Nvidia "You Want a Piece of This ?" AMD "That Piece May Already Be Mine". Patent War Reigniting

[othertomperson]

It just seems like a limited form factor and handicapped hardware for that form factor. Granted I haven't used one (and probably never will because I'm not a content creator)

 

Well the form factor is another issue. If you look at the specs, you're getting upto a 12 Core Xeon CPU and two AMD FirePro GPUs in a tiny footprint. I don't see how you could expect that to be cheap, or how you would build it cheaper yourself.

[Trik'Stari]

Well the form factor is another issue. If you look at the specs, you're getting upto a 12 Core Xeon CPU and two AMD FirePro GPUs in a tiny footprint. I don't see how you could expect that to be cheap, or how you would build it cheaper yourself.

Meh. I've always just thought people used them for the hype and a lack of knowledge of other operating systems. Also isn't Cuda supposed to be better than openGL or whatever the firepro gpu's use?

 

I dunno, I see LMG using Nvidia GPU's and not Mac pro's for their content creation, that's gotta be worth something. Granted their hardware is probably more expensive.

 

 

Worth it to point out, I am vehemently anti apple so yeah, I am biased as hell. I've used OSX before, found nothing appealing about it, although it was a VM over an internet connection so is wasn't very responsive. That aside it just seemed unimpressive to say the least.

[othertomperson]

Meh. I've always just thought people used them for the hype and a lack of knowledge of other operating systems. Also isn't Cuda supposed to be better than openGL or whatever the firepro gpu's use?

 

I dunno, I see LMG using Nvidia GPU's and not Mac pro's for their content creation, that's gotta be worth something. Granted their hardware is probably more expensive.

 

 

Worth it to point out, I am vehemently anti apple so yeah, I am biased as hell. I've used OSX before, found nothing appealing about it, although it was a VM over an internet connection so is wasn't very responsive. That aside it just seemed unimpressive to say the least.

 

I just went on PC Part Picker to try and re-create that £3200 Mac Pro using as close to the same parts as possible. I bothered to get halfway through and it was already over £4000, so I'm really not seeing it as a rip off at all. Seems to me anyone who goes out of their way to spend £1000 more just to use Windows is the ignorant one.

 

Also I don't see the point in being anti any company. What you essentially did was drive a fork-lift and tut about how it would perform on a motorway.

[Trik'Stari]

I just went on PC Part Picker to try and re-create that £3200 Mac Pro using as close to the same parts as possible. I bothered to get halfway through and it was already over £4000, so I'm really not seeing it as a rip off at all.

 

Also I don't see the point in being anti any company. What you essentially did was drive a fork-lift and tut about how it would perform on a motorway.

Fair enough. I just don't like the whole closed eco system thing.

[othertomperson]

Fair enough. I just don't like the whole closed eco system thing.

 

That's fair. If Linux supported all my PC needs I'd switch to it in a heartbeat.

[Trik'Stari]

That's fair. If Linux supported all my PC needs I'd switch to it in a heartbeat.

100% agreed with you there. I would think by now that there would be a free software on Linux that would be better for the content creation stuff that people use mac's for.

 

Not to mention, isn't Linux more flexible overall than any other operating system?

[Techhog]

You can't. Mac Pros come with a load of RAM, Xeon CPUs, non-consumer grade GPUs. Most people I've seen build similarly priced Hackintoshes have used consumer hardware and skimped on features to match the price. They also haven't considered the software that comes with it that, to get equivalents of the same quality, would add significantly to the price.

To be fair, it's only really the recent Mac Pro that ends up being a good value. It wasn't very good before, especially during the 1-2 years without any upgrades.

[othertomperson]

100% agreed with you there. I would think by now that there would be a free software on Linux that would be better for the content creation stuff that people use mac's for.

 

Not to mention, isn't Linux more flexible overall than any other operating system?

 

Potentially. It has in the past suffered from being incredibly powerful but near impossible to use. Maybe that's changed now. It also doesn't change the fact that the hardware in the Mac Pro is heavily subsidised.

[LAwLz]

I just went on PC Part Picker to try and re-create that £3200 Mac Pro using as close to the same parts as possible.

I'd rather not get into a "Mac vs PC" fight but I think your methodology is flawed. When comparing two computers like that you shouldn't try to make computer X as similar to computer Y as possible, and then compare how much they cost.

I think it's far more logical to check the price of computer Y, build a computer X that costs the same and then compare the benefits/drawbacks. If a CPU SKU costs 300 dollars more for 0.2GHz increase in clock (everything else being similar) then it's obviously a bad purchase and the money could be better spent elsewhere. In my methodology you would go "wow that's bad value, I should get the cheaper one and then upgrade something else instead" but in your methodology you would go "well I got to match the specs exactly, no matter the cost".

 

So next time you want to compare the Mac Pro vs a PC, I recommend you completely forget about the specs of the Mac Pro, and then the only thing you should focus on is trying to get the prices to be roughly the same. When you've picked out parts for the PC on PCParkPicker and the prices match, then you compare benefits and drawbacks.

 

It's the same thing with console comparisons. I don't get why people try to make the PC specs as similar as possible to the consoles when trying to make a "PC vs console" comparison. Who cares if the PC has a quad core if the quad core is better than the octa core?

 

The only way to get exactly the same specs as a Mac Pro, is to get a Mac Pro, so why bother wasting money to try to get something similar? Instead what you should do is think "is this really worth the price. What can I get for the same price if I build it myself?".

[othertomperson]

I'd rather not get into a "Mac vs PC" fight but I think your methodology is flawed. When comparing two computers like that you shouldn't try to make computer X as similar to computer Y as possible, and then compare how much they cost.

I think it's far more logical to check the price of computer Y, build a computer X that costs the same and then compare the benefits/drawbacks. If a CPU SKU costs 300 dollars more for 0.2GHz increase in clock (everything else being similar) then it's obviously a bad purchase and the money could be better spent elsewhere. In my methodology you would go "wow that's bad value, I should get the cheaper one and then upgrade something else instead" but in your methodology you would go "well I got to match the specs exactly, no matter the cost".

 

So next time you want to compare the Mac Pro vs a PC, I recommend you completely forget about the specs of the Mac Pro, and then the only thing you should focus on is trying to get the prices to be roughly the same. When you've picked out parts for the PC on PCParkPicker and the prices match, then you compare benefits and drawbacks.

 

It's the same thing with console comparisons. I don't get why people try to make the PC specs as similar as possible to the consoles when trying to make a "PC vs console" comparison. Who cares if the PC has a quad core if the quad core is better than the octa core?

 

The only way to get exactly the same specs as a Mac Pro, is to get a Mac Pro, so why bother wasting money to try to get something similar? Instead what you should do is think "is this really worth the price. What can I get for the same price if I build it myself?".

 

Because you're doing the exact same thing but looking from the other end. I'm matching specs and comparing price, you're matching price and comparing specs. You get the same out of it, either way. The answer to your question is "something less than the Mac Pro".

 

There's also more to these parts than specs. You can compare the specs of a 6-core Xeon and Quadro to those of a six-core i7 Extreme and GTX all you like, but they are designed with different use cases in mind.

 

It sounds like the question you really want to be asking is "is it worth anyone spending £3200 on a PC -- Mac or Windows," and the answer may well be "no", but that's a different assertion to saying this product is overpriced.

[LAwLz]

Because you're doing the exact same thing but looking from the other end. I'm matching specs and comparing price, you're matching price and comparing specs. You get the same out of it, either way. The answer to your question is "something less than the Mac Pro".

 

There's also more to these parts than specs. You can compare the specs of a 6-core Xeon and Quadro to those of a six-core i7 Extreme and GTX all you like, but they are designed with different use cases in mind.

 

It sounds like the question you really want to be asking is "is it worth anyone spending £3200 on a PC -- Mac or Windows," and the answer may well be "no", but that's a different assertion to saying this product is overpriced.

No you will end up with very different results. The most obvious example of this would be that the Mac Pro probably comes with an Apple mouse and keyboard. If you do it your way, you would pick the same mouse and keyboard. If you did it my way you could either pick a less expensive one and spend the money somewhere else, or you could get a better keyboard for the same or slightly more money.

See the difference? You said it yourself, you went over budget when you tried to make it exactly the same as the Mac Pro. That would never happen if you did it my way.

 

 

Also, not sure about your definition of "overpriced" but if someone says "this 3200 pound machine is not worth buying because it is too expensive", then that to me means that it's overpriced. If other similar products costs the same then that simply means that all of them are overpriced. Just because competing products costs similar amounts doesn't mean the price is justified.

[othertomperson]

No you will end up with very different results. The most obvious example of this would be that the Mac Pro probably comes with an Apple mouse and keyboard. If you do it your way, you would pick the same mouse and keyboard. If you did it my way you could either pick a less expensive one and spend the money somewhere else, or you could get a better keyboard for the same or slightly more money.

See the difference? You said it yourself, you went over budget when you tried to make it exactly the same as the Mac Pro. That would never happen if you did it my way.

 

 

Also, not sure about your definition of "overpriced" but if someone says "this 3200 pound machine is not worth buying because it is too expensive", then that to me means that it's overpriced. If other similar products costs the same then that simply means that all of them are overpriced. Just because competing products costs similar amounts doesn't mean the price is justified.

 

lmfao just how much are you expecting Apple to subsidise!? It's already £1000 cheaper than the sum of its parts. What exactly do you expect them to do? You are being completely unreasonable.

[LAwLz]

lmfao just how much are you expecting Apple to subsidise!? It's already £1000 cheaper than the sum of its parts. What exactly do you expect them to do? You are being completely unreasonable.

When did I say anything about subsidizing? Maybe it is the parts themselves that are overpriced, so anything with those parts in them becomes overpriced?

[othertomperson]

When did I say anything about subsidizing? Maybe it is the parts themselves that are overpriced, so anything with those parts in them becomes overpriced?

 

And that's Apple's fault because...?

 

I don't see what you're whinging at myself. If you want one of the most powerful content creation PCs available right now, you shouldn't expect it to be cheap.

[LAwLz]

And that's Apple's fault because...?

 

I don't see what you're whinging at myself. If you want one of the most powerful content creation PCs available right now, you shouldn't expect it to be cheap.

I never said anything that could be interpreted as blaming Apple for the high price. In fact, I even said "If other similar products costs the same then that simply means that all of them are overpriced". I never singled out Apple as being overly expensive or anything like that.

Don't be so defensive.

[othertomperson]

I never said anything that could be interpreted as blaming Apple for the high price. In fact, I even said "If other similar products costs the same then that simply means that all of them are overpriced". I never singled out Apple as being overly expensive or anything like that.

Don't be so defensive.

 

This whole discussion is about whether Apple products are overly expensive or not. My position was that they weren't, Trik'Stari's was that they were. I'm not being defensive, you came to this argument and now seem to be confused as to what your point even is.

[Trik'Stari]

This whole discussion is about whether Mac Pros are overpriced or not. My position was that they weren't, Trik'Stari's was that they were. I'm not being defensive, you came to this argument and now seem to be confused as to what your point even is.

My comment was that a more capable computer could be built for less. Judging soley by cpu, motherboard, storage, ram, gpu, and power supply. And LawlZ is kind of right about things like the keyboard, and I already mentioned the monitor that is apart of the mac (I assume we are talking desktops here). Sure, when you factor in the screen, software, peripherals and other things it might become a good deal. I am judging soley by the hardware alone.

[othertomperson]

My comment was that a more capable computer could be built for less. Judging soley by cpu, motherboard, storage, ram, gpu, and power supply. And LawlZ is kind of right about things like the keyboard, and I already mentioned the monitor that is apart of the mac (I assume we are talking desktops here). Sure, when you factor in the screen, software, peripherals and other things it might become a good deal. I am judging soley by the hardware alone.

 

You can't make a more capable computer for less though. To build something yourself that is equivalent it will cost you £1000 more.

 

6 core 3.9GHz Xeon

2 FirePros (each about equivalent to a FirePro W8000)

16 GB 1833MHz DDR3 RAM

256GB PCI-E storage

 

Not to mention the form factor and the level of engineering that went into just cooling the thing. Just on hardware alone, this is a good deal.

 

If you're making a better deal by choosing things like an i7 4790k, a single Quadro GPU, then that's just saying that this isn't the product for you and that you can build *a* PC for less, not that this is not really good for the price.

[bogus]

AMD and NV cross license lots of GPU IP much like AMD/Intel on the CPU side. Perhaps AMD is possibly stepping in because some of NV's filings against Samsung/Qualcom venture into that shared IP space.

 

The way I read the article, AMD is looking into going after the big guys just like NV and not to protect them. It appears to me like AMD is waiting for NV's complaints to further unfold so they can use those judgments in their own civil case.

 

Example:

 

NV: "Samsung, you can't sell that GPU because it uses technology "X" and we have a patent for that!"

 

AMD: "Hold on a sec, "X"="A"+"B" and we license "B" from NV while they license "A" from us. You can't just leave us hanging, we want a piece of that pie!"

 

 

Am I blatantly missing something obvious here? I just seems like most responses are for an article different from the one I just skimmed through. 

Well the thing you are missing is AMD current position in the market: a huge part of their revenues - both in the present and in the future - is semi custom designs for third partys.

If AMD is going after their possible customers it would be one of the most stupid things they could ever do. They would just be closing doors - just like what NVIDIA is doing. Apple already closed theirs, Samsung surely doesn't want to use NVIDIA Tegra, and let's see the outcome from ARM, that claimed they will stay beind their Mali IP - and they own the ARM licesing - NVIDIA is just a licensee that can end up with a SoC with no architecture to be legally supported.

So, in my point of view, AMD intervention will be something to secure current and future relationships - something like "we will stay behind you in your GPU IP, and we will get to make semi-custom solutions for some of your product lines". They gurantee security and get to deliver semi-custom solutions.

 

AMD will never go after any of the big players in the market, specially when they have healthy relationships: Samsung, Apple, etc - because that's where the huge pie slice is, not on a enforced licensing deal.

In the worst possible scenario AMD will take action against NVIDIA, imo.

[Raudi_]

[spartaman64]

Ehh... How did you come to that conclusion? Remember, Nvidia threw the first rock at Samsung by filing to have their mobile devices removed from the US market. It was not until after that happened that Samsung fired back.

yea if anything nvidia is attacking samsung for helping amd 

edit: http://linustechtips.com/main/topic/237524-alleged-reason-for-nvidia-samsung-lawsuit-from-a-samsung-regional-manager/ and wow i didnt believe the manager at first but this might be a good case for his argument because amd might be trying to help out samsung in the patient war

[pixeldensity]

yea if anything nvidia is attacking samsung for helping amd 

edit: http://linustechtips.com/main/topic/237524-alleged-reason-for-nvidia-samsung-lawsuit-from-a-samsung-regional-manager/ and wow i didnt believe the manager at first but this might be a good case for his argument because amd might be trying to help out samsung in the patient war

I read your opening post and I don't believe you b/c nvidia doesn't even make cpus, so that doesn't make sense why NV would be suing samsung for helping amd make cpus.

 

That being said, man this thread has gone to S**t, some of the comments here make me cringe harder than hearing NCIX daily's opening jokes. I swear sometime the comments that go around remind me of the console war comments on IGN. Come on guys.

[Syntaxvgm]

potato.

well all be playing on game consoles if this goes too far

[KeltonDSMer]

Well the thing you are missing is AMD current position in the market: a huge part of their revenues - both in the present and in the future - is semi custom designs for third partys.

If AMD is going after their possible customers it would be one of the most stupid things they could ever do. They would just be closing doors - just like what NVIDIA is doing. Apple already closed theirs, Samsung surely doesn't want to use NVIDIA Tegra, and let's see the outcome from ARM, that claimed they will stay beind their Mali IP - and they own the ARM licesing - NVIDIA is just a licensee that can end up with a SoC with no architecture to be legally supported.

So, in my point of view, AMD intervention will be something to secure current and future relationships - something like "we will stay behind you in your GPU IP, and we will get to make semi-custom solutions for some of your product lines". They gurantee security and get to deliver semi-custom solutions.

 

AMD will never go after any of the big players in the market, specially when they have healthy relationships: Samsung, Apple, etc - because that's where the huge pie slice is, not on a enforced licensing deal.

In the worst possible scenario AMD will take action against NVIDIA, imo.

 

I agree with most of what you are saying. I was just explaining what I thought the article was about; that is not at all what I think AMD should or will do.

 

The article translates "we will continue to explore the possibilities for monetizing the company's graphics IP in the future" into "AMD is going to sue everybody" lol.

 

The Author must forget too that AMD sold the ATI mobile graphics IP to, of all companies, Qualcom in 2008. ATI Imageon is now Adreno (VLIW architecture).

 

Personally, I think that was not a great move. Some people have a strong opinion that AMD payed too much to buy ATI in '06. I don't necessarily think so but they sold the mobile GPU IP for less than 100million USD two years later...that was obviously a poor decision looking back with 20/20 hindsight. AMD would be doing great right now if they were making dollars on every SOC with an Adreno section in it.

 

We'll see if anything happens, but no I don't think AMD is going to (or is even able to) start suing everybody.

 

Edit: When I mention the "author" I mean the WCCF guy not OP

[Jerakl]

Can we add a requirement for a [WCCF] tag for all WCCF articles, or ban WCCF all together since what they post tends to br either pure horse shit or extremely bias bull shit.

EDIT: small grammar error