Jawed
Legend
- Status
Bouncing Zabaglione Bros.
Legend
The writing was on the wall at the beginning of the year, with quite a few people saying the chipset division was on the way out. If it wasn't for the handhelds, they'd have nothing to do. Nvidia chipsets are just no longer worth the premium given the high quality chipsets coming from AMD and Intel.
It's ironic that Nvidia kick-started that market with Nforce and showed what could be done and what money could be made in that high performance/quality chipset market. AMD grabbed its slice by buying ATI and their chipset team, and Intel had to rise to the challenge, leaving nothing for Nvidia.
Silent_Buddha
Legend
Well to be fair Intel haven't upped the quality of their chipsets. Intel chipsets have pretty much always been at the top or near the top in terms of both stability and speed.
Nvidia could only lay claim to having speed while their stability (and quality) was sorely lacking in many cases. Data corruption being the ugly one that manifested most often, but not all problems limited to that.
Support was also rather limited once Nvidia decided they didn't want to bother. Intel on the hand still supports many of their older chipsets even on the newest OSes. And when they don't the chipsets still retain sufficient support through legacy drivers. Just look at the launch of Vista for an example of this with regards to earlier Nforce chipsets compared to earlier Intel chipsets.
I'll certainly give Nvidia credit for raising the bar for AMD chipsets however. That was a virtual mess with VIA generally being hit or miss. And Nvidia definitely did some great things there to up the quality and performance of chipsets. ATI later came in and attempted to follow Intels path rather than Nvidia's path. Stability and support first. Speed later.
Regards,
SB
Nvidia could only lay claim to having speed while their stability (and quality) was sorely lacking in many cases. Data corruption being the ugly one that manifested most often, but not all problems limited to that.
Support was also rather limited once Nvidia decided they didn't want to bother. Intel on the hand still supports many of their older chipsets even on the newest OSes. And when they don't the chipsets still retain sufficient support through legacy drivers. Just look at the launch of Vista for an example of this with regards to earlier Nforce chipsets compared to earlier Intel chipsets.
I'll certainly give Nvidia credit for raising the bar for AMD chipsets however. That was a virtual mess with VIA generally being hit or miss. And Nvidia definitely did some great things there to up the quality and performance of chipsets. ATI later came in and attempted to follow Intels path rather than Nvidia's path. Stability and support first. Speed later.
Regards,
SB
So, after digitimes and charlie reporting it, them categorically denying it .. it now seems set in stone.
It also humors me to see who's getting his info from AMD and who's getting their info from nVidia.
Just follow the trail of "rv870 delayed untill 2010" and "nvidia will be the first with DX11, probably in the back to school period"
On a related note, According to nv VP Toni Tomassi, they are the only reason we have AA in our PC games.
http://www.fudzilla.com/content/view/15794/1/
(although, that's probably Fuad's IQ wreaking havoK on the "post processing" quote.)
sigh
It also humors me to see who's getting his info from AMD and who's getting their info from nVidia.
Just follow the trail of "rv870 delayed untill 2010" and "nvidia will be the first with DX11, probably in the back to school period"
On a related note, According to nv VP Toni Tomassi, they are the only reason we have AA in our PC games.
http://www.fudzilla.com/content/view/15794/1/
(although, that's probably Fuad's IQ wreaking havoK on the "post processing" quote.)
sigh
Last edited by a moderator:
Fuad is really drinking the kool aid, isn't he? 
jimmyjames123
Regular
Nice way for you to twist a conversation. Fuad didn't even directly quote Tony Tomassi in the article.
So for NV to talk about advancing PC games in TWIMTBP campaign with visual effects not possible nor practical on console systems, and to make new PC games superior enough to actually give people incentive to buy them instead of sticking only to console-based games, is now supposed to mean "[NVIDIA] are the only reason we have AA in our PC games"?
That's a huge stretch, but whatever floats your boat I guess
Last edited by a moderator:
Yeah, thanks for not including the line below it
Fuad is really drinking the kool aid, isn't he?
No, he's TOOL-aid.
Silent_Buddha
Legend
Yeesh, where does Fuad get his info?
I thought it was pretty common knowledge that R500 was somewhere between DX9 and DX10 (closer to 10 than 9).
At least he also gives a token nod to ATI also working to advance PC gaming.
Regards,
SB
I thought it was pretty common knowledge that R500 was somewhere between DX9 and DX10 (closer to 10 than 9).
At least he also gives a token nod to ATI also working to advance PC gaming.
Regards,
SB
DegustatoR
Veteran
It is definately closer to 9 than 10 although it does go beyond 9 and even 10 in some aspects.
Well the BIOSes have certainly become far more enthusiast friendly. Not sure if that required work on Intel's part too or if the mobo manufacturers just stepped it up.
Even if that was the case it certainly isn't reflected in the games....
Silent_Buddha
Legend
Well, Intel chipsets started getting more enthusiast friendly around the 440BX era, which predates the introduction of Nforce chipsets by about 3 years. 1998 vs 2001 if I have my dates correct.
I still remember having to actually change the clock crystal to overclock back in the 286/386 and early 486 days.
And it was pretty much all due to the MB makers. Intel has generally shied away from anything that would allow a CPU to run beyond spec on their own MBs. And back in the pentium days introduced clock multiplier locking, ostensibly to combat less reputable computer makers from overclocking chips and selling as if they were a higher grade chip.
Regards,
SB
Silent_Buddha
Legend
They introduced the multiplier lock simultaneously with the introduction of the MMX instruction set. The P166 MMX and P200 MMX were both multiplier locked. Not sure if the non-MMX versions also had multiplier locks introduced around that time.
Hmm, looking back Intel also introduced clock clocked 486's denoted by dx4. Can't remember if those came out before or simultaneously with the MMX series of Pentiums.
Regards,
SB
Hmm, looking back Intel also introduced clock clocked 486's denoted by dx4. Can't remember if those came out before or simultaneously with the MMX series of Pentiums.
Regards,
SB
You know Fudo actually agreed with Charlie today?
http://www.fudzilla.com/content/view/15813/1/
http://www.semiaccurate.com/2009/10...x275-gtx260-abandons-mid-and-high-end-market/
http://www.fudzilla.com/content/view/15813/1/
http://www.semiaccurate.com/2009/10...x275-gtx260-abandons-mid-and-high-end-market/
True dat
Last edited by a moderator:
Charlie says current GTXs are about to go EOL:
http://www.semiaccurate.com/2009/10...x275-gtx260-abandons-mid-and-high-end-market/
Is nVidia in such deep waters?
http://www.semiaccurate.com/2009/10...x275-gtx260-abandons-mid-and-high-end-market/
Is nVidia in such deep waters?
I've heard rumors about GTX 285 indeed being EOL'd and stock at various retailers starting to run dry already, but who knows if Charlie's story is at all accurate.
- Status
Similar threads
