ASUS ROG Crosshair VIII HERO (Wi-fi) review
MSI MEG X570 Godlike review
Corsair NightSword RGB gaming mouse review
Promo: URCDKey Summer Sale Windows 10 Pro for $11
Corsair MP600 PCIe 4.0 NVMe SSD review
Palit GeForce RTX 2070 SUPER JetStream review
MSI GeForce RTX 2070 SUPER Gaming X TRIO review
Palit GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER JetStream review
ASUS GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER Strix review
MSI GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER Gaming X review
NVIDIA CEO comments on GeForce Partner Program
Nvidia recently held a conference call on their latest financial results, one person in the call was Jen-Hsung Huang, and he is the CEO of Nvidia. He was asked about the cancellation of the Geforce Partner Program in relation to how Nvidia came to that decision and what the possible implications are on market share.
Jen-Hsung Huang 'The majority of the ecosystem embraced it, but some people hated it'. In his believe one gaming brand (say ROG) per videocard brand (NVIDIA) would be more transparent. More graphics cards series (Gaming / ROG / AMD/ NVIDIA) and brands under one label (ROG) would be less transparent. Have a read on his reaction below as spotted by our colleagues from HWI. It's a comment, albeit a small one:
Toshiya Hari - Goldman Sachs & Co. LLC
Great. Thank you so much. Jensen, I had a question regarding your decision to pull the plug on your GeForce Partner Program. I think most of us read your blog from last Friday. I think it was, so we understand the basic background. But if you can describe what led to this decision and perhaps talk a little bit about the potential implications, if any, in terms of your ability to compete or gain share. That will be really helpful. Thank you so much.
Jen-Hsun Huang - NVIDIA Corp.
Yeah. Thanks for your question, Toshiya. At the core, the program was about making
sure that gamers who buy graphics cards knows exactly the GPU brand that's inside. And the reason for that is because, we want gamers to – the gaming experience of a graphics card depends so much on the GPU that is chosen.
And we felt that using one gaming brand, a graphics card brand, and interchanging the GPU underneath causes it to be less – causes it to be more opaque and less transparent for a gamer to choose the GPU brand that they wanted. And most of the ecosystem loved it. And some of the people really disliked it.
And so instead of all that distraction, we're doing so well. And we're going to continue to help the gamers choose the graphics cards, like we always have, and things will sort out. And so we decided to pull the plug because the distraction was unnecessary and we have too much good stuff to go do.
Nvidia cautious that possible cryptocurrency demand might drop - 03/13/2018 11:04 AM
GPU demand from the cryptocurrency mining industry is showing signs of slowdown recently and Nvidia has started taking measures to minimize possible damage, according to some market sources, reports d...
NVIDIA Collaborates with Activision and Bungie to Bring / Bundle Destiny 2 to PC - 06/14/2017 07:37 AM
NVIDIA, Activision and Bungie, creators of the award-winning Destiny game franchise, today announced they are partnering to bring the Destiny franchise to PC for the first time with the much-anticipat...
NVIDIA CEO Keynote at GTC 2017 Watch it Here (ended) - 05/10/2017 05:45 PM
In about 15 minutes NVIDIA will hold a keynote about: Intelligent Video Analytics, Intelligent Machines and IoT, Self-Driving Cars, Virtual Reality and Augmented Reality, Data Center and Cloud Computi...
Nvidia Confirms Shield Pro-console with 500GB - 05/21/2015 04:05 PM
An Nvidia employee has confirmed a Pro edition of Nvidia's streaming Shield Console, to be released in May close to Computex. The console will come with Android TV in the Pro as a normal version wit...
Nvidia CEO Jen-Hsun Huang Blogs about GTX 970 - 02/24/2015 08:50 PM
CEO and Founder of NVidia Jen-Hsun Huang has written a post on Nvidia's blog regarding the GeForc GTX 970. It is quite unusual for a CEO to do this, so I'll just leave it for you to read. After th...
Kaarme
Senior Member
Posts: 1541
Joined: 2013-03-10
Senior Member
Posts: 1541
Joined: 2013-03-10
#5546973 Posted on: 05/15/2018 05:00 PM
I don't know what planet you are on, but here on planet earth there are a lot of stupid people not to mention people who want to get into games but have zero idea about technology.
So yes, people will and do think those two cards are the same by looking at them.
Clearly you do not deal with people in the tech world; more people are technology illiterate than you think.
Then what difference will it make for them if the boxes are more different than they currently are (with the Nvidia/AMD specific part being the second largest text after the card manufacturer's brand)? Wouldn't those people on your planet Earth proceed to pick a random box from the shelf nonetheless? Apparently they have hundreds of dollars of spare money to spend on a whim, so maybe they will get the most flashy box, but here we will encounter the little matter of taste, which neither Nvidia or AMD can affect.
You can always attack any argument by referring to idiots doing unimaginable things, but I don't really see the relevance. We aren't even banning cars despite idiots causing deaths on the roads every day.
I don't know what planet you are on, but here on planet earth there are a lot of stupid people not to mention people who want to get into games but have zero idea about technology.
So yes, people will and do think those two cards are the same by looking at them.
Clearly you do not deal with people in the tech world; more people are technology illiterate than you think.
Then what difference will it make for them if the boxes are more different than they currently are (with the Nvidia/AMD specific part being the second largest text after the card manufacturer's brand)? Wouldn't those people on your planet Earth proceed to pick a random box from the shelf nonetheless? Apparently they have hundreds of dollars of spare money to spend on a whim, so maybe they will get the most flashy box, but here we will encounter the little matter of taste, which neither Nvidia or AMD can affect.
You can always attack any argument by referring to idiots doing unimaginable things, but I don't really see the relevance. We aren't even banning cars despite idiots causing deaths on the roads every day.
schmidtbag
Senior Member
Posts: 4113
Joined: 2012-11-10
Senior Member
Posts: 4113
Joined: 2012-11-10
#5546983 Posted on: 05/15/2018 05:17 PM
Understood, but there's a difference between preferential treatment because your affiliation brings in a lot of money, vs preferential treatment as long as you follow specific conditions. That's the problem here. Nvidia could deliberately give Asus all the best chips because Asus will make something good with them and though that's a little unfair, I wouldn't fault them for doing that. But GPP strong-hands the situation, where Nvidia is basically saying "disassociate yourselves with AMD or else you aren't going to get the better chips. Since I give you more profit than them, I know you will comply". Does that not sound a bit unethical to you? It's borderline blackmailing.
That example you show is a very different practice. Brands like Porsche and Ferrari make these special edition cars only for their most loyal fans. They're deliberately limited production because they only want a select few people to possess them. After all, if they're a commodity, they're not that special. What Nvidia is trying to do here is almost the exact opposite: they're trying to get their products more known, more associated with well-established brands, and in the hands of more people, despite the limitations of production.
The problem is that is a common practice in the business world. Every company treats their best customers in a different way than they treat the other customers. And this involves better payment conditions, better discounts, better support and priority for their products.
Understood, but there's a difference between preferential treatment because your affiliation brings in a lot of money, vs preferential treatment as long as you follow specific conditions. That's the problem here. Nvidia could deliberately give Asus all the best chips because Asus will make something good with them and though that's a little unfair, I wouldn't fault them for doing that. But GPP strong-hands the situation, where Nvidia is basically saying "disassociate yourselves with AMD or else you aren't going to get the better chips. Since I give you more profit than them, I know you will comply". Does that not sound a bit unethical to you? It's borderline blackmailing.
For example in the car industry there´s a common joke regarding luxury brands like Porsche and Ferrary and their special edition cars released in limited conditions, that more important that having the money to buy them is having the garage already filled with their cars because a new customer to the brand has zero chances of buying a limited edition car from them... Basically they are allocating their limited products to their best customers...
So nothing new about this kind of practices...
So nothing new about this kind of practices...
That example you show is a very different practice. Brands like Porsche and Ferrari make these special edition cars only for their most loyal fans. They're deliberately limited production because they only want a select few people to possess them. After all, if they're a commodity, they're not that special. What Nvidia is trying to do here is almost the exact opposite: they're trying to get their products more known, more associated with well-established brands, and in the hands of more people, despite the limitations of production.
xrodney
Senior Member
Posts: 325
Joined: 2015-06-18
Senior Member
Posts: 325
Joined: 2015-06-18
#5546986 Posted on: 05/15/2018 05:21 PM
My main point with my earlier posts wasn't that Nvidia was doing the right thing, it's that some people on Guru3D seem to think name recognition and branding doesn't affect sales, which is wrong. If AMD ever brought Nvidia to court over GPP they'd have to show damages and those damages would be sales lost due to loss of AIB "gaming" branding.
I think you are maybe underestimating/misunderstanding people here.
Yes, branding and their promotion do afect sales, however those brands and cost for promotions are AIBs and Nvidia should STFU and GTFO.
IF those brands were made by Nvidia and fully sponsored by Nvidia that would be different story, but thats not the case here.
And whats making this even worse is that those brands are not even GPU related but rather gaming related including Mobos, notebooks, monitors, gaming accesories etc.
And Nvidia does not make single one of those.
My main point with my earlier posts wasn't that Nvidia was doing the right thing, it's that some people on Guru3D seem to think name recognition and branding doesn't affect sales, which is wrong. If AMD ever brought Nvidia to court over GPP they'd have to show damages and those damages would be sales lost due to loss of AIB "gaming" branding.
I think you are maybe underestimating/misunderstanding people here.
Yes, branding and their promotion do afect sales, however those brands and cost for promotions are AIBs and Nvidia should STFU and GTFO.
IF those brands were made by Nvidia and fully sponsored by Nvidia that would be different story, but thats not the case here.
And whats making this even worse is that those brands are not even GPU related but rather gaming related including Mobos, notebooks, monitors, gaming accesories etc.
And Nvidia does not make single one of those.
Venix
Senior Member
Posts: 863
Joined: 2016-08-01
Senior Member
Posts: 863
Joined: 2016-08-01
#5547004 Posted on: 05/15/2018 06:20 PM
― Al Capone
“You can go a long way with a smile. You can go a lot farther with a smile and 80%market share .”
― Nvidia
“You can go a long way with a smile. You can go a lot farther with a smile and a gun.”
― Al Capone
“You can go a long way with a smile. You can go a lot farther with a smile and 80%market share .”
― Nvidia
H83
Senior Member
Posts: 2661
Joined: 2009-09-08
Senior Member
Posts: 2661
Joined: 2009-09-08
#5547011 Posted on: 05/15/2018 06:37 PM
The bold part underlines the most important question about this matter: is Nvidia just asking their partners to create different brands for Nvidia and AMD or are they asking them to join with the condition that they have prejudice AMD somehow so Nvidia can reap some sort of benefits??? If it´s the first, nothing wrong, if it´s the second then what Nvidia is doing is obviously illegal. So far i still haven´t seem anything that indicates the second theory so i see now wrong doing from Nvidia, just a childish and stupid marketing ploy that failed miserably...
In case there´s some evidence of Nvidia forcing their partners into something illegal, please show me so i can change my mind.
Understood, but there's a difference between preferential treatment because your affiliation brings in a lot of money, vs preferential treatment as long as you follow specific conditions. That's the problem here. Nvidia could deliberately give Asus all the best chips because Asus will make something good with them and though that's a little unfair, I wouldn't fault them for doing that. But GPP strong-hands the situation, where Nvidia is basically saying "disassociate yourselves with AMD or else you aren't going to get the better chips. Since I give you more profit than them, I know you will comply". Does that not sound a bit unethical to you? It's borderline blackmailing.
The bold part underlines the most important question about this matter: is Nvidia just asking their partners to create different brands for Nvidia and AMD or are they asking them to join with the condition that they have prejudice AMD somehow so Nvidia can reap some sort of benefits??? If it´s the first, nothing wrong, if it´s the second then what Nvidia is doing is obviously illegal. So far i still haven´t seem anything that indicates the second theory so i see now wrong doing from Nvidia, just a childish and stupid marketing ploy that failed miserably...
In case there´s some evidence of Nvidia forcing their partners into something illegal, please show me so i can change my mind.
BReal85
Senior Member
Posts: 297
Joined: 2016-10-25
Senior Member
Posts: 297
Joined: 2016-10-25
#5547014 Posted on: 05/15/2018 06:49 PM
"Jen-Hsung Huang 'The majority of the ecosystem embraced it, but some people hated it"
MAJOR BS, Mr. Huang. Even most of the NV owners expressed their concern about this step. The most sincere thing would be to boycott your products.
"Jen-Hsung Huang 'The majority of the ecosystem embraced it, but some people hated it"
MAJOR BS, Mr. Huang. Even most of the NV owners expressed their concern about this step. The most sincere thing would be to boycott your products.
schmidtbag
Senior Member
Posts: 4113
Joined: 2012-11-10
Senior Member
Posts: 4113
Joined: 2012-11-10
#5547015 Posted on: 05/15/2018 06:51 PM
It isn't either of those. GPP was supposed to offer manufacturers a higher priority on the condition that AMD products are disassociated from the same brand. It's an optional program, so they're not asking companies to do anything. But since Nvidia is the one with leverage in this situation, they're basically forcing these companies to comply. I'm not sure if it's illegal, but it is anticompetitive.
Keep in mind, AMD couldn't do the same thing, because their marketshare and overall product quality is lower. If they did try to pull this, the exact same outcome would happen: Nvidia would be associated with the original gaming brands (like ROG or Aorus or whatever) and AMD would get the new brands. That obviously works against them.
I don't know about whether or not it is illegal and I never said otherwise. I said "borderline blackmailing", suggesting this is legally a pretty gray area. There are legal restrictions on various forms of anticompetitive actions, but I don't know what the specifics are.
EDIT:
Kind of the point of blackmailing is it gives you the illusion of choice. You're told it's optional, but if you choose against that option, the negative consequences outweigh the gains. The sole purpose of blackmail is to get people/companies to "willingly" do what you want to avoid such consequences. AIB partners don't want to be shafted with supply or poor-quality parts, so, they have to comply. The only one who wins from GPP is Nvidia; it makes no difference to the major AIB partners, it hurts the small AIB partners, and it potentially (but not definitively) hurts AMD.
The bold part underlines the most important question about this matter: is Nvidia just asking their partners to create different brands for Nvidia and AMD or are they asking them to join with the condition that they have prejudice AMD somehow so Nvidia can reap some sort of benefits??? If it´s the first, nothing wrong, if it´s the second then what Nvidia is doing is obviously illegal. So far i still haven´t seem anything that indicates the second theory so i see now wrong doing from Nvidia, just a childish and stupid marketing ploy that failed miserably...
It isn't either of those. GPP was supposed to offer manufacturers a higher priority on the condition that AMD products are disassociated from the same brand. It's an optional program, so they're not asking companies to do anything. But since Nvidia is the one with leverage in this situation, they're basically forcing these companies to comply. I'm not sure if it's illegal, but it is anticompetitive.
Keep in mind, AMD couldn't do the same thing, because their marketshare and overall product quality is lower. If they did try to pull this, the exact same outcome would happen: Nvidia would be associated with the original gaming brands (like ROG or Aorus or whatever) and AMD would get the new brands. That obviously works against them.
In case there´s some evidence of Nvidia forcing their partners into something illegal, please show me so i can change my mind.
I don't know about whether or not it is illegal and I never said otherwise. I said "borderline blackmailing", suggesting this is legally a pretty gray area. There are legal restrictions on various forms of anticompetitive actions, but I don't know what the specifics are.
EDIT:
Kind of the point of blackmailing is it gives you the illusion of choice. You're told it's optional, but if you choose against that option, the negative consequences outweigh the gains. The sole purpose of blackmail is to get people/companies to "willingly" do what you want to avoid such consequences. AIB partners don't want to be shafted with supply or poor-quality parts, so, they have to comply. The only one who wins from GPP is Nvidia; it makes no difference to the major AIB partners, it hurts the small AIB partners, and it potentially (but not definitively) hurts AMD.
Monchis
Senior Member
Posts: 1303
Joined: 2014-06-15
Senior Member
Posts: 1303
Joined: 2014-06-15
#5547054 Posted on: 05/15/2018 09:16 PM
― Al Capone
“You can go a long way with a smile. You can go a lot farther with a smile and 80%market share .”
― Nvidia
What a coincidence. Now that people have been calling the ceo of nvidia a gangster, I was also thinking of Al Capone, specifically how both of them had fans defending them :O
“You can go a long way with a smile. You can go a lot farther with a smile and a gun.”
― Al Capone
“You can go a long way with a smile. You can go a lot farther with a smile and 80%market share .”
― Nvidia
What a coincidence. Now that people have been calling the ceo of nvidia a gangster, I was also thinking of Al Capone, specifically how both of them had fans defending them :O
Venix
Senior Member
Posts: 863
Joined: 2016-08-01
Senior Member
Posts: 863
Joined: 2016-08-01
#5547110 Posted on: 05/16/2018 02:21 AM
the reason i made that joke was because this offer ... is an offer the partners can not refuse really if the nvidia cards really bring 80% of their revenue from gpus .... then how much they can afford to be 2nd class partners with nvidia if they do not accept ?
What a coincidence. Now that people have been calling the ceo of nvidia a gangster, I was also thinking of Al Capone, specifically how both of them had fans defending them :O
the reason i made that joke was because this offer ... is an offer the partners can not refuse really if the nvidia cards really bring 80% of their revenue from gpus .... then how much they can afford to be 2nd class partners with nvidia if they do not accept ?
Monchis
Senior Member
Posts: 1303
Joined: 2014-06-15
Senior Member
Posts: 1303
Joined: 2014-06-15
#5547111 Posted on: 05/16/2018 02:27 AM
I understand, gangsters and extortion go hand in hand.
the reason i made that joke was because this offer ... is an offer the partners can not refuse really if the nvidia cards really bring 80% of their revenue from gpus .... then how much they can afford to be 2nd class partners with nvidia if they do not accept ?
I understand, gangsters and extortion go hand in hand.
DW75
Senior Member
Posts: 1044
Joined: 2012-08-19
Senior Member
Posts: 1044
Joined: 2012-08-19
#5547129 Posted on: 05/16/2018 05:25 AM
Once again, Nvidia is just trying to cover their ass. They attempt to get away with doing some unethical garbage, and get roasted for it. Their solution: blame the customers, and refuse to accept responsibility for their devious behavior. That is the Nvidia way.
Once again, Nvidia is just trying to cover their ass. They attempt to get away with doing some unethical garbage, and get roasted for it. Their solution: blame the customers, and refuse to accept responsibility for their devious behavior. That is the Nvidia way.
fantaskarsef
Senior Member
Posts: 10453
Joined: 2014-07-21
Senior Member
Posts: 10453
Joined: 2014-07-21
#5547152 Posted on: 05/16/2018 08:28 AM
Nothing wrong with wanting. I would personally read it too. (Even while there may be like 90% legal stuff without any real informative value.)
And you are right that AIBs did not admit that their actions were due to GPP. But their quick reversal of action and plans once connection was mentioned and GPP scrapped...
And I think you should not call it hear-say. At least not things which GN guy said in that YT video. (if you meant that) Because he did claim that he only spoke of things he got directly from communication with AIB's people and consider solid.
So, he was either saying truth or he lied. I have no problem if you think that what he said is just made up BS. It is opinion about GN credibility.
But it is not hearsay. Otherwise anyone could call Hilbert's information obtained via email communication as "yet another hearsay." And that would be wrong.
Edit: And I think GPP was scrapped exactly because nVidia did not want anyone in public to see those contracts. This ending up in some court, and information pulled + dissected by tech sites...
For 2 months GPP is being discussed, and it shined bad light without even knowing tip of an iceberg. While I think that GPP was meant to cause harm to AMD. I think too that there may be statements which originally meant no harm, but upon closer look, they may prove to be much worse PR nightmare.
Well, with hear-say I definitely didn't think about somebody's YT video which I haven't seen, I was meaning it in a more law-orientated way of saying it. Hear-say might still be proof in terms of the law if it aids to the picture and other, substantial evidence, framing the picture already painted.
Yes I too think they didn't want anybody to read the contracts, I'm fairly sure they made them sign NDAs before even giving them to the manufacturers. That's why I'd want to see them, to know if e.g. the board partners could choose to either form a new brand for NV or if they have to use their main brand (which would, imho, take a bit of blame off of NV and towards their GPP partners), what real advantages they could have gotten in terms of marketing, etc.
I honestly didn't think it was meant to hurt AMD, but in the first place, to strengthen NV's stand, agains their only competitor who happens to be AMD. So generally, it was anti-competitive in a way of strengthening their own position, to the disadvantage of anybody else out there, being only AMD though. If Intel later might join the dGPU market, they might have found themselves in the same situation as AMD, for that matter, being forced into any other brand naming schemes with the manufacturers, etc.
Schrodinger's Customer - simultaneously smart enough to know the difference between RX Vega and Geforce GTX but stupid enough to not know the difference between ROG and AREZ.
BEST. FING. POST.
I wish I could use this as a signature.
Nothing wrong with wanting. I would personally read it too. (Even while there may be like 90% legal stuff without any real informative value.)
And you are right that AIBs did not admit that their actions were due to GPP. But their quick reversal of action and plans once connection was mentioned and GPP scrapped...
And I think you should not call it hear-say. At least not things which GN guy said in that YT video. (if you meant that) Because he did claim that he only spoke of things he got directly from communication with AIB's people and consider solid.
So, he was either saying truth or he lied. I have no problem if you think that what he said is just made up BS. It is opinion about GN credibility.
But it is not hearsay. Otherwise anyone could call Hilbert's information obtained via email communication as "yet another hearsay." And that would be wrong.
Edit: And I think GPP was scrapped exactly because nVidia did not want anyone in public to see those contracts. This ending up in some court, and information pulled + dissected by tech sites...
For 2 months GPP is being discussed, and it shined bad light without even knowing tip of an iceberg. While I think that GPP was meant to cause harm to AMD. I think too that there may be statements which originally meant no harm, but upon closer look, they may prove to be much worse PR nightmare.
Well, with hear-say I definitely didn't think about somebody's YT video which I haven't seen, I was meaning it in a more law-orientated way of saying it. Hear-say might still be proof in terms of the law if it aids to the picture and other, substantial evidence, framing the picture already painted.
Yes I too think they didn't want anybody to read the contracts, I'm fairly sure they made them sign NDAs before even giving them to the manufacturers. That's why I'd want to see them, to know if e.g. the board partners could choose to either form a new brand for NV or if they have to use their main brand (which would, imho, take a bit of blame off of NV and towards their GPP partners), what real advantages they could have gotten in terms of marketing, etc.
I honestly didn't think it was meant to hurt AMD, but in the first place, to strengthen NV's stand, agains their only competitor who happens to be AMD. So generally, it was anti-competitive in a way of strengthening their own position, to the disadvantage of anybody else out there, being only AMD though. If Intel later might join the dGPU market, they might have found themselves in the same situation as AMD, for that matter, being forced into any other brand naming schemes with the manufacturers, etc.
Schrodinger's Customer - simultaneously smart enough to know the difference between RX Vega and Geforce GTX but stupid enough to not know the difference between ROG and AREZ.
BEST. FING. POST.
I wish I could use this as a signature.
joe smith
Junior Member
Posts: 1
Joined: 2018-06-11
Junior Member
Posts: 1
Joined: 2018-06-11
#5555962 Posted on: 06/11/2018 07:15 PM
They are liers. they never admitted what wrong they have done. right now I am using GeForce GTX 1050 Ti but recently while I am playing games my screen is turned black sometimes. So I have contacted netgear router support usa and after they heard my complain they told me that the problem is on GPU. But I don't have enough money to buy a new one. Tell me what will I do.
They are liers. they never admitted what wrong they have done. right now I am using GeForce GTX 1050 Ti but recently while I am playing games my screen is turned black sometimes. So I have contacted netgear router support usa and after they heard my complain they told me that the problem is on GPU. But I don't have enough money to buy a new one. Tell me what will I do.
Fox2232
Senior Member
Posts: 9359
Joined: 2012-07-20
Senior Member
Posts: 9359
Joined: 2012-07-20
#5556086 Posted on: 06/11/2018 10:49 PM
LOL, sorry... LOL again...
Unbelievable...
Rly!
They are liers. they never admitted what wrong they have done. right now I am using GeForce GTX 1050 Ti but recently while I am playing games my screen is turned black sometimes. So I have contacted netgear router support usa and after they heard my complain they told me that the problem is on GPU. But I don't have enough money to buy a new one. Tell me what will I do.
LOL, sorry... LOL again...
Unbelievable...
Rly!
Click here to post a comment for this news story on the message forum.
Senior Member
Posts: 12154
Joined: 2004-05-16
I'm curious to know who exactly Huang thinks he is fooling? Does he think gamers are idiots who cannot distinguish between "GeForce GTX" and "Radeon RX"? Frankly, I find it insulting how he continues with the blatant lie that the GPP was about "transparency".
Seriously now, does Huang want to alienate and offend the gaming community? Seems that he's not interested in rebuilding that bridge and re-establishing that trust with gamers. Still spreading fud, still playing the victim, and still no apology.
Schrodinger's Customer - simultaneously smart enough to know the difference between RX Vega and Geforce GTX but stupid enough to not know the difference between ROG and AREZ.
Perhaps it's deeper than that.
I don't know what planet you are on, but here on planet earth there are a lot of stupid people not to mention people who want to get into games but have zero idea about technology.
So yes, people will and do think those two cards are the same by looking at them.
Clearly you do not deal with people in the tech world; more people are technology illiterate than you think.
I agree that to some people that will be confusing but the important aspect here is that MSI already established a Gaming X brand and shoved both companies under that brand. If Nvidia was simply asking MSI to color their boxes/cards green, I think a lot less people would have an issue but that isn't what happened. Nvidia tried forcing AMD out of that brand entirely.. a brand that MSI has been building as the "gaming" "ultra sleek" "quiet" "fastest cards" "blahblah marketing nonsense". All the work MSI put into that brand that benefited AMD indirectly and Nvidia tried kicking AMD out of it. That's the crux of the issue.
I can agree with that...partialy.
But, main problem here was that Nvidia wanted usurp AIB established brands for themself which on its own is bad, but on top of that "threaten" if they dont.
If Nvidia wanted to as they called it "stop confusion" about what GPUs you buy, all that was needed is to ask AIBs to make it more visible.
There would not be problem to have Green themed ASUS ROG XXX for Nvidia cards and Red themed ASUS ROG YYY sub brands and packaging, instead they went super greedy and wanted to grab AIBs established brands for themselfin try to push AMD sales down and as well cost AIBs more money for promoting separate brands.
Seriously, any ideas like this should be shot in the heart and one more to head, just to make sure they stay down.
Lol - I guess I already responded to this in my reply to agent above. I agree that if Nvidia's main goal was to promote differentiation they could have done it differently. My main point with my earlier posts wasn't that Nvidia was doing the right thing, it's that some people on Guru3D seem to think name recognition and branding doesn't affect sales, which is wrong. If AMD ever brought Nvidia to court over GPP they'd have to show damages and those damages would be sales lost due to loss of AIB "gaming" branding.