• 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.

Nvidia Opensourcing Entire Gameworks software library - including Physx.

PhysX has never really been used to its full capacity, I used to be quite excited with the old PhysX demos prior to Nvidia buying the company and then removing the need for a proprietary PPU card.

OT though its good to see Nvidia sharing the codebase, should stop these silly additions to games which hammer AMDs cards (I thinking of the hair in the Witcher/Tomb Raider). Maybe they both could come to an agreement about gsync/freesync to have a single standard?
 
Dr Delphi said:
PhysX has never really been used to its full capacity, I used to be quite excited with the old PhysX demos prior to Nvidia buying the company and then removing the need for a proprietary PPU card.

OT though its good to see Nvidia sharing the codebase, should stop these silly additions to games which hammer AMDs cards (I thinking of the hair in the Witcher/Tomb Raider). Maybe they both could come to an agreement about gsync/freesync to have a single standard?
Click to expand...

Freesync is actually the AMD driver implementation of the Vesa adaptive sync.
Intel is supporting it also, but not with any product either.

If NVidia decides to support the Vesa Adaptive sync, all current Freesync monitors will work with the Nvidia cards on that part also.

On top on hardware level, the Vesa adaptive sync exists on the DP1.3 and 1.4 cards Nvidia is making right now (Pascal). They only have to activate it via the drivers!
Same applies to the HDMI 2.0 sockets of the above cards.
 
Dr Delphi said:
PhysX has never really been used to its full capacity, I used to be quite excited with the old PhysX demos prior to Nvidia buying the company and then removing the need for a proprietary PPU card.

OT though its good to see Nvidia sharing the codebase, should stop these silly additions to games which hammer AMDs cards (I thinking of the hair in the Witcher/Tomb Raider). Maybe they both could come to an agreement about gsync/freesync to have a single standard?
Click to expand...

There is nothing for AMD and Nvidia to come together on. It's Nvidia who are refusing to use the open standard which is adaptive sync. Amd use Adaptive Sync which is built into the Display Port 1.2a standard. Amd call there version Freesync but it's still using the open standard which nvidia could use anytime they want as it does not belong to AMD.
 
GoogalyMoogaly said:
While I'm not saying you are, I don't think owning a card of the other brand stops you being a fanboy. I'm sure it's been discussed before. Didn't Gregster own AMD cards in the past but still get called an Nvidia fanboy? I'm sure it's not just Greg either that have owned AMD but been called an Nvidia fanboy because he didn't blindly worship at the altar of AMD.

Hopefully this does happen though, will surely just make things better. Unless it means Nvidia stop contributing to it because they don't want to give away any trade secrets or tech. If it's just left up to the community (and other developers) then I'm not sure what it would offer over GPUOpen. Do we even need 2 open source packages of this nature?

Maybe it'll increase uptake if companies have more visibility? But given how so many people complain about GameWorks do we really want more uptake?
Click to expand...

Gregster never owned or used an AMD card exclusively for more than 25 minutes.
 
tommybhoy said:
Are you comparing ~2 years of running NV exclusively with ~2 weeks of running AMD exclusively as being the same thing?

Edit, just to clarify nothing negative with reviewing cards and punting them on afterwards for a hobby-just an observation.

On topic, great news Nv's removing the lock out which shouldn't have been there in the first place if your looking to be the good guy.
Click to expand...

As I said, not just Greg. But I don't see what length of using a card has to do with being biased? Also, why is exclusivity important? Are we making these rules up as we go along?
AMDMatt did and possibly still does own Intel CPUs despite working for AMD. It doesn't mean he's not going to be biased towards the company he works for.

I don't think a company has to make things open source, they're both businesses and they want unique selling points. Let's remember that Mantle wasn't open-source either. It was something AMD could potentially use to get some extra sales and why shouldn't they?

But as has been said, I'm wondering if Nvidia were perhaps running out of steam with Gameworks anyway, especially with DX12 and Vulkan coming out that might have shaken things up. Also it often got a lot of bad press (quite possibly deserved) for the problems it (may have) caused, maybe they just got bored of that.

Maybe they saw the popularity and uptake of GPUOpen and thought "We want some of that!" :D
But seriously maybe there just isn't the interest there to make it worth their time and they figure open-sourcing it will lighten the load on them while keeping their name attached.

I can't say I've ever really been that bothered by any GameWorks stuff (ignoring the fact it often won't run well on my AMD cards) and this statement hasn't really changed that. I'm not thinking "OK, now maybe I'll get to experience SmokeWorks (or whatever it's called)". Maybe something good and interesting will come out of it, we'll see.
As I think it was Humbug that brought up some time ago, it's probably better, from a performance point of view, if the game engine does the effects anyway, rather than a 3rd party library that isn't privy to the engine's optimisations.
 
Dr Delphi said:
PhysX has never really been used to its full capacity, I used to be quite excited with the old PhysX demos prior to Nvidia buying the company and then removing the need for a proprietary PPU card.

OT though its good to see Nvidia sharing the codebase, should stop these silly additions to games which hammer AMDs cards (I thinking of the hair in the Witcher/Tomb Raider). Maybe they both could come to an agreement about gsync/freesync to have a single standard?
Click to expand...

I was rather excited myself for physx in the past. Even if nvidia wanted to keep it locked to their own hardware, they could have just allowed people to use a Nvidia graphics card as a physx accelerator even if you owned an AMD/ATI graphics card. But they had to lock that out.

Nvidia essentially killed phsyx themselves and the prospect of what hardware accelerated physics could offer.
 
Gregster said:
Now what have I said? :(
Click to expand...

You didn't say enough good stuff about AMD in your videos so you're still a nVidia fan mate, wouldn't worry though you've got the performance whilst they're turning down settings and praying at dawn every morning for vega to be good :D
 
Googaly made the likeness, but personally wouldn't expect both of them to agree that not only is AMD crap at the top end right now while at the same time believing Nv should have been upfront with 3.5Gb+5Gb not to mention proper specs in the first place leaving NV worthy of the **** storm that ensued.:p
 
Too little too late if you ask me, Even if they announced Freesync support as of tomorrow I'm not sure I'd move to them, We've seen how they treat their playerbase and I dread the thought of there ever being no-one else.
It's why I avoided Maxwell and the 980ti and went with Fiji in order to show support for the struggling at that time AMD , But since then having watched how they've treated those who went with the 10 series high end it's put me off them as a company.
So much so that I'll now prosctively avoid giving them my money, Unless Vega's a real lemon :D
 
tommybhoy said:
Googaly made the likeness, but personally wouldn't expect both of them to agree that not only is AMD crap at the top end right now while at the same time believing Nv should have been upfront with 3.5Gb+5Gb not to mention proper specs in the first place leaving NV worthy of the **** storm that ensued.:p
Click to expand...

Yeah, it was my fault, sorry Greg. Used you as an example to make a point that got a bit out of control. Apologies for that.

I'd agree that AMD haven't been competitive at the high end for a while now. The "Overclockers Dream" (which I have 2 of) was disappointing and I don't think consistently matched the 980Ti. Given the price and the stock issues (which are possibly connected) I expected better. Sure over time it may compare better to the 980Ti (based on other GPU trends) but I didn't pay full price at launch for a card that will outperform the Nvidia equivalent 6 months after the next gen is released.
I've got a Freesync monitor so I'd really like AMD to release something that can compete with the 1080Ti (before the 1180Ti is released).

That said there are a number of things Nvidia do that I'm not a fan of either. the 970 memory issue being one of them. Having to sign in to GeForce Experience and how integrated they're making that is another. Plus the whole thing about Nvidia drivers sending info from your PC back to Nvidia concerns me also.

I don't really think one is good and one is evil, I just see them both as businesses with PR and marketing departments.
 
GoogalyMoogaly said:
Yeah, it was my fault, sorry Greg. Used you as an example to make a point that got a bit out of control. Apologies for that.

I'd agree that AMD haven't been competitive at the high end for a while now. The "Overclockers Dream" (which I have 2 of) was disappointing and I don't think consistently matched the 980Ti. Given the price and the stock issues (which are possibly connected) I expected better. Sure over time it may compare better to the 980Ti (based on other GPU trends) but I didn't pay full price at launch for a card that will outperform the Nvidia equivalent 6 months after the next gen is released.
I've got a Freesync monitor so I'd really like AMD to release something that can compete with the 1080Ti (before the 1180Ti is released).

That said there are a number of things Nvidia do that I'm not a fan of either. the 970 memory issue being one of them. Having to sign in to GeForce Experience and how integrated they're making that is another. Plus the whole thing about Nvidia drivers sending info from your PC back to Nvidia concerns me also.

I don't really think one is good and one is evil, I just see them both as businesses with PR and marketing departments.
Click to expand...
Nothing to be sorry about and your observation was spot on. Back on topic, I remember this being said quite some time ago about GameWorks becoming open source and I saw it as a good thing then and a good thing now but only if it gets used. I like the GameWorks effects and PhysX but it wasn't used enough really. FlameWorks, FaceWorks are 2 things I can't recall seeing at all (might be something that used them?) and as PC gamers, we are already an afterthought when it comes to games on PC it seems, so not sure any game devs would use the effects unless NVidia (or AMD) sponsor the games.
 
Gregster said:
You are coming across as a proper AMD fanboy Tommy. Quite sad really but hey ho :)
Click to expand...
That's your perogative and don't have a problem if you think it's sad or with anybody else having the impression of what I am or not, wouldn't even try and impose on you( and others) otherwise.:cool:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom