Nvidia Monopolising the market discussion.

[Rohith_Kumar_Sp]

Heres a random graph off google images. Not my graph.0c8146e0_CB1.PNG

As you see AMD are clearly down the bottom

doesn't say which game was played or anything, WUT ? 

[AlwaysFSX]

Heres a random graph off google images. Not my graph.

As you see AMD are clearly down the bottom

Look at the two links in my signature. Actual testing by an actual forum member. Sorry, but no.

[AlwaysFSX]

doesn't say which game was played or anything, WUT ? 

Logic.

[Trik'Stari]

PhysX is nvidia's technology for the physics processing to be put on the gpu. Only amd cards run the physics on CPU. From what I've heard AMD generally run poorly compared to similarly spec gpu over on green team. I dont actually know however since I run a 980 in my system, never owned a AMD card in my life.

You can choose to run PhysX on CPU or GPU with Nvidia. Regardless of whether you have an Intel or AMD CPU. Check in your Nvidia Control Center.

[DeepRD]

good lord can you kids open your minds to the reality of these businesses?

 

NVIDIA IS A GRAPHICS COMPANY

 

AMD IS A MICROPROCESSOR COMPANY

 

NVidia is building/expanding tools for graphics design, and now developing tools to make all these years of research easier to implement for other people

 

AMD's marketing just needs to shut up and quit brainwashing the fanboys into thinking that NVidia is shunning them out. AMD is not a graphics company and do not have the structure nor funds to be one. They should be focusing on what they originally exist for - microprocessor solutions.

 

Just suck it up and accept the fact that a GRAPHICS company is excelling at their primary focus....GRAPHICS. There is nothing wrong with being the alternative option as far as a GPU product - but crying out from the top of your lungs that you're getting the shaft because you're behind in graphics research when your company's focus is microprocessors....just blows my mind in stupidity

That's beside the point, as a consumer I want AMD to grow their share in the gaming market. Otherwise Nvidia can just charge what they want for me to purchase their product. Like windows, who the hell whats to pay 130 AUD for win 8.1?! I sure hell don't really want to, but hey windows can charge what they want. 

[DeepRD]

doesn't say which game was played or anything, WUT ? 

Edited 

[Rohith_Kumar_Sp]

That's beside the point, as a consumer I want AMD to grow their share in the gaming market. Otherwise Nvidia can just charge what they want for me to purchase their product. Like windows, who the hell whats to pay 130 AUD for win 8.1?! I sure hell don't really want to, but hey windows can charge what they want. 

you can't force people to buy something they don't seem deserve buying, if you want AMD to grow thier share, may be release new cards once a year instead of rebranding their cards from the last 3 years ?, and you also need to understand AMD is not jsut GPU, the also do CPU

[Bsmith]

Haven't seen that since BF4...

 

and let looks up the benches of BF4 with the fury, 980Ti and 295x2.

well looks at that! the fury X isn't performing that good at it, well.... guess a AMD title doesnt save the fury X.

 

[AlwaysFSX]

You can choose to run PhysX on CPU or GPU with Nvidia. Regardless of whether you have an Intel or AMD CPU. Check in your Nvidia Control Center.

Do have to make a note here, not in Project Cars you cannot. It strictly runs on the CPU.

 

That's beside the point, as a consumer I want AMD to grow their share in the gaming market. Otherwise Nvidia can just charge what they want for me to purchase their product. Like windows, who the hell whats to pay 130 AUD for win 8.1?! I sure hell don't really want to, but hey windows can charge what they want. 

Better products sell, can you understand that concept? AMD threw their money down a toilet and is paying dearly for it, so now they're resorting to placing blame on others when it's them who fucked up.

[LegacyStijncat]

physx doesn't run on AMD

[Nexxus]

PhysX is nvidia's technology for the physics processing to be put on the gpu. Only amd cards run the physics on CPU. From what I've heard AMD generally run poorly compared to similarly spec gpu over on green team. I dont actually know however since I run a 980 in my system, never owned a AMD card in my life.

Ya wanna try that again?

Let me add I have a second card that CAN and DOES get used from time to time as deadicated phyx duty..odd that nvidia drivers would force physx onto the CPU in this case no?

[DeepRD]

To be honest the difference is almost negligible. AMD doesn't have the capital to produce, so they go with the cheap route of whining and complaining to get people on their side.

AMD put ALOT of money in APU (which was a total waste) and they also now put ALOT of money into HBM (looking GOOD). AMD do have to capital to do their business. The only reason their GPU are budget friendly is because it is a refresh not a new architecture 

[Rohith_Kumar_Sp]

Edited 

that's it? one benchmark graphs for one game ? 

[AlwaysFSX]

AMD put ALOT of money in APU (which was a total waste) and they also now put ALOT of money into HBM (looking GOOD). AMD do have to capital to do their business. The only reason their GPU are budget friendly is because it is a refresh not a new architecture 

AMD put a lot of money in to buying companies they shouldn't have. Not their R&D "lookie at what we did" crap.

[LegacyStijncat]

NVIDIA IS A GRAPHICS COMPANY

 

AMD IS A MICROPROCESSOR COMPANY

This is correct, but also wrong.

Keep in mind, AMD is not a renamed ATI. AMD bought ATI. AMD's people have always worked for CPU's, while ATI's people still work for graphic cards, just under another name.

[DeepRD]

But seriously, do people really support a monopolization of the market? Do people really want nvidia to be the only choice we have in the future?

[Real_PhillBert]

I think a bunch of people are blaming Nvidia for AMD's lower R&D budget.

 

Nvidia simply has a lot more money to throw at a new GPU design than AMD does, as a result the AMD cards upper limits are usually lower. To be honest I have been very impressed with how competitive AMD has been given their budget.

 

If you really want to see AMD increase performance and catch up with Nvidias market share, buy AMD products and stock. This will give them a bit more money to develop future products. 

[DeepRD]

Do people really want nvidia to be the the only choice we can make in the future? Because all I am seeing in future builds in Intel & Nvidia. (Maybe not intel since last 3 gen of cpu have been really similar)

[minibois]

But seriously, do people really support a monopolization of the market? Do people really want nvidia to be the only choice we have in the future?

Of course I do. I would love to get ripped off and pay 600 dollars for a GTX 960

[AlwaysFSX]

But seriously, do people really support a monopolization of the market? Do people really want nvidia to be the only choice we have in the future?

Yes. I'm going to buy a good product, not something sub par. If that leads to monopolization then there's only one entity to blame; the one that produces a sub par product.

[Rohith_Kumar_Sp]

But seriously, do people really support a monopolization of the market? Do people really want nvidia to be the only choice we have in the future?

no one really wants that, you can't blame people for AMD not trying. doesnt mean i am going to buy a product that's not worth its competitor. 

[AlwaysFSX]

no one really wants that, you can't blame people for AMD not trying. doesnt mean i am going to buy a product that's not worth its competitor. 

For example, the 980 Ti is faster than the Fury X at the same price. Which are you going to go with? The choice is obvious with bias aside.

[DeepRD]

Yes. I'm going to buy a good product, not something sub par. If that leads to monopolization then there's only one entity to blame; the one that produces a sub par product.

I think AMD has done a fine job with their GPU. Reminding that I have been on green team since forever. But AMD have squeezed more performance out of an older architecture which took nvidia at least 2 generations of architecture to reach. the 390 is still a competitive card.

 

The fury X if you watch hardware chuncks beats the titan X in 4k at more optimised games. TBH I think linus's graphs are a bit dodgy. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rfCb6oiJ6EI

[typographie]

Nvidia has been hard at work advertising gameworks and not allowing AMD to optimise their games on their hardware. A good example being Project Cars which is integrated with PhysX [and somewhat witcher 3]. What do you guys think about their aggressive marketing? I personally think we need to stop nvidia's monopolization. Also note, I am a nvidia user, loving shadowplay.

 

You aren't really talking about a monopoly, you're talking about Nvidia's strategy to set their product apart from AMD's and attempt to provide additional value beyond the benchmark figures. A monopoly is whole market dominance by a single supplier, which is not even remotely close to the situation. AMD sponsors game development too, and frequently AMD hardware performs better in those titles than it should. AMD also has it's own proprietary features, some of which are cross-platform and some are not.

 

I think if Batman Arkham Knight teaches us anything, it's that Nvidia has far less control over these products than the paranoia and conspiracy theories would suggest. That game doesn't even seem to have SLI working at launch. Most people can forget about using the GameWorks features in it.

[exyia]

This is correct, but also wrong.

Keep in mind, AMD is not a renamed ATI. AMD bought ATI. AMD's people have always worked for CPU's, while ATI's people still work for graphic cards, just under another name.

 

and ATi was bought to develop chipsets for their CPU's. They were not bought for their graphics department. They just merely exist because they're at least successful enough to not be worth shutting down. AMD did not buy them just to do a "hey let's make GPU's too"