5 ms·
If there was strong competition, none of that circus would be possible.
by sto_hristo 6y ago
If there was strong competition, none of that circus would be possible.
- willis936 6y agoArguably nvidia has been innovating while on top to prevent the competition that does exist to catch up. They have such a dominant market share because they make more compute for less dollar. When the day comes that isn’t the case, they’ve already made well established hardware features and adopted APIs people want: raytracing and machine learning.
- kevingadd 6y agoBeyond that they're doing some truly spectacular stuff with their hardware. DLSS is amazing quality-wise and lets you run games at acceptable quality with much weaker hardware than it would take to run at native resolution, and because it's primarily implemented using the dedicated ML hardware, for most games it doesn't eat into valuable rasterization/compute resources. AMD simply does not have the hardware to do this right now and they also don't have the years of research and development that went into modern DLSS (like the generally crappy 1.x versions of DLSS) While true quality fanatics are going to want to run things at native resolution, the average person will be quite happy with DLSS 4k instead of native 4k, and they'll be able to get much higher framerates in that mode than on equivalently priced AMD hardware.
- 10000truths 6y ago> They have such a dominant market share because they make more compute for less dollar. Is that really the case? I looked at getting an accelerator card for personal use. AMD’s Radeon Instinct MI25 will run me $900 - $1000. A similarly specced NVidia Tesla P100 is in the $3000 range.
- rowanG077 6y agoThey don't make more compute for less. They just win via cuda. AMD is an afterthought. Well I guess NVIDIA is not the only one to blame. The ML world basically sold their soul to the level they decided to use cuda.