Three Nvidia blog posts and an Nvidia press release? I know you're trolling so I shouldn't bite but at least try a bit harder.
Or maybe Nvidia users using cutting edge OS?
http://blogs.nvidia.com/blog/2014/01/23/oscar-noms/
http://blogs.nvidia.com/blog/2012/02/27/oscar-goes-to-hugo-rango-nvidia-quadro/
http://www.marketwired.com/press-re...r-best-visual-effects-nasdaq-nvda-1395967.htm
http://blogs.nvidia.com/blog/2014/10/03/gone-girl-nvidia/
While Quadro earning money, Firepro being... well... open standard.
The other point is that in some extreme critical applications, what you need is stability above everything else, and here's where Nvidia excel. The company I work for has thousands of Quadro and Tesla cards, if a guy detects a bug Nvidia will take care of it. Our experience with AMD cards wasn't so good, their support was not on par with Nvidia, so in the end it became an official guideline for the company to not to acquire AMD GPU cards.
.
You know.. This sounds familiar.
Oh wait.... OriginPC drops AMD for lack of support.
It's very common. And doesn't have anything to do with what is going on on the surface. Backdoor business.
You are a victim of you own company coolaid.
You know.. This sounds familiar.
Oh wait.... OriginPC drops AMD for lack of support.
It's very common. And doesn't have anything to do with what is going on on the surface. Backdoor business.
You are a victim of you own company coolaid.
For the most expensive CAD applications performance/$ is meaningless, because we're talking about very expensive resources working with very expensive software working on very expensive projects, so the cost of going for the top performer is marginal in the big scheme of things.
The other point is that in some extreme critical applications, what you need is stability above everything else, and here's where Nvidia excel. The company I work for has thousands of Quadro and Tesla cards, if a guy detects a bug Nvidia will take care of it. Our experience with AMD cards wasn't so good, their support was not on par with Nvidia, so in the end it became an official guideline for the company to not to acquire AMD GPU cards.
So it's easy to assume that the BoD of my company is corrupt than accept that AMD professional support could have bern a failure at the time of the decision? Yeah, *I* should be drinking a lot of kool-aid as of lately. How many professional cards have you tested in seismic applications?
AMD is taking a trashing. At this point they should just sell the GPU patents and focus on their ARM designs. Let someone like Intel bring ATI back to it's former glory!
To bring back ATI to it's former glory, all AMD needs to do is lower their card's TDP,
and maybe fire AMD_Roy from their Company.
What AMD sells is more than hardware, it is hardware + brand + support + ecosystem. If they have a problem in developing the other components of their products, be it for outright incompetence or for lack of proper resources allocated to the task, they can only blame themselves and themselves alone.
I get by far the superior SSAA
I disagree. In these forums for example, representing the techies, I think it's closer to 50/50. Imo it's the non techies that push nvidia to the 65-70%. Brand presence has more sway with non techies than techies I would imagine because we are more likely to be better informed, and make a purchasing decision based on price/performance/etc, rather than brand name. Heck back when amd made good cpus, wouldn't you have bought one, assuming you are a techie? However, ask a non-techie what amd is and you'll probably get a blank look, but I bet they know what Intel is.
The most power hungry graphics card was the Radeon R9 290 with an average draw of 238 Watts and a peak of 356 Watts. The GeForce GTX 780 Ti came in with an average of 265 Watts and a max of 360 Watts.
If Apple were to buy AMD, drop all NV cards from its products, rebrand all AMD Radeon to Apple i-series, NV's market share would drop so fast, they wouldn't know what hit them. The problem with AMD is AMD not the technical characteristics or drivers of its products.
How do you conclude this? Do you even know how much flexibility there is with nVidia?
You are just reinforcing my point, marketing and supply chain *are* a very significant components of a product. If AMD can't advertise their products correctly and can't make them reach the consumers (as you noticed in a few posts ago that you couldn't get AMD products), why do you think the fault lies with the consumer? It was AMD who was supposed to *advertise* their products, you know, construct a case showing their very good value proposition and spread that word urbi et orbi, as you have been competently making on this forum. If they have such a good value proposition and don't build a case for them, I can only think of two possibilities:
1) They *are* incompetent
2) It's not worth it
I think we can discard 1, so we're going 2). Both companies before stopping reporting numbers exclusively for the consumer market didn't really make money with consumer cards. Nvidia had low operational margins and AMD never ever could stay much further than break even. So for AMD going itself deeper into red to fight for a very low margin market shouldn't be worth it. That they will lose share for this decision is only their fault, not the consumer's.
Same with the supply chain issues. If you can't find AMD cards in a given country, it's not because customers or retailers there are Nvidia Fanboys, but because AMD isn't building the supply chain up. How are they expect to win a fight if they are not even showing up?
You are an exception as a consumer. You don't buy a product, you buy hardware. To reach those conclusions you did (a job that AMD was supposed to help you to do), you had to spend a lot of time thinking and researching about the hardware you want to buy, so you could discard the marketing part of the product you were pondering about acquiring and have the means to access AMD products. Most people don't want or don't have the time to enter in the same rabbit hole you did, and your Apple example fits this bill nicely: AMD's products would get the "it works" marketing aura of each Apple's product, and would get Apple's supply chain support, which is one of the best of the market.
Keep in mind that AMD thoroughly trashed its brand with the screw ups on the CPU market. It sure has an impact on the GPU sales.
As side note, regarding the software support on the professional market, I can't really say about today, but in previous years the support was really subpar. But I must say that in terms of raw performance the cards are very good, and I've been people telling lots of good things on some other forums. I'm thinking about recommending a reevaluation on the GPU acquisition policy, last least for low complexity projects. And I'm not telling that Nvidia was 20+ years better than AMD, but I can't really recall a time where Nvidia didn't have excellent software support on the professional market. That's why they took this market all for themselves, and they get all the profits too (while AMD couldn't make a penny).
You and I both know most NV users are unaware of this. Again, chuck another major graphics issue to ignore / not important status because NV...
Because as has been shown with VSR vs. DSR and traditional Super-sampling analysis by ComputerBase, NV induces more blur and even has contrast issues. It's all there at Conputerbase. It's not in every game but there are enough examples that peoce AMD's super-sampling produces superior IQ in enough games for this not to be a fluke.
This ^
Add to the fact that AMD has people like AMD_Roy working for them who often makes childish comments about their competitors, which only hurts their brand value in return.
I noticed this in a link that was provided in the CPU forum :
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=nvamd_binary_comparison&num=8
The most power hungry graphics card was the Radeon R9 290 with an average draw of 238 Watts and a peak of 356 Watts. The GeForce GTX 780 Ti came in with an average of 265 Watts and a max of 360 Watts.
So even if it consume less it MUST consume more, i dont understand such "articles" and "authors", are we supposed to be stupid that much.?.
Anyway good viral marketing from Phoronix, AMD should pay attention to the damages brought by theses kind of lies wich are spread ad nauseam here and there.
You are just reinforcing my point, marketing and supply chain *are* a very significant components of a product. If AMD can't advertise their products correctly and can't make them reach the consumers (as you noticed in a few posts ago that you couldn't get AMD products), why do you think the fault lies with the consumer? It was AMD who was supposed to *advertise* their products, you know, construct a case showing their very good value proposition and spread that word urbi et orbi, as you have been competently making on this forum.
What?You don't buy a product, you buy hardware.
Then nvidia and intel should be known as slow and power hungry junk - tegra and atom.Keep in mind that AMD thoroughly trashed its brand with the screw ups on the CPU market. It sure has an impact on the GPU sales.
If full RGB over HDMI is the worst you can come up with for nVidia. Then they are in pretty good shape. At least it didnt take 3 years to partially fix monitor sleep.
For some unknown reason AMD has a poor track record of executives acting unprofessionally like this: Roy Taylor, Richard Huddy, John Fruehe, Randy Allen, Mike Houston, among others. But whenever you find these guys working for other companies, they tend to talk a lot less BS than when they were at AMD. AMD as a company has structural PR problems and marketing problems.
It has not gone unnoticed. I think that they just cannot, for whatever reason, find the right people to do the right job. Finding good people is very difficult if they are all taken up by other companies. Not saying this is the case, but it sure seems that way sometimes. It's like every person they aquire to do a job is worse than the ones they are replacing. Look at the CEO chain of events. Very unfortunate.
You are just reinforcing my point, marketing and supply chain *are* a very significant components of a product. If AMD can't advertise their products correctly and can't make them reach the consumers (as you noticed in a few posts ago that you couldn't get AMD products), why do you think the fault lies with the consumer? It was AMD who was supposed to *advertise* their products, you know, construct a case showing their very good value proposition and spread that word urbi et orbi, as you have been competently making on this forum. If they have such a good value proposition and don't build a case for them, I can only think of two possibilities:
1) They *are* incompetent
2) It's not worth it
I think we can discard 1, so we're going 2). Both companies before stopping reporting numbers exclusively for the consumer market didn't really make money with consumer cards. Nvidia had low operational margins and AMD never ever could stay much further than break even. So for AMD going itself deeper into red to fight for a very low margin market shouldn't be worth it. That they will lose share for this decision is only their fault, not the consumer's.
Same with the supply chain issues. If you can't find AMD cards in a given country, it's not because customers or retailers there are Nvidia Fanboys, but because AMD isn't building the supply chain up. How are they expect to win a fight if they are not even showing up?
You are an exception as a consumer. You don't buy a product, you buy hardware. To reach those conclusions you did (a job that AMD was supposed to help you to do), you had to spend a lot of time thinking and researching about the hardware you want to buy, so you could discard the marketing part of the product you were pondering about acquiring and have the means to access AMD products. Most people don't want or don't have the time to enter in the same rabbit hole you did, and your Apple example fits this bill nicely: AMD's products would get the "it works" marketing aura of each Apple's product, and would get Apple's supply chain support, which is one of the best of the market.
Keep in mind that AMD thoroughly trashed its brand with the screw ups on the CPU market. It sure has an impact on the GPU sales.
As side note, regarding the software support on the professional market, I can't really say about today, but in previous years the support was really subpar. But I must say that in terms of raw performance the cards are very good, and I've been people telling lots of good things on some other forums. I'm thinking about recommending a reevaluation on the GPU acquisition policy, last least for low complexity projects. And I'm not telling that Nvidia was 20+ years better than AMD, but I can't really recall a time where Nvidia didn't have excellent software support on the professional market. That's why they took this market all for themselves, and they get all the profits too (while AMD couldn't make a penny).
Then nvidia and intel should be known as slow and power hungry junk - tegra and atom.