nVIDIA Maxwell

[sontin]

Crystal Dynamics just gave Nvidia the middle finger. It had to wait until Lara Croft came out to write drivers for it. I doubt is is the only developer to shut Nvidia out. I'm thinking Nvidia is going to face that more and more into the future.

You are right. And Square Enix paid the price. :biggrin:

/edit: And we will see how much money AMD has to pay all of these developers. Ignoring more than 80% of the pc market is not really a sane business strategy. And looking ahead of 2013 there is not really much coming, hm? nVidia has Ubisoft (AC4, Watch Dogs, SC) and the new Batman game.

 

[Leadbox]

You are right. And Square Enix paid the price. :biggrin:

/edit: And we will see how much money AMD has to pay all of these developers. Ignoring more than 80% of the pc market is not really a sane business strategy. And looking ahead of 2013 there is not really much coming, hm? nVidia has Ubisoft (AC4, Watch Dogs, SC) and the new Batman game.

You like feeling excluded don't you? It is in the developer's interests to make sure their product works well on all platforms in order to maximize profit
Don't worry, you will be accommodated too

 

[sontin]

Not really. If you don't care for the PC as a developer you take the money from AMD or nVidia and run away with it. Better to get $10, $20, or $30 millions in one payment instead of waiting that people buy your products.

 

[3DVagabond]

Not really. If you don't care for the PC as a developer you take the money from AMD or nVidia and run away with it. Better to get $10, $20, or $30 millions in one payment instead of waiting that people buy your products.

Where did you get those figures from?

 

[Ibra]

You are right. And Square Enix paid the price. :biggrin:

/edit: And we will see how much money AMD has to pay all of these developers. Ignoring more than 80% of the pc market is not really a sane business strategy. And looking ahead of 2013 there is not really much coming, hm? nVidia has Ubisoft (AC4, Watch Dogs, SC) and the new Batman game.

Don't forget that Intel has 80% market share. So why developers would optimize their games for AMD? For console ports?

It's only a matter of time until all dGPU's go the way of the dodo. When AMD APU's get to 20nm production, it will really start to hurt discrete graphics.

But AMD fanboys said that Trinity will kill dGPUs. :whiste:

Infraction issued for inflammatory language.
-- stahlhart

 

[3DVagabond]

Don't forget that Intel has 80% market share. So why developers would optimize their games for AMD? For console ports?

Which is why you see so many AAA games with Intel iGPU as recommended hardware? Because that's what they optimize there games for that's what you would see.

But AMD fanboys said that Trinity will kill dGPUs. :whiste:

Who were these fanbois?

Please don't encourage trolls.
-- stahlhart

 

[Ibra]

Which is why you see so many AAA games with Intel iGPU as recommended hardware? Because that's what they optimize there games for that's what you would see.





Who were these fanbois?

And how many APUs in game systems requirements? Zero.

Short memory. Not good. :|

 

[3DVagabond]

And how many APUs in game systems requirements? Zero.

Short memory. Not good. :|

That was my point. I guess the sarcasm was too subtle. You were saying that optimizing for AMD would be cutting out 80% of the gamer market because that's the % of Intel iGPU users. My point was they don't optimize for that 80% now.

The naming names was rhetorical as well. Sorry, I guess I'm batting 0% on the wittiness meter.

 

[RussianSensation]

Not really. If you don't care for the PC as a developer you take the money from AMD or nVidia and run away with it. Better to get $10, $20, or $30 millions in one payment instead of waiting that people buy your products.

That makes no sense.

1) If you don't care to be a PC developer, chances are your game will run like a dog and in general will be crap. Then people will be so dissatisfied with your game, they will constantly complain on your forum and your firm will get poor reputation as a game developer with constant bugs/glitches/performance problems.

2) If your game is horribly optimized, a lot of people will decide not to buy it until faster hardware is available. Then instead of buying your game at launch for $40-50, people will wait until it drops to $5-10 to buy it they know you need a GTX780 to run it at 1680x1050.

3) Over time the developers will give access to AMD/NV even if the game is TWIMTPB or GE. Working together just gives each GPU maker with exclusive access in the beginning to better cater the drivers for their architecture giving them a head start. Also, they developers may expose certain feature set that benefits that GPU maker (TXAA option, PhysX, DirectCompute/Global Illumination, etc.)

Developers and AMD/NV work together to provide a more optimal gaming experience to gamers from day one. Both parties benefit. The difference is NV has been doing this for years and years and AMD has only recently started to get serious about it. As a result, we are going to see more and more games that run faster on NV cards and others that take advantage of GCN and unless a gamer can easily afford $1000 GPU setups, it'll come down to the type of games the person plays.

No one is stopping AMD/NV from developing a stronger GPU architecture that leverages OpenCL, DirectCompute, Tessellation, HDAO, etc. The feature that keeps fragmenting the industry is PhysX. If Maxwell is a modern DirectCompute architecture, it could easily trump AMD's best card in all the next gen games even if they are optimized for AMD.

 

[sontin]

That makes no sense.

1) If you don't care to be a PC developer, chances are your game will run like a dog and in general will be crap. Then people will be so dissatisfied with your game, they will constantly complain on your forum and your firm will get poor reputation as a game developer with constant bugs/glitches/performance problems.

That sounds exactly like Tomb Raider. :awe:

2) If your game is horribly optimized, a lot of people will decide not to buy it until faster hardware is available. Then instead of buying your game at launch for $40-50, people will wait until it drops to $5-10 to buy it they know you need a GTX780 to run it at 1680x1050.

That sounds exactly like Tomb Raider. :awe:

Developers and AMD/NV work together to provide a more optimal gaming experience to gamers from day one. Both parties benefit.

Tomb Raider anyone? And how are nVidia users "benefit" from such statements:

AMD (NYSE: AMD) today announced exclusive collaboration with Square Enix to optimize “THIEF™” for the Graphics Core Next architecture in select AMD Radeon™ graphics processors, [...]
And as the exclusive hardware partner for 'THIEF,'[...]

http://www.amd.com/us/press-releases/pages/amd-gaming-evolved-2013jun11.aspx

The difference is NV has been doing this for years and years and AMD has only recently started to get serious about it. As a result, we are going to see more and more games that run faster on NV cards and others that take advantage of GCN and unless a gamer can easily afford $1000 GPU setups, it'll come down to the type of games the person plays.

Sure, the marketing department could have it not describe better. So games like Tomb Raider "run faster on nV cards" compared to what? 3DMark?!

It is clear that you don't announce an exclusive partnership with the 20% company if you really care about the pc market.

 

[Leadbox]

snip

People in this thread had no problem running the game on nvidia hardware you ignored them though, pity.

 

[ShadowOfMyself]

Its amazing how a troll disappears and 2 more show up

Tomb Raider has been one of the most successful games this year, pretty much everyone loves it and considers it one of the best reboots of all time

Good job saying the game is crap just because your little Nvidia card cant run it as well as youd like

 

[Will Robinson]

NVDA have lots of cash to throw at this problem.I think they'll do just fine.:sneaky:

 

[f1sherman]

Well it's a new architecture and a new manufacturing process. Should be similar to the jump from G70 to G80 or from GT100 to GF100. Just because Nvidia has been stuck on 28nm for too long doesn't mean they've given up...

Though it wouldn't be a huge surprise if Maxwell is released at 28nm.
New architecture + new man. process is quite a risk.
http://www.3dcenter.org/artikel/der-lange-weg-zu-den-ersten-20nm-grafikkarten

 

[Stuka87]

You are right. And Square Enix paid the price. :biggrin:

/edit: And we will see how much money AMD has to pay all of these developers. Ignoring more than 80% of the pc market is not really a sane business strategy. And looking ahead of 2013 there is not really much coming, hm? nVidia has Ubisoft (AC4, Watch Dogs, SC) and the new Batman game.

80% Who/what are you referring too? Intel iGPU's? Why would any game maker optimize their game to run on those? Thats the only GPU with a percentage number that high. nVidia's are no where close to being that high.

 

[SirPauly]

Tomb Raider anyone?

TombRaider was a welcomed title with some added immersion like TressFX. nVidia are big boys and gals and for me was an opportunity to see their world class driver teams and developers go to work for their customers. nVidia apologized and did go to work. Tombraider may of not been ideal for all at the start but there was a lot of good over-all.

And how are nVidia users "benefit" from such statements:
http://www.amd.com/us/press-releases/pages/amd-gaming-evolved-2013jun11.aspx

Because it may be a fun title for PC gamers and the focus and awareness is still PC driven.

What do you want AMD to do? Not try to garner awareness for their fine hardware and to improve out-of-the box experiences for their current and potential customers? These investments from AMD and nVidia are so welcomed based on they promote PC gaming and trying -- may not be ideal at all times -- appreciate the experiences they're trying to deliver for their customers.