Why does nvidia cheat so much?

Page 15 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
B

bononos

Diamond Member
Aug 21, 2011
3,928
186
106
JSt0rm said:
Thats very revisionist. There was a huge backlash here and anandtech moderation said they wanted the focus group tag in everybodys sig.
Click to expand...

Yep and it took a huge huge amount of stink to get Rollo kicked out.

IIRC Rollo was initially (after the viral marketing drama) allowed to return to the forums which is worrying after all the mess he created. I'm not sure if the members he denounced and managed to get banned from AT (for telling the truth about his focus group affiliation) were allowed back in.
 
JSt0rm

JSt0rm

Lifer
Sep 5, 2000
27,399
3,947
126
bononos said:
Yep and it took a huge huge amount of stink to get Rollo kicked out.

IIRC Rollo was initially (after the viral marketing drama) allowed to return to the forums which is worrying after all the mess he created. I'm not sure if the members he denounced and managed to get banned from AT (for telling the truth about his focus group affiliation) were allowed back in.
Click to expand...

He got kicked out again pretty quick. Those people banned by his actions probably just changed their online habits and never came back here.
 
R

Rifter

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
11,522
751
126
SickBeast said:
I never said it was. My point is that both nVidia and AMD had the ability to work with and program for Direct X 9. The same is not true for PhysX, CUDA, or C for Graphics.
Click to expand...

Both AMD and Nvidia and anyone else really can use PhysX too, only Nvidia can use GPU PhysX but thats ATI's fault for not coming out with there own GPU accelerated physics platform. Its not Nvidias job to make a GPU physics API for ATI users.

Lots of games are released every year that make use of physX. If anything PhysX is way more open than directX as PhysX is in use on macs and both Ps3 and X360 games.

ATI have been talking about GPU physics(havok) since 2006, you cant blame Nvidia for coming out with a GPU physics API while ATI dragged its heels on GPU physics for 5-6 years and still has nothing to show for it.

Bottom line if you want better than CPU physics you have to buy Nvidia, personally i dont see GPU physics as anything special and am happy with CPU based physics for now.
 
B

bononos

Diamond Member
Aug 21, 2011
3,928
186
106
Rifterut said:
Both AMD and Nvidia and anyone else really can use PhysX too, only Nvidia can use GPU PhysX but thats ATI's fault for not coming out with there own GPU accelerated physics platform. Its not Nvidias job to make a GPU physics API for ATI users.

Lots of games are released every year that make use of physX. If anything PhysX is way more open than directX as PhysX is in use on macs and both Ps3 and X360 games.

ATI have been talking about GPU physics(havok) since 2006, you cant blame Nvidia for coming out with a GPU physics API while ATI dragged its heels on GPU physics for 5-6 years and still has nothing to show for it.

Bottom line if you want better than CPU physics you have to buy Nvidia, personally i dont see GPU physics as anything special and am happy with CPU based physics for now.
Click to expand...

Does the physx work on a PC which has an ATI card?
I haven't been gaming for a while so I'm not up to date on the issues.
 
B

beginner99

Diamond Member
Jun 2, 2009
5,315
1,760
136
Maybe this has been said but was too lazy to read the whole thread. I'm not an nv fanboy but you could just as well blame crytek for not doing all in their power to give all users the best possible experience. They cheaped out in several ways.
 
Lonbjerg

Lonbjerg

Diamond Member
Dec 6, 2009
4,419
0
0
beginner99 said:
Maybe this has been said but was too lazy to read the whole thread. I'm not an nv fanboy but you could just as well blame crytek for not doing all in their power to give all users the best possible experience. They cheaped out in several ways.
Click to expand...

Didn't you get the memo?:

It's always NVIDIA's fault!!!

Even if there is nothing wrong....it's NVIDIA's fault!!!

It does get a bit boring when the witchhunt is fueled by ignorance and rejection of fatcs..
 
R

Rifter

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
11,522
751
126
bononos said:
Does the physx work on a PC which has an ATI card?
I haven't been gaming for a while so I'm not up to date on the issues.
Click to expand...

The CPU based physX will work on any computer with any GPU. The GPU accelerated physX(which IMO is very overrated) will only work on Nvidia GPU's.
 
M

mosox

Senior member
Oct 22, 2010
434
0
0
In the long run the stuff Nvidia did turned against them. Nvidia is too heavy on the marketing/PR departments and lately too light on the research and development and that's a common trend in many companies. The management/PR/marketing/sales people run the show, the engineers are happy if allowed to sit in the corner.

Their DX11 line is proof to that. Lots of different GPUs starting with the GF100, then 104, etc, the Fermi looked more like a damage control scramble than consistent thinking.

They had a hard time in filling all the price points and making a consistent line of products. They finally closed the gaps two years after the AMD 5000 series was out.

Even today they have only a few really competitive DX11 cards, the 560Ti and the 570 being the most prominent.

Nvidia like Creative didn't know how to manage their success.
 
Last edited:
Keysplayr

Keysplayr

Elite Member
Jan 16, 2003
21,211
50
91
mosox said:
In the long run the stuff Nvidia did turned against them. Nvidia is too heavy on the marketing/PR departments and lately too light on the research and development and that's a common trend in many companies. The management/PR/marketing/sales people run the show, the engineers are happy if allowed to sit in the corner.

Their DX11 line is proof to that. Lots of different GPUs starting with the GF100, then 104, etc, the Fermi looked more like a damage control scramble than consistent thinking.

They had a hard time in filling all the price points and making a consistent line of products. They finally closed the gaps two years after the AMD 5000 series was out.

Even today they have only a few really competitive DX11 cards, the 560Ti and the 570 being the most prominent.

Nvidia like Creative didn't know how to manage their success.
Click to expand...

Anyone else want to take this one? :\ Just getting a little to bizarre.
 
Last edited:
SirPauly

SirPauly

Diamond Member
Apr 28, 2009
5,187
1
0
JSt0rm said:
I dont even really understand why videocards are sooooo important to some people in here.
Click to expand...

Because, it's more than just simplistic numbers but about what the GPU's can do to improve immersion and the gaming experience itself.
 
B

bononos

Diamond Member
Aug 21, 2011
3,928
186
106
- diverting the issue since AMD can't "beat hardware on its merits" - ??? AMD is faster (if not by much) except for a hole at a certain price range
- "Can't beat em, then smear em. LOL"
The breezy and flippant comments in response to my post earlier and the general attitude of some posters leaves me with an uneasy feeling. A moderator who openly states a revisionist version of why AT mandated 'focus group' affiliation is very strange since it was a huuuuge stink back then.

Rifterut said:
The CPU based physX will work on any computer with any GPU. The GPU accelerated physX(which IMO is very overrated) will only work on Nvidia GPU's.
Click to expand...

What about a system with ATI GPU + Physx card?
I remembered Nvidia limiting sli to nforce only - only opened up to AMD chipsets recently. Could ATI crossfire run on nforce back then?


PS

Regarding the comments a few pages back about cos being free to do as they want to improve their products. There is a difference btwn that and hobbling your competitors.
 
G

Genx87

Lifer
Apr 8, 2002
41,091
513
126
bononos said:
What about a system with ATI GPU + Physx card?
I remembered Nvidia limiting sli to nforce only - only opened up to AMD chipsets recently. Could ATI crossfire run on nforce back then?
Click to expand...

Does anybody own a PhysX card? afaik Ageia made one in 05-06 time frame and they were pretty slow. I'd imagine running PhysX on a multicore cpu today would yield the same results if not better.
 
Last edited:
SirPauly

SirPauly

Diamond Member
Apr 28, 2009
5,187
1
0
A person, with a third party tweak or using an older beta set of drivers can utilize the ability if someone really desired to do a hybrid mode. One can't receive official support.

AMD could offer GPU PhysX to their customers if they licensed Cuda and PhysX and spent resources for their customers. Nothing is stopping them.

AMD could create their own API for GPU Physics and invest resources, nothing is stopping them.

All this talk of anti-competitive and yet Intel and AMD are leveraging x86 for GPU's, which Intel controls, which stops everyone.
 
G

Genx87

Lifer
Apr 8, 2002
41,091
513
126
SirPauly said:
A person, with a third party tweak or using an older beta set of drivers can utilize the ability if someone really desired to do a hybrid mode. One can't receive official support.

AMD could offer GPU PhysX to their customers if they licensed Cuda and PhysX and spent resources for their customers. Nothing is stopping them.

AMD could create their own API for GPU Physics and invest resources, nothing is stopping them.

All this talk of anti-competitive and yet Intel and AMD are leveraging x86 for GPU's, which Intel controls, which stops everyone.
Click to expand...

AMD has bullet for physics which uses opencl. I am sure things have changed but a couple years ago AMDs hardware couldnt even run their own physics API due to poor opencl implementation. Nvidia didnt have a problem running AMDs physics API :D
 
SirPauly

SirPauly

Diamond Member
Apr 28, 2009
5,187
1
0
Silverforce11 said:
Whats a AAA upcoming title with Physx? I thought its dead already.
Click to expand...

The confusion with some is PhysX is much more than just the GPU component but about trying to improve Physics as a whole for many platforms. Personally like to see the GPU component be eventually ported to OpenCL, so it may hopefully garner more adoption.

Also believe that Physics will help transform gaming from the static past by improving fidelity and as things mature improve and maybe redefine game-play; to raise the bar of immersion and gaming experience potential.

How does one get there? What steps does it take to achieve this? It doesn't happen over night, one may imagine. What kind of innovation and leadership will it take?

I was excited when ATI and nVidia were working with HavokFX -- excited that both were working to try to bring GPU Physics to the gamer.
 
Z

ZimZum

Golden Member
Aug 2, 2001
1,281
0
76
darkswordsman17 said:
I seriously am completely baffled by your responses. You don't actually address anything...........
Click to expand...

This is a common debate tactic around these parts. Heres what you do: Quote a post, then write a whole bunch of words that have absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with the post you quoted. Then at the end throw in some thinly veiled personal attacks. Nothing so overt as to garner infractions. Gotta be subtle, question his/her mental state, make them seem irrational and unbalanced for daring to disagree with you, etc etc.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom