Agreed. More and more TVs support 4K 120fps every year and monitors keep getting higher fps / more pixel dense at current >120fps, pushing the market towards the flagship cards that are just insanely expensive at > $1K USD
Those are very worrying statistics. I am planning to upgade to a discrete GPU from the 5600G’s iGPU, I hope this doesn’t become a problem in the future.
It’s a problem already, right now. Prices are already ridiculous and I’m sure the Nvidia 5000 series will be even more so before AMDs 8000 series add fuel to the fire in an effort to retain their fledgling market share.
It’s the main reason I haven’t upgraded yet: I just don’t want to drop ~$1K USD on another GPU that can handle 4K 120fps displays
NVIDIA hardly cares about the discrete GPU, they’re happy with their data centre sales and it is terrible they don’t even have a proper competition. That’s why their valuation sky rocketed.
They have ROCm and ZLUDA but both are inferior to CUDA. They completely overslept the whole AI hype cycle and they could have been valued now to over 1 trillion.
You compete by having your own product, not by using what your competitors developed. It’s on AMD for not making their own product to compete with CUDA
What part of “programming languages are standards” do you not understand?
What you wrote is like suggesting that Internet Explorer shouldn’t have been allowed to implement JavaScript and that all websites should’ve been forced to decide between being compatible with only Netscape or only IE.
Then it’s on AMD to develop a competing API, and ultimately on them for not being competitive enough to develop an alternative alongside the development of CUDA.
It’s not Nvidia’s fault they developed a better product. And I say this as someone who prefers AMDs products, although I had to get a 3060 for my 3D modeling. I would have loved to go AMD, but I really couldn’t.
Nvidia turning your own code into an anti-competitive lock-in is absogoddamnlutely their fault. Again: they actively prevent efforts to recompile CUDA into the competing APIs that already exist and work just fine - because they have to maintain their vice-grip on a market they got to first and turned into a weapon.
I would have loved to go AMD, but I really couldn’t.
The problem is that NVIDIA isn’t resting on their laurels, they improve by a large margin from architecture to architecture and continue to innovate features. AMD can barely keep up imitating some of these features (upscaling, RT, frame generation, heck even NVENC is superior to what Radeon offers) and the results are often worse (RT performance, DLSS vs FSR).
AMD only barely undercuts NVIDIA’s pricing based on raster performance, so this is essentially the easiest upsell ever. Pay 15 % more but get better versions of features, new features early, broader compatibility also in terms of compute and more efficiency? Sure, most people will pay 15 % more for that.
AMD needs to be way more aggressive on pricing and try to innovate useful features first on Radeon. That being said, I think NVIDIA would simply price-match as soon as AMD gains any traction.
At this point I have more faith in Intel to be competitive in a few generations. They seem to be able to almost match RT performance, already putting AMD to shame with their first generation of Arc GPUs. Their upscaling tech is way closer to DLSS, Intel QSV is a pretty solid hardware encoder and let’s hope they do a better job competing at compute.
Nvidia essentially forces AMD to clone whatever bullshit they do next, or else Nvidia will fixate on it and crow about how AMD can’t do [blank]. It’s a pattern of anticompetitive behavior. It only works because Nvidia has such a dominant market share… and it is a method to preserve and deepen that divide. They do not want fair comparisons between their hardware and AMD’s, and they actively prevent software compatibility. This has been going on so long that I used to type this up about nVidia and ATI.
AMD is doing really great things with APUs like the Steam Deck. I just got a travel mini PC with a Ryzen 7 7840U. It can play most games at 1080p high quality with 30fps and fits in the palm of my hand.
It might be a while before you can play VR on an APU but they’re already comparable to GPUs from 5 years ago
yeah its just an arch based linux distro with a custom gamemode, although by default it’s read-only so you can only install flatpaks. you can get around that if you need to.
The problem is that Nvidia pulls proprietary nonsense out of their ass, specifically to say “AMD can’t do [blank]!”
Physics. Sound. Compute. Hair. Raytracing. Upscaling. And on and on and on, aggressively poised to be incompatible. CUDA is fifteen years old and Nvidia still threatens anyone who tries cross-compiling it to SPIR-V or OpenCL.
This is anti-competitive behavior from a blatant monopoly. They have supermajority market share - they are abusing it. The right answer is to shatter this corporation.
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: [email protected]
Video game news oriented community. No NanoUFO is not a bot :)
Posts.
News oriented content (general reviews, previews or retrospectives allowed).
Broad discussion posts (preferably not only about a specific game).
No humor/memes etc…
No affiliate links
No advertising.
No clickbait, editorialized, sensational titles. State the game in question in the title. No all caps.
No self promotion.
No duplicate posts, newer post will be deleted unless there is more discussion in one of the posts.
No politics.
Comments.
No personal attacks.
Obey instance rules.
No low effort comments(one or two words, emoji etc…)
Please use spoiler tags for spoilers.
My goal is just to have a community where people can go and see what new game news is out for the day and comment on it.
I really hope this situation doesn’t keep deteriorating. We need competition in this market, there is already so much insane price gouging.
Agreed. More and more TVs support 4K 120fps every year and monitors keep getting higher fps / more pixel dense at current >120fps, pushing the market towards the flagship cards that are just insanely expensive at > $1K USD
Those are very worrying statistics. I am planning to upgade to a discrete GPU from the 5600G’s iGPU, I hope this doesn’t become a problem in the future.
It’s a problem already, right now. Prices are already ridiculous and I’m sure the Nvidia 5000 series will be even more so before AMDs 8000 series add fuel to the fire in an effort to retain their fledgling market share.
It’s the main reason I haven’t upgraded yet: I just don’t want to drop ~$1K USD on another GPU that can handle 4K 120fps displays
NVIDIA hardly cares about the discrete GPU, they’re happy with their data centre sales and it is terrible they don’t even have a proper competition. That’s why their valuation sky rocketed.
AMD needs a suitable alternative to CUDA cores.
They have ROCm and ZLUDA but both are inferior to CUDA. They completely overslept the whole AI hype cycle and they could have been valued now to over 1 trillion.
The FTC needs to invalidate Nvidia’s monopoly on CUDA. AMD can’t compete because AMD isn’t allowed to compete because of copyright law.
You compete by having your own product, not by using what your competitors developed. It’s on AMD for not making their own product to compete with CUDA
What part of “programming languages are standards” do you not understand?
What you wrote is like suggesting that Internet Explorer shouldn’t have been allowed to implement JavaScript and that all websites should’ve been forced to decide between being compatible with only Netscape or only IE.
AMD’s compute capabilities are fine. CUDA is an artificially restricted API that is not permitted to recompile into anything else.
Then it’s on AMD to develop a competing API, and ultimately on them for not being competitive enough to develop an alternative alongside the development of CUDA.
It’s not Nvidia’s fault they developed a better product. And I say this as someone who prefers AMDs products, although I had to get a 3060 for my 3D modeling. I would have loved to go AMD, but I really couldn’t.
Nvidia turning your own code into an anti-competitive lock-in is absogoddamnlutely their fault. Again: they actively prevent efforts to recompile CUDA into the competing APIs that already exist and work just fine - because they have to maintain their vice-grip on a market they got to first and turned into a weapon.
THAT’S WHAT ANTI-COMPETITIVE MEANS.
They’ve announced they’re working on exactly that.
The problem is that NVIDIA isn’t resting on their laurels, they improve by a large margin from architecture to architecture and continue to innovate features. AMD can barely keep up imitating some of these features (upscaling, RT, frame generation, heck even NVENC is superior to what Radeon offers) and the results are often worse (RT performance, DLSS vs FSR).
AMD only barely undercuts NVIDIA’s pricing based on raster performance, so this is essentially the easiest upsell ever. Pay 15 % more but get better versions of features, new features early, broader compatibility also in terms of compute and more efficiency? Sure, most people will pay 15 % more for that.
AMD needs to be way more aggressive on pricing and try to innovate useful features first on Radeon. That being said, I think NVIDIA would simply price-match as soon as AMD gains any traction.
At this point I have more faith in Intel to be competitive in a few generations. They seem to be able to almost match RT performance, already putting AMD to shame with their first generation of Arc GPUs. Their upscaling tech is way closer to DLSS, Intel QSV is a pretty solid hardware encoder and let’s hope they do a better job competing at compute.
Fire and motion.
Nvidia essentially forces AMD to clone whatever bullshit they do next, or else Nvidia will fixate on it and crow about how AMD can’t do [blank]. It’s a pattern of anticompetitive behavior. It only works because Nvidia has such a dominant market share… and it is a method to preserve and deepen that divide. They do not want fair comparisons between their hardware and AMD’s, and they actively prevent software compatibility. This has been going on so long that I used to type this up about nVidia and ATI.
AMD is doing really great things with APUs like the Steam Deck. I just got a travel mini PC with a Ryzen 7 7840U. It can play most games at 1080p high quality with 30fps and fits in the palm of my hand.
It might be a while before you can play VR on an APU but they’re already comparable to GPUs from 5 years ago
I keep looking at SteamDecks but can’t pull the trigger.
Besides gaming what can you do with it? Like can I browse the darkweb on the go? Does it have regular PC functionality?
yeah its just an arch based linux distro with a custom gamemode, although by default it’s read-only so you can only install flatpaks. you can get around that if you need to.
Thanks.
I guess if I get one I can say “I use Arch btw”.
The problem is that Nvidia pulls proprietary nonsense out of their ass, specifically to say “AMD can’t do [blank]!”
Physics. Sound. Compute. Hair. Raytracing. Upscaling. And on and on and on, aggressively poised to be incompatible. CUDA is fifteen years old and Nvidia still threatens anyone who tries cross-compiling it to SPIR-V or OpenCL.
This is anti-competitive behavior from a blatant monopoly. They have supermajority market share - they are abusing it. The right answer is to shatter this corporation.