Nvidia Monopolising the market discussion.

[Grrizz]

I'm willing to bet a judge would force Intel to license it for a dollar. Though Intel needs the x86-64 license from AMD so it would work out.

IIRC the x86-64 licence would continue but the x86 licence is on non-transferable terms so as long as Intel are making use of it I don't think they can be forced to licence it.

[DeepRD]

1. \

   Uhm, yeah.. about that.. IBM owns everything. They survive on patent money alone. If they wanted to they could create every technological product you'd ever want to own, but of course there's the obvious legal problems with that.

   1. And though much older, another tech company with letters for a logo ranked number three: IBM's brand was valued at $112.5 billion. The only other technology company in the top 10 was Microsoft, with an overall brand value of $69.8 billion.May 21, 2013
   2. 1. Samsung now worth $200 billion, but market-cap gap with Apple persists. The world's top maker of televisions and mobile phones has jumped over the $200 billion in market capitalization for the first time. Of course, the excitement surrounding Korea's Samsung Electronics is centered on the mobile phone business.Dec 7, 2012
      2. BAM

That is only samsungs technology devision I believe, not their hospital and engineering and clothing groups

[AlwaysFSX]

IIRC the x86-64 licence would continue but the x86 licence is on non-transferable terms so as long as Intel are making use of it I don't think they can be forced to licence it.

Somehow that's one thing I've never bothered to look in to. Guess it just feels like it'll always be like the way it is and never change.

[AlwaysFSX]

 

1. \

   1. And though much older, another tech company with letters for a logo ranked number three: IBM's brand was valued at $112.5 billion. The only other technology company in the top 10 was Microsoft, with an overall brand value of $69.8 billion.May 21, 2013
   2. 1. Samsung now worth $200 billion, but market-cap gap with Apple persists. The world's top maker of televisions and mobile phones has jumped over the $200 billion in market capitalization for the first time. Of course, the excitement surrounding Korea's Samsung Electronics is centered on the mobile phone business.Dec 7, 2012
      2. BAM

That is only samsungs technology devision I believe, not their hospital and engineering and clothing groups

 

IBM. Owns. Everything. There's some tech out there, I'm willing to bet there's some thinkforce from IBM behind it.

[Grrizz]

Somehow that's one thing I've never bothered to look in to. Guess it just feels like it'll always be like the way it is and never change.

Yea honestly I don't see AMD going anywhere, its in both Nvidia and Intels best interests to keep them around from what I can tell.

[typographie]

They could continue to operate but their pricing would be controlled by the respective governments though if they were found to be unfair.

 

Well, sure, fair point. But similarly that's a fate Nvidia would avoid at all costs. Imagine what that would do to their stock price alone, to say nothing of their actual profitability.

 

 

The bigger issue if that happened is they would loose their x86 licence and Intel would have an instant monopoly on the x86 CPU market.

 

http://www.kitguru.net/components/graphic-cards/anton-shilov/amd-x86-license-agreement-with-intel-cannot-block-our-merger-or-acquisition/

Intel relies on that agreement for certain AMD licenses (probably AMD64) just as AMD relies on Intel for x86. AMD's own statements on it are optimistic, at least. It sounds like they would probably be able to work out the details with Intel such that the deal remained in place, should an acquisition be attempted.

[AlwaysFSX]

Yea honestly I don't see AMD going anywhere, its in both Nvidia and Intels best interests to keep them around from what I can tell.

That's the reason why Nvida has been crippling all their cards for the past couple of generations. The Titan and 780 Ti are pretty much the same thing that was in the 680, and there's quite a performance gap between those. Nvidia could have just outright released the full fledged things when the 600 series launched and killed AMD outright.

[Suika]

I don't feel like buying a subpar product k thx.

 

AMD releases something good, I'll be buying that something good. Haven't seen anything that tickles my fancy yet.

[Grrizz]

Well, sure, fair point. But similarly that's a fate Nvidia would avoid at all costs. Imagine what that would do to their stock price alone, to say nothing of their actual profitability.

 

 

 

http://www.kitguru.net/components/graphic-cards/anton-shilov/amd-x86-license-agreement-with-intel-cannot-block-our-merger-or-acquisition/

Intel relies on that agreement for certain AMD licenses (probably AMD64) just as AMD relies on Intel for x86. AMD's own statements on it are optimistic, at least. It sounds like they would probably be able to work out the details with Intel such that the deal remained in place, should an acquisition be attempted.

"However, it should be noted that if the cross-license between AMD and Intel is terminated because a party gets acquired by a third company, licenses granted to another party will survive unless that other party gets acquired too (i.e., if AMD is taken over, Intel sustains rights to AMD’s IP)..."

That is the concerning part, the acquiring company would have to bring something new to the table to keep Intel interested because if AMD were to get acquired the acquiring company wouldn't get Intels IP but Intel would retain AMDs IP... of course AMDs in progress/ongoing IP might be enough for Intel to renew the deal with the acquiring company.

Edit: There was a revision to that article the next day, looks like all is well and there is a general misconception about the terms of the agreement;

"Advanced Micro Devices has clarified terms of the cross-license agreement with Intel Corp. on Thursday. As it appears, if either AMD or Intel change their control (i.e., gets acquired), the cross-license agreement between the two companies is automatically terminated for both parties."

"The only scenario under which the cross-license agreement is terminated for only one party is upon a breach of contract."

[ImBleu]

Well people need to stop sucking Nvidia off and being fanboys,

the 970 and 960 ( and to an extent 980 ) are, for the moment, not logically priced for the performance, and people are still buying them and recommending them.

 

I also hate seeing "Made by AMD" or "Made by Nvidia",

and if they do, both companies should be able to get access to the game at the same time. I would imagine it would be anti-competitive to have one company accessing the game early ( a bit as if a racing car manufacturer had access to the race track before )

 

I'm sorry, but no matter what we do, Nvidia will keep it up. Yes I could go buy an R9 Card, but the fact remains that I can't afford several Graphics cards to switch out per game title. I'd still recommend Nvidia GPUs because as more and more games are going for "Nvidia, the way its meant to be played" titles, why buy an AMD GPU knowing you're being screwed. Agressive Marketing? Sure. But I'd rather just buy an Nvidia GPU and not draw the short straw.

[exyia]

Yeah, business wise, but im a selfish prick and dont want them to use software to roadblock AMD so they can charge 300AUD for a 960. I'm sure if I ever run a business, I would want all your money so I can afford these nvidia cards.

 

roadblock????

 

graphics company develops tools to make graphics technology integration easier for game developers - people who did NOT go to school for graphics research

 

game developer doesn't have to spend hundreds of thousands trying to implement graphics technology/design nor spend the time/money to get it to run well. game developers can spend more time on designing....GASP....GAMES. games are cheaper to develop. less game developers run out of money or get shut down. consumers get better....gasp....GAMES

 

OMG HOW HORRIBLE! NVIDIA IS SO ANTI-CONSUMER WITH THEIR DEVELOPMENT TOOLS!

 

a microprocessor company can't accept the fact that their SIDE business of graphics/GPU's isn't up to par with that of a graphics-based company.....so they pout and complain instead of just adopting what's been done so well and focus their attention on their own business strength of microprocessors?

 

...

 

k.....

 

do you even stop to think about how much better off those game developers would be if they just took their programming knowledge elsewhere? do you ever stop to think about how stupid game development is as a career choice?

- innovative gameplay idea

- code the base game engine

- develop concept art and story

- implement art into usable game models

- market game to the public

- polish gameplay

- polish visuals/graphics

- QA test every aspect of the game

- Optimize the game for multiple platforms

 

AND THEN

- Hope it actually sells well enough to not be a flop and a waste of money?

 

you're talking about people that turn this:

 

to this:

 

AND it has to be fun to play? received well? and reasonably priced?

 

ORRRR you could take that programming knowledge and help develop more critical software that people use everyday and pay much more money for?

 

....

 

but you can't see past your narrow minded "wah wah wah, my wallet" consumer view, so....whatever

[MEC-777]

I think too many people make some of these issues out to be something far worse than they actually are. TW3 runs just fine on my R9 290 and so do many other "Nvidia" titles said to be "handicapping" the red team but actually don't.

 

I say look at the actual numbers. Look at the actual in-game performance. Yes, in some, there is sizable difference in performance, but some run just as equally better/worse depending on the game. Where AMD might fall back in one game, Nvidia falls back in another. 

 

From a purely performance stand point (not looking at how many games are Nvidia titles) I don't see the green dominance, aside from the fact that their ultra high-end cards are simply faster/more powerful. 

[Rohith_Kumar_Sp]

 

From a purely performance stand point (not looking at how many games are Nvidia titles) I don't see the green dominance, aside from the fact that their ultra high-end cards are simply faster/more powerful. 

it's the 2nd best concept, people look at benchmarks, and but the next lower tired card from that company. 

[MEC-777]

it's the 2nd best concept, people look at benchmarks, and buy the next lower tired card from that company. 

 

That's kind of an odd way to do it. It makes more sense to look at performance comparisons of the actual cards you're looking to buy.

 

"Wow that 980Ti is really fast. Guess I'll buy the 970 instead of the R9 390." :blink:  wut? 

[Rohith_Kumar_Sp]

That's kind of an odd way to do it. It makes more sense to look at performance comparisons of the actual cards you're looking to buy.

 

"Wow that 980Ti is really fast. Guess I'll buy the 970 instead of the R9 390." :blink:  wut? 

oh you have no idea how many of my friends who aren't into PC looks at all the benchmarks and see the nvidia tops them and insists on buying nvidia card which they can afford, not everyone knows the PC industry like we do, i tried to convince him to get an R9290 which had 4 gigs, but nope, he insisted on getting nvidia after seeing those batman game works video, there are people who just look at the benchmarks and see who's in the lead and buy those cards, it happens, whether we like it or not. 

[KWelz]

The irony of this whole argument is that the founder of Nvidia was an engineer or designer at AMD

[Trik'Stari]

The irony of this whole argument is that the founder of Nvidia was an engineer or designer at AMD

Was he?

[db87]

Most often Gameworks get's added at a very late time. Far Cry 4 version 1.0.0 for example didn't have tessellation and FUR (hairworks). Also the ambient lightning was altered and optimized at 1.0.1 (day one patch). So even if AMD had access to version 1.0.0 prior to the release they couldn't optimize what wasn't there yet...

 

We also have to realize that games sometimes get rushed to meet the release date. Nvidia has only given a few weeks to add the GameWorks features and also forwards that version to their driverteam for optimization. In such occasion AMD gets the retail version just days prior to release. That's means that AMD is at least 3 weeks behind Nvidia. AMD then releases a beta driver within two weeks after the release.

 

 

Also Nvidia argues that Gameworks sourcecode is available for the game developer. While that's true the game developer is prohibited to share that to third parties like AMD. This makes Gameworks a black box for AMD.

[KWelz]

Was he?

 

I had to go double check my facts.   I was mostly right.  

 

One of three founders was a Microprocessor designer for AMD.  He left there and helped start Nvidia, where he is now CEO.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jen-Hsun_Huang

[Trik'Stari]

I had to go double check my facts.   I was mostly right.  

 

One of three founders was a Microprocessor designer for AMD.  He left there and helped start Nvidia, where he is now CEO.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jen-Hsun_Huang

Damn, that is ironic.

[KemoKa]

 *rolls eyes* Give me strength... Look, we've had this conversation time and time again. Despite the possibility that AMD may someday go under, there is no risk of a monopoly on graphics processors as long as everyone else does their job. Antitrust laws forbid monopolies (and come on, guys, Nvidia is not Comcast), and anyway, if AMD were to die, someone else would immediately take up the mantle (hurr hurr), be it Qualcomm, ARM, Samsung or Intel. We don't know who, but someone will take over.
 

Can we leave it at that please?

Ah, what was I thinking...?

[kipper]

Go fuck a donkey, i run all my Batman Arkham games fine on a full AMD platform, and it has TWIMTBP all over the shot.

 

[Foxxer]

-snip-

LOL!

[Dzzope]

I had to go double check my facts.   I was mostly right.  

 

One of three founders was a Microprocessor designer for AMD.  He left there and helped start Nvidia, where he is now CEO.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jen-Hsun_Huang

But well before AMD bought ATI...

[Arty]

Thier is no reason to Split Nivida if AMD diseappears i don't understand that logic

the only time i would see the need to split a company if thier a monoply is if they balls to the walls jack prices up.