Anand Tours ATI and NVIDIA 220
logicalstack writes "The folks over at AnandTech have written an
expose on their visits
to both ATI and NVIDIA. Interestingly enough ATI's facility shrouded in secrecy and NVIDIA's is quite open, Including full color pictures of their server farm, and a pic of the NV30 test machine the 'Ikos.' The CEO even showed off the old school NV1 with 1MB of ram!"
Here's the real link (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Here's the real link (Score:2, Funny)
It's like the damn submitter thought we would know where to find it at anand tech, and what's this "the folks" Why is it I imagine a bunch of geeks all wearing heard hats of one color with nvidia or ati's logo on it, Being lead around by an older fellow with a diferent color hardhat.
Right, a tour group, It was probably just one guy who payed the guard 20$ and a bottle of jack to be let in after hours....
I like Hard|OCP's tour of gainward. They manufacture there video cards two to a PCB and cut them down the middle. That would be cool to build two systems which where connected by the unsevered agp card.
Like some freak siamese twin, "And here is Tommy and Timmy, identical twins sharing the same GPU'
Low Bandwidth Version (Score:1)
Though this has no banner ads, so Anand doesn't get any money if you view this one, but take your pick.
Re:Here's the real link (Score:1)
The link (Score:2, Informative)
Direct link to the article [anandtech.com]
IKOS is a company that makes gate arrays (Score:3, Interesting)
When I was there a few years ago, they would sometimes hijack all the desktops in the company for more power. If I remember correctly, they would boot them into linux at night and make (slashdot cliche imminent!) a beowulf cluster!
-Greg Daly, formerly of riva extreme, aka
'costly sun boxes' + the real link (Score:1)
quote:" NVIDIA would love to move away from these costly Sun boxes altogether and transition to a much more affordable x86-linux platform, but the problem is finding a 64-bit x86 solution. NVIDIA is currently evaluating Intel's Itanium for use in their farm but as far as their needs go, AMD's Opteron would be a gift from God. NVIDIA is eagerly awaiting the launch of Opteron so that their dreams may be fulfilled with an affordable x86 solution that offers 64-bit memory addressability; until then, they'll have to stick with these million-dollar sun systems."
could someone fill me in why million dollar ibm(linux) systems aren't an option? no 64bit(!?????)
or other 64bit systems??
the pictures of those big computer racks sure make me drool.. i wonder how tight their security is...............
Re:'costly sun boxes' + the real link (Score:3, Informative)
You've got AIX, Alpha, even the new Linux capable boxes from IBM are 64 bit but they are NOT cheaper than SUN.
Re:'costly sun boxes' + the real link (Score:2)
Re:'costly sun boxes' + the real link (Score:1)
Nice racks (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Nice racks (Score:2)
MMmmmmm...... fiber optics....
MMmmmmm..... chief engineer patty....
this is a joke, thank you, good night.
At Least... (Score:2)
At least they would know what to do with those racks.
Re:Nice racks (Score:2)
ow!
stop that!
overclock IKOS! (Score:1, Funny)
Other crap ATI has done (Score:2, Funny)
Who cares? Perspective, dammit! (Score:2)
Hell, there's probably NVIDIA engineers who have done equally egregious things.
I'll bet Linus himself has pulled a fau paux once or twice. Should I not use Linux?
Isaac Newton was supposed to be somewhat of an asshole as well. Should we not use physics or calculus?
The original post was talking about a company policy regarding no photographs in a R&D lab. That's ludicrously generous. I've worked in an isolated R&D lab, and you do *not* get anywhere near anyone unless you have a damn good reason (sightseeing a la Anandtech doesn't count as a good reason).
Frankly, I think NVIDIA is simply crazy for letting people wander around and shoot photos, but that's just me.
Re:Other crap ATI has done (Score:5, Insightful)
This is the dumbest thing I've ever read. The situation you describe is not ATI selling you a shitty product. It's not ATI stealing from shareholders. It's not ATI killing your dog.
What it sounds like is some guy getting two beers without waiting like the rest of the tools in line. And you are one of the tools.
You see, this is one random guy who happens to be at a trade show, probably one he doesn't want to be at. He's been drinking. He's in a position of power, so he uses it to get what he wants. This is how the world works.
Now, insofar as my inflammatory comment about your status as a tool, let's review the facts:
1. You're at quakecon
2. You don't understand that life's not fair, and rich/powerful people get stuff that you don't.
3. You wasted your breath telling this guy off.
4. You posted a stupid rant on Slashdot.
No further questions, your honor.
Dude, this is Slashdot (Score:2)
Because (Score:2)
Thatsa great line, I should put it on a bumper sticker.
What all those computers do (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Verilog simulators (Score:2, Informative)
NC-Verilog does a similar thing, though instead of C they use some proprietary byte-code to model the Verilog constructs. It's still a compiled simulator.
Almost all other simulators (including Verilog-XL) are Verilog interpreters, not compilers (there are a few exceptions, of course). They are much slower.
Storage (Score:1)
I can fathom it, How much storage DO they have?? They have 2.1TB RAM
Crackers`n`Soup
I find it ironic......... (Score:1)
very open considering the absolute opposite is
true when considering XFree support for operating
systems. And before someone replies, YES I KNOW
NVIDIA has some sort of corporate sob story for
why they do things the way they do. I don't
need to hear again why money ultimately is the
reason they/whoever can't be more open with
their/whoever's standards.
Re:I find it ironic......... (Score:1)
standard (Score:1)
i was surprised that nvidia opened up their arms and welcomed you since those guys were the most arrogant bastards at the career fair. they used to literally tell you to fuck off if you dont have a 3.5 GPA. now it's just a "you'll have no chance" comment from them - as if i would jump off a building if i cant work for them (but in times like this, we are dying to find jobs.)
i've had friends that worked there before giving nasty feedback about the people there of having to work overtime pretty much everyday and having to come in weekends all the time. ATI, for some reason never show up at job fairs in montreal.
like all companies you apply to online, you just get the normal immediate automated response from them that they've placed my cv on file and would contact me as soon as there's something available - which never happens.
The IKOS box (Score:1)
My project was to map efficiently a big processor on the IKOS box. As compiling it from the VHDL design resulted in something too big to fit the box, I had to extract the logical function of the design (generate a binary decision diagram from the transistors netlist) and generate the good gates to map that on the box. I won't bore you with the details, but I really enjoyed that job !
OT? What's the best cheap video card for Jaguar? (Score:2)
So, any suggestions about what the best, cheap upgrade car for a two year old Mac would be? It's not worth it to me to shell out $200 or more for the top of the line hardware -- I don't play video games or anything like that -- but if a video card in the say $50 to $75 range would give a noticeable boost then it might be worthwhile.
Does anyone know what the minimum video hardware is to get QE running and how much it would cost to get that hardware costs these days? On the same lines, given similar hardware, have people seen better gains by upgrading graphics hardware or adding more ram? For the money I'm willing to spend right now, I could throw in half a gig of ram, but I've heard that upgrading the video card could be almost as much of a performance boost. It would be nice to get a few more opinions on which upgrade path makes more sense...
Thanks!
Re:OT? What's the best cheap video card for Jaguar (Score:2)
See the Endian FAQ [rdrop.com]
A little lopsided... (Score:2)
But giving access to the chip architects (more than a lunch meeting anyway) is cooler than a bunch of fuzzy pictures with Anand's thumb in front.
Re:No wonder Nvidia is largely considered better! (Score:5, Insightful)
ATI imposed very strict restrictions on photographs during our visit to their offices in Thornhill, Ontario; we saw a lot of interesting things at ATI's offices (including the foundation for their fountain of fire in the lobby of their main building) but we weren't able to take pictures of most of them. On the other hand, ATI sat us down with one of their chip architects and we were able to get a wealth of information about how their GPUs were made.
NVIDIA wasn't able to set us up with any engineers for an extended period of time (although lunch with Chief Scientist, David Kirk is always informative) but they were much more lax on the picture front so we were able to bring you more of the behind the scenes from NVIDIA.
ATI just didn't want anybody taking pictures, but they were the one sharing the real information.
Re:No wonder Nvidia is largely considered better! (Score:2, Funny)
The picture thing I can understand. Maybe the intern has some saucy shit up on the screen and didn't read the motherfucking memo close enough to note that some fucking strangers were walking around the place ready to snap a billion digi cam photos.
Fucking christ on a moped: who give a fuck what the nVidia server farm looks like? I don't recall buying a video card based upon the size and configuration of some fucking SERVERS.
Re:No wonder Nvidia is largely considered better! (Score:1, Interesting)
Re:No wonder Nvidia is largely considered better! (Score:1)
Re:No wonder Nvidia is largely considered better! (Score:4, Interesting)
Next we come to nVidia, I repeatedly came up against a brick wall, the case was the same for other developers, with David Kirk doing a fine politician-style non-answering of questions after his presentation. You generally got the impression that there were a select few that may be lucky enough to be given certain information, but it was very much on nVidia's terms.
Fair enough, companies have secrets which they need to keep, but from my experiences with the companies, ATI are far far more open. If anything this article backs that up. Would you prefer a bundle of photos or a chance to talk with a variety of the actual engineers?
Re:No wonder Nvidia is largely considered better! (Score:2)
With ATI, they answered my questions accurately but briefly, and made no particular response to the bug reports I posted (which finally seem to be fixed now - mostly - in 02.3, 8 months after I notified them). Their dev support team gave me adequate support, IMHO. Their regular user technical support was not even close to adequate, the once or twice I've used them - I had to track down the fix myself and explain it to them (which they never even acknowledged).
nVidia OTOH went out of their way to explain their extensions, listen to my suggestions, meet with me personally etc etc. "Outstanding support" would be a better description - they told me all I wanted to know (within reason), and I felt like they were listening carefully to the suggestions I had for future hardware. Haven't tried their ordinary tech support, if they actually have any (being a chip maker not a board maker like ATI).
Re:NVIDIA open? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:NVIDIA open? (Score:1, Insightful)
Let's hear it for the hypocrits! Hear Hear!
Re:NVIDIA open? (Score:2)
I know, I bet it was to play Tux Kart [sourceforge.net]
Hrm... Maybe we can't assume he's playing closed games?
Re:NVIDIA open? (Score:1)
Re:NVIDIA open? (Score:2, Funny)
Do you mean, same gameplay, more realistic graphics?
Please, (and I really mean this) Gaming industry, give us some kind of new game. It's just the same crap over and over and over. Like TV Sitcom's the games produced these days are stuck in a rut.
Re:NVIDIA open? (Score:2)
The unfortunate fact of the matter is that even if the gaming industry rehashes gaming concepts, they have a level of polish that can't be found in open source games. Take, for instance, Deus Ex. Was it revolutionary? No, it was a first person shooter. Was it highly interactive, engaging, and immersive? I think so. Were the production values high? Yes. And that is what is missing from the current line-up of open source games.
Open Source development cannot hope to keep pace with commercial game development. The time frames are too short, production costs too high, and talent at too much of a premium to create games that would require a high end graphics card. Which is what we are talking about, right?
Some types of games are very successful in Open Source (See: mahjongg, which I play every day). But the games that use a high level ATI or Nvidia card are not developed by the Open Source community. Engines, maybe (see Id), but the game content, no way. Maybe someday, but not today.
Re:NVIDIA open? (Score:2)
I think that Free games will eventually max hardware out, but you have to remember that growth in Free Software works slower. The difference is that it is steady, and eventually passes propreitary software, which has usually moved on and is looking for profit somewhere else (look at mozilla).
My original point is that a person who is dedicated to using a 3D card in Linux in a non-propreitary manner can still get games to play that are decent.
The original poster implied this wasn't true.
I think the next revolution needs to be in free content creation. This is he only way that things will move forward.
I think people need to be more creative.
I think part of the reason that the DMCA dosen't get people's ire up anymore is that most people don't create content. That needs to change. We used to be a more creative world. This will help the free gaming cause.
I can see your points.
As an aside: You may want to checkout billardgl, a good use of graphics (and uses a decent amount of the graphic card).
Re:NVIDIA open? (Score:1)
hahaha you got burned!
Re:NVIDIA open? (Score:1, Offtopic)
Re:NVIDIA open? (Score:2)
On Microsoft Windows, of course. 'Cuz last I heard, the ATI cards won't work for UT2003 on Linux. Mind you, this may have changed, and I speak not from experience as I still have a shitty Rage 128 in my machine (hey, it handles Q3 and RtCW fairly well).
I'm trying to decide between upgrading to a Radeon 8500 or a GF4-Ti4200, and I'm leaning toward the GF4 because I'd rather have a proprietary binary driver that works than an open-source one that doesn't. So if anyone has had a good experience running a Radeon 8500 under Linux (especially with UT2003 demo, either the open-source dri driver or ATI's binary release), please let me know.
Re:NVIDIA open? - radeon 8500 (Score:1)
http://bulmalug.net/body.phtml?nIdNoticia=1488 [bulmalug.net]
The article is in Spanish
Re:NVIDIA open? - radeon 8500 (Score:2)
UT2003 and Linux (Score:1)
Re:NVIDIA open? (Score:1)
It's like buying a porsche that is capable of 180mph but you can only get maybe 100mph if you're lucky. Why not just buy the bmw that goes at 150mph and actually go 150mph?
Re:NVIDIA open?-BSD MIA. (Score:2)
Re:NVIDIA open?-BSD MIA. (Score:2)
They have.
Now what kernel does the Mac OS X use?
The Mach kernel, which is NOT THE BSD KERNEL!
FreeBSD was the first OS the Mach kernel would run, which is why Apple based OS X on FreeBSD, but FreeBSD does not use the Mach kernel.
Re:NVIDIA open? (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't get it. I'm all for Open Source, but I'm even *more* for a company taking an active interest in supporting their hardware under Linux. I've got a GEForce2 on my system and the drivers are *sweet*. Full support of *all* the hardwares features. How often do you get that under Linux? Not to mention the fact that the drivers compare nicely with their Windows counterparts.
Why spend the same amount of money for hardware that has less support and will effectively run slower because of it? I just don't get it...
If every hardware company were like NVidia we would have far less trouble buying a new printer/modem/videocard/etc.
Re:NVIDIA open? (Score:2)
"Trust No One" is one of the stupidest reasons I've heard for supporting Open Source.
If NVidia wants to keep their source private, fine. Just so long as they accept the responsibility of supporting different systems. It would be nice if they did both, but writing closed source drivers is certainly better than *nothing*.
I bet you trusted someone else to write your sound card drivers too...
Re:NVIDIA open? (Score:2)
Re:NVIDIA open? (Score:4, Informative)
I use those binary-only drivers myself with a GF3 and have had no problems with X crashing.
Re:NVIDIA open? (Score:1)
Unified drivers: bad idea for old hardware (Score:2)
The problem with a unified driver that's proprietary is that despite what they say, older hardware does not get the same level of support as open source drivers for cards of the same age. Worse, since your architecture is unified, you can't open source the drivers for older cards without jeopardizing IP on new cards!
So, while I'm glad the unified driver works for you and your newish card, I had to ditch my TNT1 for an older Radeon because the unified drivers never supported my TNT1 on K6-III/VIA chipset very well (i.e., it crashed too much).
Cheers,
-l
who got a 64MB Radeon VE dirt cheap for his new flat panel. and yes, next year I hope to upgrade the mb/cpu. :)
Re:Unified drivers: bad idea for old hardware (Score:2)
Re:Unified drivers: bad idea for old hardware (Score:2)
Besides, the Radeon works fine.
-l
p.s., I have 1 computer and I don't know anyone near me who runs the same set-up, so the point's prolly moot anyway.
Re:Unified drivers: bad idea for old hardware (Score:2)
You are right about them lacking an easy way to report bugs, it would be nice if they had a web form or even email address available. I couldn't find anything on their site.
Re:Unified drivers: bad idea for old hardware (Score:2)
sorry if I seemed a little brusque.
-l
Re:NVIDIA open? (Score:3, Insightful)
I'm glad you could publish your drivers under the GPL, but not everyone is and I'd rather have closed drivers that work well for me than no drivers at all.
Re:NVIDIA open? (Score:2)
Because NVIDIA has a unified driver architecture. ATI is trying to do this too now. Actually, they started doing it with the 8500, but they rewrote the drivers for the R200, and broke 8500 compatability, which means unified drivers for anything past the R200.
Re:NVIDIA open? (Score:1, Insightful)
Binary only my ass (Score:1, Funny)
Nvidia's driver page [nvidia.com] clearly has source tarballs for the GLX and kernel drivers.
Re:NVIDIA open? (Score:5, Informative)
Oh well. Here it goes anyway.
The primary reason is that they cannot. They do not own all of the code that is in the drivers. There are extensive cross-licensing agreements between nVidia and SGI, dating back to the creation of nVidia from a bunch of ex-SGI engineers and the ensuing lawsuits. A good bit of the core code in nVidia drivers is essentially owned by SGI. nVidia cannot release that code. Period. End of story.
The secondary reason is that there is reason to believe that there are trade secrets in the drivers. Why do most people still favor nVidia over ATI? Because of the drivers. They work damn well most of the time, and the drivers you download today still support the original TNT. Additionally look at the GeForce4 and the Radeon 8500. On paper the Radeon 8500 was superior, and yet the GF4 beat it in benchmarks consistently. Why? The drivers. They were more mature, better written, and streamlined.
Don't like the situation? Fine, don't buy an nVidia card. What? Nobody else has 3d acceleration worth a crap? All the other drivers are just as unstable and slower too? Well, gee, maybe there's more proof that nVidia knows what the hell it's doing. Yes, it sucks if you're a *BSD fan or something else such that the binary-only drivers aren't usable, but, again, nobody made you buy nVidia.
Frankly, nVidia has spectacular Linux support. They release the Linux drivers within weeks of the Windows drivers and they're pretty damn stable (frankly, I suspect that if you have continual issues here that it's some other piece of hardware being marginal and pushed over the limit by running the card at full functionality). Oh yeah, and they're fully functional... don't forget that little bit.
It's really sad to see people whining for Linux support, getting pretty damn spectacular support, and then whining that it's not good enough. No wonder most manufacturers don't bother - damned if you do, damned if you don't. So why spend the time and money on a marginal market if you're just going to get roasted anyway?
Re:NVIDIA open? (Score:2, Informative)
SGI has stated, on a number of occaisions, that they are not responsible for the closed nature of nVidia's driver and that they have, in fact, tried to push nVidia into opening the drivers...
Please learn all the facts before posting that crap again.
Dinivin
Re:NVIDIA open? (Score:2)
I believe the statment really goes:
Linux is for those who hate Microsoft, BSD is for those who love UNIX.
Considering that BSD origonates from the origional UNIX, that makes more sense...but then again you are probably a linux zealot who thinks RMS is some sort of man god...
Re:NVIDIA open? (Score:1)
Actually, I really dislike the GPL and everything it stands for. What I dislike more, though, is the arrogance of many BSD users I see on here with the sig:
Linux is for those who hate Microsoft, BSD is for those who love UNIX.
Dinivin
Re:NVIDIA open? (Score:2)
-- Bob
Re:NVIDIA open? (Score:2)
But you'll believe the guy who said that the problem is SGI IP without providing any links? Says a lot about you.
Dinivin
Re:NVIDIA open? (Score:2)
Here's mine:
FreeBSD Driver Initative [netexplorer.org]
Announcement of collaboration between NVIDIA, SGI, and VA Linux [sgi.com]
NVIDIA press release [nvidia.com]
And another release [nvidia.com]
Tom's Hardware discussion [tomshardware.com]
Oh, and SGI isn't the only proprietary code either. There's also a cross licensing agreement with S3 for the S3TC (S3 Texture Compression) algorithms that NVIDIA doesn't have the right to disclose.
NVIDIA and SGI drop lawsuits [siliconstrategies.com]
Re:NVIDIA open? (Score:2)
Of all those links, only two talk about how SGI's IP is preventing nVidia from open sourcing the drivers. Neither of those two (Tom's Hardware and the FreeBSD nVidia driver initiative) can even remotely be considered official statements by either nVidia or SGI.
Care to try again?
Hey, I'll gladly admit that I have no proof that my statement is true. I have simply based it on what an SGI employee has told me.
How about you admitting you have no proof to back up your statement about SGI's IP.
Oh, and your final link should read "NVIDIA and S3 drop lawsuits" not "NVIDIA and SGI..."
Dinivin
Re:NVIDIA open? (Score:2)
I guess you're too stubborn (or is that stupid?) to admit when you're wrong.
Dinivin
Agree, agree, agree! (Score:1, Interesting)
But then along comes NVIDIA...I bought a GeForce4 Ti and was shocked and pleased to find FULLY FUNCTIONAL DRIVERS that actually WORKED, right off the NVIDIA site. Being a Woody user I was even more surprised to find that the NVIDIA Linux drivers worked with the ancient version of XFree shipped with Woody. No mucking with CVS snapshots, no rebuilding the XF86 source...just install and go.
It has been a long, long time since I've had working OpenGL on my system. I've NEVER had STABLE OpenGL on a Linux box until now. NVIDIA's drivers kick ass. Commercial support? HELL YAH! I could care LESS if they are binary-only drivers. In fact, having modprobe whine and tell me I'll be "tainting" my kernel by loading the Nvidia driver is downright INSULTING.
UT2k3 runs like a dream! I can use the GL modes of Xscreensaver! I can play Egoboo, BZFLAG, GLTron and crack-attack again! (Actually, Egoboo clocks in at over 200fps so it is too FAST to play
Re:NVIDIA open? (Score:3, Interesting)
Remember how the $600 Quadro2 hardware was exactly the same as a $200 GeForce2, except for a tiny little resistor? I'm sure there are a few places in the NVIDIA driver like:
if(user_paid_for_quadro()) {
make_antialiasing_fast();
enable_overlay_planes();
} else {
make_antialiasing_slow();
disable_overlay_planes();
}
So naturally a few days after they release the driver souce, somebody would provide a "magic" version of the driver that makes all of NVIDIA's low-end cards perform just like their high-end cards. Then they wouldn't be able to charge $600 for "pro" video cards anymore...
Re:NVIDIA open? (Score:2, Informative)
The GF4 chip is separate from the GF4 Quadro chip though - at least as far as pinouts go (it may be that the actual core is the same still, but fat lot of good that does if there aren't leads for the "professional" bits). The GF2/Q2 chips and cores were identical excepting a resistor, as you note.
There are also (allegedly, I certainly have not confirmed this) SGI-only features in the core. I can't imagine that these functions would be exposed at all in public drivers though, so I can't see that being an issue.
Re:NVIDIA open? (Score:2)
1) The GeForce2 hardware is identical to Quadro2 hardware, except for a single resistor. (which you can solder to "morph" your card into the other type - there are instructions for this on several websites)
2) The Quadro2 performs an order of magnitude faster than the GeForce2 on certain specific benchmarks, such as antialiased line drawing. These specific features are used in many CAD applications but not in any games.
Therefore, the driver must be crippling certain features when it thinks it's running on a GeForce 2. So NVIDIA can charge CAD users $600 for essentially the same hardware that a gamer buys for $200... (these prices were when the GeForce2 was first released, of course)
Re:NVIDIA open? (open the spec, not the code) (Score:1)
But there can be NO reason for not opening the full interface specifications for their cards.
Then the people complaining about binary drivers can write "better" open source drivers.
Re:NVIDIA open? (open the spec, not the code) (Score:3, Insightful)
NVIDIA cards are unlike anything you've ever seen on the inside. It's not a simple matter of register banging like most hardware. And yes, there is quite a bit of proprietary/trade secret stuff in there, such that publishing the driver source or opening the hardware interface would be detrimental to NVIDIA.
As much as we all hate it, the tech industry is largely driven by trade secrets, patents, and lawsuits. I don't think anyone at NVIDIA really likes that, but it's the only way to survive given the broken state of IP laws in the world.
-John (having contributed to the driver)
Re:NVIDIA open? (open the spec, not the code) (Score:2)
Re:NVIDIA open? (Score:2)
How can it be a trade secret when it will only work with there card? It's not like ATI is making the same chipset. If ATI wanted to know how there drivers work, they would know. Hell, I'd be surprised if the don't have a de-compiled version on there systems now.
That said, I am pleased with nVidia support. I even wrote them some letters when they first started doing it, to show my support.
Re:NVIDIA open? (Score:2)
Re:NVIDIA open? (Score:5, Informative)
You might want to try switching from nvagp to agpgart, or vice versa, depending on your mobo.
I went from agpgart->nvagp a few months ago, and suddenly most of my stability problems with the drivers were gone.
Re:NVIDIA open? (Score:2)
The page isn't Gentoo specific (I use debian personally)
Re:NVIDIA open? (Score:2)
A) There is licensed stuff in the GL implementation that they can't release.
B) ATI's major weak point is drivers. Since OpenGL drivers implement the *entire* OpenGL API, rather than just bang hardware like other drivers, opening the code would hand over a *lot* of optimizations to ATI. Helping your competitor out with their one weak aspect is asking a bit too much of a company.
And NVIDIA's drivers a rock-solid for me an many others. I've used them on a Riva TNT1, GeForce2 MX, and GeForce 4 Go 440. They've worked *perfectly* on every single one. I haven't ever had an X crash. Now, if you're having problems, that's just your setup.
Re:NVIDIA open? (Score:2)
Hmmm... I wonder whose code was buggy there...
Re:evidence (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:evidence (Score:2)
Re:evidence (Score:1)
Re:evidence (Score:1)
Re:evidence (Score:2)
Re:evidence (Score:1)
This isn't evidence of NVIDIA's greatness, it's just a difference in business practices.
3dfx might still be around because they won a lawsuit against NVIDIA, but NVIDIA bought out 3dfx and killed support for people that had recent 3dfx hardware.
At least when Apple bought out Power Computing they threw up a webpage with some manuals and downloads.
NVIDIA screwed over those that bought 3dfx pure and simple.
NIVIDIA corporate policy isn't any better than anyone elses and in some aspect worse.
Re:evidence (Score:1)
Got any actual evidence? Linkage? etc.
Hey I feel for you. 3dfx was a sad company to see go, but if it was because of NVIDIA, it would be because NVIDIA makes way better products than 3dfx could. 3dfx was out competed.
Links? (Score:1)
his just came out, from Yahoo, 3dfx has announced that they will be sold to NVidia as soon as the deal is approved by its shareholders. From the release, "After aggressively pursuing a wide range of options that take into consideration the interests of our creditors, our shareholders, our employees and our customers," said Alex Leupp, president and CEO, 3dfx Interactive Inc., "we strongly believe that to reduce expenses, sell our assets and dissolve the company provides the highest return to our creditors, shareholders, and employees." I think we all saw this one coming. For more details, go to the press release
Re:evidence (Score:1)
nVidia didn't buy 3dfx, they just bought most of their IP and remaining chip inventory. The company (3dfx Interactive) itself shut down their manufacturing and cut off their users from downloading existing drivers.
Re:evidence (Score:2)
That explains their stock price...$8.95 down from a 52-week high of $72.66. Of course, part of that is that Microsoft changed the Xbox chips, leaving NVidia holding the bag (or goodwill as they say in the industry). I don't quite see how yet another company getting screwed by Microsoft qualifies as a breath of fresh air, but what the hell.
Not that ATI stock is anything to write home about -- down about 50% on the past 5 years. I attribute that to some of the worst drivers knows to man. ATI up until about six months ago reminds me of Apple in the Amelio era.
For the record my computer has a nforce chipset and a radeon video card. And it runs windows just fine!
Re:evidence (Score:2)
Re:Check this out! Its hilarious (Score:2)
Wouldn't "A big something" be more accurate?