-
Competitor rules
Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.
Exclusive – Nvidia Talks GameWoks And DirectX 12 Plans For 2016
- Thread starter Gregster
- Start date
It's a village bicycle. Gets around the place. Went from independent to Sony, to AMD to now Google AFAIK.
It's no where near as refined, documented or supported as PhysX.
Associate
- Joined
- 3 Jan 2010
- Posts
- 1,379
I never said they were the bad guys but even if (should it help you sleep at night) we perceive them simply as the good guys who overstepped the mark then in my opinion it's just not a good idea to have a gpu vendor also in control of software that can effect the other side. You may choose to apply a blinkered perspective to it but if we was being honest, neutral and willing to criticise dubious relationships then I feel we would have to acknowledge that from a consumer standpoint there is a conflict of interest in having the market leader get a mix of free marketing and control in how the software is being implemented. Even if we assume they intend no maliciousness against AMD it still is a strange relationship which is obviously a conflict of interest to have it work as well for AMD so even if it was just slower resolution of issues, more Nvidia advantageous programming then that is quite disingenous still.
We need competition in the industry and it seems like Nvidia prefer the opposite as we get gsynch (proprietary tech), physx (vendor specific) and soon it could require subscribing to even get updates on your gpu's (closed platform). Like I said, if you try and be neutral then there is a pattern of Nvidia being a closed company that aims to benefit Nvidia and gain control (key word there) as they aren't anti competitive but the more they operate toward closed platforms and potentially even hindering the competition then it really does toe the line. With Nvidia patent trolling as well we can see there has been some attempt to be anti-competetive or use dirty tricks. Freesynch could have been adopted by both sides and been beneficial for consumers but did that happen? No. And unless your grandmother gave birth to all the Nvidia staff and can swear by them all as being good little children then we have to accept big companies have several influences and there is no guarantee this over-reach is going to remain fair play. From a consumer standpoint I see it as anti-competitive and I see it as a strange relationship that is very open to abuse, regardless of how much you want to ignore it and even if Nvidia never do act on it there is a conflict of interest in that relationship that is against there normal pattern so it only makes sense that people question such a close relationship. Most consumers would want to have a completely open and fair competitive scene so they can move from vendor to vendor reliably, I can't say if you're definitely the same or don't have some biases in that regard but if we speak honestly then it's actually your image of Nvidia as the good guy that is getting in the way of seeing that Nvidia are actually usually a good company but THIS time they have overstepped.
I don't assume they are always the bad guy (since they basically release gpu's and sell products so they aren't exactly evil) but this is the one time I question this sort of activity. Again, if we chose to view this from a neutral perspective and as if we were overseers of the industry rather than specific vendors then it would seem anti-competitive and open to abuse in my eyes. Companies nowadays from banks to sporting institutions (fifa) to computer companies (apple and microsoft) have all engaged in illegal or strange activity before, you'd be naive to implicitly trust this sort of thing and even if you assume they are the good guys it is still a relationship that shouldn't be there in my eyes so again I don't doubt it could be useful to developers but it should be from someone else or Nvidia should have it as a more open thing where AMD have more say too. From a sceptical consumer standpoint or a neutral party standpoint it is a conflict of interest and you're ignoring that. It just seems that if it is from Nvidia it should be open source but then again I don't think they are that kind of company so it's even more questionable when AMD are offering the open source solutions but Nvidia are managing to push people to the performance hampering ways (probably based sheerly on market share and push power).
http://arstechnica.co.uk/gaming/201...completely-sabotaged-witcher-3-performance/2/
third paragraph shows the kind of performance hits people were getting on AMD cards too. Admittedly I've not kept up with how it was updated but the fact it launched so broken (as is often the case with gameworks) does lead to more questions as to whether it's designed to come out broken so they have an excuse to hamper AMD and then slowly fix it and still end up with weaker performance for AMD/ As others pointed out, you can get more from elsewhere but I imagine Nvidia has a reason to push there vendor beneficial software.
Last edited:
Nvidia could not use async on its own like Amd can as their cards are not able to without a scaler afaik, Or even if they could software emulate it, it would be rubbish.
Associate
- Joined
- 3 Jan 2010
- Posts
- 1,379
Then it sounds like something they'd have known for a long time and had the chance to implement but chose not to as it doesnt fit there desired path. they won't implement it for future cards either I'd imagine as they'll want to keep to what gives them market control instead. Thankfully the Nvidia gods in there infinite wisdom got us overpriced gsynch monitors and left us with no open standard that would have been free and open for the consumer.
Last edited:
It is free and open to anyone with an amd card, customers can choose what they want albeit pricier Gsync or cheaper async.
If I buy Amd next round I won't be sitting at home on my freesync monitor thinking ' hmmm but nvidia isn't open'. I would be enjoying my freesync.
My problem with gameworks is not with the concept itself, or the fact its nvidias child.
The problem is what it does with game development.
It was created to help developers, gave them effects which can be easily implemented in the games. It does just that...and that is the problem.
It allows developers to go lazy, and use crappy old engines and just add shiny effects (i'm looking at ubisoft titles, and fallout). They don't even care to adjust the effects just dropping them in and done. Like Witchers hair 64x tesselation, which is pointless, or fallout: tesselation on godrays (wtf?).
TLDR gameworks does the job well, but it enables the developers to go lazy and push out crappy unoptimized games.
The problem is what it does with game development.
It was created to help developers, gave them effects which can be easily implemented in the games. It does just that...and that is the problem.
It allows developers to go lazy, and use crappy old engines and just add shiny effects (i'm looking at ubisoft titles, and fallout). They don't even care to adjust the effects just dropping them in and done. Like Witchers hair 64x tesselation, which is pointless, or fallout: tesselation on godrays (wtf?).
TLDR gameworks does the job well, but it enables the developers to go lazy and push out crappy unoptimized games.
Last edited:
Associate
- Joined
- 3 Jan 2010
- Posts
- 1,379
True but it wasn't because of Nvidia, it was because AMD went through pushing it through HDMI to make sure it was possible while Nvidia aimed to put a blockade infront of the free and open for anyone software solution. Still it does mean I can have a freesynch monitor and rely on either gpu now at least.
Well if it weren't for AMD getting it through HDMI then yes, you would be thinking of that because when it comes to the point of upgrading you would have to consider your options and the option Nvidia chose is a consideration. Unless you buy the cards blindly then it's always a factor in your card choice whether you choose to put it at the back of your mind or not. Sure, enjoy your gpu after purchase but it doesn't change that it requires a conscious decision and you may not choose to care about that stuff but I'm industry conscious as well as product conscious. I usually opt to make my purchases based on what I want from the future and support the companies who are giving us the best option.
A lot of stupid people don't but in the end that's when you slowly play into some companies hands that simply want to make everything about paying more money. Simple analogy for you, some people (doesn't bother me though) don't like DLC so they support companies like CD project red. Am I going to wake up myself and worry about if the other devs are selling DLC rather than enjoying my game as you'd put it? No, but it doesn't change that I'm smart enough to not let companies rip me off with cheap mobile experiences that nickle and dime me or ignore the companies making a good experience without overcharging me. It's simple, if we want the industry to move in the right direction then we have to back it with money.I'm open to others supporting what they feel is right too but in this case it's obvious the Nvidia situation (which isn't necessarily Nvidia's fault but the monitor manufacturers') has led to ridiculous overcharging and poor value for money. I'll stick with supporting the freesynch stuff so this hopefully doesn't become a big problem and we end up with higher and higher monitor prices while people just accept it for minimal improvement.
I don't own any free or gsync monitors yet but when I do it will be which one is right for me at the right price, Currently I don't need async as I'm quite happy with my old samsung.
Heck I have not bought or played farcry 4 because of personal feelings, But I know a lot of people talked the talk about Farcry 4 and Ubisoft and yet got the game anyway, That's just the way people are and you can not blame a company for what people are willing to buy.
Heck I have not bought or played farcry 4 because of personal feelings, But I know a lot of people talked the talk about Farcry 4 and Ubisoft and yet got the game anyway, That's just the way people are and you can not blame a company for what people are willing to buy.
Associate
- Joined
- 3 Jan 2010
- Posts
- 1,379
Of course you can blame a company for what people are willing to buy, they are the ones designing, creating and then clearly marketing that thing to try and make you want it. It is entirely there responsibility when they design and market it with the exception that people then choose from what is available but we all know how that ends up. People can pay hundreds of dollars for a rag with a brand name on it, not all people are smart or have financial sense so it's down to companies to make responsible products and consumers to become educated consumers somewhat but you can't blame people for not knowing everything about every product anyway. I did say myself 'I'm open to others supporting what they feel is right too' but of course that doesn't mean anything and everything a company releases is automatically okay and good. gsynch isn't that bad but it's clearly not necessary and led to overcharging in a few cases. I'm simply glad AMD was able to get around it and not leave Nvidia users with overpriced monitors as the only option
Last edited:
See, the problem is, I got that far in your post and then stopped reading. You might well of had some good points but why throw that in there? Very silly.
Dunno why you'd choose to take offence at that, nor why it'd make you stop reading a post. That's very silly O.o
If you know Greg, then you would know where his heart lies and you struck him deep in his heart.
Where did I say that was offensive? It just isn't a good start to a sensible conversation and not needed.
Of course you can blame a company for what people are willing to buy, they are the ones designing, creating and then clearly marketing that thing to try and make you want it. It is entirely there responsibility when they design and market it with the exception that people then choose from what is available but we all know how that ends up. People can pay hundreds of dollars for a rag with a brand name on it, not all people are smart or have financial sense so it's down to companies to make responsible products and consumers to become educated consumers somewhat but you can't blame people for not knowing everything about every product anyway. I did say myself 'I'm open to others supporting what they feel is right too' but of course that doesn't mean anything and everything a company releases is automatically okay and good. gsynch isn't that bad but it's clearly not necessary and led to overcharging in a few cases. I'm simply glad AMD was able to get around it and not leave Nvidia users with overpriced monitors as the only option
So buy it or don't, that's your choice. Companies exist for making money, if no one bought gsync I am sure nvidia would add a scaler in thier cards, but people did buy them and that's not nvidia's fault as the customers are happy with thier purchase and if there not happy then they choose Amd or no have no async.
Panasonic have viera link but why don't they make it open so samsung and lg can use it!
Poor analogy. There's literally tens if not hundreds of companies doing the same things that Samsung, LG, Panasonic, Phillips etc are doing. It doesn't harm the consumer if 1 company falls behind or 1 company offers something new - each of them will have their own thing.
GPU users have 2 choices, AMD or nVidia - one company falling behind has a HUGE impact on consumers if not rectified. Whether it's nVidia's "fault" is a different matter entirely - but they're definitely not helping the issue, and it's us consumers who will suffer in the end for it. If there was a third player in the game, then it would be less of an issue - having 4 or 5 would be fantastic. Unfortunately practices in the past have led us to the point of only 2 - and soon to be only one if this continues, which may work for Highlander but not for us
Associate
- Joined
- 3 Jan 2010
- Posts
- 1,379
because it pertained to a later point that highlighted that you are often coming from a position of looking merely at vendors rather than the industry and from a neutral standpoint or even a standpoint ignoring any preference or interest in the gpu industry then it obviously a dubious relationship open to abuse. It is a conflict of interest for Nvidia to help AMD and so I was highlighting (whether candidly or not) that anyone who was impartial to the industry rather than having some interest or preference for Nvidia would recognise that it poses a dubious relationship.
still, if you ignore the good parts of a post because the bad parts aren't to your liking then there's no discussion to be had unless it falls in your favour it seems. I agree the comment came off a little barbed but we know you have a preference towards Nvidia and I've seen plenty of times where you personally like to take the gloves off and play dirty when it comes to other arguments so lets not play the victim to ignore the worthwhile parts. I felt you was posing the argument as Nvidia were being treat as the bad guys when in fact treating them as the good guys is a bigger danger as they are the ones in control and open to abuse. These boards have plenty of jibes and kicks at one another so I agree I shouldn't encourage it more but then if you were the bigger man you'd simply address the good points and highlight the rest isn't needed rather than ignore (and presumably mouthpiece again later) the same issues.
If it helps greg, most of the time when I comment with barbs and knives to you it's because I like you and I think you have the opportunity to slip away from what I feel is a bit of an overly clear preference to one side. I don't even mind if you end up being on the green team and choosing to forego AMD in the future (might mean I can't count on your reviews as much if you only have one sides card though of course) but I feel I've often seen your comments come in barbed against AMD before and then never a bad word to say about Nvidia. There's a difference between a preference and a bias and you toe the line in my mind, I apologise if you feel it's been a case of sniping you but I'll admit it's often been more aimed at trying to get you to shirk the bias. If it's made me come off wrong though I'll just have to find a gentler way of pointing it out in the future if I feel that is the case. And if you feel this entire post is quite barbed then please take it the kindest possible way, I often do speak in harsh terms and I really mean no offense in this entire post but I do feel I am a straight talker and it comes off offensive even when I read it myself (should it be interpreted wrong) but clearly I'm highlighting your a decent guy but when the gloves come off you know you have one sides back and I'd like to see that be less of the case but it's of course your choice.
Last edited:
Associate
- Joined
- 23 Dec 2015
- Posts
- 120
- Location
- Staffordshire
To be honest, to anyone who who owns a g-sync monitor and gpu on here, can you really tell the difference in real world gaming? To me it just seems like a very expensive upgrade for what you actually get in return.