Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
WMGroomAK

nVidia GeForce Partner Program: Well Intention Marketing or Anti-Competitive

Recommended Posts

Just now, mr moose said:

It's still a very big gamble.  We know the dGPU market is shrinking (all markets are shrinking), This has effected everyone in the industry.   Nvidia's market is essentially 50/50 data centre and GTX branded cards.  They have many more options than to risk billion dollar fines on a poorly executed attempt to corner the market.   Don't get me wrong,  I strongly believe this is the easiest legal mistake not to make, So if it turns out nvidia did exactly what people are accusing them of, I will be the first to mock them publicly. 

Its a gamble but not that big. Its the same thing all companies do when they take illegal actions or actions that could cost them a lot of money. Risk assessment. What is the cost of being caught vs the profit to be made. If the profit potential is high enough then who cares about the law? Every major company breaks the law and probably does so fairly often. Intel got fined billions of dollars but they made many times that.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Derangel said:

Its a gamble but not that big. Its the same thing all companies do when they take illegal actions or actions that could cost them a lot of money. Risk assessment. What is the cost of being caught vs the profit to be made. If the profit potential is high enough then who cares about the law? Every major company breaks the law and probably does so fairly often. Intel got fined billions of dollars but they made many times that.

I get that, that's why Intel did it.   However everything they are making is selling (shelves are empty).  Right now even if they could wrestle another 10% potential market share from AMD (at the expense of a lawsuit from Intel) they are not going to actually sell that many more GPU's, because they'd have to find a way to step up production first.


QuicK and DirtY. Read the CoC it's like a guide on how not to be moron.  Also I don't have an issue with the VS series.

Sometimes I miss contractions like n't on the end of words like wouldn't, couldn't and shouldn't.    Please don't be a dick,  make allowances when reading my posts.

Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, mr moose said:

I get that, that's why Intel did it.   However everything they are making is selling (shelves are empty).  Right now even if they could wrestle another 10% potential market share from AMD (at the expense of a lawsuit from Intel) they are not going to actually sell that many more GPU's, because they'd have to find a way to step up production first.

Its selling now, but it won't be forever. Right now is the best time for them to do it. When things stabilize they could be in a position to entirely sink AMD in the GPU market. The right time to do something like this isn't in the middle of new launches or when shelves are flush with products. Right now they can use this to bully AIBs and OEMs with threats of getting even less allocation.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Derangel said:

Its selling now, but it won't be forever. Right now is the best time for them to do it. When things stabilize they could be in a position to entirely sink AMD in the GPU market. The right time to do something like this isn't in the middle of new launches or when shelves are flush with products. Right now they can use this to bully AIBs and OEMs with threats of getting even less allocation.

 

I would argue if they have ever been in a position to sink AMD, it was over the last few years.  AMD were on the verge of bankruptcy with under performing GPUs for a very long time.  Nvidia had enough market share and revenue/profit to drop their prices to the point AMD would have started hemorrhaging.   I find it difficult to believe they would have passed up that opportunity before vega and zen were released only to decide now to risk a lawsuit and bad PR in a move that will not likely improve sales figures until 2019 at the earliest and maybe not even 2020 with ram not ramping up production until then.


QuicK and DirtY. Read the CoC it's like a guide on how not to be moron.  Also I don't have an issue with the VS series.

Sometimes I miss contractions like n't on the end of words like wouldn't, couldn't and shouldn't.    Please don't be a dick,  make allowances when reading my posts.

Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, mr moose said:

 

I would argue if they have ever been in a position to sink AMD, it was over the last few years.  AMD were on the verge of bankruptcy with under performing GPUs for a very long time.  Nvidia had enough market share and revenue/profit to drop their prices to the point AMD would have started hemorrhaging.   I find it difficult to believe they would have passed up that opportunity before vega and zen were released only to decide now to risk a lawsuit and bad PR in a move that will not likely improve sales figures until 2019 at the earliest and maybe not even 2020 with ram not ramping up production until then.

I wonder if the Intel-AMD deal is what tipped the scales. That new chip is very good and along with AMD's new APUs that could really cut Nvidia's laptop stuff. Perhaps AI stuff as well. Nvidia and AMD are both heavily investing in deep learning. It will be a couple years until that really bares fruit though. If Nvidia could cripple, or completely kill off, AMD's GPU division then it would be more than worth whatever fines they have to pay as it would give them exclusive access to those rapidly growing fields. This entire thing is definitely something to keep an eye on and see where it goes. It would be nice if it wasn't as bad as it seems, but it doesn't look good right now. Kyle's experience in the industry lends some weight to the concern as well.

Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Derangel said:

I wonder if the Intel-AMD deal is what tipped the scales. That new chip is very good and along with AMD's new APUs that could really cut Nvidia's laptop stuff. Perhaps AI stuff as well. Nvidia and AMD are both heavily investing in deep learning. It will be a couple years until that really bares fruit though. If Nvidia could cripple, or completely kill off, AMD's GPU division then it would be more than worth whatever fines they have to pay as it would give them exclusive access to those rapidly growing fields. This entire thing is definitely something to keep an eye on and see where it goes. It would be nice if it wasn't as bad as it seems, but it doesn't look good right now. Kyle's experience in the industry lends some weight to the concern as well.

i dont think they want amd dead at all, they want it which in an inch of its life because they dont want to become the only one and get in trouble

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, cj09beira said:

i dont think they want amd dead at all, they want it which in an inch of its life because they dont want to become the only one and get in trouble

There is that side of it too.  


QuicK and DirtY. Read the CoC it's like a guide on how not to be moron.  Also I don't have an issue with the VS series.

Sometimes I miss contractions like n't on the end of words like wouldn't, couldn't and shouldn't.    Please don't be a dick,  make allowances when reading my posts.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So let me get this straight... This is my TL;DR version which may or may not be 100% accurate (please feel free to correct me if I am missing something).

 

 

1) Nvidia has launched a program they call GeForce Partner Program (GPP for short).

2) AMD went to HardOCP with this story. HardOCP says they ignored the info AMD gave them and decided to do their own research.

3) According to HardOCP there are essentially two major things to this story which together creates the issue.

a) If you are part of the GPP you get:

Quote

high-effort engineering engagements -- early tech engagement -- launch partner status -- game bundling -- sales rebate programs -- social media and PR support -- marketing reports -- Marketing Development Funds (MDF). MDF is likely the standout in that list of lost benefits if the company is not a GPP partner.

Basically, if you are in the partner program Nvidia will help you engineer computers, give you free games, maybe post about your computer on their Facebook page and so on. If you're not in the partner program you're on your own.

 

b) If you are in the partner program then your "Gaming Brand Aligned Exclusively With GeForce".

Basically, you are not allowed to label a computer as "gaming" if it doesn't have a GeForce GPU in it.

 

My problem with this article is that for a) we get a citation from a document we can't see, so we have no idea about context or if it's even written like that at all. For b) we don't even get what appears to be a citation.

 

It would be one thing if we could see these documents and read them for ourselves, but I think it's one hell of a jump to assume that both a) and b) are legitimate and not taken out of context.

All we have to go by is small snippets from a secret document, which has been filtered through the author.

I'd like to see some better evidence before making my mind up.

 

I'm glad to see that only a handful of people have brought out their pitchforks so far. I was fully expecting the usual "Nvidia is run by the literal devil and is out to destroy everything! Please AMD save us!" crap we usually get on this forum.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The GPP is not anti trust on its own.  Being a partner over right now, gives more benefits while it gives nV benefits too. 

 

Tier 1 OEM, and board partners get the same preferential treatment right now as do GPP partners do.  Free games, they don't get this right now, they must pay for it currently.  Free marketing, from nV, they don't have that right now either.

 

So what nV is trying to do it, essential is cut away from AMD's products, and make them the sole gamer brand if a partner signs up.  This is not anti competitive since the company has the choice and they are getting something more over what they had before.

 

Who this affects, OEM's, AIB's.  OEM's and AIB's, the larger guys won't care to much as they have the funds to create two separate lines.  The smaller guys though, they are going to be in trouble they can't create two separate lines, and market it, but we are talking about 3 companies in the North East? and 2 in Asia that do both IHV's cards?  All of them are major players.  The OEM's ya got 3 of them them that have more than 50% of the computer marketshare.  All big fish.  And the smaller guys are still pretty big too.

 

Obviously AMD doesn't like this, because they are getting kicked out of the gaming market, doesn't really matter for them anyways, the only people buying AMD GPU's gaming right now are the ones that really don't know why the hell they are doing so bad to begin with compared to the competition or just like their products more.

 

Can nV use this program do to distasteful things, it sounds like it, but as other stated, need more info.....

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Derangel said:

I wonder if the Intel-AMD deal is what tipped the scales. That new chip is very good and along with AMD's new APUs that could really cut Nvidia's laptop stuff. Perhaps AI stuff as well. Nvidia and AMD are both heavily investing in deep learning. It will be a couple years until that really bares fruit though. If Nvidia could cripple, or completely kill off, AMD's GPU division then it would be more than worth whatever fines they have to pay as it would give them exclusive access to those rapidly growing fields. This entire thing is definitely something to keep an eye on and see where it goes. It would be nice if it wasn't as bad as it seems, but it doesn't look good right now. Kyle's experience in the industry lends some weight to the concern as well.

That is possible but highly unlikely, because that ultra book will be going up against not pascal based notebooks, its going to be going up against next gen notebooks, and we all know if it can barely get up to a gtx 1030 in a notebook, how will it fair against next gen?

 

AMD's GPU division did it by themselves, they crippled themselves, by not funding it properly.  This has nothing to do with nV. 

 

Exclusive deals are nothing new in the industry, look at AMD with memory, they have done it many times over.  Of course nV being smart didn't play into the need to use the same memory AMD helped create.  Did AMD get benefits from this, hell ya, they got memory for less than what those companies normally sell to others for.

 

This is a bit different I agree, this exclusive selling of a product as a separate line. It doesn't stop these partners for selling other products, just not in the same line.  It also doesn't stop a company when a competitor has as good of product or better to stop being in the program.  They just don't get the benefits they once had with the program, which those benefits they don't have right now anyways.  Once AMD or Intel actually have competing products to nV, this program isn't even worth the paper its written on.  We see how fast graphics market swings can be, 10, 20% swings in notebook, 10% in dgpu's, easily if companies can compete.  This isn't like the CPU business, where OEM's and system builders are the main source of revenue, AIB's are the main source of revenue for nV and AMD.  Where a person keeps their OEM or built system for 6 or 7 years, and upgrades parts like the graphics card ever gen or two.

 

The concerns are there yeah, it sounds shady has hell when nV doesn't share the particulars about the program, but business transactions are never transparent, and never should be, because most people looking from the outside, don't know what the hell they are looking at.

 

Look if you want independent people looking into these things, yeah people like Kyle, like Linus, and others that have been in the industry before and know how these things actually work, are the best to look at.  And even Kyle stated, he needs more info, but since nV hadn't gotten back to him yet, he thinks it looks bad, and yeah it does look bad from what we have seen so far.

 

The current anti trust laws don't cover this at all and for good reason, because its not anti trust ;), the closest thing they have to it is customer allocation but these are non compete clauses based on regions or market segregation of products and customers, not marketing based as a whole.  nV is not telling their partners to not to sell AMD products, just not in the same line.  If nV, the best maker for GPU's currently is helping their partners to make more money, they don't want the same line to be associated with GPU's that aren't as good as it water downs the brand.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sigh. NVidia being scummy again with anti competitive tactics. The worst part is that people will still support this behaviour. Hopefully, the larger brands won't fall for this nonsense. Then again Asus is kinda already doing that.

 

So why is NVidia doing this? Well, take a brand name like Asus' ROG, for instance. With this partner program, the ROG branding will be exclusive to NVidia, thus allowing NVidia to bandwagon onto an established gaming brand at no cost. Furthermore, it will exclude AMD from this same branding, thus preventing AMD (or Intel for that matter) to benefit from the vendors own branding. It will require Asus to make another branding, that ultimately will be weaker.

 

This entire ordeal only benefits NVidia. It will be at the cost of the vendors, AMD, Intel, and of course, YOU. Vote with your wallet, it's the only power you have.


Watching Intel have competition is like watching a headless chicken trying to get out of a mine field

CPU: Intel I7 4790K@4.6 with NZXT X31 AIO; MOTHERBOARD: ASUS Z97 Maximus VII Ranger; RAM: 8 GB Kingston HyperX 1600 DDR3; GFX: ASUS R9 290 4GB; CASE: Lian Li v700wx; STORAGE: Corsair Force 3 120GB SSD; Samsung 850 500GB SSD; Various old Seagates; PSU: Corsair RM650; MONITOR: 2x 20" Dell IPS; KEYBOARD/MOUSE: Logitech K810/ MX Master; OS: Windows 10 Pro

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Razor01 said:

the only people buying AMD GPU's gaming right now are the ones that really don't know why the hell they are doing so bad to begin with compared to the competition or just like their products more.

Is anyone else confused by this run-on sentence?

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Notional said:

Sigh. NVidia being scummy again with anti competitive tactics. The worst part is that people will still support this behaviour. Hopefully, the larger brands won't fall for this nonsense. Then again Asus is kinda already doing that.

 

So why is NVidia doing this? Well, take a brand name like Asus' ROG, for instance. With this partner program, the ROG branding will be exclusive to NVidia, thus allowing NVidia to bandwagon onto an established gaming brand at no cost. Furthermore, it will exclude AMD from this same branding, thus preventing AMD (or Intel for that matter) to benefit from the vendors own branding. It will require Asus to make another branding, that ultimately will be weaker.

 

This entire ordeal only benefits NVidia. It will be at the cost of the vendors, AMD, Intel, and of course, YOU. Vote with your wallet, it's the only power you have.

 

 

That is tough luck for AMD, they shouldn't have handed over the GPU market to nV.  They did this by not spending money for R&D for their GPU line ups for years.  Keep this in mind, AMD would have gone to their attorneys to seek an injunction if there were any grounds to do so.  That didn't happen.  So they went to the press.

 

Its not nV's fault that AMD's GPU's don't compete in gaming.

 

Yes it only benefits nV, that is what companies, do , they want to be on top of the food chain, nothing wrong with that.

 

You also can't blame consumers for wanting nV products, well AMD sat around long enough on GCN and did nothing to advance their tech.  This is what happens.  They lose market share, then they lose their ability to persuade their partners to give them equal opportunity to market their products.  AMD is not entailed to consumer's money if they don't' have products that consumers want.  They don't run a charity either.  If you run a charity and want to help AMD, by all means do so.  Take a tithe out when it comes to tax time

 

Tell me something, if you owned a brick and mortar, and you had two separate motherboard manufacturers wanting to sell products with you, One has a lion's share of the market and you know you can sell those by the droves, and other, they are nice but just not competitive, will you take part in the larger companies marketing deal, where you know you will also get extra benefits for the same things you are already selling droves of?  Or let the benefits slide and selling limited quantities of the not as good brand?  You know one of them you don't need to worry about left over stock.  AKA A-10 anyone?  AKA Fury X anyone?

Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, Notional said:

So why is NVidia doing this?

 

Doing what exactly?  So far all we have is an aggressive article with no supporting evidence and no interested parties willing to put their name to it.  They won't even tell us which documents they claim to have read let alone print them.  

 

The only facts we have are insinuations from the journalist and a blog from nvidia that claims:

 

Quote

The program isn't exclusive. Partners continue to have the ability to sell and promote products from anyone.

 

There might be another article from someone else which has more compelling evidence, but so far they all point back to Bennett and claim only that AMD has reached out and that's the only source for all of this. 


QuicK and DirtY. Read the CoC it's like a guide on how not to be moron.  Also I don't have an issue with the VS series.

Sometimes I miss contractions like n't on the end of words like wouldn't, couldn't and shouldn't.    Please don't be a dick,  make allowances when reading my posts.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@Razor01 things aren't that simple thought, there are reasons why amd didn't have enough money to invest into R&D, which is nvidea still outsold them by alot even when they had the better product, which happened more than once, that is the fault of consumers  

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, cj09beira said:

@Razor01 things aren't that simple thought, there are reasons why amd didn't have enough money to invest into R&D, which is nvidea still outsold them by alot even when they had the better product, which happened more than once, that is the fault of consumers  

Why did nV outsell AMD?  It started with Maxwell against the r3xx and Fury Lines.

 

r3xx was late by 6 months, Fury line a couple months after, they dropped down to 20% and less market share because of that.  Then Polaris against Pascal, status quo, they got clobbered again.  What is going to happen with next gen, yeah its going to be worse then what we saw before. 

 

How do you blame this on a consumer when AMD brings out rebranded products and late products to the market and expect consumers to just buy AMD and nV products equally?

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Razor01 said:

Why did nV outsell AMD?  It started with Maxwell against the r3xx and Fury Lines.

 

r3xx was late by 6 months, Fury line a couple months after, they dropped down to 20% and less market share because of that.  Then Polaris against Pascal, status quo, they got clobbered again.  What is going to happen with next gen, yeah its going to be worse then what we saw before. 

:| lets forget all about the history that really matters which is the one BEFORE the products that we got when amd dint have enough R&D

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Razor01 said:

That is tough luck for AMD, they shouldn't have handed over the GPU market to nV.  They did this by not spending money for R&D for their GPU line ups for years. 

Indeed. I wonder if AMD's deroute was the consequence of Intel's illegal anti consumer tactics, very similar to this? Yeah, that sounds quite plausible. Buying ATI at a way too high price didn't help, but that wasn't what sabotaged AMD.

7 minutes ago, Razor01 said:

Tell me something, if you owned a brick and mortar, and you had two separate motherboard manufacturers wanted to sell products with you, One has a lion's share of the market and you know you can sell those by the droves, and other, they are nice but just not competitive, will you take part in the larger companies marketing deal, where you know you will also get extra benefits for the same things you are already selling droves of?  Or let the benefits slide and selling limited quantities of the not as good brand?

I would offer both, so the consumer (my actual customer) has a choice and get to buy what they want. I would never, as a company, allow myself to be 100% dependable on another company I have no control over. Why do you think LTT made floatplane? They cannot afford to allow one company (Youtube) to dictate their existence. Allowing such a situation is just incompetent.

 

8 minutes ago, mr moose said:

Doing what exactly?  So far all we have is an aggressive article with no supporting evidence and no interested parties willing to put their name to it.  They won't even tell us which documents they claim to have read let alone print them.  

Well, of course, when it comes to journalism it is always a case of trust. You either trust them or not. You should however never blindly trust them. This is what Videocardz have to say about it:

 

Remember that these things need to get leaked in which case credibility is limited. There's a smoking gun here, but this case is far from over though.

 

The program is very much exclusive, but only when it comes to branding. No ones claimed that Asus is not allowed to make or sell AMD products anymore. Only that if Asus joined the program, it would have to dedicate its gaming brand exclusively to NVidia.This is all a marketing ploy. Now if it was just NVidia's own, then no problem. But when they are indirectly forcing third party companies to implement their marketing at the expense of not only the vendor itself, but also the consumer, then it's a problem.


Watching Intel have competition is like watching a headless chicken trying to get out of a mine field

CPU: Intel I7 4790K@4.6 with NZXT X31 AIO; MOTHERBOARD: ASUS Z97 Maximus VII Ranger; RAM: 8 GB Kingston HyperX 1600 DDR3; GFX: ASUS R9 290 4GB; CASE: Lian Li v700wx; STORAGE: Corsair Force 3 120GB SSD; Samsung 850 500GB SSD; Various old Seagates; PSU: Corsair RM650; MONITOR: 2x 20" Dell IPS; KEYBOARD/MOUSE: Logitech K810/ MX Master; OS: Windows 10 Pro

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, cj09beira said:

:| lets forget all about the history that really matters which is the one BEFORE the products that we got when amd dint have enough R&D

They had the R&D prior to that, that is why GCN came out, they had decent R&D then.  It wasn't till the new/current management started to shave graphics R&D for CPU R&D.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Razor01 said:

Why did nV outsell AMD?  It started with Maxwell against the r3xx and Fury Lines.

 

r3xx was late by 6 months, Fury line a couple months after, they dropped down to 20% and less market share because of that.  Then Polaris against Pascal, status quo, they got clobbered again.  What is going to happen with next gen, yeah its going to be worse then what we saw before. 

 

You need to understand, nVidia has been outselling ATi/AMD waaaay before Maxwell and R-300 series times.

We could go back to all the way to ... 2004 .. if we wanted.

Look at the market share difference throughout the years.


Intel X99 Rig -- CPU + PSU being RMA'ed
Intel Z390 Rig (*NEW* Primary)

  • i7-6800K @ 4.0 GHz --- i7-8086K
  • ASUS X99 Deluxe --- Gigabyte Z390 Aorus Master
  • 2x Sapphire NITRO R9-Fury in Crossfire / ASUS ROG Platinum Matrix R9-280X
  • 32 GB, 16 GB DDR4 G.Skill Trident Z Red/Black 3000 MHz + 16 GB DDR4 G.Skill Trident Z RGB 3000 MHz
  • CM Hyper 212 EVO (temporary) .... EKwb Predator kit .... in-progress
  • SanDisk 480 GB SSD + 1TB Crucial MX 500 SSD + 1TB Samsung 860 EVO
  • EVGA SuperNOVA 850W P2 + Red/White CableMod Cables
  • Phanteks Enthoo Luxe Tempered Glass Edition
  • Logitech G502 Proteus Spectrum + Corsair K70 (Red LED, anodized black, Cheery MX Browns)

Intel Z97 Rig (Secondary)

  • Intel i5-4690K @ 4.6 GHz  4.8 GHz (still tweaking it)
  • ASUS ROG Maximus VII Hero Z97
  • Sapphire Vapor-X HD 7950 EVGA GTX 1070 SC Black Edition ACX 3.0
  • 20 GB (8GB X 2 + 4GB X 1) Corsair Vengeance DDR3 1600 MHz
  • Corsair A50 air cooler  NZXT X61
  • Kingston V300 120GB SSD [non-gimped version] + SanDisk Ultra II 240GB SSD + WD Caviar Black 1TB HDD
  • Antec New TruePower 550W EVGA G2 650W + White CableMod cables
  • Cooler Master HAF 912 White NZXT S340 Elite w/ white LED stips

AMD 990FX Rig (Decommissioned...for now)

  •  FX-8350 @ 4.8 / 4.9 GHz (given up on the 5.0 / 5.1 GHz attempt)
  • ASUS ROG Crosshair V Formula 990FX
  • 12 GB (4 GB X 3) G.Skill RipJawsX DDR3 @ 1866 MHz
  • Sapphire Vapor-X HD 7970 + Sapphire Dual-X HD 7970 in Crossfire  Sapphire NITRO R9-Fury in Crossfire *NONE*
  • Thermaltake Frio w/ Cooler Master JetFlo's in push-pull
  • Samsung 850 EVO 500GB SSD + Kingston V300 120GB SSD + WD Caviar Black 1TB HDD
  • Corsair TX850 (ver.1)
  • Cooler Master HAF 932
  • Logitech G9x + Corsair K70 (red LED, anodized black, cherry MX Brown)  *NONE*

 

<> Electrical Engineer , B.Eng <>

<> Electronics & Computer Engineering Technologist (Diploma + Advanced Diploma) <>

<> Electronics Engineering Technician for the Canadian Department of National Defence <>

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, -rascal- said:

 

You need to understand, nVidia has been outselling ATi/AMD waaaay before Maxwell and R-300 series times.

We could go back to all the way to ... 2004 .. if we wanted.

Look at the market share difference throughout the years.

 

 

They were but not by what we saw then.

 

AMD was hovering around 40% marketshare with the HD lines, outside of r600 and hd3xxx.

 

That is enough commanding marketshare to stop things like this from happening.

 

Maxwell was a kick in AMD balls, it was the lowest marketshare they have ever had in their entire history.

 

jpr_q2_2016_amd_vs_nvda_SHARE.png

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Notional said:

Indeed. I wonder if AMD's deroute was the consequence of Intel's illegal anti consumer tactics, very similar to this? Yeah, that sounds quite plausible. Buying ATI at a way too high price didn't help, but that wasn't what sabotaged AMD.

I would offer both, so the consumer (my actual customer) has a choice and get to buy what they want. I would never, as a company, allow myself to be 100% dependable on another company I have no control over. Why do you think LTT made floatplane? They cannot afford to allow one company (Youtube) to dictate their existence. Allowing such a situation is just incompetent.

 

Well, of course, when it comes to journalism it is always a case of trust. You either trust them or not. You should however never blindly trust them. This is what Videocardz have to say about it:

 

Remember that these things need to get leaked in which case credibility is limited. There's a smoking gun here, but this case is far from over though.

 

The program is very much exclusive, but only when it comes to branding. No ones claimed that Asus is not allowed to make or sell AMD products anymore. Only that if Asus joined the program, it would have to dedicate its gaming brand exclusively to NVidia.This is all a marketing ploy. Now if it was just NVidia's own, then no problem. But when they are indirectly forcing third party companies to implement their marketing at the expense of not only the vendor itself, but also the consumer, then it's a problem.

Offering both when one isn't selling is not a good idea, because at the end you need to either write off the left over inventory which if you don't sell within 6 months after an updated product comes out or eat the cost by selling at no profit or a loss, either way its just bad.

 

Fury X, Dell was selling those after Pascal came out, a good 6 months after, at higher than gtx 1080 prices.  Crazy stuff I know, but that is what happens with left over stock,  who would buy such products at that time?

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Notional said:

Indeed. I wonder if AMD's deroute was the consequence of Intel's illegal anti consumer tactics, very similar to this? Yeah, that sounds quite plausible. Buying ATI at a way too high price didn't help, but that wasn't what sabotaged AMD.

I would offer both, so the consumer (my actual customer) has a choice and get to buy what they want. I would never, as a company, allow myself to be 100% dependable on another company I have no control over. Why do you think LTT made floatplane? They cannot afford to allow one company (Youtube) to dictate their existence. Allowing such a situation is just incompetent.

 

Well, of course, when it comes to journalism it is always a case of trust. You either trust them or not. You should however never blindly trust them. This is what Videocardz have to say about it:

 

Remember that these things need to get leaked in which case credibility is limited. There's a smoking gun here, but this case is far from over though.

 

The program is very much exclusive, but only when it comes to branding. No ones claimed that Asus is not allowed to make or sell AMD products anymore. Only that if Asus joined the program, it would have to dedicate its gaming brand exclusively to NVidia.This is all a marketing ploy. Now if it was just NVidia's own, then no problem. But when they are indirectly forcing third party companies to implement their marketing at the expense of not only the vendor itself, but also the consumer, then it's a problem.

 

If there is evidence that what they are saying is true then they don;t need to fear a defamation case.  Evidence is evidence. The fact they fear a defamation case only furthers the proposition they have no evidence and it's more hearsay.

 

So even though we have no evidence and Nvidia have outright claimed it's not exclusive, you are still willing to claim it is?

 

Pardon me but I am going to wait for evidence before I make a call one way or the other.


QuicK and DirtY. Read the CoC it's like a guide on how not to be moron.  Also I don't have an issue with the VS series.

Sometimes I miss contractions like n't on the end of words like wouldn't, couldn't and shouldn't.    Please don't be a dick,  make allowances when reading my posts.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Razor01 said:

Offering both when one isn't selling is not a good idea, because at the end you need to either write off the left over inventory which if you don't sell within 6 months after an updated product comes out or eat the cost by selling at no profit or a loss, either way its just bad.

 

Fury X, Dell was selling those after Pascal came out, a good 6 months after, at higher than gtx 1080 prices.  Crazy stuff I know, but that is what happens with left over stock,  who would buy such products at that time?

Sure, but you are delving into a non issue here. AMD products are not only selling, they are completely sold out everywhere (GPU). I see no reason for Asus, MSI or similar to stop selling AMD cards. But again, that is not what NVidia is demanding either. They only seem to demand exclusive use of the vendors gaming brand (ie. ROG).


Watching Intel have competition is like watching a headless chicken trying to get out of a mine field

CPU: Intel I7 4790K@4.6 with NZXT X31 AIO; MOTHERBOARD: ASUS Z97 Maximus VII Ranger; RAM: 8 GB Kingston HyperX 1600 DDR3; GFX: ASUS R9 290 4GB; CASE: Lian Li v700wx; STORAGE: Corsair Force 3 120GB SSD; Samsung 850 500GB SSD; Various old Seagates; PSU: Corsair RM650; MONITOR: 2x 20" Dell IPS; KEYBOARD/MOUSE: Logitech K810/ MX Master; OS: Windows 10 Pro

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Notional said:

Sure, but you are delving into a non issue here. AMD products are not only selling, they are completely sold out everywhere (GPU). I see no reason for Asus, MSI or similar to stop selling AMD cards. But again, that is not what NVidia is demanding either. They only seem to demand exclusive use of the vendors gaming brand (ie. ROG).

 

They aren't selling because of gaming......  Vendor's know this.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×