AMD's official "eff you GPP" response: A Gamer's Choice

[leadeater]

8 minutes ago, Humbug said:

They do. Execution and delivering it is not so easy...

Well I know they could do it if they wanted to, caveat being losing money on the product however I think the long term gain far outweighs it. If AMD came out with a card that had gaming performance double that of a 1080 Ti but costs 4 times the price it would still sell and even if they didn't sell a single card the image gain would be worth it.

 

Titan V is a good example, how many gamers actually have that card and how many gamers talk about that card.

 

Titan V is a stupid graphics card (buy the Tesla or Quadro)

Bugatti Veyron was a stupid car

Concorde was a stupid plane

 

Set a benchmark and you'll forever be talked about and measured up to until you are beaten.

[AlTech]

10 hours ago, Ryan_Vickers said:

I read the whole AMD page and I honestly don't know what this is or why they have announced it

 

Edit: just watched that video and now I'm even more confused and slightly offput by this

To me it looks like a press release acknowledging the GPP's existence and how much of a bully Nvidia is.

[AlTech]

8 hours ago, Ryan_Vickers said:

As I said, everyone (well, most people I think) are aware of the recent rebrands under GPP - they see what's happened and totally understand the position AMD is in.  They don't need to explain themselves or ask for attention or anything.  But they have, and my impression of how they've done that is not a "this is what happened to us", but almost like a cover up, like "yes, we've chosen to rebrand, this was all our idea" as if people will actually believe that.  Again, that's just my impression, and it's very strange.  I don't like it.

The thing is most people probably don't know AMD nearly as well as they know Nvidia. So even if they knew about the GPP, they might not know that there are other options out there.

[AlTech]

1 hour ago, leadeater said:

there are a lot of people that would actually pay more for an AMD GPU that is actually faster even if the price makes zero sense.

There are?

 

20 minutes ago, leadeater said:

snip

Right now GCN has a problem though.

 

On a Single GPU, they can't make anything lwith more than 64 CUs which is why Navi is going to be scalable (Think Turning GCN GPU turning into Ryzen CCXs but with only graphics hardware).

[leadeater]

32 minutes ago, AluminiumTech said:

There are?

Sales of Vega FE weren't exactly low if you need a good indicator and that was a performance inferior product too. If it's truly well and above faster people that buy performance crowns will buy it not just supporters of AMD.

 

32 minutes ago, AluminiumTech said:

Right now GCN has a problem though.

I mean they could do a completely new architecture, money and ROI is what's stopping them but if they throw ROI out as a requirement almost anything can be done, see examples I gave (other than Titan V).

[SpaceGhostC2C]

2 hours ago, laminutederire said:

Oh well it was taken my bad. Didn't knew about this line from G Skill (how old is it by the way?)

I know they used it till late DDR3, but I'm not sure if they ever used it in DDR4. They seem to have gone for more Xs and Zs instead  

[Valentyn]

1 hour ago, leadeater said:

Titan V is a good example, how many gamers actually have that card and how many gamers talk about that card.

 

Titan V is a stupid graphics card (buy the Tesla or Quadro)

Bugatti Veyron was a stupid car

Concorde was a stupid plane

 

How dare you! *covers baby's ears*; he was talking about about someone else.

[M300843499]

Just waiting for AMD to go down and Walmart to go into graphics business.

 

GGXXZP 12GB 2860 CORE GPU with Macaroni Cheese.

[laminutederire]

38 minutes ago, SpaceGhostC2C said:

I know they used it till late DDR3, but I'm not sure if they ever used it in DDR4. They seem to have gone for more Xs and Zs instead  

Those looked old indeed (same will be said about the RGB ram kit of today I guess)

[Misanthrope]

AMD - "We are all about the gamers and choice!"

me - "Is that why you've chosen to release mining specific driver improvements at one fairly crucial point?"

 

Don't let these PR assclowns fool you: AMD would completely walk out of the gaming market if they knew mining was more reliable and long term.

[SpaceGhostC2C]

3 minutes ago, Misanthrope said:

AMD - "We are all about the gamers and choice!"

me - "Is that why you've chosen to release mining specific driver improvements at one fairly crucial point?"

 

I like having the choice between mining and gaming  

[Humbug]

39 minutes ago, Misanthrope said:

AMD would completely walk out of the gaming market if they knew mining was more reliable and long term.

yep, they are a business.. Would suck but it's true.

 

39 minutes ago, Misanthrope said:

AMD - "We are all about the gamers and choice!"

me - "Is that why you've chosen to release mining specific driver improvements at one fairly crucial point?"

They cater to both markets though. There are far more frequent gaming specific optimizations in their drivers.

[Drak3]

14 hours ago, Biggerisbetter said:

I believe AMD is going about this in the wrong way. Due to AMD ryzen popularity I would start phasing out companies like MSI, Asus, and gigabyte from selling their motherboards for ryzen cpus. This would hurt these companies the most and start allowing sapphire and XFX to make motherboards for amd ryzen cpus. 

These companies wouldn't care, Ryzen isn't that popular.

[Ryujin2003]

19 hours ago, lots of unexplainable lag said:

sausy sauce: https://gaming.radeon.com/en/radeon-a-gamers-choice/

 

 

Asus is first with the AREZ lineup live: 

https://www.asus.com/Graphics-Cards/AREZ-Series-Products/

 

So rather than locking in partners with non-industry standard crap and limiting customer choice AMD's all like "hey, we open sourced this stuff, enjoy it". And now they're doing the same with GPU branding, kinda like GPP, but without forcing manufacturers to join in or face the lack of supplies and marketing and whatnot. It's the official and kind "fuck off GPP" response from AMD.

 

"No anti-gamer / anti-competitive strings attached." sums it up best.

Haven't dug through so if this yet, but didn't know if you've seen AMDs video. It even gives an honorable mention to Dell and HP in the TV scene.

 

 

[AlTech]

1 hour ago, leadeater said:

Sales of Vega FE weren't exactly low if you need a good indicator and that was a performance inferior product too. If it's truly well and above faster people that buy performance crowns will buy it not just supporters of AMD.

k.

1 hour ago, leadeater said:

I mean they could do a completely new architecture, money and ROI is what's stopping them but if they throw ROI out as a requirement almost anything can be done, see examples I gave (other than Titan V).

They are working on a replacement for GCN but in the mean time they are working to fix some of GCN's issues by making doing what they did with Ryzen to GPUs.

 

Expect to see multiple GPU dies on the same PCB acting as 1 large GPU in Navi.

1 minute ago, Drak3 said:

These companies wouldn't care, Ryzen isn't that popular.

I would say it is popular. Admitedly not as popular as Coffee Lake but it is still popular.

[Misanthrope]

34 minutes ago, Humbug said:

yep, they are a business.. Would suck but it's true.

My overall point is that if AMD was in Nvidia's position they would absolutely do something very similar to the GPP without hesitation even. You are correct in asserting they're just a business, what bothers me is the fact that the image of the freedom-loving underdog they cultivate it's bullshit yet so many people buy into it.

[GOTSpectrum]

3 hours ago, leadeater said:

Sales of Vega FE weren't exactly low if you need a good indicator and that was a performance inferior product too. If it's truly well and above faster people that buy performance crowns will buy it not just supporters of AMD.

 

I mean they could do a completely new architecture, money and ROI is what's stopping them but if they throw ROI out as a requirement almost anything can be done, see examples I gave (other than Titan V).

AMD has said that Navi will be the last we will see of GCN. They have been working on a replacement on the back burner for some time and now they have money they are going full throttle. 

 

But what exactly would you guys like to see? MCM tech? More pipelines? Radically different processor design(as in the actual stream processors). Isn't GCN actually still really competitive in the compute sector? 

[Razor01]

8 hours ago, Brooksie359 said:

Everything you talk about that people did that was unethical actually isn't in my mind. Most of the hype around Vega and Polaris and basically most of AMD products made by fans and enthusist. Even saying that you have a new technology that could prove to be good isn't unethical and can easily be tested. All of these scenarios you speak of are about a company doing something by themselves to intise consumers to do something. That's what marketing is. But as soon as you start strong arming other companies into doing things because of you market position. That's where the line should be drawn. It's entirely possible that this could be seen as anticompetitive and therefore illegal because it does hurt AMDs ability to compete. It's very similar to what Intel did to them back in the day and they were found guilty of it. Bottom line is that you can't have anticompetitive practices just because you are the market leader. 

 

 

No AMD did a huge amount of the hype.

 

How about Poor Volta? 

 

Wrong you are using legal terms incorrectly, look them up the legal definitions and then try to understand what you don't understand.

 

In my my view hood winking potential customers is much worse than this.

 

That is false adverting lol which is outright illegal!

[Razor01]

8 hours ago, Brooksie359 said:

It is different but I still think they could make a case for it being anticompetitive. 

Again legal terms that you don't understand.

 

Anti competitive, look it up on the FTC site and see if anything nV has done with the GPP even remotely fits into that. 

 

Give you HINT, it doesn't!

 

Throwing words around just because you think are correct doesn't make you correct.

 

Kyle did the same crap in his article, and its BS.  Some times people need  a wake up call when they are ignorant of what they talk about.

 

THERE IS NO anti competitive clause that can go against the 1st amendment which advertising (branding) is covered by.

 

Seriously shit if you live in the US, I would feel pretty sorry for you if you don't understand that.  If you don't then well before you start talking about laws and what not, know what jurisdictions they are going to be in and then figure these things out before you open your mouth.

 

So unless you want to rewrite the 1st amendment, there is Nothing anti competitive about what nV wants.

[laminutederire]

17 minutes ago, Razor01 said:

Seriously shit if you live in the US, I would feel pretty sorry for you if you don't understand that.  If you don't then well before you start talking about laws and what not, know what jurisdictions they are going to be in and then figure these things out before you open your mouth.

Nvidia might be based in the US, their practices should comply everywhere they do business in. Laws in Asia or Europe can be quite different than in the US. That's if you just want to look at final consumers.

Asus, Gigabyte and MSI for instance are all based in Taiwan, so if Nvidia contracts were to be legal, they'd have to be in the US AND in Taiwan and Chinese laws, otherwise the contracts wouldn't be legally binding.

(And to be fair, we the rest of the world do not care one bit of the US first amendment, for any business taking place in our respective countries.)

What is true is that if US laws do not protect consumers on that, then US consumers are screwed and nobody can do a damn thing about that until the US laws change. What is also true is that if the European Union seems it is not okay, then Nvidia has to abide and stop what it does in Europe. So they cannot force anything on AIB through GPP. And if they decide to cut allocations because of it, then they can get sued in the US for breach of a contract deemed legal in the US. Same goes if China does not recognize this as legal.

Then Nvidia has to either stop selling any product through AIB in all areas where it is not legal, or they have to let AIB do whatever they want outside of the areas where it is legal.

[pas008]

2 minutes ago, laminutederire said:

Nvidia might be based in the US, their practices should comply everywhere they do business in. Laws in Asia or Europe can be quite different than in the US. That's if you just want to look at final consumers.

Asus, Gigabyte and MSI for instance are all based in Taiwan, so if Nvidia contracts were to be legal, they'd have to be in the US AND in Taiwan and Chinese laws, otherwise the contracts wouldn't be legally binding.

(And to be fair, we the rest of the world do not care one bit of the US first amendment, for any business taking place in our respective countries.)

What is true is that if US laws do not protect consumers on that, then US consumers are screwed and nobody can do a damn thing about that until the US laws change. What is also true is that if the European Union seems it is not okay, then Nvidia has to abide and stop what it does in Europe. So they cannot force anything on AIB through GPP. And if they decide to cut allocations because of it, then they can get sued in the US for breach of a contract deemed legal in the US. Same goes if China does not recognize this as legal.

Then Nvidia has to either stop selling any product through AIB in all areas where it is not legal, or they have to let AIB do whatever they want outside of the areas where it is legal.

aib are just licensed manufacturers of nvidia products not consumers

[Kamjam21xx]

2 hours ago, Misanthrope said:

My overall point is that if AMD was in Nvidia's position they would absolutely do something very similar to the GPP without hesitation even. You are correct in asserting they're just a business, what bothers me is the fact that the image of the freedom-loving underdog they cultivate it's bullshit yet so many people buy into it.

Radeon Prorender

Freesync

TreesFX

Radeon rays

GeometryFX

AoFX

ShadowFX

LiquidVR

Firerays

Firerender

Rapidfire

Radeon open compute

 

All open source from AMD, and theres probably more i dont know about. their professional cards make way more sense to buy money and speed wise for most single users. Theyre a great company. 

 

Cuda cores might not be special anymore. if it wasnt for nvidia leaving everything closed source , i would have no incentive to buy a workstation card from them at all. https://gpuopen.com/compute-product/hip-convert-cuda-to-portable-c-code/

 

Fyi ill never buy an nvidia card, ill let my girlfriend get one. But i dont like what they do, and wont help them do it.

 

[Razor01]

12 minutes ago, laminutederire said:

Nvidia might be based in the US, their practices should comply everywhere they do business in. Laws in Asia or Europe can be quite different than in the US. That's if you just want to look at final consumers.

Asus, Gigabyte and MSI for instance are all based in Taiwan, so if Nvidia contracts were to be legal, they'd have to be in the US AND in Taiwan and Chinese laws, otherwise the contracts wouldn't be legally binding.

(And to be fair, we the rest of the world do not care one bit of the US first amendment, for any business taking place in our respective countries.)

What is true is that if US laws do not protect consumers on that, then US consumers are screwed and nobody can do a damn thing about that until the US laws change. What is also true is that if the European Union seems it is not okay, then Nvidia has to abide and stop what it does in Europe. So they cannot force anything on AIB through GPP. And if they decide to cut allocations because of it, then they can get sued in the US for breach of a contract deemed legal in the US. Same goes if China does not recognize this as legal.

Then Nvidia has to either stop selling any product through AIB in all areas where it is not legal, or they have to let AIB do whatever they want outside of the areas where it is legal.

Contracts have where the jurisdiction will take place in them.  They will be done here in the US   Its usually done by the party giving the other other party the goods.

 

And the FTC and EU regulatory bodies are different, those aren't bound by the jurisdiction parts of a contract, but EU will look at what happens with the FTC and follow by those guidelines.  This is because EU uses local guidelines where the companies reside in their judgement. 

 

Cutting allocation unless there is a contract in place to give a certain amount of allocation, there is nothing anyone can about that either.  So lets say a new contract is there for next gen cards, which there will be, nV doesn't need offer that to the AIB's if they don't want to.

 

There is no way gov's can force a company to sell to another company unless both companies agreed upon something and there are business obligations that if with held will hurt one of the companies.  If that obligation isn't there to begin with, there is nothing.  This is why nV did this right now because they know their next gen is coming and there is no competition and AIB's if they want all those benefits and proper allocation, they need to be part of GPP.

[laminutederire]

2 minutes ago, Razor01 said:

 

Except it doesn't. The US complies with the Hague conference rules, and so does China (And therefore Taiwan ). That legal body wrote guidelines to promote on international contracts. It is said in article 2 of their 2015 document on principles on choice of law in international commercial contracts, that in a context of a contract between actors of two states, each actor can choose which country a section of the contract can be read in, and this can change at any given time. Therefore, Nvidia can get sued in the US regarding their contract with MSI, a Chinese company, on a section of the contract that MSI decided should be regarded through the prism of Chinese law. Jurisdiction has nothing to do with that principle (It's even said in their document), since jurisdiction only determines which justice entity is responsible for the final decision. Said jurisdiction is determined by something else.

Whether it is drafted in the US or not does not matter, what matters is that it takes place between two bodies from different countries.

 

Those aren't bound by jurisdiction because non compliance with said laws lead to nullify the contract.

 

Retaining allocation is not illegal per se, but threatening to retain some if they do not sign the GPP contract, or retaining as a consequence of not signing it is arguably in the category of abusing their position in the market.

[Razor01]

31 minutes ago, Kamjam21xx said:

Radeon Prorender

Freesync

TreesFX

Radeon rays

GeometryFX

AoFX

ShadowFX

LiquidVR

Firerays

Firerender

Rapidfire

Radeon open compute

 

All open source from AMD, and theres probably more i dont know about. their professional cards make way more sense to buy money and speed wise for most single users. Theyre a great company. 

 

Cuda cores might not be special anymore. if it wasnt for nvidia leaving everything closed source , i would have no incentive to buy a workstation card from them at all. https://gpuopen.com/compute-product/hip-convert-cuda-to-portable-c-code/

 

Fyi ill never buy an nvidia card, ill let my girlfriend get one. But i dont like what they do, and wont help them do it.

 

 

 

You can't convert all CUDA over directly there are features in CUDA and what nV can do with their architectures that don't work on other architectures.  Mostly due to special extensions that are only exposed in CUDA.

 

Also direct translation of one code to another, those things never work well.  Its better if the code is rewritten from scratch.