nVidia disables PhysX when ATI card present in Win7

[Mem]

Originally posted by: BenSkywalker

Quite possibly the dumbest thing ATI could do would be to support PhysX. That would mean that Nvidia cards would be the king of GPU accelerated physics no matter what. Nvidia would artificially make it run poorly on ATI cards even if they were capable of running it much better than Nvidia cards. There is absolutely NO one who can blame ATI for not accepting it. Blame Nvidia for making it a choice that is impossible to take.

ATi decided to back Intel's proprietary and far less advanced Havok. If ATi showed that they were dedicated to supporting open standards only that would be one thing, as it stands right now Intel is trying to sue AMD out of business- and that is the company AMD decided to hop in bed with at the first chance. Given the choices that AMD made it is without a hint of doubt entirely reasonable to question why they did not support PhysX. Sadly, they instead claim they are behind industry standards while exclusively offering support for their largest competitors proprietary physics API. Intel is currently in the process of taking AMD to court to remove their x86 license, there is no doubt what lengths Intel will go to to hurt AMD, and that is the company the fell all over themselves to align themselves with. Why not also support PhysX?

The bottom line if that I can buy an Nvidia card with an advertised feature on the box and Nvidia has removed that feature from select users on purpose(anyone who says they had to is an idiot) without any warning on the box that they would do that.

You mean defend nVidia and ATi? ATi has been doing that exact same thing, exactly that same thing for years.

To be fair AMD has both Intel and Nvidia has main competitors for CPU/Video cards etc... so whichever one they go with is not a win win situation, as for suing well they all sue each another sooner or later so nothing new there , remember this one with Intel suing Nvidia over chipset licenselink. ...dog eat dog world as they say.


Getting back on main topic I think the conclusion is we just need for the dust to settle and one open standard supported by all,that would solve the problem for both sides and gamers ,how long this will take nobody knows,also I think Microsoft could play an important role in this area.

 

[BenSkywalker]

To be fair AMD has both Intel and Nvidia has main competitors for CPU/Video cards etc... so whichever one they go with is not a win win situation, as for suing well they all sue each another sooner or later so nothing new there , remember this one with Intel suing Nvidia over chipset licenselink. ...dog eat dog world as they say.

Intel is their largest competitor in terms of marketshare in the CPU, graphics and chipset markets. I'm not saying they were wrong supporting Havok, I'm saying why not support both if you aren't dedicated to open standards? Clearly ATi supports proprietary physics first and foremost at the moment, so why not support the one that actually has GPU acceleration along with the one that doesn't?

Getting back on main topic I think the conclusion is we just need for the dust to settle and one open standard supported by all,that would solve the problem for both sides and gamers.

We need a platform for that to happen on. DX11 will certainly help open up the possibility, but who is going to go through the trouble of spending enormous R&D to develop a solution they are then going to give away? On a realistic basis, MS is the best option we have on this front, and since DX11 failed to support its' own physics API(which would actually be useable on a lower percentage of gaming platforms then PhysX or Havok, but I digress) we have little hope for a true open standards physics API for a couple of years at this point.

 

[dguy6789]

I'm not saying Intel is entirely innocent and a superior choice either, especially since they will be competing in the graphics segment soon as well. Any API that is owned and controlled by one of the competing companies is a bad idea to make the standard.

It either needs to be entirely open source or owned by a company that isn't competing with ATI, Nvidia, or Intel in the near future.(Microsoft would be a good choice implementing it into Direct X)

As of right now though, PhysX becoming the defacto standard is more dangerous to ATI than Havok becoming it is.(Mainly because Larabee isn't coming out for a long long time) Neither are very appealing options for gamers because someone somewhere is going to be left out and left behind if either Havok or PhysX becomes the standard. If Havok becomes the standard, Intel graphics will probably be the only choice for people who want in game physics. There's no way Intel would let a competitor's product run their API better than their own products. If it's PhysX as the standard, then Nvidia is the only choice for the same reasons. The only way to avoid artificially implemented hardware bias is to have an open source API or one that isn't owned by the competing companies.

 

[dadach]

Originally posted by: Keysplayr
The "mixing nvidia and ati...bad, bad" quote makes me wonder if you had forgotten you had posted it. Do you not still feel that mixing is bad, bad? If you thought that then, why don't you think it now? And also, do you feel that you are missing very important PhysX content now that you can't run it? Or do you still feel that it is "0 value". If not the latter, what made you change your mind? Why is PhysX important to you now?

Yes, I am asking these questions already knowing the answers. But I'd like you to prove the answers I already have in my head, wrong.

to go out and spend time on this just proves you are trying too hard...i did have both cards in my win7 machine, and 8800gt was used for physx (main was 4980)...i was able to enable it, and thats how it should be...if nvidia changed it all of the sudden, THAT IS WHAT I CALL bullshit, not the fact that im losing anything...and no, i dont think i am missing anything yet, because as you could have seen in your research, we are still waiting for the games...or maybe some new ones came out in last 2 months? i didnt really have time to check it

 

[akugami]

Originally posted by: BenSkywalker

To be fair AMD has both Intel and Nvidia has main competitors for CPU/Video cards etc... so whichever one they go with is not a win win situation, as for suing well they all sue each another sooner or later so nothing new there , remember this one with Intel suing Nvidia over chipset licenselink. ...dog eat dog world as they say.

Intel is their largest competitor in terms of marketshare in the CPU, graphics and chipset markets. I'm not saying they were wrong supporting Havok, I'm saying why not support both if you aren't dedicated to open standards? Clearly ATi supports proprietary physics first and foremost at the moment, so why not support the one that actually has GPU acceleration along with the one that doesn't?

I think ATI will support PhysX...on OpenCL. If they (ATI) support CUDA PhysX there's just too much nVidia can do to sabotage ATI and give themselves (nVidia) an advantage. On OpenCL there's at least a higher level of transparency and the playing field is largely equalized.

I have no illusions about ATI being an altruistic company. They'd push their own standards if they had the leverage. They'd try to get technologies in use that gives them a leg up if they could. This is what nVidia is doing. I don't blame nVidia. In fact from a business perspective I applaud what they are doing.

However as a consumer, I can criticize their decisions if I feel that it can have a negative impact on me. Let's all detach our emotions from the GPU wars. This is all business to ATI, nVidia and Intel. They are each doing what they feel is best to ensure their long term survival. That doesn't mean human emotion doesn't come into play and impact some of the decisions. It's just that for the most part, all decisions are made based upon long term survival. Business are not non-profit organizations. They're here to make money.

 

[VirtualLarry]

Originally posted by: akugami
Business are not non-profit organizations. They're here to make money.

And screwing over your paying customers, changing drivers to make their hardware useless, is generally not the best way to go about getting and keeping customers.

 

[Blazer7]

Originally posted by: akugami

Originally posted by: BenSkywalker

To be fair AMD has both Intel and Nvidia has main competitors for CPU/Video cards etc... so whichever one they go with is not a win win situation, as for suing well they all sue each another sooner or later so nothing new there , remember this one with Intel suing Nvidia over chipset licenselink. ...dog eat dog world as they say.

Intel is their largest competitor in terms of marketshare in the CPU, graphics and chipset markets. I'm not saying they were wrong supporting Havok, I'm saying why not support both if you aren't dedicated to open standards? Clearly ATi supports proprietary physics first and foremost at the moment, so why not support the one that actually has GPU acceleration along with the one that doesn't?

I think ATI will support PhysX...on OpenCL. If they (ATI) support CUDA PhysX there's just too much nVidia can do to sabotage ATI and give themselves (nVidia) an advantage. On OpenCL there's at least a higher level of transparency and the playing field is largely equalized.

I have no illusions about ATI being an altruistic company. They'd push their own standards if they had the leverage. They'd try to get technologies in use that gives them a leg up if they could. This is what nVidia is doing. I don't blame nVidia. In fact from a business perspective I applaud what they are doing.

However as a consumer, I can criticize their decisions if I feel that it can have a negative impact on me. Let's all detach our emotions from the GPU wars. This is all business to ATI, nVidia and Intel. They are each doing what they feel is best to ensure their long term survival. That doesn't mean human emotion doesn't come into play and impact some of the decisions. It's just that for the most part, all decisions are made based upon long term survival. Business are not non-profit organizations. They're here to make money.

Screw emotions, let's talk about business. What's there to applaud? There 're people out there that spent good money on nV cards and they stuck to them even when they moved to ATI just for PhysX. That was a good sign that even people that decided to opt for the competition did not forgot nV completely and what was nV's response to this? They decided that those people (a.k.a. customers) are not worth their support. From a business perspective this isn't sane. If you bother to take a look at what's being going on at other forums you'll see the discontent about this latest move. I hope nV reconsiders and make things right for their customers. If they want to make PhysX a standard they need all the support they can get and shutting out people is not the way to do it. Besides, with this move PhysX looks much more like a proprietary std rather than an open one.

Originally posted by: VirtualLarry

Originally posted by: akugami
Business are not non-profit organizations. They're here to make money.

And screwing over your paying customers, changing drivers to make their hardware useless, is generally not the best way to go about getting and keeping customers.

:thumbsup:

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: dadach

Originally posted by: Keysplayr
The "mixing nvidia and ati...bad, bad" quote makes me wonder if you had forgotten you had posted it. Do you not still feel that mixing is bad, bad? If you thought that then, why don't you think it now? And also, do you feel that you are missing very important PhysX content now that you can't run it? Or do you still feel that it is "0 value". If not the latter, what made you change your mind? Why is PhysX important to you now?

Yes, I am asking these questions already knowing the answers. But I'd like you to prove the answers I already have in my head, wrong.

to go out and spend time on this just proves you are trying too hard...
Umm. It proves that I went and got some quotes of yours. Nothing more, nothing less.


i did have both cards in my win7 machine, and 8800gt was used for physx (main was 4980)...i was able to enable it, and thats how it should be...
Says who? You? All the other guys/gals who have primary ATI graphics cards and want PhysX to? Of course that's how you feel. "It should be". Because if it isn't, you're sunk.

Maybe Nvidia was getting annoyed that ATI had some sort of repreave for not supporting PhysX via a discrete Nvidia GPU running PhysX. Maybe it's the announcement that Larrabee wont be here til 2011, and that is probably synonamous with Havok in 2011 as well. Long time for one competitor to have an advantage over another. Long time for more PhysX games to emerge.

if nvidia changed it all of the sudden, THAT IS WHAT I CALL bullshit, not the fact that im losing anything...and no, i dont think i am missing anything yet, because as you could have seen in your research, we are still waiting for the games...or maybe some new ones came out in last 2 months? i didnt really have time to check it

You call it bullshit. Big business probably calls it something else. If you don't think your missing anything, then why all the fuss? The answer is, OF COURSE your missing something. Whether you think it's a miniscule feature or a tremendous one. You're still missing it regardless. And you know that. And that's why you are angry. I don't blame you as a consumer, but like Akugami aptly put it, Nvidia, ATI, Intel, all in it for the business. That's what corporations do. I hope this doesn't shatter any illusions you had of these big companies.

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: VirtualLarry

Originally posted by: akugami
Business are not non-profit organizations. They're here to make money.

And screwing over your paying customers, changing drivers to make their hardware useless, is generally not the best way to go about getting and keeping customers.

I think Nvidia has 2/3rds of discrete graphics card market share right about now. Maybe a bit more. Aren't the only customers they are going to lose already the customers they don't have? The other 1/3rd? Or look at it another way, if you're in the market for a new DX11 card for Win7 when they come out, and you definitely want PhysX but know you can't get it by pairing up your favored high end ATI card and a low end NV card to run PhysX beside it, what choice are you most likely going to make? If you are the type that thinks PhysX is nothing and will never take off, then you would buy whichever card you want. If you're the type who feels PhysX is taking off and there isn't any other competitor in sight for AT LEAST 17 MONTHS (Larrabee/ATI/Havok/2011), then you only have one choice.

I'm not saying anything is right, or wrong here. What I am saying is that I don't think Nvidia made any kind of decision about this lightly. They probably had endless market projection simulations and predictions. Timing appears to be right. Just over a month to Win7 release.

 

[akugami]

Originally posted by: VirtualLarry

Originally posted by: akugami
Business are not non-profit organizations. They're here to make money.

And screwing over your paying customers, changing drivers to make their hardware useless, is generally not the best way to go about getting and keeping customers.

I'm not saying I agree with some of the business decisions. I have previously stated in this thread that I think if nVidia is actively disabling ATI (GPU) + nVidia (PhysX) then that decision stinks and has the potential to hurt consumers. However, you and I don't run nVidia (or ATI). Management decides the course of action and it is taken by the company. Whether it is a good and smart business decision and whether it is a decision that will be beneficial to consumers can be guessed at and argued about. The most we can do is vote with our wallet.

Originally posted by: Blazer7

Originally posted by: akugami

Originally posted by: BenSkywalker

To be fair AMD has both Intel and Nvidia has main competitors for CPU/Video cards etc... so whichever one they go with is not a win win situation, as for suing well they all sue each another sooner or later so nothing new there , remember this one with Intel suing Nvidia over chipset licenselink. ...dog eat dog world as they say.

Intel is their largest competitor in terms of marketshare in the CPU, graphics and chipset markets. I'm not saying they were wrong supporting Havok, I'm saying why not support both if you aren't dedicated to open standards? Clearly ATi supports proprietary physics first and foremost at the moment, so why not support the one that actually has GPU acceleration along with the one that doesn't?

I think ATI will support PhysX...on OpenCL. If they (ATI) support CUDA PhysX there's just too much nVidia can do to sabotage ATI and give themselves (nVidia) an advantage. On OpenCL there's at least a higher level of transparency and the playing field is largely equalized.

I have no illusions about ATI being an altruistic company. They'd push their own standards if they had the leverage. They'd try to get technologies in use that gives them a leg up if they could. This is what nVidia is doing. I don't blame nVidia. In fact from a business perspective I applaud what they are doing.

However as a consumer, I can criticize their decisions if I feel that it can have a negative impact on me. Let's all detach our emotions from the GPU wars. This is all business to ATI, nVidia and Intel. They are each doing what they feel is best to ensure their long term survival. That doesn't mean human emotion doesn't come into play and impact some of the decisions. It's just that for the most part, all decisions are made based upon long term survival. Business are not non-profit organizations. They're here to make money.

Screw emotions, let's talk about business. What's there to applaud? There 're people out there that spent good money on nV cards and they stuck to them even when they moved to ATI just for PhysX. That was a good sign that even people that decided to opt for the competition did not forgot nV completely and what was nV's response to this? They decided that those people (a.k.a. customers) are not worth their support. From a business perspective this isn't sane. If you bother to take a look at what's being going on at other forums you'll see the discontent about this latest move. I hope nV reconsiders and make things right for their customers. If they want to make PhysX a standard they need all the support they can get and shutting out people is not the way to do it. Besides, with this move PhysX looks much more like a proprietary std rather than an open one.

I understand what you're saying. I'm just saying that let's not castrate nVidia and then casting ATI into the role of savior or even looking at ATI as a company fighting for us consumers. The only thing ATI is fighting for is consumer dollars and that if the roles were reversed we'd likely see similar actions from them as we're seeing from nVidia to try to lock us into the ATI fold.

As for whether nVidia's decision is good or not...look at my previous posts in this thread to see how I feel on that issue. I have been critical of nVidia in this whole thread about them cutting off an ATI+nVidia combo. So don't even think I'm applauding nVidia's decision. However, and again, let's detach emotion from this issue and look at it from the proper angle. It's a business decision by nVidia. Whether it is a good business decision and whether it is a good decision for consumers is another story.

In fact, my brother still has a couple of 9800's sitting in his closet from an SLI build. I used to have an 8800 which I sold. We both upgraded to ATI cards cause they offered better products for the money in this round. But if nVidia worked on ensuring nVidia support of PhysX with an ATI primary GPU we'd likely use them. That's also assuming there was compelling PhysX content out now, which there really isn't but that's a different, though somewhat related, argument. However, we don't know the future and there might be compelling reasons to own a PhysX accelerator and that's why I think this decision hurts consumers. A view I've previously expressed in this thread.

 

[Blazer7]

Originally posted by: akugami

I understand what you're saying. I'm just saying that let's not castrate nVidia and then casting ATI into the role of savior or even looking at ATI as a company fighting for us consumers. The only thing ATI is fighting for is consumer dollars and that if the roles were reversed we'd likely see similar actions from them as we're seeing from nVidia to try to lock us into the ATI fold.

I don't know why we are discussing ATI here. My understanding is that this whole thing is an nV issue and ATI has nothing to do with nV's decision. I really don't care whether ATI would play nice with us consumers if they were in nV's place. Any such move deserves the scorn from us consumers regardless of the company(ies) involved.

As for whether nVidia's decision is good or not...look at my previous posts in this thread to see how I feel on that issue. I have been critical of nVidia in this whole thread about them cutting off an ATI+nVidia combo. So don't even think I'm applauding nVidia's decision. However, and again, let's detach emotion from this issue and look at it from the proper angle. It's a business decision by nVidia. Whether it is a good business decision and whether it is a good decision for consumers is another story.

In fact, my brother still has a couple of 9800's sitting in his closet from an SLI build. I used to have an 8800 which I sold. We both upgraded to ATI cards cause they offered better products for the money in this round. But if nVidia worked on ensuring nVidia support of PhysX with an ATI primary GPU we'd likely use them. That's also assuming there was compelling PhysX content out now, which there really isn't but that's a different, though somewhat related, argument. However, we don't know the future and there might be compelling reasons to own a PhysX accelerator and that's why I think this decision hurts consumers. A view I've previously expressed in this thread.

Yes I've seen your previous posts and it's exactly that people like us are left with nV hw that has no other function than that of a paper weight that annoys the hell out of me. I was recently considering to hold one of my 2 factory oced 8800GTS 512 just for PhysX. Thank God I didn't. I still haven't decided on my next vid cards but this latest move from nV doesn't sit well with me.

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: Blazer7

Originally posted by: akugami

I understand what you're saying. I'm just saying that let's not castrate nVidia and then casting ATI into the role of savior or even looking at ATI as a company fighting for us consumers. The only thing ATI is fighting for is consumer dollars and that if the roles were reversed we'd likely see similar actions from them as we're seeing from nVidia to try to lock us into the ATI fold.

I don't know why we are discussing ATI here. My understanding is that this whole thing is an nV issue and ATI has nothing to do with nV's decision. I really don't care whether ATI would play nice with us consumers if they were in nV's place. Any such move deserves the scorn from us consumers regardless of the company(ies) involved.

As for whether nVidia's decision is good or not...look at my previous posts in this thread to see how I feel on that issue. I have been critical of nVidia in this whole thread about them cutting off an ATI+nVidia combo. So don't even think I'm applauding nVidia's decision. However, and again, let's detach emotion from this issue and look at it from the proper angle. It's a business decision by nVidia. Whether it is a good business decision and whether it is a good decision for consumers is another story.

In fact, my brother still has a couple of 9800's sitting in his closet from an SLI build. I used to have an 8800 which I sold. We both upgraded to ATI cards cause they offered better products for the money in this round. But if nVidia worked on ensuring nVidia support of PhysX with an ATI primary GPU we'd likely use them. That's also assuming there was compelling PhysX content out now, which there really isn't but that's a different, though somewhat related, argument. However, we don't know the future and there might be compelling reasons to own a PhysX accelerator and that's why I think this decision hurts consumers. A view I've previously expressed in this thread.

Yes I've seen your previous posts and it's exactly that people like us are left with nV hw that has no other function than that of a paper weight that annoys the hell out of me. I was recently considering to hold one of my 2 factory oced 8800GTS 512 just for PhysX. Thank God I didn't. I still haven't decided on my next vid cards but this latest move from nV doesn't sit well with me.

Doesn't sit well with you how? Are you emotionally attaching yourself to any company?
Judge the companies by their products. And paperweight schmaperweight. That's what eBay is for. or FS/FT.

 

[Blazer7]

For the 2nd time. Screw emotions!

Any company that writes off their customers doesn't sit well with me and that's because I AM the customer.

And no I am not attached to nV regardless of how much money I've spent on their products during the last few years.

I judge companies by their products their support and policies towards their customers and I can say that this latest scheme has me disappointed.

 

[akugami]

Originally posted by: Blazer7

Originally posted by: akugami

I understand what you're saying. I'm just saying that let's not castrate nVidia and then casting ATI into the role of savior or even looking at ATI as a company fighting for us consumers. The only thing ATI is fighting for is consumer dollars and that if the roles were reversed we'd likely see similar actions from them as we're seeing from nVidia to try to lock us into the ATI fold.

I don't know why we are discussing ATI here. My understanding is that this whole thing is an nV issue and ATI has nothing to do with nV's decision. I really don't care whether ATI would play nice with us consumers if they were in nV's place. Any such move deserves the scorn from us consumers regardless of the company(ies) involved.

ATI is being discussed because this is about ATI+nVidia no longer working. At least no longer working with the latest drivers with an ATI GPU as the main video card and nVidia purely as a PhysX accelerator. Some of the folks here seem to be trying to cast ATI in the light of the non-evil company while nVidia is the devil company.

They're both faceless corporations if you get right down to it. We might like one company's products and business decisions more than the other but in the end, both companies are out to try to make the most money possible for their stakeholders.

 

[zebrax2]

Originally posted by: Keysplayr

Originally posted by: dadach

if nvidia changed it all of the sudden, THAT IS WHAT I CALL bullshit, not the fact that im losing anything...and no, i dont think i am missing anything yet, because as you could have seen in your research, we are still waiting for the games...or maybe some new ones came out in last 2 months? i didnt really have time to check it

You call it bullshit. Big business probably calls it something else. If you don't think your missing anything, then why all the fuss? The answer is, OF COURSE your missing something. Whether you think it's a miniscule feature or a tremendous one. You're still missing it regardless. And you know that. And that's why you are angry. I don't blame you as a consumer, but like Akugami aptly put it, Nvidia, ATI, Intel, all in it for the business. That's what corporations do. I hope this doesn't shatter any illusions you had of these big companies.

The bolded word is the keyword here. Current implementation of PhysX aren't that compelling yet but that doesn't mean future implementations aren't. What's saddening here is that if for example i shifted from Nvidia to ATI that would leave my previous card(Nvidia) collecting dust on the closet rather than being used. Yeah i could sell my previous card but that would leave me without a backup card.

 

[Blazer7]

Originally posted by: akugami

Originally posted by: Blazer7

Originally posted by: akugami

I understand what you're saying. I'm just saying that let's not castrate nVidia and then casting ATI into the role of savior or even looking at ATI as a company fighting for us consumers. The only thing ATI is fighting for is consumer dollars and that if the roles were reversed we'd likely see similar actions from them as we're seeing from nVidia to try to lock us into the ATI fold.

I don't know why we are discussing ATI here. My understanding is that this whole thing is an nV issue and ATI has nothing to do with nV's decision. I really don't care whether ATI would play nice with us consumers if they were in nV's place. Any such move deserves the scorn from us consumers regardless of the company(ies) involved.

ATI is being discussed because this is about ATI+nVidia no longer working. At least no longer working with the latest drivers with an ATI GPU as the main video card and nVidia purely as a PhysX accelerator.

ATI is not the knight in the shiny armor for sure but they do not make nV's decisions. nV does that and those that complain because of nV's recent decision are also nV's customers. That's why I see no point in discussing ATI here.

Some of the folks here seem to be trying to cast ATI in the light of the non-evil company while nVidia is the devil company.

As I've already mentioned before any such move that hurts us customers deserve our scorn regardless of the company(ies) involved. If there 're people here that try to seize the opportunity and portray ATI as our savior they are really missing the point.

They're both faceless corporations if you get right down to it. We might like one company's products and business decisions more than the other but in the end, both companies are out to try to make the most money possible for their stakeholders.

QFT

 

[nitromullet]

Originally posted by: Keysplayr
Doesn't sit well with you how? Are you emotionally attaching yourself to any company?
Judge the companies by their products. And paperweight schmaperweight. That's what eBay is for. or FS/FT.

That's probably a lot easier to say when you got your $500+ GTX 295 for nothing. I don't want to harp on you being a focus group member, but you don't need to mock us with your freebies either.

Prior to NV PhysX there was not even a chance to do anything with your old card(s), except relegate them to a second rig or sell. We either accepted that, or didn't upgrade.

With the opportunity to use an NV card as a 'discrete Physics' card they just added value to a previous purchase. This was something to be happy about. Of course, in true NV fashion, they take a great idea and something for us to get excited about and turn it to shit. I get that it's their choice, business is business, blah blah, but it just always seems that NVIDIA chooses ill will over good will. It's like they want to keep screwing us over just to see if we'll keep buying their stuff.

You say this type of stuff doesn't matter, but honestly, I couldn't wait to get onto the i7 platform. I had a perfectly good 780i board and I haven't even switched video cards since then, but it makes he happy just to know that I can put whatever two matching cards I want into my rig, and I'll get SLI or CF fully supported. I know that Intel is a huge money making corp as well, but they have created good will with me for providing a platform that not only is fast as hell but also allows me flexibility not provided by any other chipset currently available.

...so, you can count me as one very-happy-not-to-be-a-NVIDIA-chipset-customer-anymore customer. I'm sure I'm not alone.

 

[TurtleCrusher]

Originally posted by: nitromullet

Originally posted by: Keysplayr
Doesn't sit well with you how? Are you emotionally attaching yourself to any company?
Judge the companies by their products. And paperweight schmaperweight. That's what eBay is for. or FS/FT.

That's probably a lot easier to say when you got your $500+ GTX 295 for nothing. I don't want to harp on you being a focus group member, but you don't need to mock us with your freebies either.

Prior to NV PhysX there was not even a chance to do anything with your old card(s), except relegate them to a second rig or sell. We either accepted that, or didn't upgrade.

With the opportunity to use an NV card as a 'discrete Physics' card they just added value to a previous purchase. This was something to be happy about. Of course, in true NV fashion, they take a great idea and something for us to get excited about and turn it to shit. I get that it's their choice, business is business, blah blah, but it just always seems that NVIDIA chooses ill will over good will. It's like they want to keep screwing us over just to see if we'll keep buying their stuff.

You say this type of stuff doesn't matter, but honestly, I couldn't wait to get onto the i7 platform. I had a perfectly good 780i board and I haven't even switched video cards since then, but it makes he happy just to know that I can put whatever two matching cards I want into my rig, and I'll get SLI or CF fully supported. I know that Intel is a huge money making corp as well, but they have created good will with me for providing a platform that not only is fast as hell but also allows me flexibility not provided by any other chipset currently available.

...so, you can count me as one very-happy-not-to-be-a-NVIDIA-chipset-customer-anymore customer. I'm sure I'm not alone.

:thumbsup:

 

[Nemesis 1]

Man keys. Your taking a beating here. I agree with ya this time, But the points others are making are good ,I dont believe there sound. But they make good points . I see this from perspective that NV is fighting for life so I see it as good move.

I would like to say this tho and here what I am saying ,

In the beginning renders were done with software. The need for speed and action pushed graphics into hardware . Because cpu lacked the power to do software renders . Today very soon were going back to the beginning again . Why . Because in software you cann do so much more . Now Cpus have the rereources . Its just enough but year by year it will follow moores law.

I agree right now today PhysicsX is better than software. That right NOW. But software is better. Just cost more in resources. I see that clearly . But I also believe that many are confused on this . Many see the window that hardware has in physics as being a hugh window . Thats not So . Believe me its not true . The Time frame or window of opertunity for hardware physicsX to be better than software physics is SMALL very small . This time there be no resource problem . Just software will take longer. But Intel is really getting good with software . really good.

I agree with NV actions hear. Its a gut shot all the way. But don't think for a moment that intel will allow NV to use both. If NV keeps CUDA closed and physics . Intel will lock NV from using Havoc on its CPUs. Intel can do this and so can AMD.

Its a hell of a gamble but if they don't do it there out anyway. So I think its a good move will they hit pay dirt . I don't think so . But I think they made the best choice to hit gold.

 

[Red Storm]

Originally posted by: Scholzpdx

Originally posted by: nitromullet

Originally posted by: Keysplayr
Doesn't sit well with you how? Are you emotionally attaching yourself to any company?
Judge the companies by their products. And paperweight schmaperweight. That's what eBay is for. or FS/FT.

That's probably a lot easier to say when you got your $500+ GTX 295 for nothing. I don't want to harp on you being a focus group member, but you don't need to mock us with your freebies either.

Prior to NV PhysX there was not even a chance to do anything with your old card(s), except relegate them to a second rig or sell. We either accepted that, or didn't upgrade.

With the opportunity to use an NV card as a 'discrete Physics' card they just added value to a previous purchase. This was something to be happy about. Of course, in true NV fashion, they take a great idea and something for us to get excited about and turn it to shit. I get that it's their choice, business is business, blah blah, but it just always seems that NVIDIA chooses ill will over good will. It's like they want to keep screwing us over just to see if we'll keep buying their stuff.

You say this type of stuff doesn't matter, but honestly, I couldn't wait to get onto the i7 platform. I had a perfectly good 780i board and I haven't even switched video cards since then, but it makes he happy just to know that I can put whatever two matching cards I want into my rig, and I'll get SLI or CF fully supported. I know that Intel is a huge money making corp as well, but they have created good will with me for providing a platform that not only is fast as hell but also allows me flexibility not provided by any other chipset currently available.

...so, you can count me as one very-happy-not-to-be-a-NVIDIA-chipset-customer-anymore customer. I'm sure I'm not alone.

:thumbsup:

:thumbsup:

 

[Nemesis 1]

Originally posted by: zebrax2

Originally posted by: Keysplayr

Originally posted by: dadach

if nvidia changed it all of the sudden, THAT IS WHAT I CALL bullshit, not the fact that im losing anything...and no, i dont think i am missing anything yet, because as you could have seen in your research, we are still waiting for the games...or maybe some new ones came out in last 2 months? i didnt really have time to check it

You call it bullshit. Big business probably calls it something else. If you don't think your missing anything, then why all the fuss? The answer is, OF COURSE your missing something. Whether you think it's a miniscule feature or a tremendous one. You're still missing it regardless. And you know that. And that's why you are angry. I don't blame you as a consumer, but like Akugami aptly put it, Nvidia, ATI, Intel, all in it for the business. That's what corporations do. I hope this doesn't shatter any illusions you had of these big companies.

The bolded word is the keyword here. Current implementation of PhysX aren't that compelling yet but that doesn't mean future implementations aren't. What's saddening here is that if for example i shifted from Nvidia to ATI that would leave my previous card(Nvidia) collecting dust on the closet rather than being used. Yeah i could sell my previous card but that would leave me without a backup card.

I am having my 800xtpe buried with me . Ijust burnt a card in my online machine . Wife says put the 800 back in . I said cold day in hell befor that happens, That baby goes in my casket . Its my material treasure.

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: nitromullet

Originally posted by: Keysplayr
Doesn't sit well with you how? Are you emotionally attaching yourself to any company?
Judge the companies by their products. And paperweight schmaperweight. That's what eBay is for. or FS/FT.

That's probably a lot easier to say when you got your $500+ GTX 295 for nothing. I don't want to harp on you being a focus group member, but you don't need to mock us with your freebies either.

Prior to NV PhysX there was not even a chance to do anything with your old card(s), except relegate them to a second rig or sell. We either accepted that, or didn't upgrade.

With the opportunity to use an NV card as a 'discrete Physics' card they just added value to a previous purchase. This was something to be happy about. Of course, in true NV fashion, they take a great idea and something for us to get excited about and turn it to shit. I get that it's their choice, business is business, blah blah, but it just always seems that NVIDIA chooses ill will over good will. It's like they want to keep screwing us over just to see if we'll keep buying their stuff.

You say this type of stuff doesn't matter, but honestly, I couldn't wait to get onto the i7 platform. I had a perfectly good 780i board and I haven't even switched video cards since then, but it makes he happy just to know that I can put whatever two matching cards I want into my rig, and I'll get SLI or CF fully supported. I know that Intel is a huge money making corp as well, but they have created good will with me for providing a platform that not only is fast as hell but also allows me flexibility not provided by any other chipset currently available.

...so, you can count me as one very-happy-not-to-be-a-NVIDIA-chipset-customer-anymore customer. I'm sure I'm not alone.

Because someone would use a 500.00 GTX295 as a secondary PhysX card, right? I'd like to know exactly how you think I'm mocking you. And focus group doesn't have a smidgeon of anything to do with it. I'd have bought the GTX295 anyway. And whatever else top end, or at least 2nd from top (which is my buying history) comes out.
In the past, when someone bought a new card, their old one would usually be sold to recoup some of the money for their upgrade. Or, if they didn't need the money, they would keep it as a backup. Otherwise, it would go on eBay or FS/FT somewhere.

Honestly guys, how many of you with ATI cards actually used your old NV card for discrete PhysX use? Maybe if ATI fans didn't slam PhysX as a useless feature constantly for the past year, and actually said they appreciated the extra value Nvidia provided as you stated above, "With the opportunity to use an NV card as a 'discrete Physics' card they just added value to a previous purchase.", that "good will" you mentioned may have materialized. But no, that didn't happen. With the exception of a rare few, and I do feel for them, PhysX has been slammed over and over again. That's fine and all, and it sucks for those users who genuinely appreciated it, but it probably really couldn't have hurt to show "good will" toward Nvidia as well. Then again, maybe that wouldn't have mattered at all from a business perspective.

With the introduction of G80, and ever since then, Nvidia has been a locomotive of innovation. Non stop. Excellent gaming performance and image quality, CUDA technology, PhysX, Tesla, 3DVision,
Pulled from another thread is:
"NVIDIA®® OptiX? engine for real-time ray tracing linky
NVIDIA®® SceniX? engine for managing 3D data and scenes linky
NVIDIA®® CompleX? engine for scaling performance across multiple GPUs linky
NVIDIA®® PhysX®® 64-bit engine for real-time, hyper-realistic physical and environmental effects" linky.

So tell me. Is Nvidia not pushing new technology for it's customers? Or does disabling discrete PhysX GPU when ATI card present wipe all of this out?
What kind of scale do you have?

 

[ShawnD1]

Originally posted by: Keysplayr
Ah, god. It's hand holding time I see. SHEER LUCK that the TWO cards; ATI and Nvidia worked together in a system each with their own drivers STABLE enough for them both to work together. And it seems it did this only occasionally. Not because they were MADE to work together in this fashion.

Not trying to insult or anything, but what is with the playing stupid routine?

Why would that be weird? Many years ago my system was using an AGP GeForce FX5200 and a PCI Radeon 7200 at the same time. The cards worked fine side by side so I don't see where this confusion is coming from.

Honestly guys, how many of you with ATI cards actually used your old NV card for discrete PhysX use? Maybe if ATI fans didn't slam PhysX as a useless feature constantly for the past year, and actually said they appreciated the extra value Nvidia provided as you stated above, "With the opportunity to use an NV card as a 'discrete Physics' card they just added value to a previous purchase.", that "good will" you mentioned may have materialized.

Why would anyone show appreciate for physx up until now? Batman Arkham Asylum is the only game to actually uses physx in a way that anyone would even care about. Now that Batman has shown us what physx can do, Nvidia decides to make physx not work on the many systems that have an ATI video card. This is the worst business move they could possibly do. Now that they can finally show ATI users why you should buy a physx card, they've made it so ATI users cannot use a physx card.

Buy this card to run physx! Oh sorry but this physx card only works if you already own a physx card so we're really just marketing this thing to nobody but thanks anyway.

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: ShawnD1

Originally posted by: Keysplayr
Ah, god. It's hand holding time I see. SHEER LUCK that the TWO cards; ATI and Nvidia worked together in a system each with their own drivers STABLE enough for them both to work together. And it seems it did this only occasionally. Not because they were MADE to work together in this fashion.

Not trying to insult or anything, but what is with the playing stupid routine?

Why would that be weird? Many years ago my system was using an AGP GeForce FX5200 and a PCI Radeon 7200 at the same time. The cards worked fine side by side so I don't see where this confusion is coming from.
There is no confusion, and you know precisely what I'm talking about. You can't not know what I'm talking about.

Honestly guys, how many of you with ATI cards actually used your old NV card for discrete PhysX use? Maybe if ATI fans didn't slam PhysX as a useless feature constantly for the past year, and actually said they appreciated the extra value Nvidia provided as you stated above, "With the opportunity to use an NV card as a 'discrete Physics' card they just added value to a previous purchase.", that "good will" you mentioned may have materialized.

Why would anyone show appreciate for physx up until now? Batman Arkham Asylum is the only game to actually uses physx in a way that anyone would even care about. Now that Batman has shown us what physx can do, Nvidia decides to make physx not work on the many systems that have an ATI video card. This is the worst business move they could possibly do. Now that they can finally show ATI users why you should buy a physx card, they've made it so ATI users cannot use a physx card.

Correction: Batman Arkam Asylum is the only game where you have noticed much more significant differences than say Mirrors Edge because the effects are completely gone when PhysX is turned off. Most users were somewhat impressed with Cryostasis however.

Buy this card to run physx! Oh sorry but this physx card only works if you already own a physx card so we're really just marketing this thing to nobody but thanks anyway.

Heh. Yeah ok. I'm using a GTX295 + a 8600GT for PhysX. Noticeable difference in performance in PhysX games. No matter how you look at it, the dedicated PhysX GPU takes the load off of the primary. Of course the GTX295 is quite fine all by itself running both renderer and PhysX. If I had a 9800GTX, an 8600GT could make the difference between playable and unplayable if used for PhysX. But you're right, they really are just marketing to nobody. But how dare I think realistically.

 

[Nemesis 1]

I don't know what engine or anything about this trailer. But I had 3D and castle . This is a must have for me . I must have .

http://www.gametrailers.com/vi...enstein/54212?type=wmv