The Streamline is a Lie

Status
Not open for further replies.

FrgMstr

Just Plain Mean
Staff member
Joined
May 18, 1997
Messages
53,043
NVIDIA is fearful of losing control of dominating the software space with developers and this is simply another grasp at control.

cake.png
 

LukeTbk

2[H]4U
Joined
Sep 10, 2020
Messages
2,201
Really unsure about that part:
If "NVIDIA already has Intel onboard," it really makes me wonder about the future of our gaming APIs, as Streamline is only a good move for NVIDIA.

Feel like it could be quite good for Intel, who would take time to make Intel specific motion vector for Intel AI part of their video card image treatment ? There is a reason they were enthusiast for it no ?
 

Lakados

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Feb 3, 2014
Messages
5,724
Intel needs to partner with somebody, and if they came out with their framework it would be dead on arrival.
Supporting Open standards would be best, but that helps AMD as much as it would Intel so Intel is left getting in bed with NVidia.
The Enemy of my Enemy and all that jazz.

Streamline is a straight-up marketing tool waving flags saying, hey look we work with other people too!
 

Zarathustra[H]

Extremely [H]
Joined
Oct 29, 2000
Messages
34,063
I wasn't familiar with Streamline prior to this article I'll have to go read up on it, but I am always suspicious of Nvidia in this regard.

They have a LONG history of trying to use proprietary solutions to lock out or lock in both users and developers in ways that really ought to be illegal if you ask me.

Here developer, have our free Hairworks/Gameworks tool and use it to develop your game. Oh and when you do, anyone running it on a GPU other than ours either won't work, or will have paralyzing performance issues, forcing them to disable these features and make the title look like crap, meaning the only way to get the best experience will be for them to buy our hardware.

Same with some hardware solutions. Take G-Sync as an example. Sure VRR has been built into the VESA standard forever, but they developed a way to make it proprietary (charging screen vendors licensing fees) and also locking it to only their GPU's. They know that people upgrade GPU's on average much more often than they do monitors, so by selling them a monitor that only works with their GPU's the user is locked in to buying Nvidia GPU's for 5+ years on average.

For many years I bought nothing but Nvidia GPU's but I always hated doing it, knowing the sleazy ways in which they operate.

This is why I am so overjoyed at Nvidia's failure to acquire ARM. I can't think of a worse more manipulative company to own such a strategically important technology for the modern world.
 

staknhalo

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jun 11, 2007
Messages
1,987
I view Nvidia going closed source vs AMD open source as just more of that competition everyone always talks about...
 

Zarathustra[H]

Extremely [H]
Joined
Oct 29, 2000
Messages
34,063
I view Nvidia going closed source vs AMD open source as just more competition everyone talks about...

Nvidia's closed source lock-ins and lock-outs are a way for them to eliminate the competition and force customers to buy from them instead, unless they want a much diminished experience.

It's straight up classic anti-competitive behavior if you ask me.
 

staknhalo

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jun 11, 2007
Messages
1,987
Nvidia's closed source lock-ins and lock-outs are a way for them to eliminate the competition and force customers to buy from them instead, unless they want a much diminished experience.

It's straight up classic anti-competitive behavior if you ask me.

Free country, open source still has to compete against something as a model ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
 

OutOfPhase

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
May 11, 2005
Messages
5,034
Nvidia's closed source lock-ins and lock-outs are a way for them to eliminate the competition and force customers to buy from them instead, unless they want a much diminished experience.

It's straight up classic anti-competitive behavior if you ask me.
Devil's advocate:
Is it anti-competitive or very-aggressively-competitive?

Do not read any advocacy for any angle from this. Purely a thought.
 

staknhalo

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jun 11, 2007
Messages
1,987
Devil's advocate:
Is it anti-competitive or very-aggressively-competitive?

Do not read any advocacy for any angle from this. Purely a thought.

Yeah, they're definitely sharks. It's working for them so far. And also lost them the ARM deal.

Edit: And I'm also saying this from a shareholder perspective, I own all 3 Intel, AMD and Nvidia ATM. Nvidia and their methods print money for them.
 

Zarathustra[H]

Extremely [H]
Joined
Oct 29, 2000
Messages
34,063
Free country, open source still has to compete against something as a model ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Honestly. it's not an open source vs. not open source argument.

Closed source software is certainly viable. It's the way in which Nvidia uses its software to create lock-ins and lock-outs that is the problem. The same can't really be done with open source, because anyone can copy it and do as they please, as long as their output remains open source (depending on the license) but it would be perfectly possible to create what they have done closed source, but do so in an ethical manner. Nvidia just didn't.

Whenever Nvidia has had the option to try to force the consumers hand, they have taken it in order to try to give themselves an unfair advantage.

It's reminiscent of when Intel sabotaged AMD performance in the Intel Compiler in order to kill the competition.
 

staknhalo

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jun 11, 2007
Messages
1,987
Honestly. it's not an open source vs. not open source argument.

Closed source software is certainly viable. It's the way in which Nvidia uses its software to create lock-ins and lock-outs that is the problem. The same can't really be done with open source, because anyone can copy it and do as they please, as long as their output remains open source (depending on the license) but it would be perfectly possible to create what they have done closed source, but do so in an ethical manner. Nvidia just didn't.

Whenever Nvidia has had the option to try to force the consumers hand, they have taken it in order to try to give themselves an unfair advantage.

It's reminiscent of when Intel sabotaged AMD performance in the Intel Compiler in order to kill the competition.

And some people just don't like the popular kid too.
 

Lakados

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Feb 3, 2014
Messages
5,724
Yeah, they're definitely sharks. It's working for them so far. And also lost them the ARM deal.

Edit: And I'm also saying this from a shareholder perspective, I own all 3 Intel, AMD and Nvidia ATM. Nvidia and their methods print money for them.
Not sure there is any "for-profit" at this stage that is a viable owner for ARM, Nvidia was probably the best of a bad set of choices, and now I only hope it doesn't get worse for ARM I'm looking over the list of names involved in the IPO process for ARM and I am not filled with confidence...

I know Apple is working hard on dropping ARM from their branding pushing hard for Apple Silicon instead, and it makes me really curious how much they are spending on RiscV in the background or if they have their own thing completely in the works.
 

staknhalo

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jun 11, 2007
Messages
1,987
Not sure there is any "for-profit" at this stage that is a viable owner for ARM, Nvidia was probably the best of a bad set of choices, and now I only hope it doesn't get worse for ARM I'm looking over the list of names involved in the IPO process for ARM and I am not filled with confidence...

I know Apple is working hard on dropping ARM from their branding pushing hard for Apple Silicon instead, and it makes me really curious how much they are spending on RiscV in the background or if they have their own thing completely in the works.

Yeah I'm still convinced they wanted it for an in-house fully integrated and branded server product from Nvidia.
 

Ebernanut

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Dec 15, 2010
Messages
1,625
Devil's advocate:
Is it anti-competitive or very-aggressively-competitive?

Do not read any advocacy for any angle from this. Purely a thought.
The way they actively try to harm the competition rather than simply making their stuff better with it makes it anti-competitive IMO. Things like adding sub-pixel tessellation that can't be seen and hurts their cards performance but tanks the performance on the competitors cards are an example of this.

As for the program it would be nice to think that Nvidia decided it was best to work on open standards that benefit everyone but I agree that with their track record it's likely just wishful thinking and at best it's probably an empty gesture for PR.
 

Lakados

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Feb 3, 2014
Messages
5,724
Yeah I'm still convinced they wanted it for an in-house fully integrated and branded server product from Nvidia.
Nvidia's business isn't large enough to make that pay off when they can do the same thing with the standard ARM licensing structure, I think they wanted to kill off Mali, and a few of the standards in ARM, replace them with their own proprietary technologies, then basically take 90% of the market over the next 4 years as mobile devices get replaced. Want to make a mobile game, boom! your dealing with NVidia, want to make a handheld, NVidia too, server or cloud gaming right back to NVidia, suddenly by their sheer force of presence developers are asking Sony and Microsoft to look at NVidia for the next console release because how much easier it would make development and working on multi-platforms. Next thing you know Nvidia's proprietary standards are just "the standard" then they start licensing those out too, AMD and NVidia can sell all the cards they want but they are paying licensing fees back to NVidia with each one they do.

I know mobile gaming here is a nonstarter, we're too old, but I work in high schools with thousands of kids, they don't game on PC or Laptop, a good handful of them have a console, but all of those little brats have tablets & phones, and those are their go-to gaming devices.
 

staknhalo

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jun 11, 2007
Messages
1,987
Nvidia's business isn't large enough to make that pay off

It's like half of their company at this point.. (we're talking like 54/46 back and forth percentages here so to speak between it and gaming)

Edit: What you said could all be true, but datacenter is not nothing anymore for Nvidia
 

bluestang

Limp Gawd
Joined
Dec 14, 2018
Messages
478
Maybe NVIDIA needs to concentrate on securing their servers from teenagers hacking into them instead of trying to control developers and screwing consumers in the process.
 

Lakados

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Feb 3, 2014
Messages
5,724
It's like half of their company at this point.. (we're talking like 54/46 back and forth percentages here so to speak between it and gaming)

Edit: What you said could all be true, but datacenter is not nothing anymore for Nvidia
It's big numbers for sure, but what would owning ARM give NVidia that they don't already get through licensing?
Sure they could shift their R&D numbers over to their new customer base, and it would make their stock go through the roof, I can't even imagine how many new leather jackets that bonus would buy let alone the yachts needed to store them.
But their data center CPUs are continuing on schedule, and sure losing out on this deal probably set them back a year or so, but it's not like owning ARM would suddenly provide the push the datacenters were needing to change from x86 to ARM that's going to be a slow burn.
I wasn't overly fond of the NVidia/ARM deal but I like the current options less.
I am excited to see what their SBC's and Chromebook offerings with MediaTek shape into, I am always on the lookout for a better emulator machine, still waiting for the day I can get Gauntlet Legends and Gauntlet Dark Legacy MAME versions running on something I can fit in my pocket.
 

Lakados

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Feb 3, 2014
Messages
5,724
Maybe NVIDIA needs to concentrate on securing their servers from teenagers hacking into them instead of trying to control developers and screwing consumers in the process.
Honestly, it's harder to do that than you would think, but NVidia got taken for a ride. Maybe next time they should do a better job updating their Linux distros against known attacks, and spend less time on having their marketing departments generate propaganda and more on phishing educational material for their staff.
This all happened because the hackers got the credentials of some mid-level manager, VPN'ed in, then ran standard folder privilege execution attacks against them using known exploits, it wasn't even a complicated attack.
 

staknhalo

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jun 11, 2007
Messages
1,987
le, and sure losing out on this deal probably set them back a year or so, but it's not like owning ARM would suddenly provide the push the datacenters were needing to change from x86 to ARM that's going to be a slow burn.
I wasn't overly fond of the NVidia/ARM deal but I like the current options less.
I am excited to see what their SBC's and Chromebook offerings with MediaTek shape into, I am always on the lookout for a better emulator machine, still waiting for the day I can get Gauntlet Legends and Gauntlet Dark Legacy MAME versions running on something I can fit in my pocket.

Leather Jacket Man has stated his intent or part of on the deal was for datacenter to have an in house (not licensed) CPU like Intel specifically for datacenter against Intel IIRC
 

Lakados

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Feb 3, 2014
Messages
5,724
Leather Jacket Man has stated his intent or part of on the deal was for datacenter to have an in house (not licensed) CPU like Intel specifically for dataCenter against Intel IIRC
IF I ever get budget approval for it I do have an H100 system on my shopping list, but I suppose that's not an in-house build just a heavily modified v9 core. I'm sad for the toys I won't get to see because that deal fell through and I hope to whatever eldritch gods are paying attention that the joining forces of Goldman Sachs, JPMorgan Chase & Co, and Mizuho Financial for the IPO release doesn't ruin this for the rest of us.
 

staknhalo

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jun 11, 2007
Messages
1,987
IF I ever get budget approval for it I do have an H100 system on my shopping list, but I suppose that's not an in-house build just a heavily modified v9 core. I'm sad for the toys I won't get to see because that deal fell through and I hope to whatever eldritch gods are paying attention that the joining forces of Goldman Sachs, JPMorgan Chase & Co, and Mizuho Financial for the IPO release doesn't ruin this for the rest of us.

Intel and Nvidia have been talking a lot about how Intel is gonna Fab here in the US again and is interested in fabing for other companies like Nvidia, named dropped specifically.

There will probably be a bunch of Grace/Emeral Rapids products highlighted by Nvidia with this new 'love $ fest'

Edit: Hopper is cool too
 

Lakados

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Feb 3, 2014
Messages
5,724
Intel and Nvidia have been talking a lot about how Intel is gonna Fab here in the US again and is interested in fabing for other companies like Nvidia, named dropped specifically.

There will probably be a bunch of Grace/Emeral Rapids products highlighted by Nvidia with this new 'love $ fest'

Edit: Hopper is cool too
Yeah, I am looking forward to those Intel fabs they also name-dropped Qualcomm and Amazon for those fabs, they are supposed to be the 20A process IF the roadmap stays on track, and that looks just straight up neat.
 

Kckazdude

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jan 4, 2002
Messages
1,762
After watching the old Intel/RDRam and Nvidia/3DMark consumer 'benefits' unfold. Now more recently Nvidia G-Sync technology. I can't help but be very trepidatious about anything they could come up with together.
 
  • Like
Reactions: N4CR
like this

FrgMstr

Just Plain Mean
Staff member
Joined
May 18, 1997
Messages
53,043
Can you imagine from a "sales" side from hardware vendors to gamedevs introducing feature sets, use cases, and implementation? NVIDIA: "Na, you don't need to talk to AMD or Intel about their tech, it is all here for you to use already."

Now couple just that, with my opinion that NVIDIA is actually evil, and imagine how things go.
 
Joined
Mar 18, 2013
Messages
3,770
nVidia really does seem bent on wining the coveted mostest evilest company award.

I don't know if they can catch some of the old school evil companies like Union Carbide, but they seem to be determined to try.
 

KazeoHin

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Sep 7, 2011
Messages
8,498
Evil? Well, by definition anyone acting in their own interests at the detriment to others is "Evil"

But there are a lot worse than Nvidia.

"Slimy" is more apt.
 

DukenukemX

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jan 30, 2005
Messages
6,133
Evil? Well, by definition anyone acting in their own interests at the detriment to others is "Evil"
There's a difference between acting in your own interests and actively working against your consumers interests. You can still benefit while your consumer does as well. This is not part of Vulkan made with the Khronos Group. This is their standard they made and control. Much like anything Apple needed could have been added to Vulkan, so too Nvidia could have added this to Vulkan as well.
But there are a lot worse than Nvidia.
I can't think of any.
 

whateverer

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Nov 2, 2016
Messages
1,611
IF any of you cares this much about fine- print this impossible, I also have a bridge to sell you.
 

ChadD

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Feb 8, 2016
Messages
5,508
If Intel is really giving that much power to Nvidia they are as stupid as we all believe them to be.

Nvidia is a company that needs to take the boots for at least a couple solid product cycles. For the good of the industry. I mean having the consoles powered by AMDs open source frameworks is good... and probably the only thing that has kept Nvidia from being even more of a pain. For all their talk of pushing things like Ray tracing... all the closed frameworks have worked against them. RT is something that could he been used much more meaningfully and been expanded on much more if Nvidia had used open standards from the start. Instead RT is mostly an after thought that isn't used for anything but a little extra eye candy in a few large titles. Its going to end up in a years long meh land just like VR. Standards are important... and when an industry can't agree on ONE it suffers. Open source frameworks are the means to adopt a industry standard. Nvidia has held back gaming.
 

Lakados

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Feb 3, 2014
Messages
5,724
If Intel is really giving that much power to Nvidia they are as stupid as we all believe them to be.

Nvidia is a company that needs to take the boots for at least a couple solid product cycles. For the good of the industry. I mean having the consoles powered by AMDs open source frameworks is good... and probably the only thing that has kept Nvidia from being even more of a pain. For all their talk of pushing things like Ray tracing... all the closed frameworks have worked against them. RT is something that could he been used much more meaningfully and been expanded on much more if Nvidia had used open standards from the start. Instead RT is mostly an after thought that isn't used for anything but a little extra eye candy in a few large titles.
Ray tracing is a DX12 / Vulkan feature, not an Nvidia one, so it’s as open as any other part of the DX12 and Vulkan frameworks for vendor implementation.
 
Last edited:

Lakados

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Feb 3, 2014
Messages
5,724
Much like anything Apple needed could have been added to Vulkan, so too Nvidia could have added this to Vulkan as well.
Metal was launched before the development of Vulkan began, and yes Nvidia can add things to an optional Vulkan library but so can anybody, but to make anything official takes time and committee meetings and reviews, sometimes you just want to do it your way and you want it done.
 

staknhalo

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jun 11, 2007
Messages
1,987
And believe it or not, you'll find the general populace/people writ large like using Nvidia's software stacks. Both on the consumer and professional ends. From taking photos with Ansel to AI and everything in-between. Almost like they know what they're doing.
 

NightReaver

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Apr 20, 2017
Messages
1,177
And believe it or not, you'll find the general populace/people writ large like using Nvidia's software stacks. Both on the consumer and professional ends. From taking photos with Ansel to AI and everything in-between. Almost like they know what they're doing.
They can enjoy paying for it then. The same "general populace" then complains about lack of competition when it really means "I still want to buy Nvidia, but for less".
 

staknhalo

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jun 11, 2007
Messages
1,987
They can enjoy paying for it then. The same "general populace" then complains about lack of competition when it really means "I still want to buy Nvidia, but for less".

I wonder when AMD's own incompetence that helped get here will ever come into any of these discussions, if ever.
 

Lakados

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Feb 3, 2014
Messages
5,724
They can enjoy paying for it then. The same "general populace" then complains about lack of competition when it really means "I still want to buy Nvidia, but for less".
That means that AMD hasn't stepped up, they are stepping up for sure but this is new for them, AMD was struggling and basically circling the bowl from 2008 to 2018, it's going to take them a while to dig themselves out but they have to give customers a good incentive to do so. On the actual hardware side they have done a good job of building things people want to buy, but developing new APIs takes time, resources, money, and partnerships; something that until recently they could not afford. During that time Nvidia got their choice pick and they have made the best of it, they developed massive development libraries and toolsets that save developers and researchers time and money and they work closely with those people to keep them happy. So AMD is in the position where they have to either beat NVidia at their own game or have to work with the community to create open standards and toolsets that they can hope will eventually supplant Nvidia's proprietary technologies. The biggest hurdle for AMD on this is they are having to convince people who have spent millions or billions on infrastructure to change to something else without giving any clear incentive to do so.
 

staknhalo

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jun 11, 2007
Messages
1,987
And if you don't want your competitors integrating your shit into their software (for what the licencing allows), then don't make your shit open source ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Math doesn't seem too hard on that one, but I dunno.
 

FrgMstr

Just Plain Mean
Staff member
Joined
May 18, 1997
Messages
53,043
And if you don't want your competitors integrating your shit into their software (for what the licencing allows), then don't make your shit open source ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Well, actually if you read the open source licenses, they cannot just incorporate that in their proprietary tools. It has to be agreed upon.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top