FAQ-QUESTIONS,release date,system specs, for CoD

Originally Posted by swiss

I still don't get it:

I'll try and use an analogy so you can understand.

Mastercard give preferential rates to customers who shop at stores that are partners with them. If you use a visa you will not only NOT get that preferential rate, but it will actually cost you more money than it should.

Shell Oil decides to make cars. If you don't put Shell brand gas in that Shell car then you will get horrible mileage due to a design to ensure you only use their brand of gas.

Nvidia includes code that makes games run like crap if you don't use their cards!

[K_Freddie]

Originally Posted by speculum jockey

Nvidia includes code that makes games run like crap if you don't use their cards!

MSoft makes DirectX11(DX11) and freely distributes it.
NVidia, Radeon, etc.. make drivers that connect their cards to lower interface of DX11.
Game developers mostly use the top interface of DX11 to connect to any card, or connect directly to the card's driver itself.
The same idea applies PHysX and other types of interfaces.

What you're saying above is non-sense, unless of course you've installed a NVidia driver for a Radeon/ATI/etc card.... well, what more can I say ??

Originally Posted by domian

You compare apples to oranges. Thats complete and utter bullshit.

Sure in youre opinion Solarworld should give theirs solar panels for free to every person, because we all want to protect the environment.

This is in relation to release#'s 196 and 197 with regards to games using the physx programming and non NV cards.

[Baron]

Originally Posted by speculum jockey

Nvidia includes code that makes games run like crap if you don't use their cards!

U really belive that?

Maby NVidia should start develope Ati`s drivers to?

Maby NVidia includes code that makes games run as well as possible if u use thire cards? (shocker, i know)

[Blackdog_kt]

Originally Posted by swiss

Isn't it the programmer/studio who decides to use physx or not?
So:

1st: blame the programmers
2nd: blame AMD for not having something similar
3rd: blame nvidia only if they OWN the programming studios.

I don't really disagree with that, but that's just one side of the coin. The point stands that if we are ever left with a single GPU brand, a lot of things we take for granted will become prohibitive in price.

I think that currently nVidia's lead is a perceived one and not a real one, a lead that's mainly in the marketing department. That's why i object to such practices, because if they sell enough of a product that needs improvement technically, they will be less inclined to improve it.

It's not like i'm an nVidia hater either, up till my current PC all i've ever had was nVidia cards. However, i have no brand loyalty whatsoever. I pay good money to these people and i expect the product to suit me, if it doesn't then too bad for them. However, the reason i can do this is because there is a competitor. I wouldn't be able to if there wasn't one.

In simple terms, a spinning logo during game start-up or all the hype about a technology that's still in its early stages and used in a handful of games (tesselation) doesn't equal true technological benefits for me that will justify their prices.

I'd rather they used some of that money to improve their manufacturing techniques, bring down the cost per unit and lower their wattage and heat signature than buy advertising space for a logo on as much games as possible. Then they would be more competitive, their products would be even better and we would all benefit from it due to the price wars with Ati.

As it is now, Ati has been selling at the prices they are simply because they know it doesn't make sense to buy a single core card that costs almost as much as, is hotter than, draws similar or more watts and delivers comparable performance to their dual core flagship model. If they were feeling threatened they would have cut prices earlier.



EDIT:

Originally Posted by dduff442

Well first of all I pointed out that both AMD and nVidia are guilty of anti-competitive practices
[...........]
People need to move past brand loyalty and see attempts to control the market for what they are: monopoly exploitation that will hurt consumers in the long run. PhysX, CUDA etc are just attempts to balkanise the industry in the exact same way Netscape and Microsoft tried to with the internet. They took open standards like HTML and added proprietary extensions; the idea was that websites would look bad or just be broken on their opponents software. This had nothing to do with helping consumers and everything to do with gaining power over them.

I don't believe that AMD are more innocent than nVidia, it's just that these tricks serve the interests of the dominant player rather than the underdog. Two companies are already insufficient for proper competition. If either gets a lock on the market, everybody loses.

dduff

That's exactly the point really.

A company develops software to further their own hardware sales: Good

A company actually spends money and time on sabotaging their own hardware if a competitor's hardware is also present on the system: Down right unacceptable and worth a big fat "screw you" to them next time i decide to buy

[addman]

Haven't read the whole thread but I'd like to comment on the whole "SoW will be Nvidia optimized etc." subject. No game developer in their right mind will make a game that runs better on one brand of VGA cards than another. It doesn't make financial sense, if you wan't to reach out to as many customers as possible you have to make the game work equally good on all different brands. Maybe 10 years ago it was different when Nvidia all but owned the VGA market but these day when it's so evenly spread you have to satisfy ALL customers. Many games have an ATi or Nvidia stamp but they work just as well on both respectives in most cases, it's mostly just a marketing ploy. This is just my own humble opinion though

[Igo kyu]

Originally Posted by Baron

U really belive that?

...

Maby NVidia includes code that makes games run as well as possible if u use thire cards? (shocker, i know)

No, that turn their cards off if there's a non nVidia card present. So that you can't use a radeon for graphics, and a Geforce for CUDA, which if they didn't turn their card off, you could do. CUDA is currently better than AMD's Stream apparently, so it could make sense to try that, if you could, but no, if you want CUDA, you have to use a nVidia card for graphics. Which means, if you have an expensive AMD card already, you can't get a cheap GeForce as a physics co-pro. You could get a cheap radeon, but it probably won't work as well as a physics co-pro as a GeForce would, and the programing interface for the radeon physics set-up is probably different too, meaning more work for developers to use that. Years from now, the AMD way which is more about complying with industry standards may turn out to be better, but at this point in time as I understand it, the proprietory CUDA interface is leading.

[Triggaaar]

Originally Posted by Baron

U really belive that?

Yes. Some of us do believe that many of these companies do whatever they can to maximise their profits. Companies, as mentioned by duff, such as Microsoft, Apple, nVidia, AMD, Netscape etc.

In the example of nVidia, they have paid developers to optimise their code to suit nVidia cards, and it's suggested that they also (and this doesn't require much imagination for any of the companies listed) do extra work to prevent the cards working well on a competitors card. This is not surprising. It makes their card look good, and leads to more sales and bigger profits, which is really the only thing most (all) of these companies care about.

Maby NVidia should start develope Ati`s drivers to?

Maybe you miss-understand the accusations, which are not made solely at nVidia.

As explained above, this is even just about making games work badly for customers of the competition - some people bought nVidia cards for PhysX, and nVidia stopped those cards working, if the customer also owned an ATI card.

[klem]

This is all a bit too deep for me.

Is anyone suggesting that SoW is being developed to deliver maximum benefit only if Nvidia's cards are used whilst ATI users have to settle for second best?

[brando]

Perhaps the Lucid Hydra chip, as seen on the new Asus Crosshair IV Extreme mobo, will go some way towards levelling this bumpy field. (Not that I'm recommending that particular board, which is aimed mainly at the over-clocking market) Once they have the software sorted it should be possible to combine green and red cards, hopefully to exploit the advantages of each type. Using the CUDA and PhysX features was mentioned in the review I read @ http://www.pureoverclock.com/review.php?id=1134&page=1