Thursday, September 17th 2009
DirectX 11 Won't Define GPU Sales: NVIDIA
"DirectX 11 by itself is not going be the defining reason to buy a new GPU. It will be one of the reasons." This coming from the same company that a few years ago said that there was every reason to opt for a DirectX 10 compliant graphics card, to complete the Windows Vista experience, at a time when it was the first and only company to be out with compliant hardware. In the wake of rival AMD's ambitious Evergreen family of DirectX 11 compliant graphics cards being released, NVIDIA made it a point to tell the press that the development shouldn't really change anything in the industry.
Speaking at the Deutsche Bank Securities Technology Conference, NVIDIA's VP of investor relations said "DirectX 11 by itself is not going be the defining reason to buy a new GPU. It will be one of the reasons. This is why Microsoft is in work with the industry to allow more freedom and more creativity in how you build content, which is always good, and the new features in DirectX 11 are going to allow people to do that. But that no longer is the only reason, we believe, consumers would want to invest in a GPU."
"Now, we know, people are doing a lot in the area of video, people are going to do more and more in the area of photography… I think that the things we are doing would allow the GPU to be a co-processor to the CPU and deliver better user experience, better battery life and make that computers little bit more optimized," added Mr. Hara
NVIDIA, which was until very recently a firm believer in graphics processing horsepower to serve as the biggest selling points of new GPUs, now switches its line on what it believes will drive the market forward. All of a sudden, software that rely on the raw computational power of GPUs (eg: media transcoding software), and not advanced visual effects that a new generation API brings with it (in games and CGI applications), is what will drive people to buying graphics processors, according to the company.
Mr. Hara concluded saying "Graphics industry, I think, is on the point that microprocessor industry was several years ago, when AMD made the public confession that frequency does not matter anymore and it is more about performance per watt. I think we are the same crossroad with the graphics world: framerate and resolution are nice, but today they are very high and going from 120fps to 125fps is not going to fundamentally change end-user experience. But I think the things that we are doing with Stereo 3D Vision, PhysX, about making the games more immersive, more playable is beyond framerates and resolutions. Nvidia will show with the next-generation GPUs that the compute side is now becoming more important that the graphics side."
The timing of this comes when NVIDIA does not have any concrete product plans laid out, while AMD is working towards getting a headstart with its next-generation GPUs that are DirectX 11 compliant, and also has compliance with industry-wide GPGPU standards such as DirectCompute 11 and OpenCL.
Source:
Xbit Labs
Speaking at the Deutsche Bank Securities Technology Conference, NVIDIA's VP of investor relations said "DirectX 11 by itself is not going be the defining reason to buy a new GPU. It will be one of the reasons. This is why Microsoft is in work with the industry to allow more freedom and more creativity in how you build content, which is always good, and the new features in DirectX 11 are going to allow people to do that. But that no longer is the only reason, we believe, consumers would want to invest in a GPU."
"Now, we know, people are doing a lot in the area of video, people are going to do more and more in the area of photography… I think that the things we are doing would allow the GPU to be a co-processor to the CPU and deliver better user experience, better battery life and make that computers little bit more optimized," added Mr. Hara
NVIDIA, which was until very recently a firm believer in graphics processing horsepower to serve as the biggest selling points of new GPUs, now switches its line on what it believes will drive the market forward. All of a sudden, software that rely on the raw computational power of GPUs (eg: media transcoding software), and not advanced visual effects that a new generation API brings with it (in games and CGI applications), is what will drive people to buying graphics processors, according to the company.
Mr. Hara concluded saying "Graphics industry, I think, is on the point that microprocessor industry was several years ago, when AMD made the public confession that frequency does not matter anymore and it is more about performance per watt. I think we are the same crossroad with the graphics world: framerate and resolution are nice, but today they are very high and going from 120fps to 125fps is not going to fundamentally change end-user experience. But I think the things that we are doing with Stereo 3D Vision, PhysX, about making the games more immersive, more playable is beyond framerates and resolutions. Nvidia will show with the next-generation GPUs that the compute side is now becoming more important that the graphics side."
The timing of this comes when NVIDIA does not have any concrete product plans laid out, while AMD is working towards getting a headstart with its next-generation GPUs that are DirectX 11 compliant, and also has compliance with industry-wide GPGPU standards such as DirectCompute 11 and OpenCL.
194 Comments on DirectX 11 Won't Define GPU Sales: NVIDIA
I mean, within this sea of ignorance (or we shall call it a "cloud"?) almost no one will know about these (fascinating) GPU wars. People find it hard to think these days.
None of the companies are free of being hypocrite. Continuing with Physx, AMD said they would not support a propietary technology, while at the same time they were secretly working with Havok, or what it is the same Intel, to use their propietary tech.
one 5850 will match the power of my 4870's, while letting me run three screens at the same time with lower power consumption.
better feature set and lower power consumption.
Red Faction Guerilla:"Video Memory: 128 MB (ATI Radeon X1300/NVIDIA GeForce 7600)"
Wolfenstein:"Video Card: 256MB NVIDIA(R) Geforce(R) 6800 GT or ATI Radeon(TM) X800"
NFS SHIFT:"Video Card – 256 MB, with support for Pixel Shader 3.0;Supported chipsets: ATI Radeon X1800 XT 512MB or greater; NVIDIA GeForce 7800 GT 256MB or greater"
so we see PS2 supported games,interesting no?
as already discussed in other thread all future game will be dx9 compatible for sure and they will run on better DX9-DX10 cards i bet
all i can say is from my experience im sticking with nvidia i was an ati fanboy since the 9800 pro till i decided to upgrade roud the 3xxx series and i went through 3 cards that where either doa or artifacted and glitched in games so i bought a 9800gtx + figuring what the hell it cant be any worse.
Boy was i surprised everything just worked no more crap where some games i have to tweak the settings endlessly before it will run right, and no more glitchy drivers
i tend to keep my cards for several years, and i dont like to replay games.
If i play a game with less than max graphics the first time around, i rarely bother to come back for a second time a few years later when i upgrade - so i like to be high end from the start.
That said, i have no immediate rush to update - i'll wait until i have a buyer for my cards to alleviate the cost.
My problem is that anything below 60FPS feels slow to me, since i happen to have fast reaction times. so when i say i want to play games maxed out, i mean "play them maxed out at 60FPS minimum" - and thus is my drive to overclock :D
And AA is key.
Just kidding but yeah I am the same way, but the problem is I cannot afford (not much income here) to do that. In fact, I actually downgraded because I was going off to college and needed a laptop (specs to left).
My reasons are:
- I love tech, especially CPU/GPU stuff, if I had the money I'd probably go with fastest things available
- It will match with W7 DirectX11. Games will appear slowly...
- I hope more and more programs will take advantage of the GPU. I use the kind that's probably to do that among the 1st (design)
- I just can't wait to see it in my case, cool as spring, powerful as Niagara, silent as the Dark Knight preying on the Arkham inmates (ok, just let me dream about the cool&silent, k), 40nm process ftw
- other reasons, I could go on for ages ...
my point was that i got used to 120hz and 120FPS, so dropping to 60 is acceptable, but bad enough for me. dropping to 30 is not acceptable, and drives me mad.
One thing that needs to be said as well: any DX11 games being made right now, will be coded for ATI since they have those cards to test on.
What this means is that when Nvidia do launch, ATI has a head start on support and performance, as the game makes can support ATI from the early stages, whereas nvidia has to be patched in.
That aside it is no secret that with Cuda/PhysX/Stereo3D NVIDIA has been trying to make a better product and that is what they are supporting, is that a bad thing ? Would i or anyone else support the opponents solution ? Did ATI ever support NVIDIAs solutions ?
Reading between the lines means nothing, the bottom line does and right now we are all arguing about the single most silly thing, which will launch a DX11 compliant card first when there is no usage for it yet.
Mussels you code a game according to the code not a card, not if that company does not invest on your project, thus it has nothing to do with who launches a card first.