As was foretold, we've added advertisements to the forums! If you have questions, or if you encounter any bugs, please visit this thread: https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/240191/forum-advertisement-faq-and-reports-thread/

NVIDIA'S FERMI: cooking eggs and bacon on your graphics card.

24

Posts

  • ClipseClipse Registered User regular
    edited March 2010
    Azio wrote: »
    -Loki- wrote: »
    And the added bonus of continually evolving DRM.
    Why does everyone on this site always pretend like it's not trivially easy to find a crack for literally any game

    Because the average gamer does not actually understand how to do this. Myself & others here have mentioned things about DRM. But you have to watch what/how you say because of the forum rules.

    For people who have actually bought the game there is a legal grey issue with DRM. Which is why it's a touchy topic around here.

    It's not really a grey issue in the US. It's pretty much a black issue; the DMCA establishes that circumventing DRM is illegal even when done for fair use purposes.

    Clipse on
  • AzioAzio Registered User regular
    edited March 2010
    Clipse wrote: »
    On the other hand, if you're trying to say that evolving DRM is not a problem because anyone who wants to can download a crack, I think you are ignoring the quite inconvenient reality that many people do not want to deal with the potential pitfalls (both legal and viral) of cracks.
    fair enough, but there is also the fact that the DRM gamers love to sperg about actually works 99% of the time

    Azio on
  • ClipseClipse Registered User regular
    edited March 2010
    Azio wrote: »
    Clipse wrote: »
    On the other hand, if you're trying to say that evolving DRM is not a problem because anyone who wants to can download a crack, I think you are ignoring the quite inconvenient reality that many people do not want to deal with the potential pitfalls (both legal and viral) of cracks.
    fair enough, but there is also the fact that the DRM gamers love to sperg about actually works 99% of the time

    That may have something to do with the fact that the unfortunate 1% generally have no recourse. If a chair works 99% of the time and I buy it only to find that it falls apart as soon as any weight is rested upon it, I simply return it to the store and get either a refund or a chair which does not fall apart. With DRM, on the other hand, the refund is generally impossible due to store policies and the exchange is pointless because copies are identical.

    Alternately, it may have to do with the fact that the DRM generally does nothing whatsoever to stop piracy -- and, in fact, generally fails to even slow piracy -- and yet restricts the fair use rights of paying customers.

    Clipse on
  • ScrubletScrublet Registered User regular
    edited March 2010
    Clipse wrote: »
    The death of PC gaming -- whether it is happening or not -- is not really relevant to the GPU as a "toy." All current consoles and likely all next-gen consoles use nVidia or ATI GPUs. So long as games continue pushing for better graphics, the market for GPUs for real-time graphics purposes will still exist.

    I totally agree. However your point is pretty irrelevant considering that the GPUs (and how they interact with and share both their video RAM and system RAM) that have been in consoles thus far are VASTLY different than what goes into a consumer computer. On paper the PS3s specs seem rather hilarious, and it's more powerful than the Xbox 360!

    ATI and Nvidia will continue to have vast and diverse portfolios between their console solutions, the exponential growth of high power phone devices, Nvidia's high-power computing that this Fermi architecture is supporting, etc. I just think the market for GPUs in consumer desktops is going to shrink. I wouldn't be surprised to learn that it already has, though I don't know if that's the case or not and don't want to see anyone throw out an opinion on the subject without some numbers to back it up. Hell I mean consumer desktop sales are such a shadow of what they used to be.

    This is not to say that it's not possible for Nvidia to suck it up with Fermi and still come back. ATI and Nvidia both have long storied histories of losing COMPLETELY to the other side for one or even two architectures and then coming back with a vengeance.

    Scrublet on
    subedii wrote: »
    I hear PC gaming is huge off the coast of Somalia right now.

    PSN: TheScrublet
  • SakeidoSakeido Registered User regular
    edited March 2010
    PC gaming is dying again? Man oh man. I remember hearing that in 1996... 1999... 2000... 2004... 2006...
    newsflash guys: the Xbox 360 is a small form factor PC. Its success alone ensures ongoing life for PC gaming.

    Sakeido on
  • ScrubletScrublet Registered User regular
    edited March 2010
    Sakeido wrote: »
    PC gaming is dying again? Man oh man. I remember hearing that in 1996... 1999... 2000... 2004... 2006...
    newsflash guys: the Xbox 360 is a small form factor PC. Its success alone ensures ongoing life for PC gaming.

    God that's one of the sillier comments I've seen whether you agree with my argument or not. Maybe next time you could try to put forth one solid argument on how the 360 supports PC gaming.

    If you read what I said you'll note that neither myself, nor Loki, said PC gaming is dead. We said that if you look at sales figures, the prevalence of crossplatform games (particularly in old PC strongholds like FPS), and the continuous new restrictions put on previously open areas of PC gaming (centralized serving, invasive DRM), PC Gaming is becoming a less attractive console to develop on. Whether you think "PC gaming is dead/in decline/best thing ever" or not, you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about if you disagree with this statement:
    -Loki- wrote:
    the PC isn't the lead platform for development anymore, because the sales aren't there

    With all that, I suggested that the role of discrete GPUs, particularly huge powerhouses like the Fermi and the 5900 series ATI is going to drop. I mean head into the computer build thread...a huge chunk of the people in there aren't even buying the 5800 series. As less and less is required, these new cards are going to be less and less exciting. Hell, how far does everyone think we are from integrated graphics being capable of running WoW at respectable settings by anyone's definition? That Larrabee tech may not have developed properly but the idea is by no means dead. We can throw bullshit numbers like "PC gaming was declared dead in 1996" but laptops weren't outselling desktops by a large margin in 1996.

    Fortunately for PC Gaming, I think there's still plenty of incentive to continue to support it for plenty of years to come. But develop exclusively for it? I think we'll see a trend where PC gaming stays relatively close to on par with consoles for graphics in order to enable simple crossplatforming. And that will not be good for GPU development.

    Scrublet on
    subedii wrote: »
    I hear PC gaming is huge off the coast of Somalia right now.

    PSN: TheScrublet
  • SakeidoSakeido Registered User regular
    edited March 2010
    Scrublet wrote: »
    Sakeido wrote: »
    PC gaming is dying again? Man oh man. I remember hearing that in 1996... 1999... 2000... 2004... 2006...
    newsflash guys: the Xbox 360 is a small form factor PC. Its success alone ensures ongoing life for PC gaming.

    God that's one of the sillier comments I've seen whether you agree with my argument or not. Maybe next time you could try to put forth one solid argument on how the 360 supports PC gaming.

    If you read what I said you'll note that neither myself, nor Loki, said PC gaming is dead. We said that if you look at sales figures, the prevalence of crossplatform games (particularly in old PC strongholds like FPS), and the continuous new restrictions put on previously open areas of PC gaming (centralized serving, invasive DRM), PC Gaming is becoming a less attractive console to develop on. Whether you think "PC gaming is dead/in decline/best thing ever" or not, you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about if you disagree with this statement:
    -Loki- wrote:
    the PC isn't the lead platform for development anymore, because the sales aren't there

    With all that, I suggested that the role of discrete GPUs, particularly huge powerhouses like the Fermi and the 5900 series ATI is going to drop. I mean head into the computer build thread...a huge chunk of the people in there aren't even buying the 5800 series. As less and less is required, these new cards are going to be less and less exciting. Hell, how far does everyone think we are from integrated graphics being capable of running WoW at respectable settings by anyone's definition? That Larrabee tech may not have developed properly but the idea is by no means dead. We can throw bullshit numbers like "PC gaming was declared dead in 1996" but laptops weren't outselling desktops by a large margin in 1996.

    Fortunately for PC Gaming, I think there's still plenty of incentive to continue to support it for plenty of years to come. But develop exclusively for it? I think we'll see a trend where PC gaming stays relatively close to on par with consoles for graphics in order to enable simple crossplatforming. And that will not be good for GPU development.

    The Xbox 360 runs some operating system that is built around DirectX. Code written for the Xbox 360 can usually recompile for a Windows PC without too much trouble - hence the staggering amount of 360 to PC ports. While there still is a dividing line between the 360 and the PC due to interface differences, if a company decides they want to release a game on both platforms it only takes a very small amount of up-front work (and money) to make it a reality. Optimizing for each platform is a whole separate matter, but it certainly does not require a ground-up rewrite.

    "Develop on" is of no relevance to my argument. "Lead platform" yeah whatever. Then think of PCs greatest advantage.. cheapest content delivery system currently available. As usual, the PC is on the bleeding edge of innovation with systems like Steam. Until that type of thing reaches consoles the much lower cost of distributing a game on PC ensures that the almost-free 360 ports will continue to hit computers.

    So sorry, I have a much better idea of what I'm talking about than you do.

    And is that second half after the quote supposed to be a revelation of some kind? That not many people buy $700cdn 5900s? Well, I'll be damned! Not many people have ever bought those kinds of cards. Even the 5800s are "high end" products with a high end target market which by definition is small.. and right now that already-smaller market is coupled with the fact 5800s are new, and early adopters are again only a portion of a market's size. Shrinking? I seriously doubt it.

    Back to the GPU thing again.. if you had any familiarity with the workflow of 3D modeling for the consoles, you'd know that the assets you eventually see in game are (typically) created with a resolution in the millions of polygons and then low poly models are created and have mapping applied to get that resolution back. So long as these 1m+ poly assets exist, you can render them at higher resolutions specifically to target the immense power of a real gaming PC. So again, this is a relatively cheap step that most companies see as value added.. ever seen the PC versions of Mass Effect 2 or Street Fighter IV compared to the consoles? This trend you refer to already does not exist.

    While the blistering pace of graphical innovation we saw up until the advent of Unreal Engine 3 has certainly ended, that is not a bad thing. The speed with which developers push through more demanding games should not be taken as a measure of health of the PC industry, or the only possible reason for companies to put out newer, more powerful cards.

    For instance, forgive if I'm wrong but you seem to have missed out on Nvidia's paradigm shift.. where they have moved away from pure graphics performance towards huge number crunching performance (which is closely related to graphics). You know, CUDA and all that? It still comes with a corresponding increase in graphics power, sooo...

    TL;DR - PC gaming can't die because 360s and PCs have a ton in common. High resolution of modern game assets ensures that more graphical fidelity can be achieved at little cost on more powerful systems; coupled with the ease of porting from 360 to PC, this creates the niche necessary to warrant ever-improving GPUs like Fermi and the 5800s (CUDA and other uses notwithstanding)

    Sakeido on
  • Dark ShroudDark Shroud Registered User regular
    edited March 2010
    Let me chime in here about the compute build thread.

    We recommend the 5770 because the 5800 series is currently over priced and are still hard to come buy. The same goes for the 5970 since it uses the same chip as the 5800 series.

    Right now Asus & Saphire are working on 4gb 5970s. Saphire also has a special 2gb 5870 they're working on. Saphire will be showing off these products at Cebit, I'm not sure about Asus.

    Either way I'll buy one of those 5970s as long as it's not over $800.00. My Core i7 system is going to be used for gaming & video editing as well as programming when I get around to taking more classes.

    Dark Shroud on
  • autono-wally, erotibot300autono-wally, erotibot300 love machine Registered User regular
    edited March 2010
    If you don't want to actively burn money, there's about never a reason for someone to buy a "high end" graphics card for gaming.
    usually, until a game comes out that makes you really notice the advantage, you can probably get a midrange card and the cost of your original mid-range card + the new one is still less than a high-end card in the beginning would have been..

    autono-wally, erotibot300 on
    kFJhXwE.jpgkFJhXwE.jpg
  • EgoEgo Registered User regular
    edited March 2010
    Either way I'll buy one of those 5970s as long as it's not over $800.00.

    *grin* I'd wager a dollar you've got student loans.

    Ego on
    Erik
  • AzioAzio Registered User regular
    edited March 2010
    Clipse wrote: »
    hat may have something to do with the fact that the unfortunate 1% generally have no recourse. If a chair works 99% of the time and I buy it only to find that it falls apart as soon as any weight is rested upon it, I simply return it to the store and get either a refund or a chair which does not fall apart. With DRM, on the other hand, the refund is generally impossible due to store policies and the exchange is pointless because copies are identical.
    A software system is not a chair. 99% reliability is a perfectly reasonable statistic for a software system. In fact, software and computer engineers exert considerable effort trying to achieve 99% reliability under typical usage conditions.

    Most of the issues people experience with DRM schemes are due to some peculiarity of their usage scenario, whether it's the other software they are running or the condition of the machine, so the analogy of trying to return a broken DRM product as you would a broken chair simply does not hold. If you try to return a chair to the dealer because it wobbles, and the dealer (or chair manufacturer) places the chair on a flat level surface and determines that the chair does not in fact wobble when used in an ideal scenario, the dealer will simply laugh in your face and tell you to fix your floor.

    Azio on
  • ClipseClipse Registered User regular
    edited March 2010
    Azio wrote: »
    Clipse wrote: »
    hat may have something to do with the fact that the unfortunate 1% generally have no recourse. If a chair works 99% of the time and I buy it only to find that it falls apart as soon as any weight is rested upon it, I simply return it to the store and get either a refund or a chair which does not fall apart. With DRM, on the other hand, the refund is generally impossible due to store policies and the exchange is pointless because copies are identical.
    A software system is not a chair. 99% reliability is a perfectly reasonable statistic for a software system. In fact, software and computer engineers exert considerable effort trying to achieve 99% reliability under typical usage conditions.

    Most of the issues people experience with DRM schemes are due to some peculiarity of their usage scenario, whether it's the other software they are running or the condition of the machine, so the analogy of trying to return a broken DRM product as you would a broken chair simply does not hold. If you try to return a chair to the dealer because it wobbles, and the dealer (or chair manufacturer) places the chair on a flat level surface and determines that the chair does not in fact wobble when used in an ideal scenario, the dealer will simply laugh in your face and tell you to fix your floor.

    Congratulations on missing the point. Yes, 99% is good and impressive. No, that doesn't make it acceptable to tell the other 1% they're fucked. As for a store refusing to refund a chair... have you ever actually returned anything? Like, in your life? Only with software, music, and movies have I ever been hassled about returning something (or rather, trying to return something). I've returned a desk chair -- after assembling it -- simply because it wasn't as comfortable as I had thought, and the customer service person didn't even hesitate to give me a full refund.

    Further, if you're going to complain about my analogy being poor, perhaps you should take more care with your own. When you assume that the 1% of chairs which fail are doing so because of poor flooring, you are implicitly assuming that the 1% of cases in which DRM causes problems are because of an already extant problem on the purchaser's computer. This is, in general, not the case.

    Clipse on
  • psychoticdreampsychoticdream Registered User regular
    edited March 2010
    well that confirms it



    http://www.legitreviews.com/news/7489/



    NVIDIA GeForce GTX 480 Video Cards Require 600W Power Supply!

    For months that we have heard the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 480 video card is a power hog and today we find out for certain thanks to some cards being shown off at CeBIT. On the side of some retail boxed graphics cards it states that a minimum 600W or greater power supply (with a minimum +12V current of 42A) is needed for proper operation. How does that compare to other graphics cards? The ATI Radeon HD 5970 is a dual-GPU video card solution and requires a 650W power supply. The ATI Radeon HD 5870 would be the single-GPU card to compare a GeForce GTX 480 against and it has a suggest power supply of 500W. So, the GeForce GTX 480 needs a 100W larger power supply than the competitors high-end single-GPU solution.

    psychoticdream on
  • amnesiasoftamnesiasoft Thick Creamy Furry Registered User regular
    edited March 2010
    It's a good thing I have an 800W power supply then... assuming the card is reasonably priced and reasonably powerful...

    amnesiasoft on
    steam_sig.png
  • ScrubletScrublet Registered User regular
    edited March 2010
    You know Sakeido, I'm so bored with derailing this thread and debating this it would blow your mind. When every PC game is a game designed for the 360 and ported over you keep fighting the good fight about how PC gaming is alive and kicking. If you are just fascinated to hear why I feel only about half of your tech discussion was relevant and half was wrong or irrelevant, PM me and I'll debate you there.

    I find this interesting because at this point where does the 470 stand? Is it going to have the power supply that puts it on the level of a 5850 or a 5700 series? When the 5000 series came out we had a pretty good idea what was going to happen (5900 = huge overpriced status symbol, 5800 = high end, 5700 = mainstream gaming, and so on). Actual performance was unknown but the lines were relatively clear. With this 400 series, as far as I know we only have these two cards announced so far. That's a very narrow line to compete against the 5000s, particularly when all signs point to these cards not living up to their development cycle.

    Scrublet on
    subedii wrote: »
    I hear PC gaming is huge off the coast of Somalia right now.

    PSN: TheScrublet
  • SakeidoSakeido Registered User regular
    edited March 2010
    Scrublet wrote: »
    You know Sakeido, I'm so bored with derailing this thread and debating this it would blow your mind. When every PC game is a game designed for the 360 and ported over you keep fighting the good fight about how PC gaming is alive and kicking. If you are just fascinated to hear why I feel only about half of your tech discussion was relevant and half was wrong or irrelevant, PM me and I'll debate you there.

    It'd be a waste of my time, so I won't bother.

    Sakeido on
  • AzioAzio Registered User regular
    edited March 2010
    Clipse wrote: »
    Yes, 99% is good and impressive. No, that doesn't make it acceptable to tell the other 1% they're fucked.
    With the exception of the infamous Starforce incident (in which idiotic keyboard warriors who steal video games blamed DRM for their $20 chinese-made DVD drives wearing out) when has this ever happened?

    When DRM fails to authenticate paying customers and game publishers get bad press, they don't just say "sorry you're fucked." Heads roll, people lose their jobs, and testers and engineers are put to work trying to find a solution. Unfortunately, as anyone with any experience in computers will tell you, solutions don't always come easy.

    Azio on
  • FatsFats Registered User regular
    edited March 2010
    Azio wrote: »
    Clipse wrote: »
    Yes, 99% is good and impressive. No, that doesn't make it acceptable to tell the other 1% they're fucked.
    With the exception of the infamous Starforce incident (in which idiotic keyboard warriors who steal video games blamed DRM for their $20 chinese-made DVD drives wearing out) when has this ever happened?

    I thought the annoying bit with Starforce was that it knocked your DVD drive down to PIO mode.

    Fats on
  • psychoticdreampsychoticdream Registered User regular
    edited March 2010
    Fats wrote: »
    Azio wrote: »
    Clipse wrote: »
    Yes, 99% is good and impressive. No, that doesn't make it acceptable to tell the other 1% they're fucked.
    With the exception of the infamous Starforce incident (in which idiotic keyboard warriors who steal video games blamed DRM for their $20 chinese-made DVD drives wearing out) when has this ever happened?

    I thought the annoying bit with Starforce was that it knocked your DVD drive down to PIO mode.

    that too


    and i cant believe we got assassins creed's weird as hell DRM solution coming up

    psychoticdream on
  • psychoticdreampsychoticdream Registered User regular
    edited March 2010
    coming closer to fermi's release
    and naturally things starting to leak out



    WHAT DO YOU do when there is a major international trade show, and you can't even supply all your partners with upcoming parts? You threaten them, which is exactly what Nvidia did for its upcoming GTX480 at CeBIT.

    Just before the show started, Nvidia reps ran around and made their partners sign a ham-handed NDA list of what is acceptable and not acceptable to talk about at CeBIT. Nvidia is desperately afraid that numbers like this will leak out. Even though it is too late, Nvidia doesn't want it confirmed, so people must be shut up.

    Last week, several sites contacted SemiAccurate saying that Nvidia called them and threatened to cut them off if they linked to the above story. This time, they were smart enough not to put anything in writing, but we hear there is at least one recording floating. It should be hilarious it ever becomes public.

    At CeBIT, they were not nearly as tactful. Needless to say, this pissed off their partners in the extreme, to the point where two of them found the author just to show him the NDA. When you are backed into a corner and need friends, that is not the time to start threatening.

    The NDA looks like this, with text below the picture.

    Nvidia NDA header

    Nvidia Rules & Regulations
    Nvidia_rules_NDA_top.JPG
    Summary of Permitted Activities:

    *Public demonstration of GF100 in 3D Vision using NVIDIA supplied PC and content.

    *Public display of color box templates and disclosure of features and brand name information included in the NVIDIA retail box template

    Not Permitted Activities:

    -Public or NDA demonstration of GF100 using any other system or content than supplied by NVIDIA

    -Public or NDA disclosure of performance numbers or benchmarks

    -Public or NDA disclosure of clocks or any other product specifications outside of those included in the NVIDIA retail box template

    -Public disclosure of pricing or availibility

    -Public or NDA press briefings of GF100. Please refer all press inquiries on GF100 to NVIDIA PR.

    -Public display of GF100 mechanical sample

    * * *

    There you have it. While it may look pretty tame, it was accompanied by some threatening language in at least two of the cases. Well done, ATI couldn't have done more damage to the Nvidia name if they'd tried. You have to wonder about a memo that won't use a publicly disclosed product name.

    Most of the questions were answered a bit ago, but lets recap. The benchmarks are on par with the ATI HD5850 for the GTX470 and about 5 percent above the HD5870 for the GTX480, but both Nvidia cards run much hotter. Clocks are 625/1250MHz, way short of the intended 750/1500, and wattage is through the roof.

    Two box samples seen by SemiAccurate had no clocks or specs on them, quite telling for a product that will paper launch later this month. There must be quite a bit of panic in Santa Clara right now. Pricing wasn't set according to four partners talked with by SemiAccurate, and availability for the high-end part, at least according to what Nvidia has promised to deliver, is basically a few hundred units per vendor. Worldwide. Ever.
    from semiaccurate and a few other sites

    psychoticdream on
  • ScrubletScrublet Registered User regular
    edited March 2010
    It's like one of those times when a train wreck is coming but you just can't look away.

    Scrublet on
    subedii wrote: »
    I hear PC gaming is huge off the coast of Somalia right now.

    PSN: TheScrublet
  • Dark ShroudDark Shroud Registered User regular
    edited March 2010
    Scrublet wrote: »
    It's like one of those times when a train wreck is coming but you just can't look away.
    +1

    I just bought a 1000watt corsair power supply. But there is no way I'm buying a Fermi now. I was interested in Nvidia's 3D tech but damn this just isn't looking good for them.

    Alright, if I can get an X58 Hydra board I'll consider one of these. Thank God my Haf 32 can take 2 power supplies if needed.

    Dark Shroud on
  • amnesiasoftamnesiasoft Thick Creamy Furry Registered User regular
    edited March 2010
    So it sounds like, as it stands, the only potential outlet of success left for these is to outdo ATI on price...

    So the real question is, is it more suicidal for them to release these at $8 Hojillion a card, or sell them with almost non-existent profit margins? Cause these can't possibly be cheap to manufacture.

    amnesiasoft on
    steam_sig.png
  • psychoticdreampsychoticdream Registered User regular
    edited March 2010
    So it sounds like, as it stands, the only potential outlet of success left for these is to outdo ATI on price...

    So the real question is, is it more suicidal for them to release these at $8 Hojillion a card, or sell them with almost non-existent profit margins? Cause these can't possibly be cheap to manufacture.

    who knows
    but remember the sabrepc rumors?
    the 480 was marked at 600 while the 470 was marked at 500 or something like that
    if its true they were following MSRP then we are screwed

    psychoticdream on
  • ScrubletScrublet Registered User regular
    edited March 2010
    I cannot believe they would be stupid enough to MSRP a 500 card that can't beat the 5870, whose original MSRP was like 230 or something.

    Scrublet on
    subedii wrote: »
    I hear PC gaming is huge off the coast of Somalia right now.

    PSN: TheScrublet
  • FatsFats Registered User regular
    edited March 2010
    The 5870 started at $379.

    Fats on
  • ClipseClipse Registered User regular
    edited March 2010
    Azio wrote: »
    Clipse wrote: »
    Yes, 99% is good and impressive. No, that doesn't make it acceptable to tell the other 1% they're fucked.
    With the exception of the infamous Starforce incident (in which idiotic keyboard warriors who steal video games blamed DRM for their $20 chinese-made DVD drives wearing out) when has this ever happened?

    When DRM fails to authenticate paying customers and game publishers get bad press, they don't just say "sorry you're fucked." Heads roll, people lose their jobs, and testers and engineers are put to work trying to find a solution. Unfortunately, as anyone with any experience in computers will tell you, solutions don't always come easy.

    Heads roll, people get fired, and the customers still don't get a refund. I don't know if I'm failing to make this clear or what, but my problem is that the software industry seems to believe they are not responsible for ensuring that a product works. If I purchase software after doing my due diligence (checking system requirements, etc) and it doesn't work, then there should be two options here: patch, or refund. Instead, the options are to do nothing and enjoy your $50 frisbee or (if you paid with a credit card) go to the nuclear option and issue a chargeback. And the latter option is inadvisable with digitally delivered games because some of these services (Steam in particular) have an unfortunate habit of banning accounts that issue justified chargebacks. DRM is just one more way in which this can effect customers, in addition to bugs, unmentioned hardware incompatibilities, and so on.

    On a more on-topic note: psychoticdream, I wouldn't really trust semiaccurate for news about video cards. Every product nVidia releases gets slammed by Charlie Demerjian with the same accusations (overheating, unreliable, overpriced, paper launch, etc), and when he is right it seems to be primarily because of broken clock syndrome.

    Clipse on
  • psychoticdreampsychoticdream Registered User regular
    edited March 2010
    Clipse wrote: »

    On a more on-topic note: psychoticdream, I wouldn't really trust semiaccurate for news about video cards. Every product nVidia releases gets slammed by Charlie Demerjian with the same accusations (overheating, unreliable, overpriced, paper launch, etc), and when he is right it seems to be primarily because of broken clock syndrome.



    i hear that complaint a lot "charlie sucks' "charlie hates nvidia" "charlie has no source" "charlie bit my finger" (.. oh wait...)

    but when he gets proven again to be right people just suddenly forget who first mentioned it or again "broken clock syndrome" low chip yields? charlie mentioned that,
    fake boards being used at tech presentations? charlie talked about it when others pointed it out to him,
    low availability of certain boards? yeah.. you know who
    weird ass NDA's by nvidia? .. see a pattern?
    btw he's not the only one to mention those things just the most pointed out by those that defend nvidia


    too many coincidences going on to be honest

    psychoticdream on
  • SakeidoSakeido Registered User regular
    edited March 2010
    Sakeido wrote: »
    Scrublet wrote: »
    You know Sakeido, I'm so bored with derailing this thread and debating this it would blow your mind. When every PC game is a game designed for the 360 and ported over you keep fighting the good fight about how PC gaming is alive and kicking. If you are just fascinated to hear why I feel only about half of your tech discussion was relevant and half was wrong or irrelevant, PM me and I'll debate you there.

    It'd be a waste of my time, so I won't bother.

    Tom's Hardware arrives at the same conclusion I did, different arguments though http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/future-3d-graphics,review-31823.html

    Sakeido on
  • AzioAzio Registered User regular
    edited March 2010
    Clipse wrote: »
    Heads roll, people get fired, and the customers still don't get a refund. I don't know if I'm failing to make this clear or what, but my problem is that the software industry seems to believe they are not responsible for ensuring that a product works
    D:

    fully half the cost of a big budget game is accounted for by quality assurance but whatever, far be it from me to dispel you of your absurd imaginings

    Azio on
  • travathiantravathian Registered User regular
    edited March 2010
    Azio wrote: »
    Clipse wrote: »
    Heads roll, people get fired, and the customers still don't get a refund. I don't know if I'm failing to make this clear or what, but my problem is that the software industry seems to believe they are not responsible for ensuring that a product works
    D:

    fully half the cost of a big budget game is accounted for by quality assurance but whatever, far be it from me to dispel you of your absurd imaginings

    lol wut? Please invite me to your fantasy world.

    travathian on
  • ClipseClipse Registered User regular
    edited March 2010
    Azio wrote: »
    Clipse wrote: »
    Heads roll, people get fired, and the customers still don't get a refund. I don't know if I'm failing to make this clear or what, but my problem is that the software industry seems to believe they are not responsible for ensuring that a product works
    D:

    fully half the cost of a big budget game is accounted for by quality assurance but whatever, far be it from me to dispel you of your absurd imaginings

    How many fucking times do I have to repeat myself?

    If I buy software for which I meet the system requirements, and it doesn't work -- I CANNOT GET A REFUND.

    You keep dodging or ignoring this point and nitpicking everything else that I say. I don't give a shit if the company spends eighty seven trillion dollars on quality assurance! If I end up with a product that doesn't work, then I deserve either a patch or a refund. How hard of a concept is this for you to understand?


    Edit: psychoticdream, you're right that broken clock syndrome is not really a correct name for it. Charlie Demerjian reports everything bad about nVidia -- facts, rumours, and his own bizarre delusions. The facts, obviously, are perfectly acceptable. With the rumours, he tends to give any negative rumour about nVidia a huge amount of credibility regardless of the source. As for the delusions; he fairly regularly claims that nVidia is cancelling various GPUs or lines of GPUs (most recently he claimed the GT200 GPU was cancelled!) or that nVidia is going out of business/looking for buyers/etc. His sources are typically anonymous tips or bizarre interpretations of public information. Basically, trusting Charlie Demerjian for nVidia news is akin to trusting Fox News for news about the Democratic party.

    And, for further reading, someone has been keeping track of Charlie for the past year or so.

    Clipse on
  • Dark ShroudDark Shroud Registered User regular
    edited March 2010
    Looks like BFG is going Red!

    Also, Nvidia blames OEMs now.

    Ironic, I was just pricing a BFG GTX260 the other day. This was before I read up on the hardware support being disabled for PhysX if ATI cards are present in the system. Nvidia really doesn't seem to want my money.

    Dark Shroud on
  • ScrubletScrublet Registered User regular
    edited March 2010
    Sakeido wrote: »
    Sakeido wrote: »
    Scrublet wrote: »
    You know Sakeido, I'm so bored with derailing this thread and debating this it would blow your mind. When every PC game is a game designed for the 360 and ported over you keep fighting the good fight about how PC gaming is alive and kicking. If you are just fascinated to hear why I feel only about half of your tech discussion was relevant and half was wrong or irrelevant, PM me and I'll debate you there.

    It'd be a waste of my time, so I won't bother.

    Tom's Hardware arrives at the same conclusion I did, different arguments though http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/future-3d-graphics,review-31823.html

    In my VERY brief, not comprehensive at all skim of a couple pages of that, it looked like it was confirming my point that Nvidia has thrown itself towards GPGPU computing and couldn't give a shit about a business model centered on consumer graphics. But as I said, if you want to continue this PM. Either PM me and we'll have an intelligent discussion on this, or "it's a waste of your time" so get over it. But you'll notice the thread topic is not "is pc gaming dead"

    I would love to talk about this, but I'm not going to do it here, and I'm not going to do it if you're more concerned about "being right" and "knowing more than you" rather than intelligently debating why I look at certain things as market trends that indicate an inevitable flight path for this industry.

    Edit: checked out the end. Look I'm not debating that Nvidia is going to continue to make graphics cards. I'm saying that is going to become a VERY small part of what they do.

    Scrublet on
    subedii wrote: »
    I hear PC gaming is huge off the coast of Somalia right now.

    PSN: TheScrublet
  • lowlylowlycooklowlylowlycook Registered User regular
    edited March 2010
    Nvidia stressed that rebranded products are not likely to make it to the retail space, so that the enthusiast buying a GPU won't be faced with confusing rebrands. Those buying a complete PC, however, could be getting an older technology with a new name.

    Well the GTS 250 would like to differ. But yeah, everytime someone posts a pre-built computer that they're thinking of buying, I have to google the video card to see exactly how worthless it is.

    lowlylowlycook on
    steam_sig.png
    (Please do not gift. My game bank is already full.)
  • psychoticdreampsychoticdream Registered User regular
    edited March 2010
  • MetallikatMetallikat Registered User regular
    edited March 2010
    When I bought my new PC in October, I agonized over whether to go with the new ATI 5800 series cards, or wait on my PC for the Fermi cards. I'd been an Nvidia guy all my life with no experience with ATI products. I saw a few good reviews on the 5870's and decided to bite the bullet with a Crossfire 5870 setup. Looking at the current Fermi situation, I think I made the right choice.

    Metallikat on
  • GiantRoboGiantRobo Registered User
    edited March 2010
    Reading all this makes my PC feel old. It just got a nvidia 6800 last year... and that was after 4 years of an x300 hah... I think I'm going to be doing an upgrade soon

    GiantRobo on
    Be as gay as you can. You're already dressed as a pirate, that's a good first step.
  • psychoticdreampsychoticdream Registered User regular
    edited March 2010
    oh man...


    SemiAccurate wrong about Nvidia 480GTX power use

    March 12, 2010

    Nvidia world iconIF YOU WANT to learn about Nvidia's Tesla and GTX480 cards at GDC, don't ask Nvidia, they have problems with the truth. The real story is found with the users, and they have interesting things to say about the upcoming card's upward bound TDP.

    If you recall, the official story is that the card, in it's cut down and underclocked version, pulls 225W. That number, along with stunningly poor performance, has lead to some notable backpedaling. If that isn't bad enough, some sources at GDC told SemiAccurate that Nvidia jacked the TDP up 50W last week without warning.

    We will be the first to admit we were wrong about the TDPs of the cards. At CES we said the GTX480s shown there were pulling 280W, something Nvidia vehemently denied. Engineers beavering away at the things Dear Leader thinks are important, the style of wheels for his Ferrari, have been pulled off to work on cards for some unfathomable reason. Working hard, they have managed to reduce the TDP of the cards 5W to 275W. Yeah, Nvidia finally admitted that the card is the burning pig anyone who has used one knows it is.

    There are two problems here, one internal and one external. The internal one is that this is a big flag saying they admit defeat, and have no hope of fixing the problems that plague the chip. Nvidia can't get the power to a reasonable level, and that is the end of it. The only way to get numbers of chips to salable quantities is to jack power through the roof to mask the broken architecture, so that is what they are doing.

    More problematic is what about the OEMs? Officially raising the TDP three weeks before launch by a very substantial 50W is massively stupid, you just can't do this to OEMs without causing them lots of pain. For high end desktops with lots of space, that can be worked around, but if the system is a little closer to the edge, 20+% more TDP can have a profound and negative effect on cooling.

    Even worse, think about all the companies that make Fermi based Tesla cards. If you put four in a system, and Nvidia jacks TDP 50W per card, that is 200W more you have to dissipate. Three weeks before launch, your cases are built and in a warehouse, your cooling system is finished, and you don't have time to change things, much less test them. 200W is a lot in a 2U server case. 21 of these in a 42U rack is an added 4.2kW that you need to dissipate, roughly 3 hair dryers on full blast.

    Then there are the laptops. I feel bad for those guys, first Bumpgate, now this. There is no way you can redesign a laptop cooling system in six months, much less three weeks. Silly ODMs, no cookie, but you will probably be blamed by Nvidia PR for 'screwing up' so badly.

    In the end, Fermi is turning into a running bad joke. You have to wonder about how many high margin orders will be shown the door when word of this leaks out. Nvidia may be "Oak Ridged" a few more times yet.

    psychoticdream on
Sign In or Register to comment.