• 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.

[H]ardOCP: GeForce Partner Program Impacts Consumer Choice

So if I'm reading it right, if you want to be a part of the GPP you are not allowed to make cards with AMD/Intel GPUs you have to be Nvidia exclusive, and if you're not part of the GPP your ability to produce/sell Nvidia based cards will be hamstrung?

That's super sketchy, but on a positive side maybe it will backfire on them and result in some companies that produced both Nvidia/AMD based cards having enough and ceasing Nvidia production like XFX did...

No, that's not what it means. It's about marketing brands, like the example with ROG and ASUS. In the GPP a marketing brand like ROG would not be allowed to use non-nvidia gpus. Outside of that brand they could use them normally. At the moment brands like ROG have Nv and AMD gpus and then there are the "normal" gpus sold by asus. Now it seems Nv wants to force it's partners to make Nv exclusive brands. AMD would then be sold under a different brand.

The stuff like higher allocation of gpus is already pretty normal on both sides, as evga or sapphire get more gpus easier then partners who serve both vendors.
 
NVidia does something dodgy and people are surprised? Why do they even need to do this, they dominate the market as it is and should be happy to watch AMD struggle to compete.

This story will evolve very quickly as more sites pick up on it and the regulators take an interest in what it means for consumers.
NVidia's been up to this sort of thing for years. People just ignore it because they like the graphics cards and fall for the marketing push of "you're missing out."

The feeling of missing out is what got sales for PhysX, for example, not actual examples of unprecedented levels of physics effects in games.
 
The feeling of missing out is what got sales for PhysX, for example, not actual examples of unprecedented levels of physics effects in games.

Not really, considering it was unprecedented as nothing else came parallel to it. That's pretty much the definition of unprecedented in real-time. Probably best not to get into a debate of less is more, though.
 
Dear god, what were Nvidia management smoking then they came up with this? Surely they would know the backlash they would recieve, even thought the intel/amd shenanigans are years old now its still in folks minds and a return to those kind of activities will result in a loss of image for the company.
Its also a gamble because neither AMD nor intel are likely to be too impressed with this and fight back - and Nvidia does not need to see more Radion products go into Intel spaces further reducing there overall market share.

Assuming this is legit, which it may not be all that. I bet there will be a new vid from everyones fav youtube flamer on this coming soon.
Honestly, people don't care. They have been ignoring it for years. Things that nVidia have actually done and been proven to have done has just been ignored en masse, whereas AMD had a reputation for things that weren't ever actually true (the whole bad drivers thing.)

Nvidia faced a bit of backlash over the 970 3.5GB thing, and lost some brand loyalty, but that tiny amount of brand loyalty they lost is probably more brand loyalty than AMD has ever had.

For years it's blown my mind that AMD had this reputation of having ****** drivers that never worked ever, while nVidia were the ones who had faced multiple class action lawsuits over poor drivers.
 
Surely Nvidia is poking themselves in the eye with a stick if they are trying to enforce this? look at the Asus ROG example... its not just GPU's, they make all sorts of RoG hardware, motherboards, monitors, keyboards etc etc..

So suddenly Nvidia says you can only make ROG branded cards for us, not for AMD or we wont support you?...

So Nvidia can dictate to other vendors what they can and cant do with their own brands? wow that is some next level egotistical BS right there :(

Someone in Nvidia has been piping hard on the rocks.

Actually for people like EVGA this does not effect them at all, its the brands like MSI, Asus and Gigabyte who this is aimed at i guess... Asus and Gigabyte both have launched exclusive "Gamer" orientated branding in recent years, with the RoG and Aorus stuff, so is Nvidia saying they can only sell their cards as RoG or Auros now?
 
Not really, considering it was unprecedented as nothing else came parallel to it. That's pretty much the definition of unprecedented in real-time. Probably best not to get into a debate of less is more, though.
My point isn't about what PhysX was actually capable of (what Aegis shown was definitely unprecedented) it was that nothing ever actually came of it. It fizzled out pretty quickly, and the only thing that ever got it sales was the promise of unprecedented physics, not the actual demonstration of it.

There's only a handful of GPU accelerated PhysX games, the rest just used PhysX as a CPU based physics API, and the ones that did have GPU physics had the rudimentary physics turned down to exaggerate the difference GPU physics makes when it was on.
 
My point isn't about what PhysX was actually capable of (what Aegis shown was definitely unprecedented) it was that nothing ever actually came of it. It fizzled out pretty quickly, and the only thing that ever got it sales was the promise of unprecedented physics, not the actual demonstration of it.

There's only a handful of GPU accelerated PhysX games, the rest just used PhysX as a CPU based physics API, and the ones that did have GPU physics had the rudimentary physics turned down to exaggerate the difference GPU physics makes when it was on.


You're creating a huge strawman argument and one that's not even true. None of it wouldn't even matter if AMD could engineer something that's truly competitive, and stop worrying about what NVIDIA is doing. That's all they ever seem to do, the only difference now is, they're not doing it publically and simply handing stories to the press.

PhysX based fluid effects like that in Borderlands 2 were exactly what Ageia (not Ageis) demonstrated from day one, the only difference is NVIDIA had the nouse and funding to get developers to use the libraries where Ageia didn't. That sort of thing isn't easy, which is why AMD only managed it once with TressFX, and look how many titles that used this before it disolved.

Doesn't matter how you cut it, ones purchasing decision rests on performance above and before all else. What NVIDIA is doing with its partners is really of no concern to me.
 
Last edited:
I wouldn't be surprised it the geniuses behind the anti-competitiveness at Intel are not working for Nvidia.

The other solution for asus is to just not brand their Nvidia cards with ROG.
 
Yeah the brand loyalty to nvidia and intel just amazes me, the majority of people either dont care or are unaware of the true situation regarding the products these companies ***** out.
The other thing is epeen, its obvious on here as well - just amazes me that folk act like this. Nvidia could be serving up fresh children everyday in there canteens and folk would still gush uncontrollably at an over priced titan xyz that gives them 15% extra epeen over others.
Sadder than a box of dead puppies.
 
I'm not bi-partisan and hardly surprised either.

The reason that AMD raised it with HOCP is because the employees of the OEMs or ODMs needed to leak it somewhere where they knew that it would go further. "Gaming" branded stuff outsells the same hardware with vanilla branding by 60 - 70%.

Let's see where this one ends up. The EU tends to have more testicular fortitude than the rest in this regard.

Expect NV to respond via "focus groups" in the next 2 to 3 days, they are remarkably quiet in normal forums thus far.
 
You're creating a huge strawman argument and one that's not even true. None of it wouldn't even matter if AMD could engineer something that's truly competitive, and stop worrying about what NVIDIA is doing. That's all they ever seem to do, the only difference now is, they're not doing it publically and simply handing stories to the press.

PhysX based fluid effects like that in Borderlands 2 were exactly what Ageia (not Ageis) demonstrated from day one, the only difference is NVIDIA had the nouse and funding to get developers to use the libraries where Ageia didn't. That sort of thing isn't easy, which is why AMD only managed it once with TressFX, and look how many titles that used this before it was absolved.

Doesn't matter how you cut it, ones purchasing decision rests on performance above and before all else. What NVIDIA is doing with its partners is really of no concern to me.
Yet nothing actually came of PhysX, you don't even hear about it now because its fizzled out.

I'm not creating a strawman argument, I'm not convinced understand what that means. There isn't anything I'm misrepresenting, then arguing against that misrepresentation.

I'm highlighting that nVidia works on illiciting an emotional response, and trying to tie customers into a proprietary eco system whereby they need to keep buying nVidia to make full use of the software or hardware they have by making people feel as if they are missing out by not having nVidia.

The main thing they actually have over the competition was never good enough for them, even now, they have to keep doing the slimy things.

Which is why PhysX came up, because it never went anywhere outside of token gestures of:

"Here are normal physics effects"

Usually involving a scene with absolutely nothing going on, as if CPU based physics couldn't muster anything better.

As I said, only a handful of games actually even used GPU accelerated PhysX, and when they did it was over the top shoehorned nonsense. Speaking of Borderlands 2, the GPU PhysX in that were a mess and caused visual obstructions because of how over the top and gratuitous it was.

There's a reason it's not used or spoken about much now, because it was only ever a checkbox feature for marketing.

Tress FX didn't work for similar reasons. It was initially attempted as a proprietary format, then updated to work with nVidia, but ultimately an unnecessary attempt to tack on a checkbox feature.

Why are you also suggesting that this is a non story just because the source is AMD?

It appears that the story is actually true, regardless of whether it's from AMD or not, so that's completely and utterly irrelevant.
 
Not surprised one bit to be honest. Looking forward to what @D.P. will have to say about this :p

On another note, Silent scone does have a point. I would have stuck with my 4K Freesync monitor had Vega been able to keep within it’s Freesync range. Freesync 2 ended up being a total disappointment to me after I waited for so long for it. Now as someone who enjoys 4K gaming I am stuck with a G-Sync monitor which actually has a good range and as a result having to buy an Nvidia card.

I do hope now that AMD are back into profit they will get more competitive again. Sadly I do not see this news leading to much of an boycott of Nvidia. AMD will need to bring the performance and give people the choice. This may happen soon with their 7nm stuff, at least in the CPU department anyway.



c4eX3tr.gif

Is that not Gregster? Lol :D
 
You're creating a huge strawman argument and one that's not even true. None of it wouldn't even matter if AMD could engineer something that's truly competitive, and stop worrying about what NVIDIA is doing. That's all they ever seem to do, the only difference now is, they're not doing it publically and simply handing stories to the press.

You can blame AMD for lacking competitive products and leading customers to buy Nvidia cards. That's fine, but you cannot blame AMD for Nvidia's business practices. It's nVidia's decision and theirs alone.
 
Not surprised one bit to be honest. Looking forward to what @D.P. will have to say about this :p

On another note, Silent scone does have a point. I would have stuck with my 4K Freesync monitor had Vega been able to keep within it’s Freesync range. Freesync 2 ended up being a total disappointment to me after I waited for so long for it. Now as someone who enjoys 4K gaming I am stuck with a G-Sync monitor which actually has a good range and as a result having to buy an Nvidia card.

I do hope now that AMD are back into profit they will get more competitive again. Sadly I do not see this news leading to much of an boycott of Nvidia. AMD will need to bring the performance and give people the choice. This may happen soon with their 7nm stuff, at least in the CPU department anyway.





Is that not Gregster? Lol :D

Nvidia need to **** off and support adaptive sync. I'm really surprised more people aren't angry about it. But then it goes hand in hand with the strange attitude people have towards nVidia, where their anti consumer and anti competitive behaviour is somehow embraced as a good thing for the consumer.

You can blame AMD for lacking competitive products and leading customers to buy Nvidia cards. That's fine, but you cannot blame AMD for Nvidia's business practices. It's nVidia's decision and theirs alone.

Most people don't seem to get this. AMD's incompetence or inability to make a high performance competitive GPU is exactly what pushed me over to nVidia, reluctantly, I might add, due to their business practices, but I don't for one second think it's remotely reasonable to blame 1 corporate entity's anti consumer and and competitive behaviour on another corporate entity simply because the second corporate entity can't compete on the same high level.

I remember having a ridiculous argument with Gregster who was absolutely thirsty to blame AMD for everything and anything he could, because AMD cards weren't working properly with X79.

His logical conclusion was that it has to be AMD drivers not working as they never do, based on the fact that they were able to identify the cause of the issue and supply a fix via their drivers, and that it wasn't happening with nVidia cards at the time.

As it turns out, the problem was the X79 chipset having some teething problems with the bandwidth for PCIE 3.0, because AMD had enabled PCIE 3 functionality via drivers before nVidia.

My argument wasn't even a defense of AMD, it was simply "we have no idea whose fault it is right now, but all that matters is that it can be fixed."

But the utter thirst to blame AMD for something else was unreal and has stood out as a memorable situation given his constant protests that was completely unbiased.
 
Back
Top Bottom