Nvidia created GameWorks to advance gaming at a faster pace.

[DarthBeavis]

Never heard a single NVIDIA employee say they wished AMD would go out of business. I know a ton of NVIDIANS and they do not have that mindset. They just focus on making their products better.

[Iconyu]

Never heard a single NVIDIA employee say they wished AMD would go out of business. I know a ton of NVIDIANS and they do not have that mindset. They just focus on making their products better.

There is only one thing Nvidia lusts for, and it's a x86 license, VIA has one but I get the impression that it's not as 'firm' as AMD's. The staff at Nvidia aren't thinking lets kill AMD, they are just doing their job well. But as a corporation AMD's 'death' would leave Intel in a monopoly position is can't really sit on, and if Nvidia can acquire AMD's IP and licenses it would be win win for them.

So when you say I know these guys and they'd never do this, I'm sure you're right, but the guy at the top tells an OEM to denounce AMD so they can have Nvidia branded PC's it doesn't really matter what the guys below him do. I can't even claim that Intel are much better, they spent years blocking AMD from loads of big OEM's, but at least they wanted AMD around which isn't something I say about Nvidia with any real certainty after 3DFx.

[Andrew LB]

They are too successful, without AMD to keep them pushing they'll sit back, and do nothing. Out of Intel, AMD and Nvidia I'd say Nvidia is the most inclined to see the death of a rival as a good thing.

I keep seeing people make this claim but I can't for the life of me find a single instance where this happened in the private sector. A far more likely scenario would be AMD continuing down their road to bankruptcy and eventually selling off the graphics division to a company like Apple, Samsung, or even a company not in the tech sector that wants to expand in that direction. This notion that nVidia would just sit back, relax, and end their 20 year mission of moving graphics technology forward, is just foolish.

There is only one thing Nvidia lusts for, and it's a x86 license, VIA has one but I get the impression that it's not as 'firm' as AMD's. The staff at Nvidia aren't thinking lets kill AMD, they are just doing their job well. But as a corporation AMD's 'death' would leave Intel in a monopoly position is can't really sit on, and if Nvidia can acquire AMD's IP and licenses it would be win win for them.

So when you say I know these guys and they'd never do this, I'm sure you're right, but the guy at the top tells an OEM to denounce AMD so they can have Nvidia branded PC's it doesn't really matter what the guys below him do. I can't even claim that Intel are much better, they spent years blocking AMD from loads of big OEM's, but at least they wanted AMD around which isn't something I say about Nvidia with any real certainty after 3DFx.

Again, I see no evidence that would lead me to believe that nVidia wants to bankrupt AMD. Wild theories, conspiring over x86 licenses, and the sort seem to be based on a lack of understanding as to what this x86 license is. The x86 license was issued by Intel many years ago and in the event of bankruptcy, court ordered reorganization, or a buy out from another company.... the x86 license issued by Intel does not get picked up by whoever buys the remaining pieces. Patents on the other hand would indeed be transferable to new owners, but since licenses are only usage rights granted by the Patent owner in exchange for fees.

If anyone had the potential of scoring big on AMD's demise, it would be more than likely Intel. Such a purchase would be approved with little push back from the Securities and Exchange Commission SEC since Intel would probably go specifically for the graphics division, while avoiding the CPU division altogether. The last thing Intel needs is some politician telling them they have to break up their corporation because of monopoly fears.

[Iconyu]

I keep seeing people make this claim but I can't for the life of me find a single instance where this happened in the private sector. A far more likely scenario would be AMD continuing down their road to bankruptcy and eventually selling off the graphics division to a company like Apple, Samsung, or even a company not in the tech sector that wants to expand in that direction. This notion that nVidia would just sit back, relax, and end their 20 year mission of moving graphics technology forward, is just foolish.



Again, I see no evidence that would lead me to believe that nVidia wants to bankrupt AMD. Wild theories, conspiring over x86 licenses, and the sort seem to be based on a lack of understanding as to what this x86 license is. The x86 license was issued by Intel many years ago and in the event of bankruptcy, court ordered reorganization, or a buy out from another company.... the x86 license issued by Intel does not get picked up by whoever buys the remaining pieces. Patents on the other hand would indeed be transferable to new owners, but since licenses are only usage rights granted by the Patent owner in exchange for fees.

If anyone had the potential of scoring big on AMD's demise, it would be more than likely Intel. Such a purchase would be approved with little push back from the Securities and Exchange Commission SEC since Intel would probably go specifically for the graphics division, while avoiding the CPU division altogether. The last thing Intel needs is some politician telling them they have to break up their corporation because of monopoly fears.

First Nvidia wouldn't stop, but they would slow down, they would do the minimal needed to make product B look better than the previous product A and get the most bang out of each round of R&D. As for intel having more to gain from AMD's demise than Nvidia, I don't need to refute that, you did fine all by yourself in your last paragraph. The only thing you didn't mention is that Intel would still have to give the license to another company most likely US based that could produce a viable alternative to the current Intel offerings.

Americans often make the mistake of looking at the people they interact with as the corporate identity, which is why you gave them legal status with rights as if they were people. The reality is that those people are really cells in an aggressive organism where morality is an alien concept that is forced onto by it's head. Otherwise each cell works on doing what's best for the companies bottom line. Consumer happiness only matter if you want to milk your customer more than once, consumer health only matters if it outweighs consumer happiness, anything you can get away with is fine unless someone bigger can force you to stop.

If you look at Amazon they do great prices, great customer care, fast delivery. On the other hand they sell at a loss to kill local competition, they hire loads of staff but treat them like slaves as there is fewer jobs around and they can get away with it, and screw paying taxes. People know this, but it doesn't stop them shopping there, and people will stay happy until there is nowhere else to go.

[DarthBeavis]

First Nvidia wouldn't stop, but they would slow down, they would do the minimal needed to make product B look better than the previous product A and get the most bang out of each round of R&D. As for intel having more to gain from AMD's demise than Nvidia, I don't need to refute that, you did fine all by yourself in your last paragraph. The only thing you didn't mention is that Intel would still have to give the license to another company most likely US based that could produce a viable alternative to the current Intel offerings.

Americans often make the mistake of looking at the people they interact with as the corporate identity, which is why you gave them legal status with rights as if they were people. The reality is that those people are really cells in an aggressive organism where morality is an alien concept that is forced onto by it's head. Otherwise each cell works on doing what's best for the companies bottom line. Consumer happiness only matter if you want to milk your customer more than once, consumer health only matters if it outweighs consumer happiness, anything you can get away with is fine unless someone bigger can force you to stop.

If you look at Amazon they do great prices, great customer care, fast delivery. On the other hand they sell at a loss to kill local competition, they hire loads of staff but treat them like slaves as there is fewer jobs around and they can get away with it, and screw paying taxes. People know this, but it doesn't stop them shopping there, and people will stay happy until there is nowhere else to go.

At NVIDIA, the people do make the company. I cannot speak about larger companies like Intel as they are huge and spread out. NVIDIA is not. I know people at all levels there (and have had conversations with even Jensen). What I have described with that I have observed at all levels.

[Iconyu]

At NVIDIA, the people do make the company. I cannot speak about larger companies like Intel as they are huge and spread out. NVIDIA is not. I know people at all levels there (and have had conversations with even Jensen). What I have described with that I have observed at all levels.

Why have nvidia launched new cards with HDMI 2.0 but without DP1.2a support and continued taking royalties in for Gsync monitors then, instead of stating support for adaptive sync? Wouldn't it be best for your customers to simply support both as adaptive sync is now a vesa standard?

I can guess at what they'll reply, "There is no point supporting monitors that don't exist, so we simply support the standard that is already here, and will expose functionality with new drivers for the new monitors. But right now, let's sell you a Gsync monitor because they rock!"

Sounds really reassuring, even logical, it's all true. But why does Crysis 2 have so many unneeded polygons? Why did Ubisoft retract DX10.1 patches for Nvidia sponsored titles? This company is filled with good people, but why would good people do these things? Why when you know they do these things do you feel like defending them?

Like I said corporations aren't people, they aren't even the people that make them, they don't have a conscience unless it's forced onto them. Yes, good people that wouldn't dream of doing those little snide things I listed, but they all got done and it wasn't an evil AI.

[DarthBeavis]

Why have nvidia launched new cards with HDMI 2.0 but without DP1.2a support and continued taking royalties in for Gsync monitors then, instead of stating support for adaptive sync? Wouldn't it be best for your customers to simply support both as adaptive sync is now a vesa standard?

I can guess at what they'll reply, "There is no point supporting monitors that don't exist, so we simply support the standard that is already here, and will expose functionality with new drivers for the new monitors. But right now, let's sell you a Gsync monitor because they rock!"

Sounds really reassuring, even logical, it's all true. But why does Crysis 2 have so many unneeded polygons? Why did Ubisoft retract DX10.1 patches for Nvidia sponsored titles? This company is filled with good people, but why would good people do these things? Why when you know they do these things do you feel like defending them?

Like I said corporations aren't people, they aren't even the people that make them, they don't have a conscience unless it's forced onto them. Yes, good people that wouldn't dream of doing those little snide things I listed, but they all got done and it wasn't an evil AI.

There are interviews that answer those questions. I suggest you find the Maximum PC no BS podcast with Tom Peterson as a start. Not going to debate UBISOFT - the company that does 1080p is not needed in games (or something similar). Lately I have become very disgusted with game devs. The console vs PC market I find much more interesting and much meatier than NVIDIA vs AMD vs Intel

How many people at NVIDIA do YOU know personally? How often to you speak with them?

[Iconyu]

I have game developer friends, most of them love nvidia too, bastards won't let me see their nvidia NDA's though.

[DarthBeavis]

I have game developer friends, most of them love nvidia too, bastards won't let me see their nvidia NDA's though.

So no one who actually works at NVIDIA then. Fugger and I do. Just telling you what I have experience bud. That is all I can do.

[Charles Wirth]

I was an AMD and ATI developer.

I am glad Nvidia has such enthusiasm to support those that work with their products.

[DarthBeavis]

I was an AMD and ATI developer.

I am glad Nvidia has such enthusiasm to support those that work with their products.

Glad you turned to the light side of the force

[zanzabar]

isnt fugger an apple server dev now, how light side can he be.

[Ace123]

This whole thread has a weird feel...

[QuadDamage]

This whole thread has a weird feel...

To you maybe, being a supporter of Vendor "B" and all, I'm not surprised.

Good to see peeps like FUGGER openly voicing his support for nVidia.

[Charles Wirth]

Iconyu has been removed from the news section.

[josh1980]

Iconyu has been removed from the news section.

Whoa. Did I miss something?

[Charles Wirth]

Defstar decided he needed to be removed from the News section as well.

[Ace123]

To you maybe, being a supporter of Vendor "B" and all, I'm not surprised.

Good to see peeps like FUGGER openly voicing his support for nVidia.

Actually im a fan of hardware. If we could get 1 or 2 more companies making graphics cards like back in the voodoo/Creative/Ati/nvidia/matrox days it would be pure bliss. I remain open to any vendor who will put out a competitive product as I find enthusiast bias towards any one company damaging as a whole to the industry. If we cannot accept "Vendor B" as you call it equally and support it as such we will create the same situation on the graphics side as we consumers are responsible for doing on the CPU side. Although I cannot help but feel slightly alleviated from that responsibility as I have purchased many vender b products in addition the vast array of products I have purchased in whole from everyone.

[QuadDamage]

Actually im a fan of hardware. If we could get 1 or 2 more companies making graphics cards like back in the voodoo/Creative/Ati/nvidia/matrox days it would be pure bliss. I remain open to any vendor who will put out a competitive product as I find enthusiast bias towards any one company damaging as a whole to the industry. If we cannot accept "Vendor B" as you call it equally and support it as such we will create the same situation on the graphics side as we consumers are responsible for doing on the CPU side. Although I cannot help but feel slightly alleviated from that responsibility as I have purchased many vender b products in addition the vast array of products I have purchased in whole from everyone.

I'm not going to write an essay here cos I got places to be, but uh,

Even though I am open minded, I choose to support a company that supports its customers by delivering a better product. It is all about product to me, hardware and software. The whole concept of supporting an inferior brand just because "it's the right thing to do for the competition sake", or because it's cheaper seems ridiculous to me, to put it simply.

With that said, nVidia, Intel and Corsair have never let me down and I will continue to buy their products.

[Charles Wirth]

More info on Gameworks

http://blogs.nvidia.com/blog/2014/11...-games-better/

[STEvil]

I'm not going to write an essay here cos I got places to be, but uh,

Even though I am open minded, I choose to support a company that supports its customers by delivering a better product. It is all about product to me, hardware and software. The whole concept of supporting an inferior brand just because "it's the right thing to do for the competition sake", or because it's cheaper seems ridiculous to me, to put it simply.

With that said, nVidia, Intel and Corsair have never let me down and I will continue to buy their products.

I just wish nVidia would fix the TDR bug already.

Its basically caused by Flash, gpu clockspeed/voltage switching algorithms (they switch too fast), and broken fan controllers and yet for the last about 4 years nVidia has claimed they dont know whats been causing it.

[LordEC911]

What is with the big push for Gameworks right now? Most of the games seem meh.
Though the Turf Effects demo/teaser is something that I'm overly excited about and have been waiting forever for something like it.

[urbanfox]

What is with the big push for Gameworks right now? Most of the games seem meh.

Code written by Nvidia, heavily optimized for Nvidia and effectively lowers AMD performance. Ubisoft has been the biggest partner for this.

[Charles Wirth]

Far Cry 4 is going to be another blockbuster for Ubisoft. And it will play best on GeForce.

The Far Cry 4 PC and NVIDIA teams have built a cutting edge partnership that emphasis productive synergy, pushing our technology and quality level further than ever before. Together we built enhanced features to provide an incredible visual experience designed to immerse players in the beautiful, but dangerous world of Far Cry 4.

- Semen Kovalev Producer, PC version of Far Cry 4

Far Cry 4 PC version is loaded with NVIDIA GameWorks technology that will set the PC version apart.

We have been working together with NVIDIA on enhanced technologies to bring visual fidelity unmatched on PC.

- Semen Kovalev Producer, PC version of Far Cry 4

Today they released a video that shows the PC version of Far Cry 4 in its GameWorked splendor. You can see it here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Iewp3ws_gqE

On NVIDIA HBAO+:

Compared to previous techniques, HBAO+ is faster, more efficient and significantly better.

- Semen Kovalev Producer, PC version of Far Cry 4

On HairWorks:

In no other game does the importance of realistic, creditable wildlife play a more important role than in Far Cry. Far Cry 4 will take advantage of NVIDIA HairWorks technology to insure the lifelike movements and physical accuracy of animal fur.?

-- Semen Kovalev Producer, PC version of Far Cry 4

GameWorks libraries included in Far Cry 4 are as follows:

NVIDIA HBAO+ adds realistic Ambient Occlusion shadowing and shading around objects and surfaces that occlude light, with a higher degree of precision than other AO techniques, significantly improving image quality in every scene.

NVIDIA TXAA temporal anti-aliasing eliminates the distracting movement of anti-aliased lines and edges, and also eliminates other artifacts associated with anti-aliasing. Edge anti-aliasing is comparable with 8xMSAA, but at the performance cost of 4xMSAA.

NVIDIA God Rays Crepuscular rays (God Rays) are rays of light that stream through gaps in between objects (e.g. clouds or foliage) and create columns of lit air, separated by darker, shadowed regions. Far Cry 4 uses NVIDIA God Rays to enhance the dramatics of scenes in multiple locations.

NVIDIA HairWorks Dynamic Fur! Critters and beasts in Far Cry 4 are brought to life through startlingly realistic GPU-accelerated dynamic fur simulation from the HairWorks library in NVIDIA GameWorks.

NVIDIA ShadowWorks Percentage-Closer Soft Shadows (PCSS) is a technique designed on top of the original shadow projection implementation in Far Cry 4, and is enabled when Dynamic Shadows are set to DX11 Enhanced in the Graphics options. PCSS applies to all characters and provides major improvements such as; shadow edges become progressively softer the further they are from the shadow caster and high-quality filtering significantly reduces the prominence of aliasing generated by the original technique.


For more info, check out the media alert below:

Ubisoft and NVIDIA Close Collaboration Makes Far Cry 4 Reach Graphical Heights

Far Cry 4 PC System Requirements Revealed

SANTA CLARA, Calif ? November 6, 2014 Ubisoft announces today a new technology PC gaming development partnership with NVIDIA that will bring players closer to their games than ever before.

Thanks to the power of NVIDIA GeForce GTX technology, including the just-released GTX 980 and 970 GPUs, this holiday?s long-awaited FPS, Far Cry 4 will look even more beautiful. By integrating NVIDIA's GameWorks technologies, such as HBAO+ for realistic shadows, TXAA for cinema quality smoothness, as well as enhanced 4K support, Ubisoft is delivering cutting-edge content that allow PC players to become fully immersed in their gaming environments. In addition, Far Cry 4 also integrates NVIDIA Godrays technology so gamers can feel the sun beating down in the Himalayas, and NVIDIA HairWorks, for rendering the realistic, but deadly adversaries that will be encountered in the game.

Ubisoft also reveals Far Cry 4 PC system requirements:

Supported 64-Bit OS: Windows 7 (SP1) x64 / Windows? 8 x64 / Windows 8.1 x64

Processor: 2.6 GHz Intel? Core i5-750 or 3.2 GHz AMD Phenom? II X4 955 (2.5 GHz Intel Core i5-2400S or 4.0 GHz AMD FX-8350 or better recommended)

RAM: 4 GB (8 GB or greater recommended)

Video Card: 1 GB DirectX 11 compliant with Shader Model 5.0 or higher

Supported Video Cards at Time of Release: AMD Radeon? HD 5850 / 6000 / 7000 / R7 / R9 series, NVIDIA? GeForce? GTX 460 / 500 / 600 / 700 / TITAN series

Sound Card: DirectX-compatible (5.1 surround sound recommended)

DVD-ROM Drive: Dual-layer Hard Drive Space: 30 GB Peripherals Supported: Windows-compatible keyboard, mouse, optional controller (Xbox 360 Controller for Windows recommended)

Multiplayer: 256 kbps or faster broadband connection

Note: This product supports 64-bit operating systems only. Laptop versions of these cards may work, but are not officially supported. For the most up-to-date minimum requirement listings, please visit the FAQ on our support website at support.ubi.com.

If you are wondering whether or not your PC can run Far Cry 4 smoothly at the highest settings, please run the NVIDIA GPU ANALYZER (http://www.geforce.com/games-applica...4/gpu-analyzer) which detects your graphics hardware and compares it to the developer's recommended GPU specification for Far Cry 4. It's a quick and easy way to see if your graphics hardware will provide you with an optimal experience in Far Cry 4.

With Far Cry 4 players will experience the most expansive and immersive Far Cry ever, in an entirely new, massive open-world. Players will find themselves in Kyrat, a breathtaking, perilous and wild region of the Himalayas struggling under the regime of a despotic self-appointed king. Using a vast array of weapons, vehicles and animals, players will write their own story across an exotic open-world landscape. Developed by Ubisoft Montral in collaboration with other Ubisoft studios, Far Cry 4 will be available worldwide on November 18 for PlayStation4 and PlayStation3 computer entertainment system, Xbox One, Xbox 360 games and entertainment system from Microsoft and Windows PC.

To live the full experience please visit: www.farcry4.com

For more information about Far Cry 4: https://www.facebook.com/farcry

About Ubisoft

Ubisoft is a leading creator, publisher and distributor of interactive entertainment and services, with a rich portfolio of world-renowned brands, including Assassin?s Creed, Just Dance, Tom Clancy's video game series, Rayman, Far Cry and Watch Dogs. The teams throughout Ubisoft?s worldwide network of studios and business offices are committed to delivering original and memorable gaming experiences across all popular platforms, including consoles, mobile phones, tablets and PCs. For the 2013-14 fiscal year Ubisoft generated sales of 1,007 million. To learn more, please visit www.ubisoftgroup.com.

2014 Ubisoft Entertainment. All Rights Reserved. Far Cry, Ubisoft, and the Ubisoft logo are trademarks of Ubisoft Entertainment in the US and/or other countries. Based on Crytek's original Far Cry directed by Cevat Yerli. Powered by Crytek's technology CryEngine.


About NVIDIA
Since 1993, NVIDIA (NASDAQ: NVDA) has pioneered the art and science of visual computing. The company's technologies are transforming a world of displays into a world of interactive discovery for everyone from gamers to scientists, and consumers to enterprise customers. More information at http://nvidianews.nvidia.com/ and http://blogs.nvidia.com/.

[El Mano]

Games development is not being constrained by hardware, but by the lack of new and fresh ideas.
And spending more and more in hardware and graphics development is not helping at all.

I wish they spent all that money in better stories and storytelling, better user interfaces, better online capabilities, etc.

Seriously. Activision has been selling us nothing but mods for the original CoD:MW for what, ten years now? Little more than a new campaign for the same game, at a premium price.
No matter how good the graphics can get, games will still be boring. And you will still need to pay a ton of cash to run such graphic engines.