Why does nvidia cheat so much?

[blackened23]

So i've been reading up on some of the shinanigans that nvidia has done on "nvidia - the way its meant to be played" games.

I can't believe the lengths nvidia has gone through to purposely hijack games to run worse on AMD hardware. I won't go into long details, but nvidia paid crytek US 2 million to delay their DX11 port, and nvidia implemented it *themselves* by applying tesselation on non visible, water, and flat objects. If you read up on this, these tactics were purposely done to hijack crysis 2 on anything that isn't nvidia hardware -- and it does not improve image quality AT ALL (on flat objects and water...and especially non visibile objects under the world -- yes they did that.)

Outright scumbaggery. They did the same with Batman: AA in 2009. This is the same company that in 2003 manipulated their drivers to disable features in 3d benchmarks to get inflated results - back then tomshardware called them out on it, and they admitted to cheating. Good to see that their cheating hasn't ended.

I can't believe they for the most part, haven't been called out on this.

 

[Barfo]

So has AMD, back then they were also applying optimizations for benchmarks through their drivers, same as Nvidia.

Though I have to say Nvidia looks worse to me in the anti-consumer practices department.

 

[blackened23]

So has AMD, back then they were also applying optimizations for benchmarks through their drivers, same as Nvidia.

Though I have to say Nvidia looks worse to me in the anti-consumer practices department.

I don't know of any specific instance where ATI/AMD has specifically applied code to a game to make it run worse on nvidia hardware. DX:HR supports AMD features but does NOT have code to hijack it on nvidia hardware. It runs well on both platforms.

I could be wrong, but AMD seems much more ethical than nvidia. Nvidia seems to have a long history of scumbag practices from what i've been reading....almost makes me want to cancel my GTX 580 order for my 2nd PC.

Please explain to me why nvidia paid EA to disable in game AA in batman:AA for everything *except* nvidia hardware? This forces ATI users to use AA through drivers which is lower performance than in game AA. Driver AA applies AA to everything, while in game AA applies it where it is needed. There is no excuse for anti consumer practices like this.

 

[Red Storm]

We should probably nip this one in the bud before it breaks out into something worse...

Yes, Nvidia has done some stuff in their time. AMD/ATI has also done some stuff in their time. Any company will do just about whatever they can to ensure their survival and future success.

In the interest of avoiding yet another flame war, /thread?

 

[blackened23]

Specific example of AMD hijacking a game to run worse on nvidia hardware.

Name one?

AFAIK ATI years ago cheated on synthetic benchmarks. To my knowledge they didn't screw consumbers by HIJACKING GAMES to run worse on non ATI hardware.

Name an example if i'm wrong with specifics on how they cheated, what features they disabled on nvidia hardware.

 

[Genx87]

This is good. Implementing a core feature of DX11 is now considered cheating.

 

[houe]

why do they do it? do you really have to ask that question? They do it because it works. It sells cards and makes them bux. People might say they are outraged and such, but in the end we talk with our money and having the best performance is most important to most no matter how it is achieved.

 

[Rvenger]

Yes but don't you remember the FX5900 Ultra and how Nvidia tweaked the detonator drivers to exceed in 3dmark 03? I believe Nvidia started all this nonsense.

 

[Genx87]

why do they do it? do you really have to ask that question? They do it because it works. It sells cards and makes them bux. People might say they are outraged and such, but in the end we talk with our money and having the best performance is most important to most no matter how it is achieved.

Not that I agree that Nvidia is cheating. But what you describe is pretty spot on. People will complain then go out and buy their cards because they are faster.

Reminds me of this great pic.

http://img5.imageshack.us/img5/6062/1258035395841.jpg

 

[blackened23]

This is good. Implementing a core feature of DX11 is now considered cheating.

This is WONDERFUL. Thanks for your enlightened, non educated response.

http://techreport.com/articles.x/21404/1

Now read that FROM START TO FINISH and educate yourself as to what nvidia REALLY did, and yes, THEY DID HIJACK the game for non nvidia hardware.

 

[blackened23]

http://www.techpowerup.com/104868/B...nables_AA_Only_on_NVIDIA_Hardware_on_PCs.html

Or how about explaining that one. Nvidia disbaled ingame AA on *all* non nvidia hardware because they entered a "financial agreement" with EA and had a hand in development. Do you deny what they did or do you just want to follow them like a sheep?

 

[Genx87]

This is WONDERFUL. Thanks for your enlightened, non educated response.

http://techreport.com/articles.x/21404/1

Now read that FROM START TO FINISH and educate yourself as to what nvidia REALLY did, and yes, THEY DID HIJACK the game for non nvidia hardware.

There is already a thread on this, one you posted within.

Debate it there if you wish.

 

[Genx87]

http://www.techpowerup.com/104868/B...nables_AA_Only_on_NVIDIA_Hardware_on_PCs.html

Or how about explaining that one. Nvidia disbaled ingame AA on *all* non nvidia hardware because they entered a "financial agreement" with EA and had a hand in development.

Nvidia isn't cheating at all

Do you deny what they did or do you just want to follow them like a sheep?

They wrote the AA for that game. Why shouldnt they be allowed to do what they like with the code? Better question, why didnt AMD write similar code? Well they did, but it requires one to buy a special edition of the game to get AA on AMD hardware.

These two examples have been debated to death.

 

[blackened23]

They wrote the AA for that game. Why shouldnt they be allowed to do what they like with the code? Better question, why didnt AMD write similar code? Well they did, but it requires one to buy a special edition of the game to get AA on AMD hardware.

These two examples have been debated to death.

What special edition of the game would that be. The one where nvidia didn't exchange millions of dollars with EA to get rights to it? Because that did happen, you can easily verify it through google if you wish.

Please explain how broadly disabling AA on all non nvidia hardware is an ethical practice. Please tell me why EA would need *nvidia* to code AA. Coding AA isn't a difficult thing to do , and certainly doesn't require a graphics cards company. I find it hilarious that you're even defending that.

Furthermore, lets look at the hundreds of games with in game AA and how they were never influenced by GPU makers, but instead coded by the developers themselves. Face it, nvidia did this not for the good of the game, but just to put their hardware in a better light. Even if it wasn't ethical.

You can say what you want about AMD but they have never made malicious code to make games run WORSE on non AMD hardware, that i'm aware of. Nvidia has done this many times.

 

[OVerLoRDI]

This should be good...

 

[DaveSimmons]

Repost, we've already had long flamewars about Batman:AA and Crysis 2 and you don't offer any specifics about your claimed "many times."

This is the same company that in 2003 manipulated their drivers to disable features in 3d benchmarks to get inflated results

Also a repost, and both companies have a long history of this. AMD has done this more recently than nvidia, using lower default image quality to fool reviewers.

OK, I'll join in:
- nvidia ships drivers that burn out cards!
- AMD ships drivers that blue screen, and their control panel crashes!
- nvidia blocks PhysX from running with AMD for no good reason!
- Lisa needs braces!
- DENTAL PLAN!

 

[SirPauly]

What special edition of the game would that be. The one where nvidia didn't exchange millions of dollars with EA to get rights to it? Because that did happen, you can easily verify it through google if you wish.

Please explain how broadly disabling AA on all non nvidia hardware is an ethical practice. Please tell me why EA would need *nvidia* to code AA. Coding AA isn't a difficult thing to do , and certainly doesn't require a graphics cards company. I find it hilarious that you're even defending that.

Furthermore, lets look at the hundreds of games with in game AA and how they were never influenced by GPU makers, but instead coded by the developers themselves. Face it, nvidia did this not for the good of the game, but just to put their hardware in a better light. Even if it wasn't ethical.

You can say what you want about AMD but they have never made malicious code to make games run WORSE on non AMD hardware, that i'm aware of. Nvidia has done this many times.

The GOTY edition which has in-game AA for AMD hardware. Information is your friend.

 

[96Firebird]

The amount of links to support claims in this thread is staggering...

No source in thread title?

 

[notty22]

The amount of links to support claims in this thread is staggering...

No source in thread title?

Why go in to long details, go ahead use google educate yourself /sarcasm...

 

[blackened23]

Links have been provided, but I blindly follow nvidia because I own nvidia hardware. They can do no wrong because hey..their anti consumer practices don't affect me.

 

[96Firebird]

I read your links, nowhere do they have any info about Nvidia paying any sum of money to Crytek. Still looking for the source of that...

I can't believe the lengths nvidia has gone through to purposely hijack games to run worse on AMD hardware. I won't go into long details, but nvidia paid crytek US 2 million to delay their DX11 port, and nvidia implemented it *themselves* by applying tesselation on non visible, water, and flat objects. If you read up on this, these tactics were purposely done to hijack crysis 2 on anything that isn't nvidia hardware -- and it does not improve image quality AT ALL (on flat objects and water...and especially non visibile objects under the world -- yes they did that.)

I'll just quote you from another post, where the news of AMD delaying 28nm GPUs really killed you inside...

Its yet another rumor among many, i'm taking all of them with a pinch of salt.

 

[Anarchist420]

If EA is offered money, then they should take it.

I don't like how people are referring to nvidia as unethical when they were willing to help the developer of the game out. ATi wasn't. ATi still does optimizations that they don't allow you turn off (either because they want the benchmark scores inflated or its how the hardware performs the calculations). For starters, they clear the z-buffer more aggressively and/or use lossy z buffer compression when they say they use lossless. How do I know? Well, their depth range is compressed and they have to if they hope to compete in benchmarks because they only do 6 zamples/color sample, nvidia does 8. Also, nvidia's filtering is good, while ATi's sucked the last time I used an ATi. They haven't changed it.

 

[SirPauly]

Links have been provided, but I blindly follow nvidia because I own nvidia hardware. They can do no wrong because hey..their anti consumer practices don't affect me.

One can say the same thing about blindly follow AMD but the differentiation is data and investigations -- I tend to let the IHV's counter each other:

http://www.hexus.net/content/item.php?item=20991

It is great to see counters on points.

 

[houe]

http://www.techpowerup.com/104868/B...nables_AA_Only_on_NVIDIA_Hardware_on_PCs.html

Or how about explaining that one. Nvidia disbaled ingame AA on *all* non nvidia hardware because they entered a "financial agreement" with EA and had a hand in development. Do you deny what they did or do you just want to follow them like a sheep?

Well to be fair both Nvidia and EA are equally guilty. So yeah Nvidia is a bad guy but so is EA! Don't blame it all on Nvidia because it takes two agreeing to make this kind of thing happen.

 

[blackened23]

http://www.gamemunition.com/rumors/did-nvidia-pay-crytek-to-delay-directx-11-support-for-crysis-2/

I'm still an nvidia sheep that blindly follows them no matter how unethical they are. I think i'll make some posts defending their hilariously anti consumer practices because I own their hardware.

Also, nvidias rebuttal is hilarious. It would hold water if AA was an nvidia specific feature. We all know that AA isn't some outrageous nvidia only technology, AA has been used for greater than a decade and they specifically disable it on AMD hardware. We aren't talking about physx...of course AMD doesn't have hardware physx. We're about talking anti aliasing. Nvidia is great at muddying the waters with excuses though, I mean hey, anti aliasing is new and groundbreaking nvidia only technology.