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

nVidia ends GeForce Partner Program

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, mr moose said:

They back tracked because of bad PR, we can only make guess and assumptions as to if any of it was illegal.

We have no copy of the legal agreement for the GPP and Kyle, who supposedly got his hands on a copy, hasn't made it publicly available. Every side of the discussion is working on speculation and one guy's interpretation of the scenario. 

 

Hell, GPP could have said "give us a separate gaming line-up and exclude AMD from using the same branding". Company A could have accepted the agreement and chose to use their current brand for Geforce while company B created a new brand for Geforce while leaving AMD on the current. 


Cor Caeruleus Reborn v6

Spoiler

CPU: Intel - Core i7-8700K

CPU Cooler: be quiet! - PURE ROCK 
Thermal Compound: Arctic Silver - 5 High-Density Polysynthetic Silver 3.5g Thermal Paste 
Motherboard: ASRock Z370 Extreme4
Memory: G.Skill TridentZ RGB 2x8GB 3200/14
Storage: Samsung - 850 EVO-Series 500GB 2.5" Solid State Drive 
Storage: Samsung - 960 EVO 500GB M.2-2280 Solid State Drive
Storage: Western Digital - Blue 2TB 3.5" 5400RPM Internal Hard Drive
Storage: Western Digital - BLACK SERIES 3TB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive
Video Card: EVGA - 970 SSC ACX (1080 is in RMA)
Case: Fractal Design - Define R5 w/Window (Black) ATX Mid Tower Case
Power Supply: EVGA - SuperNOVA P2 750W with CableMod blue/black Pro Series
Optical Drive: LG - WH16NS40 Blu-Ray/DVD/CD Writer 
Operating System: Microsoft - Windows 10 Pro OEM 64-bit and Linux Mint Serena
Keyboard: Logitech - G910 Orion Spectrum RGB Wired Gaming Keyboard
Mouse: Logitech - G502 Wired Optical Mouse
Headphones: Logitech - G430 7.1 Channel  Headset
Speakers: Logitech - Z506 155W 5.1ch Speakers

 

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

Except I, and probably you, don't actually care that much about whether or not GPP is illegal. My point was simply GPP could be or not be illegal independent of 10 million examples of legal uses of market power so getting bogged down in examples is a bit of waste of time for everyone.

I can see that. Fun though. 


If anyone asks you never saw me.

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

 

They back tracked because of bad PR, we can only make guess and assumptions as to if any of it was illegal.

I just find it more than a little strange that they backed off the program instead of practicing what they preached. They talked big about transparency and yet nothing materialised from it. I think that says a lot about the questionable legality of the program.


CPU - Ryzen Threadripper 2950X | Motherboard - X399 GAMING PRO CARBON AC | RAM - G.Skill Trident Z RGB 4x8GB DDR4-3200 14-13-13-21 | GPU - Aorus GTX 1080 Ti Waterforce WB Xtreme Edition | Case - Inwin 909 (Silver) | Storage - Samsung 950 Pro 500GB, Samsung 970 Evo 500GB, Samsung 840 Evo 500GB, HGST DeskStar 6TB, WD Black 2TB | PSU - Corsair AX1600i | Display - DELL ULTRASHARP U3415W |

Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, Carclis said:

I just find it more than a little strange that they backed off the program instead of practicing what they preached. They talked big about transparency and yet nothing materialised from it. I think that says a lot about the questionable legality of the program.

 

But finding it a little strange is not the same as being illegal or underhanded.   Rule number one when faced with bad PR, tread carefully and say nothing unless you are absolutely sure it won't backfire.   A lot of PR nightmares don't actually come from a what a company has done but what they say after the fact.

 

 

Just in regard tot he rest of the thread:

 

I'm not too sure what is going on on these forums of late, but why is it o.k for some people assume correlation is enough to proclaim guilt, but several examples of something being an industry standard practice is just written off as "not the same thing"? 

 

 


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
58 minutes ago, mr moose said:

Rule number one when faced with bad PR, tread carefully and say nothing unless you are absolutely sure it won't backfire.

I'm pretty sure "don't say anything unless your lawyer is present" applies here. 

 

You don't want to say anything unless you have someone, usually a lawyer, screen responses with before culpability can be assured. 


Cor Caeruleus Reborn v6

Spoiler

CPU: Intel - Core i7-8700K

CPU Cooler: be quiet! - PURE ROCK 
Thermal Compound: Arctic Silver - 5 High-Density Polysynthetic Silver 3.5g Thermal Paste 
Motherboard: ASRock Z370 Extreme4
Memory: G.Skill TridentZ RGB 2x8GB 3200/14
Storage: Samsung - 850 EVO-Series 500GB 2.5" Solid State Drive 
Storage: Samsung - 960 EVO 500GB M.2-2280 Solid State Drive
Storage: Western Digital - Blue 2TB 3.5" 5400RPM Internal Hard Drive
Storage: Western Digital - BLACK SERIES 3TB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive
Video Card: EVGA - 970 SSC ACX (1080 is in RMA)
Case: Fractal Design - Define R5 w/Window (Black) ATX Mid Tower Case
Power Supply: EVGA - SuperNOVA P2 750W with CableMod blue/black Pro Series
Optical Drive: LG - WH16NS40 Blu-Ray/DVD/CD Writer 
Operating System: Microsoft - Windows 10 Pro OEM 64-bit and Linux Mint Serena
Keyboard: Logitech - G910 Orion Spectrum RGB Wired Gaming Keyboard
Mouse: Logitech - G502 Wired Optical Mouse
Headphones: Logitech - G430 7.1 Channel  Headset
Speakers: Logitech - Z506 155W 5.1ch Speakers

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, ARikozuM said:

I'm pretty sure "don't say anything unless your lawyer is present" applies here. 

 

You don't want to say anything unless you have someone, usually a lawyer, to screen responses with before culpability can be assured. 

First thing I thought of was the Mozilla CEO resignation.  Whilst  not really comparable to this, a legal activity and opinion he engaged in 6 years earlier lost him his job purely due to BAD PR.

 

 


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
1 hour ago, mr moose said:

 

But finding it a little strange is not the same as being illegal or underhanded.   Rule number one when faced with bad PR, tread carefully and say nothing unless you are absolutely sure it won't backfire.   A lot of PR nightmares don't actually come from a what a company has done but what they say after the fact.

 

 

Just in regard tot he rest of the thread:

 

I'm not too sure what is going on on these forums of late, but why is it o.k for some people assume correlation is enough to proclaim guilt, but several examples of something being an industry standard practice is just written off as "not the same thing"? 

 

 

Those were my thoughts on Nvidia's handling of the matter which I find questionable considering the they deem their actions legal. I still think it's illegal going by the ACCC's definition of "Misuse of Market Power". I'd assume you would be more familiar with this than most and would at least be able to see the similarities there.


CPU - Ryzen Threadripper 2950X | Motherboard - X399 GAMING PRO CARBON AC | RAM - G.Skill Trident Z RGB 4x8GB DDR4-3200 14-13-13-21 | GPU - Aorus GTX 1080 Ti Waterforce WB Xtreme Edition | Case - Inwin 909 (Silver) | Storage - Samsung 950 Pro 500GB, Samsung 970 Evo 500GB, Samsung 840 Evo 500GB, HGST DeskStar 6TB, WD Black 2TB | PSU - Corsair AX1600i | Display - DELL ULTRASHARP U3415W |

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Carclis said:

Those were my thoughts on Nvidia's handling of the matter which I find questionable considering the they deem their actions legal. I still think it's illegal going by the ACCC's definition of "Misuse of Market Power". I'd assume you would be more familiar with this than most and would at least be able to see the similarities there.

To decide if it meets the criteria for misuse of market power you have to know more details regarding the contracts,  However let's assume what we think is true actually is:

 

Does nvidia hold market power?  Keeping in mind market share is not he same as market power.  Market power is almost exclusively the ability to control the market,  does nvidia set the standards? do they control who gets to manufacturer products that compete in that specific market?   Yes and no,  yes they do but only with products that use Nvidia specific hardware acceleration (cuda cores). 

 

Do they control the product use market? no because consumers have a choice to use openCL.  In games both cards work effectively enough to play the game.  Sure Nvidia is way in front on performance (in both categories), but so is Lambourgini and you wouldn't argue they control the market when more hyundai's are used every week.  

 

Does nvidia control the functional level of this specific market (production/distibution)?  No,  they can only control the use of their GPU, Whilst it does extend into branding rights and advertising/pricing criteria, it has always done this and so does AMD, so it almost certainly does not provide evidence of market control through production and distribution.

 

So by this reasoning alone they would not fit the category to be a market power.  Sure they are big, they have the lions share of the market and their products are better, but their products do not intrinsically force a consumers hand, if AMD make a better product there is no reason to stay with nvidia.

 

Then on top of that it can be argued that Nvidias financial situation puts them in a position where they can afford to restrict competition or that by using their market share they can force an unfair advantage, however those have to be proven in:

 

Quote

-‘Purpose’ refers to a firm’s intention to achieve a particular result. It can be established by direct evidence or by inference. The purpose specified in s. 46 need not be a firm’s only purpose, but it needs to be a substantial purpose.

It needs to be shown that the direct purpose of GPP was to limit/reduce AMD sales. This is hard to prove given the voluntary nature of GPP and the fact that none of the contracts (as we've been told) expressly prevented AIB partners from selling AMD stock.    Branding may play a role in sales success, but a marketing campaign is just that, a campaign of branding and ads, it is not a direct action that can specifically achieve a particular result.

 

Quote

-‘Effect’ refers to the direct consequence of a firm’s conduct. This is determined objectively by examining the actual impact on the competitive process within the relevant market. Although not determinative, evidence of consumer or competitive detriment will be relevant to the ACCC’s consideration of whether to pursue a matter.

This effectively says AMD sales have to drop before they will consider anything,  and when they do they don't need causal proof, an array of coonditions that determine a markets likely outcome can be enough.  AMD market share is still growing so this isn't going to be considered.

 

Quote

-‘Likely effect’ refers to the likely consequences of a firm’s conduct, including its potential impact on the competitive process. ‘Likely’ means that there is a real chance or a possibility that is not remote.

The best case scenario for AMD here is if they do suffer sales losses, that they can point to branding as the cause, because if their losses are across the board (from AIB manufacturers who do not sign up to GPP or even sell Nvidia) then their case is shot.  You cannot argue likely effect to be caused by one action when it is happening to everything irrespective of that one action.

 

 

 

So, no I don't think it passes muster with misuse of market power.   Does this mean it wasn't unethical? of course not, it may have been, but we just have no evidence for any of it. 

 

EDIT: and just to add, lets assume the GPP has the effect of reducing AMD sales.  The consumer law in effect here states:

Quote

It is not illegal to have market power or to use it. Conduct by a business with market power is only a contravention of the Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (CCA) if it  has the purpose, effect or likely effect of substantially lessening competition.

This means running AMD out of business or reducing their sales substanntially, I.E given they have 30% market share GPP would likely have to reduce their sales drastically before it would even be considered.


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
49 minutes ago, mr moose said:

-snip-

Not sure if I agree on your comparison to the car market (there being far more competitors and options as well as less barriers to entry) but I can understand why you don't think it's illegal.


CPU - Ryzen Threadripper 2950X | Motherboard - X399 GAMING PRO CARBON AC | RAM - G.Skill Trident Z RGB 4x8GB DDR4-3200 14-13-13-21 | GPU - Aorus GTX 1080 Ti Waterforce WB Xtreme Edition | Case - Inwin 909 (Silver) | Storage - Samsung 950 Pro 500GB, Samsung 970 Evo 500GB, Samsung 840 Evo 500GB, HGST DeskStar 6TB, WD Black 2TB | PSU - Corsair AX1600i | Display - DELL ULTRASHARP U3415W |

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Carclis said:

Not sure if I agree on your comparison to the car market (there being far more competitors and options as well as less barriers to entry) but I can understand why you don't think it's illegal.

My car thing wasn't so much meant to be an analogy but more to highlight the difference between controlling a product that everyone wants/performs the best versus producing a product that is heavily used in the market that competitors can compete with.       Not everyone can make a car like the Lamborghini, but just about anyone can make something to compete with Hyundai and that's whats in the market place and holds the market share. 


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

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


×