• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

A call to boycott Nvidia games for ATI/AMD owners

Page 8 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
WelshBloke said:
Your doing it in a very one sided way though.

Do you feel the same when AMD sponsors a game or AMD does better in something?

Also your suggestion that AMD users boycott a group of games would be self defeating anyway if it happened. Why would a games company bother to make any of their games work well on AMD hardware if no AMD users were playing them.
Click to expand...

I would like to see AMD and nVidia be even more pro-active. Try to offer more differentiation and reasons why the PC are still compelling. Help developers even more, invest more, do more.
 
WelshBloke said:
Your doing it in a very one sided way though.

Do you feel the same when AMD sponsors a game or AMD does better in something?

Also your suggestion that AMD users boycott a group of games would be self defeating anyway if it happened. Why would a games company bother to make any of their games work well on AMD hardware if no AMD users were playing them.
Click to expand...

But usually AMD sponsored games run great on nVidia hardware, sometimes even faster.
 
mosox said:
Well, there's nothing wrong pressing an anti-anything agenda IMO. People still have the right to be against a Corporation if they feel cheated.
Click to expand...
Yes, but as part of a community it is harmful to post blatantly unsubstantiated accusations simply to gauge reactions in the hopes it proves one of your points. Really, who's being disingenuous now?

I don't care what company you or anyone else supports (or hates), just your refusal and/or inability to back up any of your assertions with solid evidence.

Have you emailed the AT staff with your review policy concerns yet?
 
There were times where AMD had a strong performance advantage with x8 AA. There were times where AMD had performance advantages based on 10.1 titles, when nVidia didn't offer the ability.

These were architectural strengths and yet some nVidia extremists didn't feel benching x8 AA was warranted based on it made AMD look good. Of course X8 AA was relevant; as was 10.1 titles.
 
Mistwalker said:
Yes, but as part of a community it is harmful to post blatantly unsubstantiated accusations simply to gauge reactions in the hopes it proves one of your points. Really, who's being disingenuous now?

I don't care what company you or anyone else supports (or hates), just your refusal and/or inability to back up any of your assertions with solid evidence.

Have you emailed the AT staff with your review policy concerns yet?
Click to expand...

The accusations are substantiated by the benchmarks. Ubisoft is the worst offender and claiming that all their shenanigans (I listed a few) over many years have nothing to do with their partnership with Nvidia is naive. I just don't buy that.

I didn't email them, I thought I might get banned for that (I'm not very liked in here). I still want to know the criteria for selecting the games featured in the reviews. Some transparency. I know that Nvidia (maybe AMD too) are pushing for the use of certain benches/games. Having transparent criteria would help the customers a lot.
 
SirPauly said:
I would like to see AMD and nVidia be even more pro-active. Try to offer more differentiation and reasons why the PC are still compelling. Help developers even more, invest more, do more.
Click to expand...

If by that you mean AMD and Nvidia diverge and we end up with AMD PC's that run one thing and Nvidia PC's that run another then I'd have to disagree and say that I think that would do a lot of harm to PC gaming.

If you mean that you'd like to see AMD and Nvidia working together within the open standards that already exist in the PC ecosystem to improve on the gaming experience for all PC gamers then I'd agree with you.
 
WelshBloke said:
If by that you mean AMD and Nvidia diverge and we end up with AMD PC's that run one thing and Nvidia PC's that run another then I'd have to disagree and say that I think that would do a lot of harm to PC gaming.

If you mean that you'd like to see AMD and Nvidia working together within the open standards that already exist in the PC ecosystem to improve on the gaming experience for all PC gamers then I'd agree with you.
Click to expand...

I think the players are working on Open Standards and improving standards -- always have. But ya can't force open standards and they have to be forged to eventually mature -- this takes time. Why should all consumers be forced to wait?

Ideally, I don't disagree but don't allow idealism to be the enemy of good.

Let me use Cuda as an example: Cuda is proprietary but based on its strengths, it helped shape OpenCL and GPU compute. How has Cuda hurt anything? It helped create more choice to consider.

Let's take the HDMI standard for 3d stereo -- it can't offer full resolution 3d gaming, so, for the PC, it's not really relevant yet for all. It needs time to mature. This is why nVidia worked with display manufacturers for 3d vision ready to me; to allow full resolution 3d gaming.

By saying proprietary is wrong is slowing down innovation and choice to me but not all roses based on it causes division and fragmentation, too.

Both AMD and nVidia are correct but both being disingenuous to a degree, too. While proprietary does bring chaos, division and fragmentation, well, it also brings innovation, awareness and choice, which hopefully brings open standards to mature over time.
 
Last edited:
WelshBloke said:
If by that you mean AMD and Nvidia diverge and we end up with AMD PC's that run one thing and Nvidia PC's that run another then I'd have to disagree and say that I think that would do a lot of harm to PC gaming.
Click to expand...

I agree. I think it would kill PC gaming. And whether something like it ever comes about is unclear --- I think developers would be stupid to limit their market, BUT, buckets of cash can change that, especially considering PC gaming isn't as profitable (or so we're told) and the pirates are stealing everything.

Nvidia is run by a PR imperialist. It seems willing to do whatever is necessary to have an upper hand (or, at least APPEAR as though they have the upper hand), and they are currently pushing a lot of detrimental aspects in that pursuit (in example, see the obnoxious tessellation factors in Hawx 2 and Physx in its entirety).

If you asked me whether Nvidia would ever try and split the PC game market, similar to consoles, I would say, ask me again when it has happened. And maybe it won't be a clear, full split, but it will be significant enough.
 
Continuity28 said:
Is that proven? I thought it was just a matter of nVidia working with these developers to make their games run well on their components, and AMD simply not being there to help the developers with their components.
Click to expand...

THIS.

companies don't intentionally program their games to cripple certain brands.

Nvidia has always been there with these companies to makes sure these games preform very well on their hardware.

This seem more of levels of pure fanboism/hatin on another company than anything else.

i swear, the levels that kids will argue over


EDIT: did anyone care to think about what kinda platform these games where programmed on?
 
Last edited:
Imho,

Okay, nVidia doesn't exist -- how exactly has your gaming improved? Does it help offer GPU Physics to the gamer? Improve upon CPU Physics! Improve Physics as a whole? Did it offer in-game AA for Batman? Did ya have the choice of tessellation at all in HawX 2? Did ya have full resolution 3d stereo? Did ya have transparency choice for DirectX 10 and 11?

Some are under the odd illusion, that if nVidia didn't offer these things, PC gaming would be better some-how. The only thing you're bitching about is actual choice to consider and taking choice away for this idealistic view of all the same. Happy gamers, holding hands, dancing around a camp fire, singing show-tunes in perfect, idealistic, harmony.

It is the competitive chaos and differentiation that moves gaming forward to innovate and offer value.
 
Mistwalker said:
Who's "we"? You're making a fantastic number of assumptions, right from your OP where poor benchmark showings for ATI = artificial performance crippling.

Then you have the audacity to ask no less than a half dozen times for other posters to prove you wrong despite having no solid presentable evidence at all.

You created the topic, made your assertions, and you are calling for a software boycott.

The burden of proof is on you. You need to understand this.

Question: have you emailed Ryan, or any staff here, with these questions? Ryan even responded to this thread and reiterated his email is always open. Have you made any attempt to collect any information about one single thing you're vaguely accusing people of here?

Nvidia has done some shady things in the name of competition, but AMD isn't a saint in that department either. Any possible valid points you have buried under the vitriol are completely ruined by the monumentally poor presentation of your arguments. Substantiate your many, many claims or you are simply a zealot making accusations.

I'm an ATI owner, and I think this thread is a travesty.
Click to expand...

Yeeeehar, way to go buddy!....this guy is unbelievable!, nice post!
 
Mistwalker said:
Who's "we"? You're making a fantastic number of assumptions, right from your OP where poor benchmark showings for ATI = artificial performance crippling.

Then you have the audacity to ask no less than a half dozen times for other posters to prove you wrong despite having no solid presentable evidence at all.

You created the topic, made your assertions, and you are calling for a software boycott.

The burden of proof is on you. You need to understand this.

Question: have you emailed Ryan, or any staff here, with these questions? Ryan even responded to this thread and reiterated his email is always open. Have you made any attempt to collect any information about one single thing you're vaguely accusing people of here?

Nvidia has done some shady things in the name of competition, but AMD isn't a saint in that department either. Any possible valid points you have buried under the vitriol are completely ruined by the monumentally poor presentation of your arguments. Substantiate your many, many claims or you are simply a zealot making accusations.

I'm an ATI owner, and I think this thread is a travesty.
Click to expand...

Well said Sir!
 
SirPauly said:
Imho,

Okay, nVidia doesn't exist -- how exactly has your gaming improved? Does it help offer GPU Physics to the gamer? Improve upon CPU Physics! Improve Physics as a whole? Did it offer in-game AA for Batman? Did ya have the choice of tessellation at all in HawX 2? Did ya have full resolution 3d stereo? Did ya have transparency choice for DirectX 10 and 11?
Click to expand...


I don't think anyone is suggesting Nvidia shouldn't exist. And to your point, there is one failing point to it --- Nvidia isn't the driving force behind those technologies.

All the technologies you listed (the only one I didn't get was the mentioning of AA in the Batman game.. that doesn't make sense) were/are already being motivated with or without Nvidia pursuing an exclusive application. Nvidia's insistence on "doing it there way", while isn't necessarily doing a whole lot of harm, but it points to a pattern of behavior that is likely to continue to persist and become even more extreme --- which will definitely be harmful.
 
Jionix said:
I don't think anyone is suggesting Nvidia shouldn't exist. And to your point, there is one failing point to it --- Nvidia isn't the driving force behind those technologies.

All the technologies you listed (the only one I didn't get was the mentioning of AA in the Batman game.. that doesn't make sense) were/are already being motivated with or without Nvidia pursuing an exclusive application. Nvidia's insistence on "doing it there way", while isn't necessarily doing a whole lot of harm, but it points to a pattern of behavior that is likely to continue to persist and become even more extreme --- which will definitely be harmful.
Click to expand...

Because without nVidia's work, no one would of received in-game AA and many DirectX 10 compliant cards from nVidia wouldn't of enjoyed the feature at all.

The reason why I desire IHV's to be more pro-active is because they can help improve upon what was originally intended. Of course, there may be some division, questionable aspects, grey territories but the key is what was originally intended. What will offer real harm is for the IHV's to do nothing.
 
I think that nVidia and AMD have equal shares in terms of technology overall on the PC platform. nVidia's approach of technology tends to be more closed source and propietary which only benefits nVidia hardware, like PhysX, CUDA etc. While AMD's had helped Microsoft developing standards that helps both vendors, like Tessellation, 3Dc+ known as BC3 and BC6 HDR compressions, Fetch4 known as Gather4, stuff like that.

I do also desire the IHV's to be more pro-active, but not in a way that will cripple the experience like nVidia is doing currently. The thing that AMD apported in games like Dirt 2, some DX11 specs etc works super b on nVidia hardware, but I can't say the same thing with PhysX or image quality stuff like AA. Batman AA anyone? At least the developers made up their mind and released the GOTY edition without the nVidia's MSAA(TM) DRM.
 
Last edited:
WelshBloke said:
But they would all be boycotting them on the grounds of them being evil and stuff.
Click to expand...

No. They would be boycotting them because they were designed to run like crap on their hardware. If they stopped doing that, boycott would end, everyone would buy their product, everyone would be happy. Well, everyone except nVidia, the evil b@stards. 😉

Seriously, I'm not saying all, or even most, of the OP's claims are substantiated. Just that your stance that a boycott is dumb because the business effected won't care about people who won't buy their product is illogical. The whole point of a boycott is to get the company's attention by hitting them in their pocketbook by not buying their product(s).
 
3DVagabond said:
No. They would be boycotting them because they were designed to run like crap on their hardware. If they stopped doing that, boycott would end, everyone would buy their product, everyone would be happy. Well, everyone except nVidia, the evil b@stards. 😉

Seriously, I'm not saying all, or even most, of the OP's claims are substantiated. Just that your stance that a boycott is dumb because the business effected won't care about people who won't buy their product is illogical. The whole point of a boycott is to get the company's attention by hitting them in their pocketbook by not buying their product(s).
Click to expand...


Why would (should) businesses care about people who wont buy their products?
 
I boycott whoever has inferior products. For quite some time now it's been Nvidia.. although their tactics seem dirtier and their company less ethical, they have made some good products in decades gone by.

I pretty much can get everything I need as a consumer from AMD or Intel though. AMD Fusion is simply impressive, and a good single sourced solution (not a hodge podge of every different company trying to get their hand in it like NV+Intel crud). And Intel has some interesting products, mostly just their SSDs for me. I'd prob avoid Sandybridge for CPUs and build an all AMD rig with a X6 processor if I needed a new rig today. I only buy "ticks" from Intel.
Tegra is just one of many products in that market for me to choose from, nothing mandatory there to buy.

So I say boycott, at least until they come out with some things that are head and shoulders above everything else on the market. They slipped into mediocrity which makes it easy to boycott them. They're reliant on Creative Labs style tricks now to get kids to buy them.. Physx (the new EAX), tessellation propoganda and 3d vision gimmicks (I've tried it and personally think its trash).
 
Last edited:
the goal of a business is not to make or sell a product. It is to make money.
Selling a product is a means to an end, and sometimes it is better to sell less for more. Or to cut a deal with another company and not sell at all.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top