMD they would be kaput inside a year there overhead and costs are continuous bleeding of money it would be a disaster

And... both of those companies would be in very serious trouble with anti-trust authorities, possibly resulting in prison sentences for any members of the board or management who were in complicit in such a scheme. At the very least, the companies would be fined gigantic amounts of money, and more than likely, Intel and/or nVidia or both would be broken up into several companies, like Standard Oil or AT&T were when they tried exactly this kind of bullshit.

Read up on 'U.S. anti-trust laws': http://2012books.lardbucket.org/boo...ss/s19-01-history-and-basic-framework-of.html

'Standard Oil': http://learning.blogs.nytimes.com/2...urt-orders-standard-oil-to-be-broken-up/?_r=0

AT&T anti-trust: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breakup_of_the_Bell_System

 

[Solaris17]

Wait I just skimmed the thread pretty much but am I correct in assuming some member uncovered a multi-billion dollar companies plot to make money by releasing a new GPU at a time a competitor had nothing to offer?

If thats the case well color me surprised captain capitalism.

and dub us lucky that someone picked up on this master plan.

 

[lilhasselhoffer]

OP, I'm having trouble deciding exactly how to consider you.

First, you post a long and rambling piece on why the future of AMD is bright, in a thread about Nvidea cards. You follow this with a thread about the "conspiracy" related to Nvidea releasing cards. You then state in this thread that competition is needed, and is in fact a good thing.



Right now, AMD and Nvidea are competing in the GPU business. Nvidea is selling a GPU (note: not a card for calculations), which objectively produces better results than AMD. AMD has not responded by releasing a new card, they have simply cut prices on their current offerings to meet the price to performance ratio of their competitor. This is competition 101, wherein if you can't compete with performance, you compete on pricing.

Those individuals who utilize a GPU for raw calculation power are getting screwed, but that's reasonable. You might find this reprehensible; defaulting back to your example of cars, I have an anecdotal relationship. Nvidea is removing the ability to move the driver's seat 6" closer to the steering wheel. They save large amounts of wasted mechanical components, lowering the cost of the car and the decreased weight increases its performance. The dwarves and midgets (or little people, whichever they prefer to be called) of the world now have issues with this car, but they are discounted from the discussion because sales to them are so insignificant as to be non-existant.


There is no conspiracy, only Nvidea removing features from their product that the vast majority of their market doesn't use. Assuming the 970 was about the cost of the 770 with the same performance in gaming, you'd have the grounds to accuse them of shenanigans. As it stands, Nvidea isn't doing anything immoral or illegal. Nvidea is better competing in the market they have, by cutting features, cutting prices, and delivering a generally better performing product.


TL;DR;
Stop whining about AMD. Their past is their past. Their future is uncertain. What matters is what they do today, and what they are doing is not competing effectively. Even staunch fans of one team or the other have to admit Nvidea currently has the lead. When AMD wins it back, by the performance of their product, they will deserve praise. Until then it's just noise and saber rattling of people far too invested in a fight that doesn't need to happen.

 

[DOA]

"When AMD wins it back, by the performance of their product, they will deserve praise."
For those of us actually gaming at 4K AMD has the performance edge and so they deserve praise NOW.

nVidia should be cheaper than AMD, they sell millions of cards to the feds. This may not bother you, it bothers me very little. I am sure AMD would love that market.

 

[Easy Rhino]

remember when dx10 came out and everyone scrambled to get a dx10 card and windows Vista so they could play no dx10 games at all? remember when dx11 came out and everyone scrambled to get a dx11 card and windows 7 so they could play no dx11 games at all? Pepperidge Farm remembers.

 

[64K]

remember when dx10 came out and everyone scrambled to get a dx10 card and windows Vista so they could play no dx10 games at all? remember when dx11 came out and everyone scrambled to get a dx11 card and windows 7 so they could play no dx11 games at all? Pepperidge Farm remembers.

Wasn't Halo 2 for PC the first DX10 title? I don't remember if there were others before it got release but I remember it came about 5 months after Vista.

 

[HumanSmoke]

Wasn't Halo 2 for PC the first DX10 title? I don't remember if there were others before it got release but I remember it came about 5 months after Vista.

Company of Heroes was the first DX10 game (via patch). Like all D3D revisions, the latency between introduction and actual use is monumental. The furore caused by it's impending arrival vastly outweighs any interest in its actual application. Remember when DX11.2 support was supposed to be graphics card dealbreaker because Kepler cards didn't support some 2D feature set components? How many DX11.2 games are there?

 

[lilhasselhoffer]

"When AMD wins it back, by the performance of their product, they will deserve praise."
For those of us actually gaming at 4K AMD has the performance edge and so they deserve praise NOW.

nVidia should be cheaper than AMD, they sell millions of cards to the feds. This may not bother you, it bothers me very little. I am sure AMD would love that market.

Fair point, AMD maintains a moderate lead in 4K monitors. It's for that reason that AMD is still relevant. Don't miss a beat here, because I'm about to refer back to my previous point. 4K gaming is currently a very small niche. I'm not saying it's somehow not awesome, but you have to recognize that the amount of 4K gaming is minimal.


Drawing all of this back to the original OP's ... thoughts; Nvidea has chosen to eject small people compatibility, in favor of the mass market. Compute was sacrificed, 4K performance was sacrificed, and all of this was done to aim at the biggest market. If their 20nm and smaller product does this we'll have a reason to talk, but otherwise Nvidea isn't doing anything extraordinary. You don't hear about AMD's 4K capability often, because that isn't where most people spend their money. If AMD brought that forward, they deserve to be lauded. As it stands, they've already indicated their stance by slashing card prices. Great for 4K gaming, but a very sad indicator for competition within the GPU market.

 

[GhostRyder]

I don't see any reason for AMD to have to. For what, 5K? ROFL.

The market is STAGNANT. Nvidia simply made a new GPU, that lowered power consumption due to efficiency, on the same node. Sounds like TSMC fixed their toolset, to me, and nothing else. AMD will bring something relevant...when it's actually needed. Until then, they keep selling what they got, like with their CPUs, until something substantially affects their sales, and they have inventory piling up, which isn't likely to happen any time soon.

This whole thread seems to be FILLED with armchair comments, by people that don't understand business, nor the silicon market as it stand right now... which is a stand-still.



And your point is....that it works as it should?

this^, thank you!

I will say though the comments about AMD not competing though in the GPU market are not really true. The GPU market is shifting around all the time and honestly the HD7970 was better than the GTX 680. The AMD R9 290x may not have been as powerful as the GTX 780ti last round but it was better at high resolutions especially 4k.

The GTX 970/980 are improved performance cards that show better power consumption while delivering slightly better performance than last round. There is nothing special or secretive about it, I don't think Cobra commander has some special plan involving nvidia GPUs as its just normal business and release cycle done to catch fresh users during the up coming holiday season and to just ride over for the next thing. The big maxwells are a time constraint and they need time to make them as good as possible for the desktop market. Nothing we have not seen before...

R9 390X is a bit off because they chose to wait for a different process. It's just a business choice and whether or not it will be a good one is to be seen when it gets released.

 

[Gmr_Chick]

really no hatin? where do I begin, hmmm......



to say that nobody is hating on AMD is either blind or naive. It doesn't matter if AMD just had the price/performance crown on the gpu side a few months ago, or their APUs are far superior than the intel equivalent the hate will always be there.

Actually, I meant nobody on this specific thread wasn't hating on AMD, save for a few trolls.

 

[Tatty_Two]

Truth is that AMD unfortunately are also-rans in GPUs and CPUs and that's bad for competition. I don't think nvidia need any convoluted strategic ploys to stay ahead of AMD.

I would agree certainly about the CPU's but hey, around this time last year they brought out the 290/X and they were competitive, so competitive in fact that a load of NVidia owners went out and bought some, now granted NVidia did a quick recovery and have brushed them aside again but AMD certainly are not "has beens or also rans" just yet in the GPU market, that's not to say they may well be (again) soon though

 

[yogurt_21]

I bought my gpu in July so I got an R9 290 because the 780 was 100$ more for 0% performance increase and the 770 was the same price for a 23% performance decrease. Had I been in the market now I would get a 970 because it's the same price as the R9 290 but 10% faster at 60% of the power use.

Will I sell my R9 290 and buy a 970? no. I ran GTX 480 SLI for nearly 4 years does not give a **** about power or noise and I recognize performance dips as time goes on and new things come out. Does not care about that either. All I care about is what IS available when I'm buying.

Did AMD commit a consipracy when they launched the R9 290X against the GTX 780? No, they were simply trying to sell a new product. The same goes for NV releasing the 980 and 970. Obviously Kepler was expensive to make maxwell seems to be cheaper.

 

[qubit]

I would agree certainly about the CPU's but hey, around this time last year they brought out the 290/X and they were competitive, so competitive in fact that a load of NVidia owners went out and bought some, now granted NVidia did a quick recovery and have brushed them aside again but AMD certainly are not "has beens or also rans" just yet in the GPU market, that's not to say they may well be (again) soon though

Yeah, they are rather more successful with GPUs, but it seems to have been more by brute force rather than a really great design and now they're running out of steam. Wizzy's comments in the graphics reviews of high power use and high heat are witness to that approach. Heck, AMD didn't even give their stock cards a decent cooler, causing them to heat throttle after a few minutes' use. That sucked balls in my book and I'd never buy a product like that. Us enthusiasts really do need healthy competition between two or more great competitors, but unfortunately it's not to be.

I guess a hypothetical analogy with their CPUs would be if Bulldozer would have performed similarly to Sandy Bridge at the time, by having AMD overclock and overvolt the stock chip, slapping watercooling on it as the only official way to cool it in order to overcome the architectural deficiencies. Then Intel brings out a slightly refined SB chip with higher stock clocks and still cooled by air, trouncing AMD's hot and bothered effort once again. This is what nvidia is doing now with Kepler and especially Maxwell.

 

[95Viper]

Company of Heroes

And, that game series rocked... on, either, NVidia or AMD.

On topic... business is business.

Got beer and popcorn... resume play.

 

[DOA]

"Us enthusiasts really do need healthy competition between two or more great competitors, but unfortunately it's not to be."
Vote with your dollars?

I am voting for 4K and an open standard to regulate frame rates.
I am also saying I am a modding, overclocking enthusiast; I don't care about power consumption and I can deal with heat effectively on my own.
Or you can go with proprietary, prepackaged and stifle competition.

 

[EarthDog]

and an open standard to regulate frame rates.

I'll bite, what does this mean?

 

[RCoon]

I'll bite, what does this mean?

I think he's referring to FreeSync, that soon-to-be VESA standard that's been up in the air for ages and nobody's done anything about it.

 

[EarthDog]

Excuse my ignorance, but what would that mean for gamers?

EDIT: Its a Gsync and Vsync alternative... yippee? What am I missing? Ok reading more... its variable matching. Cool. Can't say I had a problem with Nvidia's adaptive vsync and the Gsync monitors look great so...................

 

[RCoon]

Excuse my ignorance, but what would that mean for gamers?

EDIT: Its a Gsync and Vsync alternative... yippee? What am I missing? Ok reading more... its variable matching. Cool. Can't say I had a problem with Nvidia's adaptive vsync and the Gsync monitors look great so...................

Open and VESA standard GSync alternative. Once the standard hits, all panels will have it, and all GPU makers will undoubtedly support it. NVidia might take a while, but they'll support it. They probably want to profit off of GSync first.

That being said I don't use VSync, and haven't for about 3 years now... doesn't bother me much.

 

[mroofie]

lol this thread reeks amd fanboyism (Faithfull to the core lol)

lol I think this youtube clip is quite relevant

 

[anubis44]

amd are crap if I didn't get this 7970 for 120.00 bucks I would have went with a gtx 770...
Mantle is Hype nothing more its really not all the great if you take the time to read there sdk

Yes, AMD is such crap, they forced nVidia to skip generational names twice (on the desktop) in the last 6 years.

Whatever happened to the GTX300 series? Oh, that's right. The GTX280 was so crushed by the Radeon 4850 and 4870 series, nVidia had to skip over their 300-series designs to their 400 series (which were mostly a heat disaster - the GTX480 was terrible). And what of the GTX800 series? Well, they DID release a couple of laptop Keplers (600 series chips) labelled as 800 series, but essentially had to skip that number altogether. AMD, meanwhile, has been consistent with their GPU generational updates since, well, since they bought ATI back in 2005.

lol this thread reeks amd fanboyism (Faithfull to the core lol)

lol I think this youtube clip is quite relevant

Thanks for the US Marines analogy. As a former Canadian Army member, I appreciate the sentiment.

I support AMD for many reasons that have nothing to do with the content of this thread. My original post is based on a theory I've tried to support with facts. If you can refute my argument, I'd love to hear it.

 

[EarthDog]

Where are the facts in that first post? Looked like speculation and theory to me...

 

[Recus]

Yes, AMD is such crap, they forced nVidia to skip generational names twice (on the desktop) in the last 6 years.

Whatever happened to the GTX300 series? Oh, that's right. The GTX280 was so crushed by the Radeon 4850 and 4870 series, nVidia had to skip over their 300-series designs to their 400 series (which were mostly a heat disaster - the GTX480 was terrible). And what of the GTX800 series? Well, they DID release a couple of laptop Keplers (600 series chips) labelled as 800 series, but essentially had to skip that number altogether. AMD, meanwhile, has been consistent with their GPU generational updates since, well, since they bought ATI back in 2005.

It's not even funny how AMD fanboys are addicted to AMD.

"The GTX280 was so crushed by the Radeon 4850 and 4870 series"

4870 has 55nm vs 65nm and DDR5 vs DDR3 but still...

As for naming: HD 1000, HD 8000, HD 9000, R9 100 M.I.A.

 

[anubis44]

Yes, it is common for a mid range GPU of a new generation to surpass the performance of the last generation Flagship. We saw that when the mid range GTX 680 GK104 outperformed the Fermi flagship GTX 580 GF110 GPU. I was replying to thebluebumblebee in post #11 where he seems to be disputing what I said before about the price of the GTX 980 GM204 is not abnormally low. In fact it is $50 higher that the GTX 680 on release which it is the successor to.

64K said: ↑
OP the GTX 970 was a bargain but the GTX 980 doesn't fit with your claim of setting the price unusually low.
What was the price of the 780 Ti when it came out?

We will see the successor to the Flagship GTX 780 Ti when the full chip Flagship GM210 comes out. I suspect it will be $700-$750 then that will be a fair comparison price wise.

My point about low nVidia pricing is mainly that the GTX970 was priced (and currently still is - though in Canada, it's impossible to find a new one cheaper than $380) approximately $120-$170 less than the similarly performing AMD equivalent (R9 290X). nVidia does not typically price their new cards at such a discount relative to the performance equivalent AMD cards: they normally try to make as much money as possible, and price their performance equivalent cards roughly at par (within ~$20-$30) of AMD's equivalents, banking on their brand-name to somehow persuade people to buy them over the AMD equivalent.

I was simply curious about:

1) Why did nVidia break with their usual habit of 2nd quarter release timeframe?
2) Why did they price the GTX970 at a $120-$170 discount (this is an absolute firesale by nVidia standards)
3) Why didn't they wait until 20nm production at TSM for their next generation chip?

Any one of these things might not have piqued my curiosity, but all three together did. Then, when the news broke from Richard Huddy that there will be no DX12 for Win7, and that this information was certain to leak out before the end of the year, it occurred to me that:

A) nVidia knew this information at least by the beginning of this year.
B) nVidia knew that they could lose some sales to AMD if gamers knew they could play games using Mantle in Windows 7 that would otherwise require DX12 to play smoothly due to shed loads of draw calls.

nVidia doesn't want to support Mantle, even though they could. They don't want to even acknowledge AMD's existence. So, IMHO, they cynically calculated that if they released Maxwell higher end cards on the old 28nm (this is now the third generation of nVidia chips on 28nm) in September of this year, before the 'no DX12 for Windows 7' news broke, and they discounted them heavily, especially the GTX970, they'd sell more cards before the news broke than if they waited for 20nm, after the news broke. The reasoning is, if a gamer is faced with the choice of an nVidia card that needs a Windows 8/10 upgrade to play the same game that an equivalent AMD card can play in Windows 7 using Mantle, many gamers, all other things being equal, would likely opt for the AMD card, as it saves them the money and hassle of upgrading to a new Windows that probably doesn't provide them with very much except DX12. That's all I'm speculating.

If this is true, it's a pretty cynical ploy, as the alternative would simply be to support Mantle, and it would show how desperate nVidia is not to show any support for AMD technology, and to grab people's money before their products look less attractive.