[Bug] Nvidia removes restrictions on hybrid NV+ATI Physx setups!!!

[ronnn]

3 months ago I remember sitting here reading about how physx had no games and took too much of a performance hit ect. ect. ect. ect. . Suddenly everyone with ATI cards cares about physx and if Nvidia blocks it from its COMPETITION?

This thread is ridiculous.
Physx enabled = Nvidia..... not ATI

edit: theres someone in the Mafia 2 thread saying physx sucks right now.
See for yourself..
http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2077920&page=2

Wow, I am surprised that you would support nvidia in limiting the function of a bought and paid for vid card!

Calling us hypocrites is a non logical way of supporting your special company.

 

[NoQuarter]

You own the card, THEY own the drivers.

They can do whatever they want with the drivers. Enable, disable features ect, they are the ones putting the effort into their driver support.

But as I said above, what they are doing is a bad move IMO.

Wrong, the drivers have to enable the card to maintain whatever functionality it was sold as having the ability to do. If you bought a card promising HDCP functionality and the drivers wouldn't do it or disabled it in the future, there would be a class action lawsuit because misleading the consumer about the products capability violates consumer protection laws.

Thankfully we don't have the kind of worthless consumer rights you and happy medium think we have.

 

[Modelworks]

... Which law would that be?

They are violating the antitrust laws. Xerox and IBM both tried this tactic of removing warranties or features based on the installation of other brands. Tying agreements are illegal and many companies have tried to get away with it, Nvidia isn't anywhere near the first. MS, Apple, Adobe all have tried it. Basically making one product conditional on whether you own another product would be enough but Nvidia went even further by making the other product a competitors which breaks the vendor lock in rules.


They cannot stop you from using a competitors product and cannot remove features because you are using a competitors product. It would be like MS selling windows but you can only use MS software or they start slowing it down, removing features. Google IE and bundling, for all the hell it has caused MS.


If someone took Nvidia to court they would lose.

Under the law I have rights to the hardware and software in the agreement at the time of purchase. Nvidia cannot come back later and change those rights without my permission. If they were allowed to do that then no contracts between two people would be worth making as either party could just change the terms later. A lot of Eula use things like "we can change this at any time and you are bound to the changes" but it has never held up in court, it is just legal department scare tactics.

From the physx eula:

You may use, display and reproduce the NVIDIA PhysX Driver on Licensed Platforms
only. For purposes of this Agreement, “Licensed Platforms” shall include the following:
- Any PC or Apple Mac computer with a NVIDIA CUDA-enabled processor
executing NVIDIA PhysX;
- Any PC or Apple Mac computer running NVIDIA PhysX software executing on
the primary central processing unit of the PC only;
- Any PC utilizing an AGEIA PhysX processor executing NVIDIA PhysX code;
- Microsoft XBOX 360™;
- Nintendo® Wii™; and/or
- Sony Playstation®3

Nowhere does it say ATI hardware is forbidden and that is the agreement I made when I purchased the card.

 

[happy medium]

From the physx eula:

Quote:
You may use, display and reproduce the NVIDIA PhysX Driver on Licensed Platforms
only. For purposes of this Agreement, “Licensed Platforms” shall include the following:
- Any PC or Apple Mac computer with a NVIDIA CUDA-enabled processor
executing NVIDIA PhysX;
- Any PC or Apple Mac computer running NVIDIA PhysX software executing on
the primary central processing unit of the PC only;
- Any PC utilizing an AGEIA PhysX processor executing NVIDIA PhysX code;
- Microsoft XBOX 360™;
- Nintendo® Wii™; and/or
- Sony Playstation®3

Nowhere does it say ATI hardware is forbidden and that is the agreement I made when I purchased the card.

No where does it say it supports ATI hardware either.

 

[Dark4ng3l]

No where does it say it supports ATI hardware either.

It doesn't have to support ATI hardware in any way since what the "main" video card is is completely irrelevant. Hell does anyone know if the cards would work with Intel integrated graphics or something like a Kyro 2 or a Matrox card(just for arguments sake)?

 

[NoQuarter]

From the physx eula:

Quote:
You may use, display and reproduce the NVIDIA PhysX Driver on Licensed Platforms
only. For purposes of this Agreement, “Licensed Platforms” shall include the following:
- Any PC or Apple Mac computer with a NVIDIA CUDA-enabled processor
executing NVIDIA PhysX;
- Any PC or Apple Mac computer running NVIDIA PhysX software executing on
the primary central processing unit of the PC only;
- Any PC utilizing an AGEIA PhysX processor executing NVIDIA PhysX code;
- Microsoft XBOX 360™;
- Nintendo® Wii™; and/or
- Sony Playstation®3

Nowhere does it say ATI hardware is forbidden and that is the agreement I made when I purchased the card.

No where does it say it supports ATI hardware either.

Actually it does:

- Any PC or Apple Mac computer with a NVIDIA CUDA-enabled processor executing NVIDIA PhysX;

 

[busydude]

No where does it say it supports ATI hardware either.

FYI, xbox 360 uses ATI graphics chip.

 

[happy medium]

Actually it does:

Quote:
- Any PC or Apple Mac computer with a NVIDIA CUDA-enabled processor executing NVIDIA PhysX;

Since when does AMD sell pc's enabled with Cuda support?

 

[HurleyBird]

No where does it say it supports ATI hardware either.

Nowhere does it say it supports barbie horse adventure paint mods either. What's your point???

 

[konakona]

3 months ago I remember sitting here reading about how physx had no games and took too much of a performance hit ect. ect. ect. ect. . Suddenly everyone with ATI cards cares about physx and if Nvidia blocks it from its COMPETITION?

This thread is ridiculous.
Physx enabled = Nvidia..... not ATI

edit: theres someone in the Mafia 2 thread saying physx sucks right now.
See for yourself..
http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2077920&page=2

Since you seem quite confused let me make it a bit clearer for you. Not everyone is enthusiastic, let alone interested in PhysX 3 months ago AND now. If you haven't noticed, most people critical of nvidia's stance are voicing their opinion on the principle of things, not actually in the hopes of using it on their computer. There are some minority that actually post how they go about doing it, but the majority wouldn't really go out of the way to be able to use PhysX. Rather, it's more like "hey, I got a spare nv card so why not" sort of thing, as long as it doesn't get all too complicated to try it out.

Basically what I am saying is you don't necessarily have to be interested in PhysX itself to have your say on it. People bitched about larabee the whole time before and after it got canned, does that make all of them genuinely interested in the tech itself? I seriously doubt it. Same applies here, nothing new.

 

[happy medium]

FYI, xbox 360 uses ATI graphics chip.

And the xbox 360 has the support. not the ATI graphics inside it.

 

[happy medium]

Nowhere does it say it supports barbie horse adventure paint mods either. What's your point???

So the Barbie company cannot sue if it dosen't work with the horse, because it never said it was supposed to.

 

[Dark4ng3l]

And the xbox 360 has the support. not the ATI graphics inside it.

Any PC has support. Add an ATI chip in it. Nowhere does it say it loses support.

 

[konakona]

Since when does AMD sell pc's enabled with Cuda support?

Last time I checked, AMD doesn't sell PCs, just GPUs and chipsets

As for what was quoted originally, having a discreet/integrated ATi GPU wouldn't somehow cripple the almighty NVIDIA CUDA-enabled processor, would it? You see, it's not like they are trying to run it on an ATi hardware. When they say "CUDA-enabled processor", I think of it as a processor doing its assigned task, regardless of whatever the hell the main GPU is doing.

 

[happy medium]

Since you seem quite confused let me make it a bit clearer for you. Not everyone is enthusiastic, let alone interested in PhysX 3 months ago AND now. If you haven't noticed, most people critical of nvidia's stance are voicing their opinion on the principle of things, not actually in the hopes of using it on their computer. There are some minority that actually post how they go about doing it, but the majority wouldn't really go out of the way to be able to use PhysX. Rather, it's more like "hey, I got a spare nv card so why not" sort of thing, as long as it doesn't get all too complicated to try it out.

Basically what I am saying is you don't necessarily have to be interested in PhysX itself to have your say on it. People bitched about larabee the whole time before and after it got canned, does that make all of them genuinely interested in the tech itself? I seriously doubt it. Same applies here, nothing new.

So your saying I should be upset with a company because it paid for physx ,supports physx drivers,pays for the R&D cost and disables it's use for it's main competition?

This is a big money business screw principles. The only ones bitching are ATI owners.
WHo owns a Ageia (or whatever its called?) physx card, 4 or 5 people? and who cares?

 

[Dark4ng3l]

So your saying I should be upset with a company because it paid for physx ,supports physx drivers,pays for the R&D cost and disables it's use for it's main competition?

This is a big money business screw principles. The only ones bitching are ATI owners.
WHo owns a Ageia (or whatever its called?) physx card, 4 or 5 people? and who cares?

If intel decided that sandy bridge is going to be a completely Nvidia free platform and that the chipset only supports up to 1 gig of ram when a nvidia card is detected would you think that this kind of practice would be tolerated?

 

[happy medium]

Last time I checked, AMD doesn't sell PCs, just GPUs and chipsets

As for what was quoted originally, having a discreet/integrated ATi GPU wouldn't somehow cripple the almighty NVIDIA CUDA-enabled processor, would it? You see, it's not like they are trying to run it on an ATi hardware. When they say "CUDA-enabled processor", I think of it as a processor doing its assigned task, regardless of whatever the hell the main GPU is doing.

Well they wouldnt sell many motherboards that way would they considering Nvidia has more then 50% of the gpu market.

 

[NoQuarter]

So your saying I should be upset with a company because it paid for physx ,supports physx drivers,pays for the R&D cost and disables it's use for it's main competition?

It doesn't really matter if you care, like I said you obviously have no understanding of your consumer rights. Just don't act surprised when others who do understand them do care.

 

[happy medium]

If intel decided that sandy bridge is going to be a completely Nvidia free platform and that the chipset only supports up to 1 gig of ram when a nvidia card is detected would you think that this kind of practice would be tolerated?

ok, then why dosent Intel put it's IGP on AMD boards? Why does AMD lock them out? I think Intel should just give up its 60% of the IGP market and let AMD put 4200 graphics on all Intel boards.

WHy not? I'm sure it would work.

While there at it, why not make Intel make there drivers for them too.

 

[Dark4ng3l]

What you need to understand is that in the PC world everyone benefits from everyone else in the end. Xerox and Canon benefit from Intel and Microsoft turning the PC into a mainstream device. Everyone benefits from Microsoft Directx being a standardized API, everyone benefits from standardised USB ports. Every software company in existence benefits from every single hardware advancement ever.

Its an ecosystem and I really can't come up with something similar to this elsewhere in the pc market today.

As for the philosophical argument. Imagine a world where everyone would do everything in their power to lock out the competition. Imagine a world where everyone would compete directly without any artificial locking out. One reality would be a disaster for the PC market and one would lead to an even more competitive and innovative marketplace. I'll let you take a guess.

 

[konakona]

the only ones bitching are ATI owners.

I am not so certain about that. Most people without admitted brand loyalty in this forum probably have bought multiple video cards from both vendors at some time during their lifetime.

Personally, both of my systems at this point happen to have an ATi card inside. I neither own a spare nvidia card that would fill that secondary physx card role, nor do I care to buy one at its current state.

Still, I don't think nvidia's strategy of self-imposed isolation is good for anyone including themselves. Quite possibly they know what they are doing and they actually might have some pretty good reason to be so deadset on such unfriendly policy, who knows. I just wish they weren't doing this.

So your saying I should be upset with a company because it paid for physx ,supports physx drivers,pays for the R&D cost and disables it's use for it's main competition?

Again, that's not what nvidia is doing. They are disabling this feature on their OWN hardware, for conditions which were not previously stated before this whole stupid driver lockup thing came along. Big difference.

 

[happy medium]

What you need to understand is that in the PC world everyone benefits from everyone else in the end. Xerox and Canon benefit from Intel and Microsoft turning the PC into a mainstream device. Everyone benefits from Microsoft Directx being a standardized API, everyone benefits from standardised USB ports. Every software company in existence benefits from every single hardware advancement ever.

Its an ecosystem and I really can't come up with something similar to this elsewhere in the pc market today.

As for the philosophical argument. Imagine a world where everyone would do everything in their power to lock out the competition. Imagine a world where everyone would compete directly without any artificial locking out. One reality would be a disaster for the PC market and one would lead to an even more competitive and innovative marketplace. I'll let you take a guess.

Hey, I admit it sometimes sucks, but sometimes when you have something the competition dosen't ,you don't want them to have it.

In the future this will be a mute arguement, there will be a physx standard everyone uses.

 

[happy medium]

I am not so certain about that. Most people without admitted brand loyalty in this forum probably have bought multiple video cards from both vendors at some time during their lifetime.

Personally, both of my systems at this point happen to have an ATi card inside. I neither own a spare nvidia card that would fill that secondary physx card role, nor do I care to buy one at its current state.

Still, I don't think nvidia's strategy of self-imposed isolation is good for anyone including themselves. Quite possibly they know what they are doing and they actually might have some pretty good reason to be so deadset on such unfriendly policy, who knows. I just wish they weren't doing this.


Again, that's not what nvidia is doing. They are disabling this feature on their OWN hardware, for conditions which were not previously stated before this whole stupid driver lockup thing came along. Big difference.

I think there will be a whole slew of games comming out for it within the next year.
Mafia 2 is a good example.

 

[Dark Shroud]

Ok at this point it's time to just ignore happy medium. I'm of the opinion he is just trolling at this point in time because his precious nvidia is failing him.

 

[happy medium]

Ok at this point it's time to just ignore happy medium. I'm of the opinion he is just trolling at this point in time because his precious nvidia is failing him.

? Ha? I make a few points and take a few points and suddenly I'm trolling?

This has nothing to do with Nvidia vs ATI. I thought this was about principles?