More NVIDIA Gameworks Controversy

DPI

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Apr 20, 2013
Messages
12,176
Witcher 3 is a buggy, unoptimized piece of shit. Just once, I wish game studios would hire competent developers.

It is? Have you actually played it or just copy-pasting what idiots have typed on the internet?

Game is playing perfectly here.
 

TheOneKnownAsMe

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jan 3, 2011
Messages
1,730
What you are describing is the end of PC Gaming, and the start of closed systems gaming.

I just think it's very interesting that AMD is promoting an open eco-system and is actually trying to spur the industry in a positive direction (with open-source libraries, Vulkan/Mantle, etc.) and Nvidia is just trying to create a walled garden, and they're using their marketshare and financial advantage to do so. And yet people are defending it? Sure, AMD doesn't have money to compete, but why defend Nvidia at all? It's damaging in the long-run, whether or not AMD is even still around in the long run.

Performance differences aside and other biases aside, I would immediately side with the company that is trying to promote an open eco-system over a walled garden.
 

Ducman69

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jul 12, 2007
Messages
10,542
I just think it's very interesting that AMD is promoting an open eco-system and is actually trying to spur the industry in a positive direction (with open-source libraries, Vulkan/Mantle, etc.) and Nvidia is just trying to create a walled garden, and they're using their marketshare and financial advantage to do so. And yet people are defending it? Sure, AMD doesn't have money to compete, but why defend Nvidia at all? It's damaging in the long-run, whether or not AMD is even still around in the long run.

Performance differences aside and other biases aside, I would immediately side with the company that is trying to promote an open eco-system over a walled garden.
"Because 'F' you, that's why!", seems to be the consensus. ;)
 

Hornet

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Oct 4, 2005
Messages
6,625
What you are describing is the end of PC Gaming, and the start of closed systems gaming.

PC gaming has been doing fine despite the dominance of Microsoft's DirectX.

I'm ok if people wants to criticize proprietary tools, but where were you guys when the industry was predominately using DX? And in fact it still does today, not all but many dev continues to make games exclusively for Windows OS only.
 

haste.

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Nov 11, 2011
Messages
1,651
Explain to me like I'm five why these "driver problems" are only occurring in NVIDIA sponsored shillworks games.
qQXsAVtjay8t.878x0.Z-Z96KYq.jpg

vCCD4HcBCqBb.878x0.Z-Z96KYq.jpg

B70wNXYI3jle.878x0.Z-Z96KYq.jpg

rzDST00DPUIk.878x0.Z-Z96KYq.jpg

Lol 3 AMD Gaming Evolved sponsored games used for your argument. Can't have it both ways pal.

You do sound like you are five with all the kicking and screaming.
 

Arbit3r

Limp Gawd
Joined
Feb 22, 2013
Messages
308
Lets put some fact out there, Nvidia has said Hairworks relies heavily on DX11 tessellation so well if you look at tessellation benchmarks well AMD is WAY behind in them just like how they are way ahead in OpenCL vs nvidia. SO they need to just get better in that area. Which IS A STANDARD of DX11.
 

Ducman69

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jul 12, 2007
Messages
10,542
Lol 3 AMD Gaming Evolved sponsored games used for your argument. Can't have it both ways pal.

You do sound like you are five with all the kicking and screaming.
Yeah I'm five. Five inches deep in your m... JK! *insert thug life music* :p
 

PRIME1

2[H]4U
Joined
Feb 4, 2004
Messages
3,942
What you are describing is the end of PC Gaming, and the start of closed systems gaming.

When AMD tried that with Mantle, AMD fans were shouting it's praises from the rooftops.


Maybe you guys need a taste of your own medicine. I hope all games use Gameworks in the future. Because it makes games better.
 

ShamisOMally

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Apr 24, 2010
Messages
1,480
>"Nvidia doesn't gimp game experiences on purpose if you don't use their hardware with a "Nvidia helped" production game"

Remember when Nvidia would disable their videocard if it detected an AMD card in your system, so you couldn't use PhysX?

Remember when if you owned a AMD card you had to rename your Unreal Engine game to something else in order to be able to use Anti-Aliasing, which would work if you owned an Nvidia card, but they forced it off if it detected an AMD card? And some games ran better if you changed the name?

Remember how PhysX 3.X which can infinitely run threads on CPU for BETTER performance than GPU processing has been around almost FOREVER and no games use it, because any game using Nvidia TWIMTBP'd "Help" or sponsership were required to use PhysX 2.X which ran shitty old X87 code and can only run well on GPU's? Or how games that now get PhysX 3.X support they limit how many threads will run in order to gimp CPU performance?

But NAHHHHHH Nvidia isn't the slimebucket people make them out to be!
 

n=1

2[H]4U
Joined
Sep 2, 2014
Messages
2,388
When AMD tried that with Mantle, AMD fans were shouting it's praises from the rooftops.


Maybe you guys need a taste of your own medicine. I hope all games use Gameworks in the future. Because it makes games better.

And did Mantle cause nVidia cards to run like crap under the DX11 path?

1393620031nTfVKdLjSj_3_2.png

Honestly if you wanted to draw parallels, the closest thing would be Tomb Raider's TressFX that caused nVidia cards to completely tank at launch. But because TressFX was open source, Crystal Dynamics could work with nVidia to optimize for their hardware, and if memory serves, it only took 2 weeks before the problem was patched away. Can't say the same for GameWorks titles.

So no, comparing Mantle to GameWorks is completely off-base.
 

NickJames

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Apr 28, 2009
Messages
6,688
Hitler was a good guy, he just wanted to make sure everyone was Aryan so that he can provide equal support and treatment for all.
 

Yakk

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Nov 5, 2010
Messages
5,810
I just think it's very interesting that AMD is promoting an open eco-system and is actually trying to spur the industry in a positive direction (with open-source libraries, Vulkan/Mantle, etc.) and Nvidia is just trying to create a walled garden, and they're using their marketshare and financial advantage to do so. And yet people are defending it? Sure, AMD doesn't have money to compete, but why defend Nvidia at all? It's damaging in the long-run, whether or not AMD is even still around in the long run.

Performance differences aside and other biases aside, I would immediately side with the company that is trying to promote an open eco-system over a walled garden.

I have no idea why people would defend a company trying to impose their dominance and kill open standards for their own goals. It will only result in higher prices for those who get caught & locked-in.

AMD's open source position makes a lot of sense being a smaller competition. It allows them developer access which nvidia has been doing their absolute best to limit (their intimate relationship with Epic for Unreal engine comes to mind).

PC gaming has been doing fine despite the dominance of Microsoft's DirectX.

I'm ok if people wants to criticize proprietary tools, but where were you guys when the industry was predominately using DX? And in fact it still does today, not all but many dev continues to make games exclusively for Windows OS only.

DX is another example of a closed standard. Microsoft used their massive dominance to control what was happening for gaming under windows. And then made their own gaming console. Vulkan, Steam OS, Unity game engine... All can't mature fast enough, along with other graphics engines which can work cross platform, not just with a wrapper.
 

pxc

Extremely [H]
Joined
Oct 22, 2000
Messages
33,064
bluesnews said:
This post in particular discusses the impact of a new version of PhysX on Project CARS performance, though there are arguments that how all this works is being misinterpreted
Read: I don't care that I'm wrong, I have a really strong opinion on the subject! bawwwwwwwwwwww
 

DPI

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Apr 20, 2013
Messages
12,176
Because it wasn't completely black-boxed like Gameworks is?

Except there was nothing "open" about Mantle. It *was* "black boxed". They talked a big game in the Mantle reveal that eventually they'd allow others to use it, but they never did that.

And the fact they punted and gave the IP away to MS & Khronos because they couldn't get developer support doesn't retroactively change that and make Mantle "open". Their endgame was hoping to spur game development to favor their APU's, NOT because of some kumbaya bullshit about wanting to be "open" and "free"
 
Joined
Feb 3, 2014
Messages
645
NV is not holding a gun to the developers heads or threatening to cut off any developers who don't use Gameworks. That would be anti-competitive. The minute NV tells a dev who refuses to use Gameworks that it will not release a driver for their game you can go ahead and complain. NV is not forcing this "black box" on anyone. Devs are using it at an increasing rate for whatever reason. Most likely it adds visuals they want.

No, they aren't. They are telling developers, 'Here are libraries to implement great new features we developed to work with our closed SKD and only works on our hardware. Instead of developing the same features for standardized, hardware independent APIs like OpenGL and DirectX. Don't want to use them? Go for it and lose the majority of your market.'
 
Joined
Jul 30, 2009
Messages
847
AMD's open source position makes a lot of sense being a smaller competition. It allows them developer access which nvidia has been doing their absolute best to limit (their intimate relationship with Epic for Unreal engine comes to mind).

Really? Where is AMD's response to Gameworks? Besides crying foul? Where is Freeworks/Openworks?

AMD only cares about open source because they lack the money and R&D resources to create multiple technologies on their own and have those techs adopted across a wide margin.

If the shoe was on the other foot expect AMD to behave identical to NV.

Competition breeds innovation. AMD has two choices when it comes to Gameworks, compete or die. Crying and having fan boys complain will get AMD no where. AMD needs to create their own rival libraries rather than dreaming of an open source fantasy.

DX is another example of a closed standard. Microsoft used their massive dominance to control what was happening for gaming under windows.

And people claimed DX would kill PC gaming...yet here we are...still playing games on PC.
 
Joined
Feb 3, 2014
Messages
645
Really? Where is AMD's response to Gameworks? Besides crying foul? Where is Freeworks/Openworks?
Isn't that Mantle/Vulkan/DX12? Why aren't the members of the NV club acknowledging that?
 

Yakk

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Nov 5, 2010
Messages
5,810
Really? Where is AMD's response to Gameworks? Besides crying foul? Where is Freeworks/Openworks?

AMD only cares about open source because they lack the money and R&D resources to create multiple technologies on their own and have those techs adopted across a wide margin.

If the shoe was on the other foot expect AMD to behave identical to NV.

Competition breeds innovation. AMD has two choices when it comes to Gameworks, compete or die. Crying and having fan boys complain will get AMD no where. AMD needs to create their own rival libraries rather than dreaming of an open source fantasy.

So my original post stands, you confirm you would prefer a closed game system to PC gaming.


And people claimed DX would kill PC gaming...yet here we are...still playing games on PC.

And DX has stalled PC game development for years. Only now are we starting to advance again with different open source tools coming out.
 

Aireoth

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Oct 12, 2005
Messages
5,933
I've owned both, still do.

1. No, we will not see exclusive games except for the rare title, even on consoles. This will be regardless of exclusive tech, nothing has ever worked that way (or we would still have betamax). Development costs are to high to limit your market, if anything, we will just see fewer and fewer titles take advantage of gpu or console specific hardware.

2. nVidia is way better than AMD from a driver stand point, I have way more problems (if I have them) with my AMD card, and no, its not on nVidia specific games, its pretty much always been this way (at least since my first ATi card in 2001).

3. Fanbois will be fanbois, if you want the card that runs the smoothest with most games, get nVidia, if you get your rocks off with having a technically superior card, get AMD/ATi, but don't bitch that the software sucks.
 

NickJames

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Apr 28, 2009
Messages
6,688
The AMD driver excuse doesn't work anymore. Their driver issues have been largely fixed since the 5000 series. Have you even used Nvidia Experience lately? Let me tell you.. it's definitely an experience I want to avoid.
 

PRIME1

2[H]4U
Joined
Feb 4, 2004
Messages
3,942
If you are having trouble playing newer games with your AMD card, upgrade to NVIDIA. It's nothing more than pure hypocrisy to cry over corporate politics. Both AMD and NVIDIA use proprietary technology and software. It's just that NVIDIA's works better and is used in more games.
 

GoldenTiger

Fully [H]
Joined
Dec 2, 2004
Messages
24,498
Witcher 3 blows on any 7 series and under card. Nvidia didn't optimize their drivers for older cards. A 960 will be equivalent in performance to 780Ti in Witcher 3. This is Nvidia's way of getting people to upgrade.

Doubtful. Maxwell is much stronger in the compute department for this type of workload than Kepler, and it's likely a result of that.
 

JMccovery

2[H]4U
Joined
Feb 9, 2006
Messages
2,208
I've been using AMD cards since the Detonator 190s fried the fan PWM controller on my 9600GT (yeah, it's been that long), and I haven't ran into a single driver issue that hasn't been a PEBKAC one. And this comes from someone that doesn't uninstall old drivers first.
 

GoldenTiger

Fully [H]
Joined
Dec 2, 2004
Messages
24,498
Because it wasn't completely black-boxed like Gameworks is?

It was, in all practical terms, and has been since essentially retired :(. I'm not exactly the biggest nvidia fan as you might notice from my title, but that statement is pretty disingenuous.
 

TheOneKnownAsMe

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jan 3, 2011
Messages
1,730
It was, in all practical terms, and has been since essentially retired :(. I'm not exactly the biggest nvidia fan as you might notice from my title, but that statement is pretty disingenuous.

Huh, I was under the impression this whole time that it was more open. My bad there.
 

Vercinaigh

Gawd
Joined
Jul 31, 2008
Messages
849
Doubtful. Maxwell is much stronger in the compute department for this type of workload than Kepler, and it's likely a result of that.

Except rolling back to a prior driver yields significant performance gains for non Maxwell cards. Just saying..
 

m4dcow

n00b
Joined
Apr 27, 2014
Messages
20
Sure the fact that Nvidia gameworks is closed off from AMD optimization sucks. The fact is that Nvidia does a shitload of R&D for their different technologies and works with developers to integrate them providing tools, expertise etc... AMD hasn't really done much of that besides TressFX. So it's not surprising that developers will gravitate towards integrating Nvidia technology.
 

drakken

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Aug 19, 2004
Messages
1,196
actually the titan is better in compute than the titan x due to double precision and ecc memory being used. the titan x is faster in 32 bit apps because they got rid of a lot of the compute tech from the original titan. I was thinking about a titan x at some point but I found out the original titan has the most compute power of all the titans and most compute over head. So maybe a mix of the two or wait for another card with double precision. It does not help games so it makes sense they took it off the card considering that the alu are half the size on the titan x than on the original titan. So anywhere there is fast motion or the frames change fast where you see less of the details on screen the titan x will look as good or better than the titan due to the larger memory to hold more point cloud data (models and particles) and texture files. So I would guess the 960 being faster is due to the smaller units being cheaper due to the way chips are fabbed. smaller chips tend to fit more chips on a wafer and thus there are less with errors on them due to simple fact most established processes only have a 8 - 12 % of errors on wafer and all the errors that are there most can often be used as lesser chips with the units that are broken simply disabled. So you make one design for the fastest non titan and disabled the memory blocks or alu's on the chips with defects and sell them as the versions with less units as if they were built that way. All your chips fit on the same card have the same pin out and can be used the same way.
 

Yakk

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Nov 5, 2010
Messages
5,810
And you confirmed that you do not want competition to bring forth advances in gaming.

On the contrary, it's deplorable that the closed sourced Microsoft controlled DirectX has stalled PC gaming development for so long.
 

Saist

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jun 7, 2004
Messages
305
Demanding source code access to all our cool technology is an attempt to deflect their performance issues. Giving away your IP, your source code, is uncommon for anyone in the industry, including middleware providers and game developers. Most of the time we optimize games based on binary builds, not source code.

Sounds like somebody doesn't actually understand Open-Source licences. Opening up the source code does not, in any way, also constitute the libre-distribution of the Intellectual Property. It also is, quite frankly, excessively common in the computing industry to release software under an Open-Source licence.

It is far less common now for vendors to hide active software behind proprietary licenses.

So; this now begs the following questions: Just where exactly did the person who made this particular quote, which appears to be Nvidia's Brian Burke, get his information on Open Source licences? From an old Steve-Ballmer driven "Get the Facts" brochure picked up at WinHec?

Given this level of fundamental mis-understanding of how open-source licenses actually work; does Nvidia actually even understand the industries that they are participating in?
 

Teenyman45

2[H]4U
Joined
Nov 29, 2010
Messages
2,871
>"Nvidia doesn't gimp game experiences on purpose if you don't use their hardware with a "Nvidia helped" production game"

Remember when Nvidia would disable their videocard if it detected an AMD card in your system, so you couldn't use PhysX?

Remember when if you owned a AMD card you had to rename your Unreal Engine game to something else in order to be able to use Anti-Aliasing, which would work if you owned an Nvidia card, but they forced it off if it detected an AMD card? And some games ran better if you changed the name?

Remember how PhysX 3.X which can infinitely run threads on CPU for BETTER performance than GPU processing has been around almost FOREVER and no games use it, because any game using Nvidia TWIMTBP'd "Help" or sponsership were required to use PhysX 2.X which ran shitty old X87 code and can only run well on GPU's? Or how games that now get PhysX 3.X support they limit how many threads will run in order to gimp CPU performance?

But NAHHHHHH Nvidia isn't the slimebucket people make them out to be!

Pepperidge Farms remembers. Oh yes... it remembers.

I've owned cards from both sides in my gaming rigs. Both Nvidia and AMD periodically "cheat" and screw over consumers. Nvidia, overall, is far, far worse than team red on this front.
 
Joined
Jul 30, 2009
Messages
847
On the contrary, it's deplorable that the closed sourced Microsoft controlled DirectX has stalled PC gaming development for so long.

So you agree DirectX needed competition to spur advancement.

Amazing how quickly after Mantle was announced that MS suddenly had DX12 in the pipeline isnt it?

Competition breeds innovation.
 

Yakk

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Nov 5, 2010
Messages
5,810
So you agree DirectX needed competition to spur advancement.

Amazing how quickly after Mantle was announced that MS suddenly had DX12 in the pipeline isnt it?

Competition breeds innovation.

Yes, competition breeds innovation. Closing access to competition breeds monopolies.

All this over virtual hair.

In this instance the virtual hair is just a small symptom of a grave underlying condition working behind the scenes.
 

Wierdo

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jul 2, 2011
Messages
1,817
I'm concerned we're headed for a "creative labs" style GPU market at this rate.

I hate to state the obvious, but nVidia knows the average consumer is an idiot and they'll use their lack of education for personal gain, letting them strangle themselves with their own shoelaces.
 
Top