• Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.
  • The forums have been upgraded with support for dark mode. By default it will follow the setting on your system/browser. You may override it by scrolling to the end of the page and clicking the gears icon.

NVIDIA Accused of Acting as "GPU Cartel" and Controlling Supply

You pulled that 99% metric out of your ass but that’s cool. Now add pricing next to each of the top 5 cards to prove my point and don’t cherry pick that either … use msrp
You obviously knows nothing about eSport. Most if not all top 100 players use Nvidia and Reflex, 2000, 3000 or 4000 series. And Nvidia don't sponsor players or teams. Hell every top player uses Nvidia, not just the top 100.


And watch that video. Shows 7900XTX draws 100-150 watts more than 4080 while delivering worse performance.

Gogogo ->

"AMD really need to fix this." Yep... AMD has tons of stuff to fix but they prioritize making CPUs and APUs, which is why they have succes right now.

Funny how people expect AMD to compete 1:1 with Nvidia which does solely GPUs and is a top 3 company worldwide in terms of market cap, while focussing on CPUs mostly... Not going to happen. Sad to break it to you.

AMD have exactly zero chance of beating Nvidia in the GPU space. All those AI money Nvidia grabs right now, will drip down into gaming space over the next many years. AMD is done for in the high-end market. Which is why Radeon 8000 series won't get any high-end SKU.

I have an AMD CPU, why? Because its great. Their GPUs tho, not so much.

AMD and Intel can battle for the low to mid-end market going forward.
 
Last edited:
You obviously know nothing about esport.


And watch that video. Shows 7900XTX draws 100-150 watts more than 4080 while delivering worse performance
lol how tf do you know what I know or don’t . That link doesn’t prove any nonsense u said so far but keep linking it .

power draw is a moot point depending on the user and here’s why- those who drop 5k on a system generally care very little about efficiency . Also those power figures are under load not daily use. Nvidia is much more efficient sure but don’t think you’re saving 150w/hr by going with nvidia . Again you are cherry picking your point . Are you also one of those folks who think a 4090 is a good value for gaming ? Lol
 
lol how tf do you know what I know or don’t . That link doesn’t prove any nonsense u said so far but keep linking it .

power draw is a moot point depending on the user and here’s why- those who drop 5k on a system generally care very little about efficiency . Also those power figures are under load not daily use. Nvidia is much more efficient sure but don’t think you’re saving 150w/hr by going with nvidia . Again you are cherry picking your point . Are you also one of those folks who think a 4090 is a good value for gaming ? Lol
LMAO, it shows exactly what system every single pro player use. Top 10 CS2 teams are listed. Every single player in it are listed. All use Nvidia. Keep dreaming. No pro's use AMD GPUs, but several use AMD CPUs.

Power draw is not a moot point. Players don't want additional 100-150 watts slammed in their face while gaming. Or additional noise, that being louder fans or coilwhine, since many use open headsets, at least at home, mostly closed at tournaments. Also, Nvidia have better minimum and higher averages fps, just less issues in general.

Once again, you have zero knowledge about eSport. I've worked close with many top players and teams. Been at 100+ tournaments, all over the world. Build tournament rigs. I know for a fact that pretty much zero of them use AMD GPU. Most want Reflex + LDAT support. AMD has nothing that even comes close.

You can act like AMD is "just as good" all you want, in reality, they don't even have 2% of the pro base when talking GPUs and Steam HW Survey also tells me that 8 out of 10 players buys Nvidia - https://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey/videocard/

Lets stop dreaming now.
 
Last edited:
LMAO, it shows exactly what system every single pro player use. Top 10 CS2 teams are listed. Every single player in it are listed. All use Nvidia. Keep dreaming. No pro's use AMD GPUs, but several use AMD CPUs.

Power draw is not a moot point. Players don't want additional 100-150 watts slammed in their face while gaming. Or additional noise, since many use open headsets.

Once again, you have zero knowledge about eSport. I've worked close with many top players and teams. Been at 100+ tournaments. Build tournament rigs. I know for a fact that pretty much zero use AMD GPU.
lol you build tournament rigs . Alright Where is the system ?
 

Attachments

  • IMG_0563.jpeg
    IMG_0563.jpeg
    489.3 KB · Views: 79
Click on the PLAYER ... LMAO

:roll:
lol alright second player is not using nvidia reflex … so you’re lying . I guess that’s not a tournament rig that you built lol. anything else ?


Awesome conversation feel free to go back to your moms basement and come out next time there’s an nvidia articicle
 
Last edited:
LMAO, it shows exactly what system every single pro player use. Top 10 CS2 teams are listed. Every single player in it are listed. All use Nvidia. Keep dreaming. No pro's use AMD GPUs, but several use AMD CPUs.

Power draw is not a moot point. Players don't want additional 100-150 watts slammed in their face while gaming. Or additional noise, that being louder fans or coilwhine, since many use open headsets, at least at home, mostly closed at tournaments. Also, Nvidia have better minimum and higher averages fps, just less issues in general.

Once again, you have zero knowledge about eSport. I've worked close with many top players and teams. Been at 100+ tournaments, all over the world. Build tournament rigs. I know for a fact that pretty much zero of them use AMD GPU. Most want Reflex + LDAT support. AMD has nothing that even comes close.

You can act like AMD is "just as good" all you want, in reality, they don't even have 2% of the pro base when talking GPUs and Steam HW Survey also tells me that 8 out of 10 players buys Nvidia - https://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey/videocard/

Lets stop dreaming now.
Of course most e-sports players are using Nvidia gpu's, they're getting them for free from Nvidia, or Asus, MSI, Gigabyte, etc.
Power draw is a moot point, the 7900XTX uses on average 50-60 watts more than an RTX 4080, not 150, when players are sponsored they aren't going to care about another 50-60 watts during gaming.
As for minimum FPS, 7900XTX is higher, average FPS is as well.
So who have you built PC's for? You're claiming you know about e-sports yet are bringing up nonsense points.
Also the Steam hardware survery isn't as accurate as Nvidia users want to insist it is, the polling is random and Valve doesn't provide their metrics for testing. And of course Nvidia has very effective marketing, convincing people they need proprietary Nvidia features to play games, while sponsoring people to use Nvidia GPU's so the average PC gamer will only want to buy from Nvidia.
 
Ya'll clearly didn't follow the moderator's instructions to stay on topic which is discussing whether Nvidia is acting like a cartel or not. The cartel actions are mostly in the enterprise environment and that's where the lion's share of the chips are going. I think AMD has a good shot at breaking the cartel-like grip with the MI300 chip especially considering its price is orders of magnitude lower than the Grace Hopper chip.

Stop talking about the FPS charts.
 
Nvidia doing Nvidia chit is only to be expected. They have to show the shareholders their serious about maintaining their lead afterall. It's no secret the tech industry is about as underhanded as it gets when it comes to profit guarding. Fall in line or be squeezed, simple.
 
Ya'll clearly didn't follow the moderator's instructions to stay on topic which is discussing whether Nvidia is acting like a cartel or not. The cartel actions are mostly in the enterprise environment and that's where the lion's share of the chips are going. I think AMD has a good shot at breaking the cartel-like grip with the MI300 chip especially considering its price is orders of magnitude lower than the Grace Hopper chip.

Stop talking about the FPS charts.
That's an axiom, as is anything bad that is said about Nvidia.
We're just discussing the details now ;)
 
>>...statements made by executives at rival chipmaker Groq and former AMD executive...

These companies are direct competitors of NVIDIA and they will do whatever it takes to harm business of NVIDIA!

Are there any complaints from Meta ( recently ordered 350,000 NVIDIA GPUs ), Amazon, or X?

Groq and AMD did Not publish benchmark results of famous MLPerf benchmarks for accelerators they design and sell.

Try to find any MLPerf benchmarks for accelerators ( Not CPUs ) of both companies at:

 
>>...statements made by executives at rival chipmaker Groq and former AMD executive...

These companies are direct competitors of NVIDIA and they will do whatever it takes to harm business of NVIDIA!

Are there any complaints from Meta ( recently ordered 350,000 NVIDIA GPUs ), Amazon, or X?

Groq and AMD did Not publish benchmark results of famous MLPerf benchmarks for accelerators they design and sell.

Try to find any MLPerf benchmarks for accelerators ( Not CPUs ) of both companies at:


Yeah Scott Herkelman claims are so outragous I wonder why anyone with half a brain could even believe him.

"This happens more than you expect, NVIDIA does this with DC customers, OEMs, AIBs, press, and resellers. They learned from GPP to not put it into writing. They just don't ship after a customer has ordered. They are the GPU cartel, and they control all supply,"

If Nvidia didn't ship within the required period to gigantic customers (that has lots of litigation power), wouldn't they get sued?
 
The comments reference the NVIDIA GeForce Partner Program (GPP) from 2018, which was abandoned following backlash over its exclusivity requirements.

No, it wasn't. As I pointed out months after the launch of the RX 7000 series all the top SKUs from ASUS, MSI, and Gigabyte are clearly reserved solely for Nvidia this generation. Nvidia didn't get rid of the GPP, they implemented it on the down low and tech journalists don't seem to give two hoots.
 
No, it wasn't. As I pointed out months after the launch of the RX 7000 series all the top SKUs from ASUS, MSI, and Gigabyte are clearly reserved solely for Nvidia this generation. Nvidia didn't get rid of the GPP, they implemented it on the down low and tech journalists don't seem to give two hoots.
What does that even mean? You want Asus to make a 4090 equivalent out of a 7900XTX?
 
I don't like a few things:
1. Nvidia competes with much smaller chips. AD104 measures around 294 mm2 and yet in manages to perform the same as the Navi 31 529 mm2 in Radeon RX 7900 GRE.
Can you imagine how much the larger chip increases the cost and decreases the profit margin?

Horrid comparison. The 7900 GRE has 17% of it's cores disabled and has a smaller bus than the full chip. Clocks are also lower due to the worse bin.

In addition it's a chiplet based architecture so costs don't increase exponentially like monolithic. The size of the actual GPU itself on Navi 31 is 304mm2.

It's akin to saying AMD is loosing in the enterprise and consumer CPU market because their total die size is large, completely ignorant of the differences in architecture.

I assure you want to be an Nvidia shareholder, no an AMD shareholder.

View attachment 336764

2. AMD always leaves imperfections with their implementations - high power consumption (media playback, idle, power spikes, etc.), and lower than usual performance in certain games (Counter-Strike 2 as a prime case), and lack of interest to put more efforts in the ray-tracing development where it lags a few years behind Nvidia's solution.

I have some for you

1) 3000 series feeding back noise causing certain PSUs to trip
2) 12VHPWR, enough said
3) High DPC latency bug that's been around for over a decade now (only fixed on the 3000 series as of right now)
4) 970 3.5GB

You act as if AMD is the only one that makes mistakes.

3. Always skipping the largest chips. Radeon RX 5700 XT, Radeon RX 8700 XT, Radeon Vega 64, to name a few.



We shall see.

You do realize AMD was almost bankrupt back when they pulled out of the high end GPU market right? 87000 XT? You are basing that one entirely on a rumor.

I disagree: the other companies don't offer RTX™ and DLSS™ for free.
NVIDIA maybe is a cartel, but an honest one.

In the context of this article both of those are irrelevant. We are talking AI not consumer GPUs.

Mind you both AMD and Intel do offer Ray Tracing so saying other companies don't offer it is patently false.

Hmm, GTX 970 with 4GB vram anybody?

Or any of Nvidia's mobile GPUs the last few generation or their low end GPUs that do a bait and switch with the memory configuration.

You mean Scott walked on stage and told everyone that RDNA3 would be 50-70% faster than RDNA2 didn't make him a liar?

50-70% seems extremely reasonable compared to the 3-5x claims Nvidia was making. I can't wait to see your proportionality greater outrage at Nvidia because as we are all aware, you treat both equally.
 
Last edited:
So Nvidia is acting like a cartel on enterprise market - fine let me tell you how 7900XTX is a bad card and how RDNA3 is not 70% faster than RDNA2 and just how AMD GPUs are really bad oh and did you hear about RT and DLSS? = this thread.

AMD has a long way ahead of them in marketing department it seems. Even longer than in engineering one.
 
Yes, this is exactly it! It seems inherent to capitalism that when a corporate entity reaches a certain size, they rely less and less on innovation and fair competition and instead increasingly focus on manipulating the system, anti-competitive practices, and using accumulated size and resources to compete rather than innovation. For example, consider Intel's or Nvidia's behavior whenever they've even perceived the slightest threat from AMD. We can recall from the early 2000s that Intel resorted to bribing OEMs with their "rebate" plan or Nvidia's GPP program in the mid to late 2010s, both of which undoubtedly have implications in the present and, imo, act more as temporary windows into the everyday running of these relationship to this day, than as aberrations of their corporate behavior. For example, I think we can all agree that AMD's mobile offerings are just as good, if not better (especially in efficiency) than Intel's and yet there are far fewer laptop models based on AMD, the ones that are are usually cheaper options (in quality), and sometimes they seemingly don't even apply the products in the best possible way, i.e. how I'm constantly seeing laptops with AMD APUs paired with nvidia dGPUs, which is fine as an option, but there seems to be very few laptop models where the stronger AMD APUs are used ALONE which I would think would be their BEST use, i.e. a thin and light, premium ultrabook with a 7840H(S)/7940H(S)/8840H(S)/8940H(S) and that's it!

I think the lack of AMD laptops testifies to the nature of the relationship between Intel/AMD and the OEMs and how Intel's bribery of OEMs like Dell previously still deeply affects everything. For example, I believe that Dell doesn't have a single AMD XPS laptop option and this is 100% a reflection of Intel's influence on OEMs and while Intel might no be giving obvious bribes or payments, they go to these OEMs form a "development partnership" where Intel basically throws a lot of cash at them...does anybody here think that Dell, Asus, MSI, etc do not have the resources to develop a top of the line laptop model based on an AMD sku? While some may argue that this is merely "just doing business", the fact still remains that in the instance of laptops (arguably the most lucrative x86 market behind enterprise) the superiority of the product (CPU) is seemingly the LAST factor in determining what laptops get produced, and I'm sure the same can be said for pre-built Desktop PCs from OEMs as well.

True story: My coworkers are aware at my interest in computers, that I build them, and I've basically become the "computer guy" if anybody has a question or needs advice....well, just a few days ago, I was talking to a coworker about laptops because his wife is in the market for one, and I mentioned AMD. His perception of AMD was as though it was still 2013, that they were a cheaper, lesser option that somebody would only buy because they have to. This guy isn't dumb, and while he isn't an enthusiast, he also isn't completely ignorant, but I tried to parse out the basis for his perception and it was largely due to his observation that for example, when you're at Best Buy, the top of the line laptop models never have an AMD option, and when there are AMD options, they're usually budget tier. It really makes you wonder how much of Intel's business in the post-ryzen era has been based upon their cartelistic relationships with OEMs and the ability it has created to curate an image and perception in the minds of consumers that is divorced from reality.

It's posts like this that make me wish TechPowerUp had some sort of comment highlights on the first page that pick out the best most thought provoking comments. Instead this comment is buried and the first page of comments is filled with trolls.
 
Low quality post by mechtech
It's not exactly old news and even if this exec is being salty its true. They have already tried this multiple times in the past and would not surprise me if they really were doing it. Just because there isn't writing of saying that something is a policy does not rule out it being enforced. The AI market is a very lucrative one, so why not push people around a bit, not like the cards aren't going to sell to someone else.

If people want change, they need to start supporting the other side, I have said it a million times and will keep saying it. AMD is currently very competitive with Nvidia except at the very top (4090, which is a very high priced card).
 
Low quality post by Prince Valiant
Sum of my reaction:
1709141433218.png



No excuses for nVidia but, I gotta wonder what prompted bringing this up?

From my observations of industries,
If you're the market-leader, it's de facto 'normal' to Act as a Cartel.

So, who's cheerios did nVidia piss in, to get this into the news circuit?
 
1. Nvidia competes with much smaller chips. AD104 measures around 294 mm2 and yet in manages to perform the same as the Navi 31 529 mm2 in Radeon RX 7900 GRE.
Can you imagine how much the larger chip increases the cost and decreases the profit margin?
I assure you want to be an Nvidia shareholder, no an AMD shareholder.
What kind of nonsense is this? GRE card has two disabled MCDs and come from dies that did not qualify for higher SKUs. AMD does not waste anything, but collects all dies and launches more products, such as 5600X3D and 5700X3D from dies that did not qualify for 5800X3D.

Yields on N5 node are around 90%, so those 10% of dies are not discarded, but collected for months in order to create a new product line.

Plus, Nvidia has not dared yet to release chiplet based GPU, which is more complex task to accomplish.
 
You're citing Hardware Unboxed? Really?!? That alone is embarrassing for you.. Steve Walton is incompetent and a known sellout. Nothing he presents can be trusted. LTT is a better source of benchmark data...
not only that but his charts are showing up to 50-70% gain as claimed so I really don't understand how he thinks this is some kind of mythbuster...
 
Back
Top