Nvidia for Better Or Worse

[Schmide]

Originally posted by: Keysplayr
Waitaminute. You think that if Nvidia's AA implementation is part of the DX standard, that AMD should have every right to run it just the same?

Yes.

Originally posted by: Keysplayr
Nvidia wrote the code along with Eidos devs to get in-game AA working on their cards.

A clear distinction. They helped them get AA working on the directx standard for which both nVidia and ATI subscribe. Every Microsoft DirectX talk I've been to talks about making rendering decisions based on the CAPS bits, not the vendor string. If they went outside the directX standard, I would give your argument weight.

Originally posted by: Keysplayr
Something the UE did not support natively (god only knows why).

Well MSAA and HDR wasn't designed into directX 9, there are plenty of tricks to make it work. I do not know the details on how it was done. I would bet it falls into the render to texture or RGBE surface technique, neither of which are new technologies.

Originally posted by: Keysplayr
AMD would not do it. They knew about it, but did n-o-t-h-i-n-g. But you still feel they should gain from it. Not be locked out from it.

Maybe they figured nVidia would do something like all that has happened and wanted to see the outcome. Or they figured, why spend the effort doing something that was figured out back in 2006/2007. I have no inside information.

Originally posted by: Keysplayr
Let me ask you something. If you and your office buddies contributes $5 every week into a lotto pool, but one week you are asked for the pool money and say "I don't want to play this week" and don't put in your $5, they hit lotto. do you think you should still get a cut?

I refuse to play the lotto, I think it's something makes poor communities poorer. I do however find this a poor analogy. You're talking about a direct purchase for profit. While I'm talking about standards for which all parties subscribe to.

I'll make an analogy. Completely hypothetical. Lets say you buy a dvd player that is capable of some enhanced dvd standard. Some content producer is having trouble getting this enhanced standard working. One dvd player maker goes to this producer and shows them how to produce content to this standard, but kindly asks that they only play the enhanced standard on their brand of player. All the dvd makers that subscribed to this standard and most likely paid money/time to come up with this standard, would be pissed because of the exclusive nature of the use of the standard, as would any user who bought a non exclusive functioning dvd player thinking he or she was getting this standard.

 

[Mr Fox]

Originally posted by: Schmide

Originally posted by: Mr Fox
Enough of this Crap... Personal Attacks are not needed here...

It may be personal business, put on the public stage because we're talking about it, but it isn't a personal attack. It is darn good business to validate/invalidate one's sources based information that could drive their motivation.

Logically anyone with "Member of Nvidia Focus Group" in their signature has enough bias to justify the above interjection.

Don't you spell nVidia with a small "n" capital "V" ?

Keys is wearing that tag because the Management. made the decision to require that in the case of Rollo, and Keys..

Keys has had to put up with more crap than he deserves, and i'm sure that the benefits at this point are minimal.

If we were to get into the Shill conversation.....There are agent provocateurs in place right now at a stealth level that far exceed the Rollo, Chris Ray, and others.

Mr Jonny Gerow had the greatest sig back in the day.

and right now you can't swing a dead cat without hitting one...in this forum specifically..

 

[Schmide]

We all put up with crap. I certainly do not have any problem with Keys or any affiliation with nVidia and I probably wouldn't have been so quick to defend the descent if the "SUPER poor, or SUPER lazy" part wasn't there. Looking back it may have been a bit of a reach to say it was completely non-personal.

This has already become way to much of a distraction. Focusing on who craps on who just detracts from the topic at hand.

I'm sorry and I put it behind me.

 

[Schmide]

I'd like to add that AMD has done some similar tricks in the past.

Circa 2004. I believe AMD attempted to team up with Atari to add extra shadow content with their new 64bit processors. Here it is.

Shadow Ops: Red Mercury

I chastise AMD for this it was marketing over quality of product and there was no reason a 32bit processor couldn't produce the same quality.

ATI did some lesser cheats to put eye-candy on their card.

ATI's Oblivion advantage - The 'Chuck patch' investigated

This however, though strikingly similar, was a driver level hack meant to show off the hardware AA ATI had introduced in it's x1000 level cards. I half chastise half commend them. As much as it was exclusive eye candy, it was also an original proof of concept hack. I declare it a push.

 

[dev0lution]

Originally posted by: MarcVenice
Kinda offtopic, because I think the whole batman thing has become a he said, no he said thing, but I dare say Nvidia aren't the innovators. Open standards bring about innovation. Closed standards don't. I'd infact say Nvidia is stalling innovation to some degree. They are trying to innovate with gpgpu-apps, yet they stop said innovation dead in it's tracks, by using closed standards. Man, what would public perception be if Nvidia just was doing things FOR gamers, instead of agains them. Oh, and, this is my opinion, nothing more of course ...

I'd disagree a bit here. Open Standards can be useful, but they hardly drive innovation when a technology is in its infancy. Oftentimes, proprietary solutions are what advance the industry because the competition has to play catch up and most companies bring new tech to market in the hopes they can monetize it. Once there are competing solutions the market becomes fractured and then the consumer benefits from Open Standards because they allow a technology to go mainstream and move beyond vendor dependency.

AMD's rallying around "open standards" is a brilliant PR move because it makes them look like the good guy while making everyone forget they haven't really delivered anything of substance. If they get a GPU implementation of OpenCL out the door and don't change their GPU compute strategy again (CTM & Brook+, now OpenCL) or their GPU physics strategy (havok FX...no just havok..no..bullet..???) then maybe I'll change my mind.

Odd that everyone is so hard on NVIDIA for using closed standards when they're also ahead on the open standards implementations as well.

 

[T2k]

In reality, I think this claim from AMD is pretty much unfounded - NVIDIA has long been accused of doing things like this but AMD has similar relationships with developers - see games like Battle Forge, DiRT 2 and Tom Clancy's H.A.W.X.

Ryan is a cool cat but at his point he just spoke utter BS - for some reason standard DirectX support (even if pushed back) and putting in *exclusive* proprietary code became the same thing in his head...

...well, they are NOT.

 

[alcoholbob]

I think it's actually

nVIDIA

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: Schmide
We all put up with crap. I certainly do not have any problem with Keys or any affiliation with nVidia and I probably wouldn't have been so quick to defend the descent if the "SUPER poor, or SUPER lazy" part wasn't there. Looking back it may have been a bit of a reach to say it was completely non-personal.

This has already become way to much of a distraction. Focusing on who craps on who just detracts from the topic at hand.

I'm sorry and I put it behind me.

Agreed. I could have expressed my thoughts a bit better. It was just a little annoying to have T2k hammering on about the focus group, and it manifested in my posting. Apologies.

 

[T2k]

Complain at your bosses and ask for a raise or quit the "program", pal.

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: T2k
Complain at your bosses and ask for a raise or quit the "program", pal.

You first?

 

[BFG10K]

Originally posted by: T2k

I swear to God I have no idea why they (NV) are paying you - most of the time you only post ludicrously childish and nonsensical excuses in defense of Nvidia...

... you are more of like a liability for them, at least from here where I sit.

PS: it is rather insulting when you think you can fool anyone with these really cheap excuses, y'know.

Originally posted by: T2k

Complain at your bosses and ask for a raise or quit the "program", pal.

You've gotten away with numerous personal insults to several people (not just Keys) over the past few days, but enough is enough. If you continue your behavior then you?ll be vacationed.

Attack the argument, not the poster. If you?re not sure what this means then refrain from posting until you are.

Video Mod BFG10K.

 

[T2k]

Originally posted by: BFG10K

Originally posted by: T2k

I swear to God I have no idea why they (NV) are paying you - most of the time you only post ludicrously childish and nonsensical excuses in defense of Nvidia...

... you are more of like a liability for them, at least from here where I sit.

PS: it is rather insulting when you think you can fool anyone with these really cheap excuses, y'know.

Originally posted by: T2k

Complain at your bosses and ask for a raise or quit the "program", pal.

You've gotten away with numerous personal insults to several people (not just Keys) over the past few days, but enough is enough. If you continue your behavior then you?ll be vacationed.

Attack the argument, not the poster. If you?re not sure what this means then refrain from posting until you are.

Video Mod BFG10K.

Interestingly enough it was the NV Focus Group Member Mod that triggered your notice.

 

[Wreckage]

Originally posted by: MarcVenice
Open standards bring about innovation. Closed standards don't.

Really? NVIDIA brought about GPU Physics. How long are we going to wait for this "open standard"?

By the way. Windows, DirectX, Havok. None of these are "open".

I assume you only use OpenGL games on Linux, otherwise you are a hypocrite.

 

[Red Irish]

Originally posted by: T2k

Originally posted by: BFG10K

Originally posted by: T2k

I swear to God I have no idea why they (NV) are paying you - most of the time you only post ludicrously childish and nonsensical excuses in defense of Nvidia...

... you are more of like a liability for them, at least from here where I sit.

PS: it is rather insulting when you think you can fool anyone with these really cheap excuses, y'know.

Originally posted by: T2k

Complain at your bosses and ask for a raise or quit the "program", pal.

You've gotten away with numerous personal insults to several people (not just Keys) over the past few days, but enough is enough. If you continue your behavior then you?ll be vacationed.

Attack the argument, not the poster. If you?re not sure what this means then refrain from posting until you are.

Video Mod BFG10K.

Interestingly enough it was the NV Focus Group Member Mod that triggered your notice.

T2k, I disagree with certain elements of Keys' posts and Idontcare's posts. I feel that they have made too much effort to attempt, albeit without success, to justify Nvidia's practices. I have stated as much, explained my stance and moved on. However, I assure you that most people want to discuss ATI/Nvidia and have no interest in witnessing a flame war between you and Keys or any other poster - I think that's what BFG was trying to say to you and I have to say that I agree with him. Nothing of any worth will be added to the forum if this thread descends into a bickering match filled with little more than name-calling and mutual accusations.

 

[Schmide]

Originally posted by: Wreckage
Really? NVIDIA brought GPU Physics. How long are we going to wait for this "open standard"?

Fixed. Agreiaed?

Originally posted by: Wreckage
By the way. Windows, DirectX, Havok. None of these are "open".

I assume you only use OpenGL games on Linux, otherwise you are a hypocrite.

I believe your definition of not being open is a bit over reaching. DirectX though implemented in private, is driven by committee, appropriate players are given appropriate time to move the standards forward.

Open standard != open source.

 

[Wreckage]

Originally posted by: Schmide


Fixed.

Not fixed. Ageia did not use a GPU.

Open standard != open source.

Closed = locked to 1 operating system. Hypocrisy.

 

[Schmide]

Originally posted by: Wreckage
Closed = locked to 1 operating system. Hypocrisy.

Yay ignore everything else I said to make your point. If you work in committee, invite input from outside parties, you are not closed.

I wonder why you cage everything into either or scenarios? It is not very productive.

 

[Wreckage]

Originally posted by: Schmide

Yay ignore everything else I said to make your point. If you work in committee, invite input from outside parties, you are not closed.

Committee? Microsoft may get input from other companies on DirectX, but they are the overlords of it.

I'm willing to bet NVIDIA works with game devlopers on PhysX. It's also open to multiple operating systems and devices. It's far more open than DirectX is.

 

[Schmide]

Originally posted by: Wreckage

Originally posted by: Schmide

Yay ignore everything else I said to make your point. If you work in committee, invite input from outside parties, you are not closed.

Committee? Microsoft may get input from other companies on DirectX, but they are the overlords of it.

I'm willing to bet NVIDIA works with game devlopers on PhysX. It's also open to multiple operating systems and devices. It's far more open than DirectX is.

Ha caught ya.

PhysX far more open, thus open, nVidia works with game developers as does microsoft, yet nVidia is the overlord of it.

You can't have your cake and eat it too.

QED

PS PhysX is far more closed as it only works on nVidia hardware!!!

 

[Wreckage]

Originally posted by: Schmide


PS PhysX is far more closed as it only works on nVidia hardware!!!

Ha caught ya. PhysX works on AMD, Intel, Nintendo, Xbox, etc. hardware!!!!!

The only thing it does not work on is AMD video cards because they were not very open to it.

 

[Mr Fox]

Originally posted by: Wreckage

Originally posted by: Schmide


Fixed.

Not fixed. Ageia did not use a GPU.

Open standard != open source.

Closed = locked to 1 operating system. Hypocrisy.

Life is all about choices...

You can run Ubuntu, Mac, Solaris, they are what they are..

The only hypocrisy lies in front of your keyboard.

If you feel that strongly about it why have you not taken personal action ?


No you would rather come here and whine about it..

 

[Schmide]

Originally posted by: Wreckage

Originally posted by: Schmide


PS PhysX is far more closed as it only works on nVidia hardware!!!

Ha caught ya. PhysX works on AMD, Intel, Nintendo, Xbox, etc. hardware!!!!!

The only thing it does not work on is AMD video cards because they were not very open to it.

PhysX works in big rooms and small rooms, red rooms and green rooms, for good girls and boys?

What happened to if the company controls it, it can't be open?

 

[Wreckage]

Originally posted by: Mr Fox


No you would rather come here and whine about it..

I assume you are talking to Schmide, PhysX runs just fine on my system.

Originally posted by: Schmide


What happened to if the company controls it, it can't be open?

By your standards if DX is open, then so is PhysX. These are not my standards. I'm just trying to think down to your level.

 

[Schmide]

Originally posted by: Wreckage

Originally posted by: Mr Fox


No you would rather come here and whine about it..

I assume you are talking to Schmide, PhysX runs just fine on my system.

Don't involve me in another argument! Attempting to push criticism on me will not be tolerated!!!

I'll admit PhysX runs in emulation fine. Let that not detract from the open standard argument. Answer the logic or GTFO.

 

[Schmide]

Originally posted by: Wreckage

Originally posted by: Schmide

What happened to if the company controls it, it can't be open?

By your standards if DX is open, then so is PhysX. These are not my standards. I'm just trying to think down to your level.

Those were your standards, put forth by you. I simply used your own words to prove my point. If you have to come down off your high irrational horse to reach my rational ground level, so be it.