Lol no...
AMD is a bigger company, yes.
Anything else that was said is debatable because both sides are innovative.
Lol no...
Why not make it 5 years? Oh that's right, then Nvidia would have been lucky to break even wouldn't they.
Fact: AMD is a bigger company than Nvidia. Always has been, always will be.
Fact: ATI/AMD is the technology leader whether it's being first to a new node or the biggest advances in the graphics field. ATI is an older company and they were making firsts before Nvidia even existed. Most of Nvidia's "innovations" came from buying out 3dfx and Ageia. Go educate yourself instead of making stupid posts.
Fact:AMD bought ATI, had a market cap of nearly 10 billion. They have managed to completely destroy the value of ATI from its acquisition and subsequent mis-management.
I thought ATi invented unified shaders for the Xbox 360 and that Microsoft required DX10 hardware to have unified shaders, but correct me if I am mistaken.
Your financial opinion changes nothing. AMD is the bigger company and ATI/AMD is the more innovative company. Anything Nvidia got to first was based on 3dfx's IP after the buyout. After that ran out they've been lagging behind AMD.
ATI/AMD - Always first to the new node, normally first to the new DirectX, mostly first with the real knockout features like Eyefinity and soon Mantle. Nvidia has some decent software based innovations but on the hardware side they barely do anything new. What was their first and last true innovation? SLI in 2004? The company history has more aquisitions than innovations - http://www.nvidia.com/page/corporate_timeline.html
So, are AMD fans saying that all future game developers are only going to code for the Mantle API instead of DX?....Wouldn't that negate at least half the gaming populous?
AMD is and always has been a bigger company than Nvidia. Normally it's AMD "pushing the tech" with Nvidia following. Every single time.
Well, at least you got that part right.
So, are AMD fans saying that all future game developers are only going to code for the Mantle API instead of DX?....Wouldn't that negate at least half the gaming populous?
Your financial opinion changes nothing. AMD is the bigger company and ATI/AMD is the more innovative company. Anything Nvidia got to first was based on 3dfx's IP after the buyout. After that ran out they've been lagging behind AMD.
ATI/AMD - Always first to the new node, normally first to the new DirectX, mostly first with the real knockout features like Eyefinity and soon Mantle. Nvidia has some decent software based innovations but on the hardware side they barely do anything new. What was their first and last true innovation? SLI in 2004? The company history has more aquisitions than innovations - http://www.nvidia.com/page/corporate_timeline.html
Nonetheless, my point stands. Both team red and team green have made substantial contributions to gpu tech and those who read the early timeline in depth would probably give the lead to nvidia for solving a lot of the initial problems and really just trailblazing the tech everybody takes for granted today. Saying that amd is always leading and nvidia following just sounds like trying to rewrite history for the sake of partisan politics.
and they have PhysX too which for many is essential for gaming.
Nvidia has also done a number of new things since then such as, CUDA, PhysX, 3D Vision, and 3D Vision Surround. Perhaps some others I'm forgetting.
Wow that is some amazing stuff right there. Released the 9700 pro. The worlds first DX9 processor! Have you ever seen the graphics acceleration on a GPU from the mid 90s? Yeah, neither has anybody else.
http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.php?p=35473351&postcount=90
Now you can add TrueAudio and Mantle to that list.
Didnt Vista come out with DX10, in which AMD wasnt even present for 6mths?
Why don't you list all of Nvidia's amazing firsts and innovations (ones that they didn't aquire from Ageia and 3dfx)?
What does it matter if the technology is acquired? How do you think AMD arrived where they are today without acquiring ATI?
The problem I have with this is that Nvidia aquired it's way to many of it's innovations after buying out 3dfx. Also the crap about them "inventing the GPU" is utter nonsense.
Before they "invented the GPU", ATI had done the following -
http://www.amd.com/us/aboutamd/corporate-information/Pages/timeline.aspx
1989 - ATI assists in establishment of VESA standard for graphics industry.
1995 - ATI is first graphics company to ship Mac-compatible graphics boards.
1996 - ATI enters the notebook market with the industry's first notebook 3D graphics accelerator.
1997 - ATI is first graphics company to provide hardware support for DVD acceleration and display.
1997 - ATI is first graphics company to release products supporting Accelerated Graphics Port, the new industry standard.
1998 - ATI is first company to introduce a complete set-top box design.
After 1999 the firsts were even more technological, especially on the hardware side.
2002 - ATI launches ATI Radeon™ 9700 Pro: world's first DirectX 9 graphics processor.
2003 - ATI introduces ATI Radeon™ 9600 XT: world's first high volume 0.13um low-k chips.
2004 - ATI introduces first 110nm GPUs (ATI Radeon™ X800 XL).
2005 - ATI GPU is featured in Microsoft Xbox 360, revolutionizing high-definition gaming.
All that before AMD even aquired them, at which point AMD has helped them to even more firsts. Nvidia simply has nothing like the history ATI has. They sure talk a big game about "inventing the GPU" but it's pretty clear to me who is moving the industry forward a lot more. This is why AMD was first to Mantle and why Nvidia will follow months later. If you know your computer history this would not be a surprise.