GeForce Partner Program Impacts Consumer Choice

DTabakov said:
It does not automatically make it legal, however, you have the options is that correct? Correct. Now it is up to you if you want to be in the first and get money or just to sell their GPU's. Perfectly legal, nVidia pay for the branding end of story. At the end of the day it's nVidia's money on the marketing part, but should it be all them? Just think of it like nVidia is your company, and that is it. Also I highly doubt that nVidia lawyers would allow something that will fuck'em up big time with getting sued their pants of off them.
Click to expand...

When a company already has nearly 3/4 of the market and then tells the AIB partners that they can't sell competition parts under their "Gaming" brands anymore or they lose marketing subsidies and inventory priority, you're veering hard toward anti-competitive practices territory.

The choice of:

Keep your 30% of competitor products as is
vs
Jeopardizing your remaining 70%'s supply chain and marketing budget

It isn't really a choice at all.
 
Investors and Lawyers.........

Meanwhile trying to smell the virtual flowers in Divinity Original Sin 2 which has a quest around every corner it seems.
 
Agent_N said:
I think that this is a stupid move on nVidias part, but don’t forget that there are investors behind the scene who want the bottom line to continue increasing so that they can rake in returns on their investments. This could be an underhanded way to try and increase the bottom line to satisfy investors. If nVidia is doing this like some iron fisted dictator wanting a stranglehold on the market then this is disgraceful and I refuse to knowingly support such business practices.
Click to expand...

Their meteoric stock rise needs propped up. Getting greedy has risks. But if they can hamper AMDs resurgence it's likely well worth the lawsuits. AMD likely wouldn't survive another Intel-level screwing. So they pay a few billion to whatever company buys AMD out in a few years and become the sole provider of high performance GPUs. It's not a terrible strategy is you DGAF.
 
And [H] continues to be a thorn in the side of dishonest practices.

It would be grand if it actually had an impact on stock price long term. Nothing else matters to large corporations except their stock price and profitability.
 
Damn this is going to be a fun ride to follow. Juicier than the amd and intel tryst that was denied for so long.
 
Let me play devil's advocate here. Though I've made my opinion clear, let's imagine for a moment away that this could play out in a good way.

Let's imagine a fictitious graphics card company. We can call it RockAss. Currently, they sell cards from both Nvidia and AMD. They do so under their gaming brand, Black Max. They have a bunch of tiers of Cards within this brand, each tier with its own cards from both Team Green and team red.

This is nice for the company, because they only have to maintain one brand line for each type of card. However for the GPU manufacturers, it artificially pits gpus against one another that may not actually be equal or the target competition.

So, under GPP, RockAss has to come up with two different brand lines of graphics cards.. let's call them RedMaxx and GreenMaxx. The GreenMaxx cards are all under the GPP program, and the other cards are not, because they're made by AMD. Now RockAss does have to maintain two brand lines with their own marketing and advertising Etc. However, Nvidia no longer has to worry about what cards it makes are being slotted into the same tier as amd's cards.

This does not necessarily limit customer choice, and it doesn't necessarily hurt the brand other then the minimal cost of maintaining the two separate gaming lines. The question is does it limit customer Choice when compared to other companies that don't wish to participate and don't wish to bifurcate their gaming lines like this?

If Nvidia is actually and truly holding marketing funds hostage and potentially inventory, commensurate with w a company's participation in this this program, then it clearly does. But if they aren't, then this may just be a brand management move gone awry.

Which of course would be their own fault because they've gone radio silent.
 
A big Thank You to Kyle and [H] for bringing the story and here's hoping others will pick it up and bang their own drums (though I'm not holding my breath while waiting).

To be fair though, I'll no doubt continue buying Nvidia cards. Partly because I've got a G-Sync monitor and partly because there's no alternative at the high end. However, if the reported details are correct (which I'm sure they are) then GPP will no doubt be scrutinised and found to be illegal, at least by the EU. Or so I hope.
 
jbc029 said:
When a company already has nearly 3/4 of the market and then tells the AIB partners that they can't sell competition parts under their "Gaming" brands anymore or they lose marketing subsidies and inventory priority, you're veering hard toward anti-competitive practices territory.

The choice of:

Keep your 30% of competitor products as is
vs
Jeopardizing your remaining 70%'s supply chain and marketing budget

It isn't really a choice at all.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure what you're on about. They will not withhold or stop delivering to the AIB's, they will just prioritize the ones they have GPP contract with. Furthermore, those will also receive bundles and money for marketing. Which makes sense if they're going to push their "gaming brand" with nVidia cards. At the moment they have to push the marketing with their gaming brand with in house money. I may be wrong but it seems pretty Ok. This does not mean that I like it or that it is good practices.

Modred189 said:
Let me play devil's advocate here. Though I've made my opinion clear, let's imagine for a moment away that this could play out in a good way.

Let's imagine a fictitious graphics card company. We can call it RockAss. Currently, they sell cards from both Nvidia and AMD. They do so under their gaming brand, Black Max. They have a bunch of tiers of Cards within this brand, each tier with its own cards from both Team Green and team red.

This is nice for the company, because they only have to maintain one brand line for each type of card. However for the GPU manufacturers, it artificially pits gpus against one another that may not actually be equal or the target competition.

So, under GPP, RockAss has to come up with two different brand lines of graphics cards.. let's call them RedMaxx and GreenMaxx. The GreenMaxx cards are all under the GPP program, and the other cards are not, because they're made by AMD. Now RockAss does have to maintain two brand lines with their own marketing and advertising Etc. However, Nvidia no longer has to worry about what cards it makes are being slotted into the same tier as amd's cards.

This does not necessarily limit customer choice, and it doesn't necessarily hurt the brand other then the minimal cost of maintaining the two separate gaming lines. The question is does it limit customer Choice when compared to other companies that don't wish to participate and don't wish to bifurcate their gaming lines like this?

If Nvidia is actually and truly holding marketing funds hostage and potentially inventory, commensurate with w a company's participation in this this program, then it clearly does. But if they aren't, then this may just be a brand management move gone awry.

Which of course would be their own fault because they've gone radio silent.
Click to expand...

My point indeed. If nVidia wants to basically "buy" the name of your gaming brand, you can create another one for AMD. The only negative will be that the name will still be unknown to the regular customers. However, there are enough people out there that follow up what's what and who's who.
 
Modred189 said:
Let me play devil's advocate here. Though I've made my opinion clear, let's imagine for a moment away that this could play out in a good way.

Let's imagine a fictitious graphics card company. We can call it RockAss. Currently, they sell cards from both Nvidia and AMD. They do so under their gaming brand, Black Max. They have a bunch of tiers of Cards within this brand, each tier with its own cards from both Team Green and team red.

This is nice for the company, because they only have to maintain one brand line for each type of card. However for the GPU manufacturers, it artificially pits gpus against one another that may not actually be equal or the target competition.

So, under GPP, RockAss has to come up with two different brand lines of graphics cards.. let's call them RedMaxx and GreenMaxx. The GreenMaxx cards are all under the GPP program, and the other cards are not, because they're made by AMD. Now RockAss does have to maintain two brand lines with their own marketing and advertising Etc. However, Nvidia no longer has to worry about what cards it makes are being slotted into the same tier as amd's cards.

This does not necessarily limit customer choice, and it doesn't necessarily hurt the brand other then the minimal cost of maintaining the two separate gaming lines. The question is does it limit customer Choice when compared to other companies that don't wish to participate and don't wish to bifurcate their gaming lines like this?

If Nvidia is actually and truly holding marketing funds hostage and potentially inventory, commensurate with w a company's participation in this this program, then it clearly does. But if they aren't, then this may just be a brand management move gone awry.

Which of course would be their own fault because they've gone radio silent.
Click to expand...
Now add into that, that it's single leading brand which it has spent millions of dollars building over the last decade and has big market share is no longer open to one supplier or the other.
 
DTabakov said:
I'm not sure what you're on about. They will not withhold or stop delivering to the AIB's, they will just prioritize the ones they have GPP contract with. Furthermore, those will also receive bundles and money for marketing. Which makes sense if they're going to push their "gaming brand" with nVidia cards. At the moment they have to push the marketing with their gaming brand with in house money. I may be wrong but it seems pretty Ok. This does not mean that I like it or that it is good practices.



My point indeed. If nVidia wants to basically "buy" the name of your gaming brand, you can create another one for AMD. The only negative will be that the name will still be unknown to the regular customers. However, there are enough people out there that follow up what's what and who's who.
Click to expand...

If it's less about making say MSI exclusively distribute NVIDIA GPUs and more about reserving brands like Aorus and ROG specifically for NVIDIA GPUs, then that's a little better. It's still a shitty way to conduct business.
 
The main trip up I see is the language concerning a company's 'gaming brand'; i.e., would a company be compliant if they had two gaming brands, one for each major vendor?

I fully appreciate Nvidia's primary purpose, which is to align vendor branding. This makes a lot of sense.

And I can't see a problem with it if their AIB partners are allowed to maintain separate gaming brands- but if they're only allowed to have a single gaming brand, then this presents a problem.
 
Modred189 said:
Let me play devil's advocate here. Though I've made my opinion clear, let's imagine for a moment away that this could play out in a good way.

Let's imagine a fictitious graphics card company. We can call it RockAss. Currently, they sell cards from both Nvidia and AMD. They do so under their gaming brand, Black Max. They have a bunch of tiers of Cards within this brand, each tier with its own cards from both Team Green and team red.

This is nice for the company, because they only have to maintain one brand line for each type of card. However for the GPU manufacturers, it artificially pits gpus against one another that may not actually be equal or the target competition.

So, under GPP, RockAss has to come up with two different brand lines of graphics cards.. let's call them RedMaxx and GreenMaxx. The GreenMaxx cards are all under the GPP program, and the other cards are not, because they're made by AMD. Now RockAss does have to maintain two brand lines with their own marketing and advertising Etc. However, Nvidia no longer has to worry about what cards it makes are being slotted into the same tier as amd's cards.

This does not necessarily limit customer choice, and it doesn't necessarily hurt the brand other then the minimal cost of maintaining the two separate gaming lines. The question is does it limit customer Choice when compared to other companies that don't wish to participate and don't wish to bifurcate their gaming lines like this?

If Nvidia is actually and truly holding marketing funds hostage and potentially inventory, commensurate with w a company's participation in this this program, then it clearly does. But if they aren't, then this may just be a brand management move gone awry.

Which of course would be their own fault because they've gone radio silent.
Click to expand...
From the article:
"The crux of the issue with NVIDIA GPP comes down to a single requirement in order to be part of GPP. In order to have access to the GPP program, its partners must have its "Gaming Brand Aligned Exclusively With GeForce.""

This woud mean that RedMaxx can't be marketed as a gaming brand. So, only Nvidia cards for RockAss'es gaming line. That is very shady.
 
IdiotInCharge said:
The main trip up I see is the language concerning a company's 'gaming brand'; i.e., would a company be compliant if they had two gaming brands, one for each major vendor?

I fully appreciate Nvidia's primary purpose, which is to align vendor branding. This makes a lot of sense.

And I can't see a problem with it if their AIB partners are allowed to maintain separate gaming brands- but if they're only allowed to have a single gaming brand, then this presents a problem.
Click to expand...

I guess the most innocuous way this works is that this mostly a branding and marketing issue. However I doubt it comes out that clean and does force partners to create multiple brands which I'm sure they don't like. And no doubt there's pressure to do this to get the marketing dollars and assuage any issues with getting supply and support from nVidia.
 
sirmonkey1985 said:
This has some weird similarities to the xfx vs Nvidia years ago when xfx was forced to go amd only.
Click to expand...

I had the same thought.

Meeho said:
From the article:
"The crux of the issue with NVIDIA GPP comes down to a single requirement in order to be part of GPP. In order to have access to the GPP program, its partners must have its "Gaming Brand Aligned Exclusively With GeForce.""

This woud mean that RedMaxx can't be marketed as a gaming brand. So, only Nvidia cards for RockAss'es gaming line. That is very shady.
Click to expand...

When you put it like that, it does certainly come off as more than a little sleazy.
 
Modred189 said:
Let me play devil's advocate here. Though I've made my opinion clear, let's imagine for a moment away that this could play out in a good way.

Let's imagine a fictitious graphics card company. We can call it RockAss. Currently, they sell cards from both Nvidia and AMD. They do so under their gaming brand, Black Max. They have a bunch of tiers of Cards within this brand, each tier with its own cards from both Team Green and team red.

This is nice for the company, because they only have to maintain one brand line for each type of card. However for the GPU manufacturers, it artificially pits gpus against one another that may not actually be equal or the target competition.

So, under GPP, RockAss has to come up with two different brand lines of graphics cards.. let's call them RedMaxx and GreenMaxx. The GreenMaxx cards are all under the GPP program, and the other cards are not, because they're made by AMD. Now RockAss does have to maintain two brand lines with their own marketing and advertising Etc. However, Nvidia no longer has to worry about what cards it makes are being slotted into the same tier as amd's cards.

This does not necessarily limit customer choice, and it doesn't necessarily hurt the brand other then the minimal cost of maintaining the two separate gaming lines. The question is does it limit customer Choice when compared to other companies that don't wish to participate and don't wish to bifurcate their gaming lines like this?

If Nvidia is actually and truly holding marketing funds hostage and potentially inventory, commensurate with w a company's participation in this this program, then it clearly does. But if they aren't, then this may just be a brand management move gone awry.

Which of course would be their own fault because they've gone radio silent.
Click to expand...

Branding/Marketing is really important, much more than I think your giving credit to. It's the reason why Asus ROG exists, instead of Asus simply, or why HyperX instead of simply Kingston. OEMs and AIBs being potentially forced to invest lots of money in creating additional branding simply to accommodate AMD might be too much to consider pursuing. I mean look at how Kingston markets its gaming products, HyperX, that's it, one branding for every product Kingston sells, memory, headsets, etc.

You mention dividing Nvidia and AMD products, that's exactly it as well! Nvidia's products are above AMD products so much in mindshare that if OEMs and AIBs are forced to toss away valuable branding like HyperX and ROG for AMD, well that works just fine and dandy for Nvidia. Let's not get started with Nvidia's dominant position. None of the AIBs can afford to piss off Nvidia, potentially losing access to Nvidia GPUs. Pretty sure the Founders Edition was a shot across their bow, in that respect.
 
Meeho said:
From the article:
"The crux of the issue with NVIDIA GPP comes down to a single requirement in order to be part of GPP. In order to have access to the GPP program, its partners must have its "Gaming Brand Aligned Exclusively With GeForce.""

This woud mean that RedMaxx can't be marketed as a gaming brand. So, only Nvidia cards for RockAss'es gaming line. That is very shady.
Click to expand...

It would mean that RedMaxx can't be used as a gaming brand for nVidia based products. There's nothing to say that a partner have only one gaming brand.
 
just another anti competition move from Nv, they as a company are all about money (which company is not?)
but the way they go about this is shit, it has always been shit, and likely will always be shit.

If your product (whatever it is) is that much better than the competition (so they claim) they would not have to resort to BS tricks and software/hardware workarounds to "pseudo" prove it, they just would be better without question, quality shows, and quality demands a higher price. there are many things that Geforce simply cannot directly compare to Radeons, raw gaming frame rate is not the end all be all, am pretty sure if AMD or anyone had billions of $ to throw at gpu design directly like Nv does, they too would be "top notch" (not saying Nvidia is IMO)

"we want to give gamers the best experience bar none" yep, just takes cutting things off not giving the full potential echelon of current high spec instead resorting to cost cutting measures in regards to voltage circuitry/durability (105/85c instead of 115/125c like AMD does) jump to new "standards" only after competition showed it was "worthwhile" (still doing 1/2 ass approach of it GDDR3-4-5/HBM as simple examples) or supporting new graphics api as fully as possible instead of figuring out a way to "trick" the software for YOUR design (DX9-10-11-12 and Vulkan which is even more "tweakable" in Nv BS wisdom)

Seems if they cannot find a way to directly compete they will find a way to make themselves appear fast and others appear slow...PhysX LMAO, Radeons when they were "allowed" to run it mopped the floor and still had performance leftover...if Nv cannot find a way, they screw others performance over to "appear" fast, just like most smartphones do with their OS upgrade cycles, make the old appear slow and the new appear blazing fast with better battery life, folks buy the new, rinse and repeat.
___________________________________________
________________
To each their own, I have not bought any Nvidia based product in many years for many reasons (and do my best to never give it as an option unless person is die hard Nv only) I do not plan on doing so in the future either, if you want folks to pay top dollar they should be getting a top dollar product, not one that was purposely skimped on just because THEY do not see the "potential" or to give them such potential without trickery results in far higher power and thermals than even direct competitor does.

Multi billion dollar company that sees money and money alone (no matter how many failures they have had many times over) folks keep just throwing money at them..fancy digital circuitry is "easy" to trick in reporting what it is not using, if there is a "master" at figuring out a way to BS the little things, it is Nv, why not, they need to keep making billion dollar profits so people keep throwing money at them no matter how "meehh" their implementation and trickery remains.

am done lol... Kyle and [H] you say it "as it is" while I not always agree on standpoints, at least you are willing to say it as it needs to be said, this is vastly important in our current media driven BS run world , who seem to care about $$$$$$$$ not ethical representation of factual evidence or whatever

^.^
 
dragonstongue said:
If your product (whatever it is) is that much better than the competition (so they claim) they would not have to resort to BS tricks and software/hardware workarounds to "pseudo" prove it, they just would be better without question, quality shows, and quality demands a higher price.
Click to expand...

There's nothing inherently evil about wanting your brand to be exclusive. The question is "What strings are really attached to this?" beyond branding because I doubt anyone believes that it's just about branding and marketing.
 
heatlesssun said:
It would mean that RedMaxx can't be used as a gaming brand for nVidia based products. There's nothing to say that a partner have only one gaming brand.
Click to expand...
The company wouldn't exactly have it's gaming brand aligned with Nvidia in that situation now would it.
 
heatlesssun said:
It would mean that RedMaxx can't be used as a gaming brand for nVidia based products. There's nothing to say that a partner have only one gaming brand.
Click to expand...

Yes, actually, there is. It says it must be the company's gaming brand. It does not say "a gaming brand". It very much implies that all gaming oriented branding must be associated with Nvidia.
 
FearTheCow said:
The company wouldn't exactly have it's gaming brand aligned with Nvidia in that situation now would it.
Click to expand...

I think the language is refereeing to a specific brand name, not gaming in general nor all specific brand names a company might use for gaming products.
 
Derangel said:
Yes, actually, there is. It says it must be the company's gaming brand. It does not say "a gaming brand". It very much implies that all gaming oriented branding must be associated with Nvidia.
Click to expand...

Even if you're a GPP member you can still sell AMD gaming GPUs so this must be referring to specific brand names.
 
heatlesssun said:
Even if you're a GPP member you can still sell AMD gaming GPUs so this must be referring to specific brand names.
Click to expand...

They can sell AMD GPUs but not under their gaming brands. So MSI couldn't sell AMD cards under their Gaming (x)g brand, Gigabyte couldn't under Aorus, ASUS couldn't under ROG, and so on.
 
If this comes to pass as is speculated in the article - I won't ever purchase an nVidia GPU in the future, or at least until a marketing and CEO change assures my conscious.
 
heatlesssun said:
Even if you're a GPP member you can still sell AMD gaming GPUs so this must be referring to specific brand names.
Click to expand...

If there were only 2 tire companies, Goodyear and Firestone, and Goodyear wanted to drive them under so they made the Goodyear Is The Best program wherein every company they work with must use Goodyear on their luxury and performance brands....

So everyone associates Cadillac and Lexus with higher end. If they ONLY see Firestone tires on cheap cars, what happens to the other companies branding?
 
Derangel said:
Yes, actually, there is. It says it must be the company's gaming brand. It does not say "a gaming brand". It very much implies that all gaming oriented branding must be associated with Nvidia.
Click to expand...

Yes, like we've earlier pointed out with an example of Asus and RoG. This does not stop Asus from creating something else in the same sense for AMD. And whilst nVidia is paying for marketing it is kind of normal.

At the end of the day, the point being they target specific customers with this. As the "casual" gamer will not give a flying crap if his card is RoG, Aorus or whatever. He want's his game running decently and that's it. However, enthusiasts that know the differences between the "normal" cards and the "gamer cards" power delivery, cooling and etc. will prefer to purchase the gaming branding for those reasons.
 
Derangel said:
They can sell AMD GPUs but not under their gaming brands. So MSI couldn't sell AMD cards under their Gaming (x)g brand, Gigabyte couldn't under Aorus, ASUS couldn't under ROG, and so on.
Click to expand...

What is a gaming brand? So Asus can sell AMD gaming GPUs and call them RedMaxx but can't say that RedMaxx GPUs are geared for gaming? I don't see how that's enforceable even in a contract.
 
Pusher of Buttons said:
If there were only 2 tire companies, Goodyear and Firestone, and Goodyear wanted to drive them under so they made the Goodyear Is The Best program wherein every company they work with must use Goodyear on their luxury and performance brands....

So everyone associates Cadillac and Lexus with higher end. If they ONLY see Firestone tires on cheap cars, what happens to the other companies branding?
Click to expand...

And I think that's part of this. Existing gaming brands will probably all go to nVidia and new ones would have to be created for AMD parts.
 
heatlesssun said:
What is a gaming brand? So Asus can sell AMD gaming GPUs and call them RedMaxx but can't say that RedMaxx GPUs are geared for gaming? I don't see how that's enforceable even in a contract.
Click to expand...

Its easy to enforce. If companies don't do it they don't get priority access to anything and Nvidia will deny them marketing resources. And if companies break the contract I'm sure there are some very hefty fines assosiated with it. It is highly illegal, but not hard to enforce.
 
heatlesssun said:
A company that's part of this program decides to brand all of its AMD gaming GPUs and laptops RedMaxx. How is this not in alignment with the GPP?
Click to expand...

It would be, provided RedMaxx was not mentioned, branded, or anything as a "gaming brand"

RedMaxx could be a "productivity brand" or the like, but from my interpretation it can have no mention of being "gaming" oriented.
 
Two things:

1) This seems to be a program of dubious legality, as noted in the article.
2) This could do with a bit less of Kyle lecturing nvidia PR drones in email. My $0.00002.

It will be interesting to see what the blow back is. It's not like regular folks can buy GPUs anyway with all the derpcoin miners.
 
DTabakov said:
Yes, like we've earlier pointed out with an example of Asus and RoG. This does not stop Asus from creating something else in the same sense for AMD. And whilst nVidia is paying for marketing it is kind of normal.

At the end of the day, the point being they target specific customers with this. As the "casual" gamer will not give a flying crap if his card is RoG, Aorus or whatever. He want's his game running decently and that's it. However, enthusiasts that know the differences between the "normal" cards and the "gamer cards" power delivery, cooling and etc. will prefer to purchase the gaming branding for those reasons.
Click to expand...

No, the casual buyer wants something they can "trust". The casual buyer is heavily influenced by word-of-mouth and marketing. You vastly underestimate just how important these brands are to companies. They're not spending several million dollars promoting them just for the hell of it.

heatlesssun said:
A company that's part of this program decides to brand all of its AMD gaming GPUs and laptops RedMaxx. How is this not in alignment with the GPP?
Click to expand...

Its not that easy. A new brand takes years to develop fully. Along with millions of dollars in marketing and promotion. On top of that there is a reason every hardware company slaps "gaming" on their products. They sell more. With GPP AIBs are not allowed to market AMD cards under any gaming oriented branding. How many casual buyers do you think they're attract if they promote that Redmaxx as a compute card or something else? Losing out on that gaming tag is a big loss. There is a reason no one Kyle has talked to likes this program.
 
ianken said:
It's not like regular folks can buy GPUs anyway with all the derpcoin miners.
Click to expand...

I'm assuming that's why they're doing this NOW. AMD is selling everything they can put in the shelf right now....but once the cryptocraze dies down....sure would be easier on NVidia if they had ALL the gaming brands and AMD is relegated to being a "mining card".
 
From the article -
NVIDIA will tell you that it is 100% up to its partner company to be part of GPP, and from the documents I have read, if it chooses not to be part of GPP, it will lose the benefits of GPP which include: high-effort engineering engagements -- early tech engagement -- launch partner status -- game bundling -- sales rebate programs -- social media and PR support -- marketing reports -- Marketing Development Funds (MDF). MDF is likely the standout in that list of lost benefits if the company is not a GPP partner.
Click to expand...

To all the loyal AIBs and OEMs out there, whom sell both AMD and NVIDIA GPUs, this bit, IMO, hurts the worse. If I were them, I'd be pissed. In my opinion.
Even more, it could mean those that chose GPP, now have an advantage that those that don't, do not. Sign up, or we strip this stuff away from you. Meaning you can't be as competitive. :(
 
rgMekanic said:
It would be, provided RedMaxx was not mentioned, branded, or anything as a "gaming brand"

RedMaxx could be a "productivity brand" or the like, but from my interpretation it can have no mention of being "gaming" oriented.
Click to expand...

That's completely unenforceable as it would be a 1st Amendment violation that would prevent AMD's freedom of speech to market its gaming GPUs as gaming GPUs.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top