Press Release | Project CARS On AMD GPUs - Clarification

[BiG StroOnZ]

but bluray isnt locked to one company and amd is more concerned about that than the money cost. i will feel no difference from using something proprietary but its bad in giving nvidia control while killing off open source standards like openCL 

 

But Blu-ray killed HD DVD. Because obviously it was inferior to to Blu-ray so it wasn't widely adopted. So in a sense by using Blu-ray you are locked into one company. You cannot purchase HD DVD's anymore or players either. They are non-existent. Therefore AMD should have taken their chance at adopting a technology that would have benefited them in the future instead of spiting themselves. 

[spartaman64]

But Blu-ray killed HD DVD. Because obviously it was inferior to to Blu-ray so it wasn't widely adopted. So in a sense by using Blu-ray you are locked into one company. You cannot purchase HD DVD's anymore or players either. They are non-existent. Therefore AMD should have taken their chance at adopting a technology that would have benefited them in the future instead of spiting themselves. 

idk where you are living but there are way more dvds and dvd players than bluray and openCL computationally is superior to cuda and there are benefits and drawbacks of both 

[Dabombinable]

amd didnt get an nvidia cuda license because they dont like supporting closed proprietary stuff a position that i respect and will always give nvidia flak for i mean seriously proprietary linux drivers wtf nvidia

Nvidia has proprietary drivers for Windows, and they have every right to create them for Linux. And anyway, the Linux community has their own drivers which are surprisingly good considering how much work needs to go into creating or reverse engineering a device driver. And AMD is using Havok, which is owned by Intel so AMD not liking to use 'closed proprietary stuff' is BS.

I'm sure Intel pays them to license Cuda.

Probably, and I still can't get over how stupid AMD was refusing the offer to use CUDA for free twice .

[Dabombinable]

idk where you are living but there are way more dvds and dvd players than bluray and openCL computationally is superior to cuda and there are benefits and drawbacks of both 

He said HD DVD, not DVD.

[Guest Kloaked]

idk where you are living but there are way more dvds and dvd players than bluray and openCL computationally is superior to cuda and there are benefits and drawbacks of both

DvD ≠ HD DvD

[BiG StroOnZ]

idk where you are living but there are way more dvds and dvd players than bluray and openCL computationally is superior to cuda and there are benefits and drawbacks of both 

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HD_DVD

 

You are probably too young to remember it...

[dimitriianghelov]

it's unacceptable to release a game in that form, they knew and they still released it. You can argue what they do and what they don't do , but if you look at the benchmarks on and other games and you compare it with Project Cars, you can't say to me with a straight face that something "shady" is not going on here.

[spartaman64]

DvD ≠ HD DvD

also like i said nvidia will completely dominate the market if cuda drowns out openCL and sony isnt the sole owner of bluray while nvidia is the owner of cuda so its not a very good analogy 

[Guest Kloaked]

also like i said nvidia will completely dominate the market if cuda drowns out openCL and sony isnt the sole owner of bluray while nvidia is the owner of cuda so its not a very good analogy

Like moose has said previously, Sony's Blu-ray is being licensed out to other companies, but Sony isn't dominating the market now are they?

Actually they're losing money, but that's probably not related to their bluray devices.

[Guest Kloaked]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HD_DVD

You are probably too young to remember it...

I hope they're too young because it'd explain the grammar.

[spartaman64]

Like moose has said previously, Sony's Blu-ray is being licensed out to other companies, but Sony isn't dominating the market now are they?

Actually they're losing money, but that's probably not related to their bluray devices.

sony isnt the owner of bluray it was developed with a bunch of companies working together if amd and nvidia worked together to make cuda then i would have no qualms with amd supporting cuda 

[spartaman64]

I hope they're too young because it'd explain the grammar.

it'd seems weird and i think my grammar is fine just no punctuation 

also when people start criticizing your grammar they usually lost the argument and have nothing more to say

[mr moose]

But Blu-ray killed HD DVD. Because obviously it was inferior to to Blu-ray so it wasn't widely adopted. So in a sense by using Blu-ray you are locked into one company. You cannot purchase HD DVD's anymore or players either. They are non-existent. Therefore AMD should have taken their chance at adopting a technology that would have benefited them in the future instead of spiting themselves. 

 

Even Apple, who like to heavily control their tech know not to tie themselves up and limit their consumers ability to interact with the rest of the world.

 

 

also like i said nvidia will completely dominate the market if cuda drowns out openCL and sony isnt the sole owner of bluray while nvidia is the owner of cuda so its not a very good analogy 

 

Blu-ray fees go to the bluray consortium where sony has majority IP ownership.  The three main companies are Sony, Phillips and Pioneer +smaller ones. It is estimated that Sony own 30+% of the IP.

 

I tried to keep it simple for those who like to misconstrue the facts to dismiss what is basically a fact of how the market works.

[Dabombinable]

sony isnt the owner of bluray it was developed with a bunch of companies working together if amd and nvidia worked together to make cuda then i would have no qualms with amd supporting cuda 

Are you blind?  Let me reiterate: Nvidia offered AMD the use of CUDA for free twice. AMD refused both times and as a result AMD is unable to use Nvidia features on their graphics cards, or gameworks. Its AMD's own damn fault for their graphics cards having troubles running or being unable to run Nvidia features on their graphics cards.

Did you understand that?

[spartaman64]

Even Apple, who like to heavily control their tech know not to tie themselves up and limit their consumers ability to interact with the rest of the world.

 

 

 

Blu-ray fees go to the bluray consortium where sony has majority IP ownership.  The three main companies are Sony, Phillips and Pioneer +smaller ones. It is estimated that Sony own 30+% of the IP.

 

I tried to keep it simple for those who like to misconstrue the facts to dismiss what is basically a fact of how the market works.

still sony doesnt own 100% of the IP

[spartaman64]

Are you blind?  Let me reiterate: Nvidia offered AMD the use of CUDA for free twice. AMD refused both times and as a result AMD is unable to use Nvidia features on their graphics cards, or gameworks. Its AMD's own damn fault for their graphics cards having troubles running or being unable to run Nvidia features on their graphics cards.

Did you understand that?

i didnt say nvidia didnt offer amd use of cuda but amd doesnt want to pay royalties to its competitor and support a closed standard which could kill openCL the open standard

also ad hominems are always great

[Guest Kloaked]

sony isnt the owner of bluray it was developed with a bunch of companies working together if amd and nvidia worked together to make cuda then i would have no qualms with amd supporting cuda 

 

They own most of it. I don't know how contracts with licensing works, but if they own a majority of it then they get the most profits from the licenses.

 

Doesn't matter if Nvidia solely owns Cuda. Intel pays them for it, AMD can pay them for it. I bet all of the AMD fanboys would have orgasms in their pants if AMD ended up licensing Cuda and had better tech overall. Do you see how AMD does on their own? They made a 290x almost mop the floor with a 780, what do you think they could do with Cuda? Probably more.

They're going to get left in the dust if they don't do something.

 

it'd seems weird and i think my grammar is fine just no punctuation 

 

It'd = It would

[Dabombinable]

i didnt say nvidia didnt offer amd use of cuda but amd doesnt want to pay royalties to its competitor and support a closed standard which could kill openCL the open standard

also ad hominems are always great

You don't get it, AMD wouldn't have needed to pay royalties. They screwed themselves over.

[spartaman64]

They own most of it. I don't know how contracts with licensing works, but if they own a majority of it then they get the most profits from the licenses.

 

Doesn't matter if Nvidia solely owns Cuda. Intel pays them for it, AMD can pay them for it. I bet all of the AMD fanboys would have orgasms in their pants if AMD ended up licensing Cuda and had better tech overall. Do you see how AMD does on their own? They made a 290x almost mop the floor with a 780, what do you think they could do with Cuda? Probably more.

They're going to get left in the dust if they don't do something.

 

 

It'd = It would

openCL given more time can surpass cuda. thats like saying nvidia gpus are more power and heat efficient so why doesnt amd pay some royalties to license nvidia gpu architecture 

[Notional]

Are you blind?  Let me reiterate: Nvidia offered AMD the use of CUDA for free twice. AMD refused both times and as a result AMD is unable to use Nvidia features on their graphics cards, or gameworks. Its AMD's own damn fault for their graphics cards having troubles running or being unable to run Nvidia features on their graphics cards.

Did you understand that?

 

So what you're telling me, is that Intel integrated GPU, supports all of GameWorks fully, because they support CUDA?

 

 

You're making a fallacy, if you think CUDA support, automatically results in full GameWorks support.

[spartaman64]

You don't get it, AMD wouldn't have needed to pay royalties. They screwed themselves over.

intel paid royalties ibm paid royalties so of course amd would have had to pay royalties as well. also relying on your competitor's tech is generally a bad idea

[mr moose]

still sony doesnt own 100% of the IP

 

That doesn't change the premise that the tech cost money to develop and advance and regardless if you have to pay a royalty to a consortium or to an individual company the result is the same for the end consumer.

 

Tech requires competition to advance, competition comes from having something your customers want but that can't get from your opposition. 

[Dabombinable]

openCL given more time can surpass cuda. thats like saying nvidia gpus are more power and heat efficient so why doesnt amd pay some royalties to license nvidia gpu architecture 

AMD's had years of time and its gotten them no where. Also, Nvidia graphics cards utilize CUDA and OpenCL, so either way AMD screwed them selves over as Nvidia gets the best of CUDA and OpenCL.

[Dabombinable]

So what you're telling me, is that Intel integrated GPU, supports all of GameWorks fully, because they support CUDA?

 

 

You're making a fallacy, if you think CUDA support, automatically results in full GameWorks support.

Lol, Intel's licensed to use it, it doesn't mean that its been implemented yet. And yes in AMD's case it would have given them gameworks support.

[spartaman64]

That doesn't change the premise that the tech cost money to develop and advance and regardless if you have to pay a royalty to a consortium or to an individual company the result is the same for the end consumer.

 

Tech requires competition to advance, competition comes from having something your customers want but that can't get from your opposition. 

but openCL is a good competitor to cuda