Quote Originally Posted by Chumbucket843 View Post
CUDA is a computing architecture. the API for CAL and CUDA are both just C with extensions so they are really both proprietary. the API must have a compiler for both architectures. CUDA is not something you just port to another gpu. there would be really no point because they are the same thing.
I'm obviously talking about the CUDA API, not about the CUDA architecture. The CUDA architecture is something internal, as it's the ISA, and access is granted through other intermediate layers, so nothing to standardize here. It's their propietary API what they want to see used, nobody uses "architectures" directly...

Quote Originally Posted by orangekiwii View Post
As has been stated, its not exclusively for gaming. Its for bigger projects.

Deal with it.

If it is also a very good competitor in gaming...thats just a bonus from nvidias perspective.
That's exactly the problem, IMO (and it's extensible to the previous gen too).

NVIDIA is trying to reach a new (emerging) market, what they call the HPC market, with their architecture. The problem is that this new market isn't there yet, so they can't split their R+D and chip manufacturing in 2 different architectures and/or product lines, so they have to make 3D rendering chips (the current market) that are good for the HPC market.

That eats transistors, developement of the architecture, and so. So the resultant chip isn't specialiced to the 3D rendering market, and has difficulties to compete with other products that are (in an efficiency performance/features to cost manner).

I'm starting to think that's the main reason of the weak performance to size ratio of the past generation, and I'm starting to think that we are going to see a repeat in this one.