GeForce Partner Program Impacts Consumer Choice

ChadD

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Feb 8, 2016
Messages
4,759
I been holding off like a lot of other people I don't really wanna buy second hand. Having said that I'm a big Linux guy and spend many hours gaming under Linux. I have stuck with NV the last few generations mainly because their Linux drivers are solid. (even though they are closed sourced). I was already leaning going back to AMD soon anyway due to their continued support for open standards and the fact that they have 100% completely open sourced their drivers at this point, even for new standards such as Vulcan. This story pretty much puts it over the top for me. It sounds like my next GPU will not be a "gaming" board... but I guess in most cases that simply means the card won't look as pretty. lol :)
 

gunbust3r

Gawd
Joined
Dec 12, 2004
Messages
900
Look at this as an excuse for us to get more l33t gaming brands like AORUS with a cool iron pumping bro eagle/chicken mascot!
 

ChadD

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Feb 8, 2016
Messages
4,759
Half joking... half serious.

Perhaps this would be a good opportunity for AMD to launch an insane over the top silly brand and sign all the vendors up to produce cards under it.

An Extreme Entertainment brand. Basically hype the gaming aspect while never ever using the words game, gamer, gaming. lol

It sounds like they are going to be forced to do that... but perhaps they should just own it and make the brand so insanely silly that it makes people ask why are they calling their gaming line "Maximal leisure Accelerators". Hire a team of comics to come up with all the marketing jargon. Make the mascot ATI ruby but in business attire. lmao
 

FrgMstr

Just Plain Mean
Staff member
Joined
May 18, 1997
Messages
50,340
So what has happened with the gaming-market these 2 decades that Microsoft dominates it ? Has gaming been destroyed all these years? i don't know about you, but personally, my years as a gamer have been great , even with only 1 OS and only 1 API dominating the gaming-market for decades! :pompous:.
The free-market auto-adjusts herself if a certain-need arises. If gamers weren't pleased by the games produced under DirectX, the sales would go down and a new API would eventually arise !!
If AMD can not stand the rules of the free-market, then it will be bought-out, just like AMD herself has bought-out ATI in the past.
Why haven't we protected ATI as well ? or 3dfx before them? Why only AMD needs constant protection while all the others don't ?
IF there is a certain law that is being violated with this GPProgram, then let the law-system apply the proper fines, .... BUT.... if it doesn't , well personally i won't support a company only because it can't withstand the free-market rules. That's not a valid argument, at least not an argument that concerns me as a customer.
Uh...OK.
 

777

Limp Gawd
Joined
Nov 8, 2015
Messages
143
So what has happened with the gaming-market these 2 decades that Microsoft dominates it ? Has gaming been destroyed all these years? i don't know about you, but personally, my years as a gamer have been great , even with only 1 OS and only 1 API dominating the gaming-market for decades! :pompous:.
The free-market auto-adjusts herself if a certain-need arises. If gamers weren't pleased by the games produced under DirectX, the sales would go down and a new API would eventually arise !!
If AMD can not stand the rules of the free-market, then it will be bought-out, just like AMD herself has bought-out ATI in the past.
Why haven't we protected ATI as well ? or 3dfx before them? Why only AMD needs constant protection while all the others don't ?
IF there is a certain law that is being violated with this GPProgram, then let the law-system apply the proper fines, .... BUT.... if it doesn't , well personally i won't support a company only because it can't withstand the free-market rules. That's not a valid argument, at least not an argument that concerns me as a customer.
Okay there horrible analogy guy. We'll all be waiting here for a someone with billions deep pockets to join in a fight where there's no guarantee of success against an entrenched competitor. That's assuming Nvidia isn't the one doing the buying out. Let's just toss your piss poor OS analogy into the trash and use a closer one involving CPU's. I didn't enjoy paying over $300 for a quad core for the better part of a decade but perhaps you did. Hooray free market. Let us all serve.
 

Imhotep

Gawd
Joined
Feb 12, 2014
Messages
815
Something tells me that intel will be joining the GPU gaming market. Nvidia would not try so hard to corner it that way. Kuduri jumping ship is the hint here we may all have been missing .
 

Gideon

2[H]4U
Joined
Apr 13, 2006
Messages
2,728
So what has happened with the gaming-market these 2 decades that Microsoft dominates it ? Has gaming been destroyed all these years? i don't know about you, but personally, my years as a gamer have been great , even with only 1 OS and only 1 API dominating the gaming-market for decades! :pompous:.
The free-market auto-adjusts herself if a certain-need arises. If gamers weren't pleased by the games produced under DirectX, the sales would go down and a new API would eventually arise !!
If AMD can not stand the rules of the free-market, then it will be bought-out, just like AMD herself has bought-out ATI in the past.
Why haven't we protected ATI as well ? or 3dfx before them? Why only AMD needs constant protection while all the others don't ?
IF there is a certain law that is being violated with this GPProgram, then let the law-system apply the proper fines, .... BUT.... if it doesn't , well personally i won't support a company only because it can't withstand the free-market rules. That's not a valid argument, at least not an argument that concerns me as a customer.
Vulkan has proven to be much better then directx so that market dominance has come at the cost of actual performance.
 

Sith'ari

Gawd
Joined
Oct 13, 2013
Messages
573
Okay there horrible analogy guy. We'll all be waiting here for a someone with billions deep pockets to join in a fight where there's no guarantee of success against an entrenched competitor. That's assuming Nvidia isn't the one doing the buying out. Let's just toss your piss poor OS analogy into the trash and use a closer one involving CPU's. I didn't enjoy paying over $300 for a quad core for the better part of a decade but perhaps you did. Hooray free market. Let us all serve.
For good or bad the rules of the free-market apply. If you want to change them , then we must change them for everybody, not for AMD especially, that's what i'm saying.
 

Sith'ari

Gawd
Joined
Oct 13, 2013
Messages
573
Vulkan has proven to be much better then directx so that market dominance has come at the cost of actual performance.
exactly, if VULCAN is helping for a better gaming-design, then the market will auto-adjust herself , short-term or long-term.
 

FrgMstr

Just Plain Mean
Staff member
Joined
May 18, 1997
Messages
50,340
exactly, if VULCAN is helping for a better gaming-design, then the market will auto-adjust herself , short-term or long-term.
You are reaching razor1-like levels with you continuously posting and reposting your already expressed opinions. This is not the GPU forum and you will not monopolize the thread about our GPP story as your own soapbox for your thoughts and opinions. Consider this your warning.
 

ChadD

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Feb 8, 2016
Messages
4,759
For good or bad the rules of the free-market apply. If you want to change them , then we must change them for everybody, not for AMD especially, that's what i'm saying.
I don't wanna get into some silly legal back and forth (again). Free markets are not anything goes... there are and always have been actual rules. The laws that appear to be at issue in this case protect ALL companies in a free market not just AMD. There is no need to change any laws... the laws making what NV doing illegal are on the books in pretty much every first world free market country in the world.
 

Dan_D

Extremely [H]
Joined
Feb 9, 2002
Messages
56,713
Gary Lang in Mchenry, IL has GM (Buick, Cadillac, Chevy, GMC) Kia, Mitsu and Subaru. They're in bed with quite a few MFRs.
This is why I said "rearely." Randall Noe in Terrell Texas is the same way. However, these are the exception, not the rule. I was using this example to make a point.
 

Algrim

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jun 1, 2016
Messages
1,696
Perhaps because of the fucking the AMD received at the hands of Intel, which they fought in court... and won, but still have never been paid for by Intel, they're trying different avenues instead of getting fucked, continue to get fucked while the lawsuits happen, and then remain fucked when they can just dick around and not pay the judgement.
This has been debunked before. Intel has paid AMD and SEC filings confirm it. Intel has not paid the EU fine yet, to the EU. AMD has no further funds incoming from Intel in regard to this settled history.
 

FrgMstr

Just Plain Mean
Staff member
Joined
May 18, 1997
Messages
50,340
Reached out to Intel this morning....which I have been blacklisted with for quite a while. They have had issue with my Intel CPU reviews in the past and "cut us off."

Hi, Kyle

Thanks for the note – I’m responding on behalf of Ben. We don’t have any comment on this.

Best

Will
Intel Corporate Relations
 

Zarathustra[H]

Fully [H]
Joined
Oct 29, 2000
Messages
30,720
Sadly, this is not surprising at all.

Nvidia has pursued one borderline illegal violation of the Sherman Act after another using their market dominance position to attempt to lock in board partners and consumers through such efforts as:

- Game Works essentially bribing developers to develop and optimize for GeForce boards at the exclusion of other designs by providing the software and development expertise at the onset of the development, locking key features to GeForce boards, and thus harming competitors,

- G-Sync, by understanding that consumers buy monitors seldomly, and GPU's more frequently attempting to lock consumers into their GPU's by coming out with a adaptive refresh standard that only works with Nvidia products.

- And now GPP.

Lets be very clear here. There is nothing wrong or illegal about a company gaining a monopoly or a strong market dominance through merit. Where it becomes a violation of the Sherman Act is when said company uses their market dominance in a market to either force themselves to become dominant in another market, or to preserve their market dominance in that same market. IMHO, the latter is exactly what Nvidia has been doing with Game Works, G-Sync and now GPP.

It reminds me a lot of the B.S. Intel pulled when they damned near killed off AMD, and the shit that Microsoft pulled that got them in such trouble with Antitrust regulators in the 90's and ealr 2000's.

I just wish I could vote with my wallet and buy a sufficiently fast GPU from AMD, but AMD doesn't sell that GPU, which is exactly why actions like these are illegal.

It seems to me this is a pretty clear violation of the Sherman Act. What I don't understand is why there isn't more aggressive enforcement of these antitrust measures. If anyone can explain this to me, I'd love to hear it.
 
Last edited:

Master_shake_

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Apr 9, 2012
Messages
13,265
They are selling under Nvidia's brand, it's called "geforce" and it's in big letters on the box.

Nvidia has 70% of the market and they have brand recognition, which comes back to the only real reason do this, is to try and fuck AMD over and create a monopoly by forcing AMD out by creating a situation that for all intents and purposes forces AIB's and OEM's to not advertise AMD in their gaming brands.
How much of that 70 percent was people buying a gpu and getting an Nvidia card when they meant to get an AMD card because of confusing packaging?

:ROFLMAO:
 

Stoly

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jul 26, 2005
Messages
6,714
The more I read about this, the more I feel like its much ado about nothing.

If OEMs/Distributors had issues they have been probably ironed out by nvidia. I'm pretty sure every current partner will enter the program and keep doing business as usual.
 

FrgMstr

Just Plain Mean
Staff member
Joined
May 18, 1997
Messages
50,340
The more I read about this, the more I feel like its much ado about nothing.

If OEMs/Distributors had issues they have been probably ironed out by nvidia. I'm pretty sure every current partner will enter the program and keep doing business as usual.
But business as usual has not meant turning over your company's gaming brand exclusively to NVIDIA or be excluded from many marketing benefits previously afforded with MDF being the highlight on that list.
 

ChadD

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Feb 8, 2016
Messages
4,759
Well if at least ASUS and MSI have no problem doing that, why should I care? Do you really think the consumer cares if a card is ROG, AORUS, BlackHawk or Humpty Dumpty XPS Turbo?

You know?, Asus could actually come up with a NEW gaming brand for solely nvidia and keep say ROG exclusively for AMD... Food for thought...
Don't think your understanding the issue. If Asus signs on with the alleged wording of these contracts NO they can not. They can not have a gaming brand featuring anything other the NV parts.

Do you really think a company like NV would draw up a contract that actually says NV is your only "Gaming" brand supplier now >.< and not word it so companies couldn't simply spin ROG Red.

A brand featuring AMD from a company with such a contract could not be marketed as a "gaming" product >.< That is the part that makes it unethical and likely illegal.
 

Stoly

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jul 26, 2005
Messages
6,714
Don't think your understanding the issue. If Asus signs on with the alleged wording of these contracts NO they can not. They can not have a gaming brand featuring anything other the NV parts.

Do you really think a company like NV would draw up a contract that actually says NV is your only "Gaming" brand supplier now >.< and not word it so companies couldn't simply spin ROG Red.

A brand featuring AMD from a company with such a contract could not be marketed as a "gaming" product >.< That is the part that makes it unethical and likely illegal.
Well since we don't know the wording of the contract, we don't know who is wright or wrong.
 

gunbust3r

Gawd
Joined
Dec 12, 2004
Messages
900
I wonder if the marketing people who dreamed this up are same ones at Nvidia who regularly venture into the shade with questionable sweepstakes/giveaways that are actually lotteries like the "Shot With GeForce GTX” NVIDIA Ansel Contest" where buying Ghost Recon Wildlands was required to be eligible for consideration.
 

d8lock

Gawd
Joined
Feb 12, 2012
Messages
684
I wonder if the marketing people who dreamed this up are same ones at Nvidia who regularly venture into the shade with questionable sweepstakes/giveaways that are actually lotteries like the "Shot With GeForce GTX” NVIDIA Ansel Contest" where buying Ghost Recon Wildlands was required to be eligible for consideration.
I imagine the people that came up with this ride around town shooting fireworks at people.
 

illli

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Oct 26, 2005
Messages
1,319
I never was that thrilled with the "The Way It's Meant to be Played " program they had. Of course I had no proof, but my hunch was NV paid off developers or "donated" for them to program for NV products while that extra $$$ "encouraging" them to not really do much for AMD products. Now... a company like NV dictates how a reseller (which spent time and money creating and marketing a brand) uses their brand? That just doesn't seem right at all.
 

wuzupfoo

Limp Gawd
Joined
May 11, 2010
Messages
320
It seems to me this is a pretty clear violation of the Sherman Act. What I don't understand is why there isn't more aggressive enforcement of these antitrust measures. If anyone can explain this to me, I'd love to hear it.
Thats an easy question... money.... Big corps can sign big campaign checks... I haven't seen another theory/reason to explain so nicely but maybe im being too cynical.
 

FrgMstr

Just Plain Mean
Staff member
Joined
May 18, 1997
Messages
50,340
Did these AIB/OEM have access to MDF and the other perks prior to GPP? Additionally, does the lack of MDF or “high effort engineering engagement” really hurt companies like Asus, MSI or Gigabyte? If something crucial like board allocation was being withheld then it would certainly be an issue but in the article you wrote it said it wasn’t directly spelled out in GPP but more of a wink and nod which sounds more like a rumor than anything concrete (if they are then they deserve to be sued).

Anyway, I’m bored of this topic so I’ll excuse myself from it.
I would suggest yes, and yes.
 

anon2020

n00b
Joined
Jul 28, 2017
Messages
14
Do you know what watering down a brand is. Its very common and happens quite often. Its poor marketing. Companies shouldn't put two competitors products and have them under the same umbrella for both. This is a no no and is bad advertising.

https://www.fisiononline.com/blog/brand-watered-down-brand-management/

I have worked in advertising only a short stint and many years ago, but this is one of the first things you never do when it comes to branding products specially if they aren't your products. The rules and guidelines are always DICTATED by the product owners. ]
Except what Nvidia supplies is not a stand alone consumer product, it is a part. AIBs put in a ton of engineering, R&D, marketing money etc. to make the final product, the graphics card, different from their competitors. It would be like Michelin going to Porsche, Ferrari, Lamborghini, etc asking for a separate brand every time one of their cars uses another brand of tire.
 

rgMekanic

[H]ard|News
Joined
May 13, 2013
Messages
4,916
Except what Nvidia supplies is not a stand alone consumer product, it is a part. AIBs put in a ton of engineering, R&D, marketing money etc. to make the final product, the graphics card, different from their competitors. It would be like Michelin going to Porsche, Ferrari, Lamborghini, etc asking for a separate brand every time one of their cars uses another brand of tire.
Thats a good analogy, "We want all of your "sports" and "performance" cars to only have Michelin tires.. you can sell sell Pirelli, but they have to be for something else"
 

MarkVI

Limp Gawd
Joined
Sep 30, 2014
Messages
209
So what has happened with the gaming-market these 2 decades that Microsoft dominates it ? Has gaming been destroyed all these years? i don't know about you, but personally, my years as a gamer have been great , even with only 1 OS and only 1 API dominating the gaming-market for decades! :pompous:.
The free-market auto-adjusts herself if a certain-need arises. If gamers weren't pleased by the games produced under DirectX, the sales would go down and a new API would eventually arise !!
If AMD can not stand the rules of the free-market, then it will be bought-out, just like AMD herself has bought-out ATI in the past.
Why haven't we protected ATI as well ? or 3dfx before them? Why only AMD needs constant protection while all the others don't ?
IF there is a certain law that is being violated with this GPProgram, then let the law-system apply the proper fines, .... BUT.... if it doesn't , well personally i won't support a company only because it can't withstand the free-market rules. That's not a valid argument, at least not an argument that concerns me as a customer.
The free market isn't some magical balancing force. It works when you have many options, it fails when you don't. When you're dealing with a scenario with very few players often consumers are left with little or no choice. When consumers' only choices are buy from company X or vacate the market, we all lose. Think about ISPs. Does ANYONE like Comcast? By your logic, they should have gone under years ago. Likewise, if NVIDIA is allowed to pull this anti-competitive crap, it weakens AMD and leaves you with the options of buy NVIDIA or don't play games.

It blows my mind that you could toss out MS dominating the gaming market as proof that a monopoly is a good thing. Where do I even start...
 

10e

2[H]4U
Joined
Jul 20, 2006
Messages
3,383
First off I want to thank Kyle for bringing our attention to this breaking story at his own personal and financial peril.

Now, I feel that nVidia has overstepped their boundaries on this one. They provide ONE component of the PC gaming or graphics experience, the GPU with associated software. They don't provide motherboards, chips, chipsets, disks, cases, keyboards, mice or monitors. Dictating what their partners (who are part and parcel of their success) can call "gaming" or any other implied enthusiast grade component is a pretty lousy practice. It's bad enough for Asus, MSI or Gigabyte but what about vendors like EVGA who have put most of their eggs in the proverbial green basket? If they don't sign on, they are screwed.

nVidia NEEDS AMD and Intel to provide CPUs, other vendors to provide RAM, motherboards etc... Will they provide marketing funds for Asus or MSI to re-brand their AMD or Intel based products as "Pro" or "enthusiast" for packaging or labeling efforts? Will they provide transitioning program money or efforts to aid their business partners for them to "unGame" their other products?

I would probably assume a "no" answer to this question.

In addition, why does nVidia feel that the PC experience is only about MOAR FPS and gaming? Isn't the PC market more sophisticated than this? Even Kyle himself has argued that for us to become a more enlightened crowd we need to look at the PC gaming experience more closely than just benchmark numbers.

As someone who has been building custom PCs for nearly 30 years, I find that this sounds like a broken record, but is nVidia really that arrogant and self-involved that they believe that they can put on paper, what even Intel would not do (and they still got caught)?

This isn't about AMD and Intel versus nVidia. This is about nVidia trying to wrest control of the market for profit and, through collateral implications, stifle competition which hurts consumers.
 

Stoly

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jul 26, 2005
Messages
6,714
nvidia just needs to update the program with NO MINING and everyone will be happy.
 

Uvaman2

2[H]4U
Joined
Jan 4, 2016
Messages
3,143
Well thinking about it, if all it took is that companies can't call AMD Gaming, while complete dirty bullshit on their behalf, it is something AMD can embrace and move forward (while suing).
Add some APIs for desktop acceleration, and boom the AMD Vega Card, with Accelera technology, fastest computer experience in the market.
Gamers will still look for FPS anyway, they will still know what a gaming card is.
 

Stoly

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jul 26, 2005
Messages
6,714
I guess that would explain why no other site has digged in the story themselves, only quoting Kyle's article.

I mean it can't be that hard to get insider info from oem's right? I mean even lousy bloggers and youtubers claim to know people in the industry.

Where's Charlie when you need him? :D:D
 
Top