Nvidia have a better technology by most accounts, so why should they try yo kill it and reduce users experience?
-
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.
Intel plans to support FreeSync.
- Thread starter Boomstick777
- Start date
Nvidia have a better technology by most accounts, so why should they try yo kill it and reduce users experience?
Lol, OpenGL was not invented by Nvidia.
My question was which technology they invented (like Gsync, Physx, etc) is open?
You didn't say invented, you said developed. Nvidia has been a massive supporter and developer of Opengl.
And why do you care if it is open or closed? You are perfectly happy using closed source DX with closed source windows and closed source computer games.mi for one use open source Linux and open source opengl as much as possible in my work. There are pros and cons to open and closed course, one isn't automatically better than the other.
OpenGL is developed by a lot of companies including AMD, not just Nvidia.
I take it from your response that Nvidia have never invented/developed any tech that is open to everyone. What a lovely company.
What software has intel on sourced, or Microsoft?
You are almost certainly replying to me from a closed source OS, possibly a closed source browser.
Anyway there are loads of nvidia source products, from the shield SDK, to their earlier CG framework., physx is open source, support for tetra K1, there is open source access to CUDA through LLVM
Last edited:
if you read on av forum - NVidia drivers for hdmi 2 arnt exactly amazing under windows 10.
The OS I'm using does not restrict features depending on which gpu/processor, etc I'm using. Every developer, gpu manufacturer, etc is on a equal footing.
Soldato
- Joined
- 6 Feb 2010
- Posts
- 14,583
Nobody says they should kill off Gsync...people just want them to support adaptive-sync AS WELL, so people that wish to use adaptive-sync would have the option to do so, and for those that believe Gsync is "superior" would still be able to pay the price premium for the "better experience" by choice.
The OS you are using is closed source, end of.
And no, your OS does indeed restrict features based on processor. Want to have windows working on PowerPC, or SPARC, nope, closed source software so cannot be ported.
Last edited:
Your looking at it the wrong way, Gsync monitors just need to be cheaper than they are now compared with async monitors.
I think the fact that gsync is a lot more expensive for essentially the same monitor as an async panel is whats stopping a lot more people buying into gsync.
Are monitor makers allowed to use async and gsync in the same monitor or would nvidia say that its gsync only?
I think a monitor is G-sync only in its current form. I think most still have just a display port input as well, unless they support dual scalers. But until Nvidia produce an ASIC Scaler for gsync instead of using an FPGA then the prices will still remain far higher.
Vulkan API
Oh dear
Nvidia did not develop Vulkan ?
Are you insinuating nVidia developed or helped with Vulkan? As far as i know that was pretty much all AMDs help. Vulkan would never of been possible without Mantle! Straight from the horses mouth that was!
It was developed by the Khronos group. Nvidia has the presedent of the Khrono's group and along with other members developed Vulkan.
Care to back that up?
No, it was originally Opengl Next. The name was then changed to Vulkan and parts of Mantle used to complete the API.