4 ms·

>Nvidia had nothing to do with their failure, unless they had some sort of high-level mole in AMD's driver teams. You're pretty close, but it's one level of ab

>Nvidia had nothing to do with their failure, unless they had some sort of high-level mole in AMD's driver teams. You're pretty close, but it's one level of abstraction away from the truth: NVidia spends absolutely earth-shakingly stonking amounts of money working directly with the devs of major studios, fixing issues with their drivers as they come, and in some cases paying studios to lock-in talking to them about the bugs they find. It's why (and how) they release new driver patches for every AAA release, and part of the reason why it triggers a redownload of the shader cache on a whole slew of Steam games every major version release. AMD and intel don't have a chance; NVidia is inside the design loop for game development far more thoroughly than other hardware vendors.

reissbaker 2y ago
Of course AMD and Intel could just do the same thing. But they don't. That's not Nvidia's fault. In fact I wish Intel and AMD would do the same! It's great customer service to know that games are going to work well out of the box with Nvidia, because Nvidia spent tons of money working directly with devs on optimization and even per-game bugfixes. As a longtime PC gamer I wish AMD released better GPUs, but they seem incapable of doing so generation after generation. Intel is getting better at the low end, so there's at least some hope there. But Nvidia is just the best in class, because they put in a huge amount of polish and work. My understanding is this is the same approach Nvidia took with CUDA: investing a massive amount to make it fast, accurate, and broadly available, while AMD continued to push out barely-tested drivers — for example, see hotz's woes with tinygrad and finally giving up and labeling the "red" (aka AMD) tinybox driver quality as "Mediocre" on their product page, with the "green" (aka Nvidia) tinybox driver quality listed as "Great" https://tinygrad.org/ https://tinygrad.org/ — and to this day restricts their competing library (ROCm) to specific ultra-expensive server-class GPUs.
- Dalewyn 2y ago
  >In fact I wish Intel and AMD would do the same! Intel at least works very closely with Microsoft to iron out the details for Windows.
WheatMillington 2y ago
You're treating AMD and Intel as resource-poor upstarts, which is ridiculous. They have every opportunity to provide the same support as nvidia.

reissbaker 2y ago

Of course AMD and Intel could just do the same thing. But they don't. That's not Nvidia's fault. In fact I wish Intel and AMD would do the same! It's great customer service to know that games are going to work well out of the box with Nvidia, because Nvidia spent tons of money working directly with devs on optimization and even per-game bugfixes. As a longtime PC gamer I wish AMD released better GPUs, but they seem incapable of doing so generation after generation. Intel is getting better at the low end, so there's at least some hope there. But Nvidia is just the best in class, because they put in a huge amount of polish and work. My understanding is this is the same approach Nvidia took with CUDA: investing a massive amount to make it fast, accurate, and broadly available, while AMD continued to push out barely-tested drivers — for example, see hotz's woes with tinygrad and finally giving up and labeling the "red" (aka AMD) tinybox driver quality as "Mediocre" on their product page, with the "green" (aka Nvidia) tinybox driver quality listed as "Great" https://tinygrad.org/ https://tinygrad.org/ — and to this day restricts their competing library (ROCm) to specific ultra-expensive server-class GPUs.

Dalewyn 2y ago
>In fact I wish Intel and AMD would do the same! Intel at least works very closely with Microsoft to iron out the details for Windows.

WheatMillington 2y ago

You're treating AMD and Intel as resource-poor upstarts, which is ridiculous. They have every opportunity to provide the same support as nvidia.