Guess not.
AMD: "[Developers use PhysX only] because they’re paid to do it"
- Thread starter Richard
- Start date
Guess not.
I think everyone has made their feelings clear on the batman:aa situation. There's no value in discussing arguments that are essentially "he said, she said".
Hopefully IHV specific optimizations (which harms competition and customers) will end soon. Nvidia funds are draining, and AMD havent shown much interest on screwing Nvidia and Geforce users. Next question is, how Intel will play when they finally get to the gaming? But its for another thread 
Hopefully IHV specific optimizations (which harms competition and customers) will end soon. Nvidia funds are draining, and AMD havent shown much interest on screwing Nvidia and Geforce users. Next question is, how Intel will play when they finally get to the gaming? But its for another thread
You think that one of the first things to cut back on will be their devrel?
I'm not a big fan of Nvidia's antics but isn't that the point? Of course they want to harm AMD, and it can't harm customers because consumers without Nvidia cards aren't customers
Richthofen
Newcomer
I'm not a big fan of Nvidia's antics but isn't that the point? Of course they want to harm AMD, and it can't harm customers because consumers without Nvidia cards aren't customers
Absolutely! This is called competition. Its up to AMD to step up but until i am more safe in the Nvidia department with general gaming compatibility i will favor their products. It's a natural thing as a consumer. And as a customer i expect from Nvidia that they do everything they can to help me enjoying my product. If AMD is not able to do that, then its AMDs fault and not the fault of anyone else.
I am really bored by all this whining from the AMD side, especially Mr. Huddy.
In other words, you want PC-world to turn into console world instead, where ultimtely you'll have nVidia compatible games and AMD compatible games, and need 2 machines to run all the games out there?
He's not saying that. He's saying that nVidia, for him, provides a better experience, and that until AMD can provide as good of an experience, he will continue to use nVidia.
Silent_Buddha
Legend
Actually since he was responding to a post commenting on Nvidia deliberately locking out other competitors through VendorID locks and other such things, he actually is saying that AMD should do the same and VendorID lock features to their cards in games.
Thus eventually splitting games into various camps where if you want to enable all features you must buy X card. And for the other set of games, you must buy Y card. Purely due to a vendor ID check.
Yes, Vendor ID checks sure do enhance the end user experience.
Thankfully, it appears Nvidia are toning down those sorts of things. Or at least Developer's appear to be less willing to allow Nvidia to do such things. Metro 2033 and Mafia being a couple of nice examples where even though they use PhysX, they still allow all GPU accelerated PhysX features to be present even if you don't have a supported GPU. And not the all or nothing BS of something like Mirror's Edge or Batman: AA. But adjusted for reasonable performance when a supported GPU isn't present.
So it seems that consumer outcry at the hideous PR fiasco that was Batman: AA may have helped either NV to decide to be more like AMD and make features work across the board, or made more developers give NV the finger by making sure features are available for all their customers.
Regards,
SB
In case of Metro 2033, as far as I know, read and seen, the Adv PhysX is 1:1 on CPU & GPU, and in fact runs faster on quadcore CPU than on any (pre-GTX4xx at least) GPU doing both gfx & physx
Well, what do you know to expect...
http://blogs.amd.com/developer/2010/11/04/introducing-the-ati-gpu-services-ags-library/
Actually he was saying that as an objective customer he will continue to purchase nVidia's products if they provide a better experience. All the whining and crying about aggressive marketing, paying off developers, proprietary features etc don't register with people beyond the enthusiast forums. Most people just don't give a crap about the nVidia vs ATi nonsense so when they see/hear that there is some feature that is nVidia only that's the only thing that clicks. And that's why nVidia still does it even with all the constant bitching at them. I presume the same goes for developers - most of their sales come from consoles anyway so a few million from nVidia is just icing on the cake. The crying from "PC gamers" who wouldn't have bought the game anyway probably doesn't matter to them.
You aren't seriously comparing that to what Nvida does are you?
No, I am just wondering if this is the public face of upcoming VendorID-blitz from AMD's side?
Well good question. However from the text on the site it looks inocuous (spelling) enough to me. It is all about exposing features which aren't available in the DX xx standard.
It always begins that way....
Well I guess we have to give them the benefit of the doubt
So long as they provide AlexV with a review sample
Bouncing Zabaglione Bros.
Legend
It always begins that way....
People always complain that AMD doesn't do enough to help devs, and now they are providing a library/SDK to help devs deal with Eyefinity and other AMD exclusive tech, you're complaining that they are using going down the road of vendor-id ? There is a big difference between the two.
And you know what? If that's how Nvidia wants to play the game, and a lot of people saying "more power to Nvidia for doing extra stuff to support their customers, and AMD should do the same", then those people shouldn't be surprised when the shoe is on the other foot. See how much they scream if vendor-ids are used to lock out Nvidia cards from DX11 or multi-screen code, or if Nvidia cards only work in 2D on AMD motherboards because of "testing issues" at AMD.
Nvidia are lucky that AMD take a higher view of these things, or they would be even more screwed than they already are.