+1. "Nvidia won, we all lost" sets a very different tone than "NVIDIA is full of shit". It's clearly not the tone the author intended to set.

Even more concerning is that, by editorializing the title of an article that is (in part) about how Nvidia uses their market dominance to pressure reviewers and control the narrative, we must question whether or not the mod team is complicit in this effort.

Is team green afraid that a title like "NVIDIA is full of shit" on the front page of HN is bad for their image or stock price? Was HN pressured to change the name?

Sometimes, editorialization is just a dumb and lazy mistake. But editorializing something like this is a lot more concerning. And it's made worse by the fact that the title was changed by the mods.

When titles are changed, the intent as I understand it is to nudge discussion towards thoughtful exchange. Discussion is forever threatening to spin out of control towards flame wars and the moderators work hard to prevent that.

I think that if you want to understand why it might be helpful to change the title, consider how well "NVIDIA is full of shit" follows the HN comment guidelines.

I don't imagine you will agree with the title change no matter what, but I believe that's essentially the rationale. Note that the topic wasn't flagged, which if suppression of the author's ideas or protection of Nvidia were goals would have been more effective.

(FWIW I have plenty of issues with HN but how titles are handled isn't one of them.)

I think it's pretty obvious. People were investing like crazy into Nvidia on the "AI" gamble. Now everybody needs to keep hyping up Nvidia and AI no matter reality. (Until it starts to become obvious and then the selloff starts)

Haven't you figured out the new global agenda yet? Guidelines (and rules) exist only to serve the masters.

> I have also realized that there is a lot out there in the world besides video games

My main hobby is videogames, but since I can consistently play most games on Linux (that has good AMD support), it doesn't really matter.

AMD isn't even bad at video games, it's just pytorch that doesn't work so well.

I am not a gamer and don't why AMD GPUs aren't good enough. It's weird since both Xbox and PlayStation are using AMD GPUs.

I guess there games that you can only play on PC with Nvidia graphics. That begs the question why someone create a game and ignore large console market.

You are certainly right that this group has little spending self-control. There is no limit just about to how abusive companies like Hasbro, Nvidia and Nintendo can be and still rake in record sales.

They will complain endlessly about the price of a RTX 5090 and still rush out to buy it. I know people that own these high end cards as a flex, but their lives are too busy to actually play games.

I want to love AMD, but they're just... mediocre. Worse for gaming, and much worse for ML. They're better-integrated into Linux, but given that the entire AI industry runs on:

1. Nvidia cards

2. Hooked up to Linux boxes

It turns out that Nvidia tends to work pretty well on Linux too, despite the binary blob drivers.

Other than gaming and ML, I'm not sure what the value of spending much on a GPU is... AMD is just in a tough spot.

> I have also realized that there is a lot out there in the world besides video games

My favorite part about being a reformed gaming addict is the fact that my MacBook now covers ~100% of my computer use cases. The desktop is nice for Visual Studio but that's about it.

I'm still running a 5700XT in my desktop. I have absolutely zero desire to upgrade.

If I hadn't bought a 3090 when they were 1k new, I likely would've switched back onto the AMD train by now.

So far there hasn't been enough of a performance increase for me to upgrade either for gaming or ML. Maybe AMDs rumored 9090 will be enough to get me to open my wallet.

> I have also realized that there is a lot out there in the world besides video games, and getting all in a huff about it isn’t worth my time or energy.

I'd really love to try AMD as a daily driver. For me CUDA is the showstopper. There's really nothing comparable in the AMD camp.

> I have also realized that there is a lot out there in the world besides video games, and getting all in a huff about it isn’t worth my time or energy.

I think more and more people will realize games are a waste of time for them and go on to find other hobbies. As a game developer, it kinda worries me. As a gamer, I can't wait for gaming to be a niche thing again, haha.

> I have also realized that there is a lot out there in the world besides video games, and getting all in a huff about it isn’t worth my time or energy.

I'm with you - in principle. Capital-G "Gamers" who turned gaming into an identity and see themselves as the real discriminated group have fully earned the ridicule.

But I think where the criticism is valid is how NVIDIA's behavior is part of the wider enshittification trend in tech. Lock-in and overpricing in entertainment software might be annoying but acceptable, but it gets problematic when we have the exact same trends in actually critical tech like phones and cars.

> I have also realized that there is a lot out there in the world besides video games

...and even if you're all in on video games, there's a massive amount of really brilliant indie games on Steam that run just fine on a 1070 or 2070 (I still have my 2070 and haven't found a compelling reason to upgrade yet).

> when they are exploited instead of just walking away and doing something else.

You don’t even have to walk away. You pretty much never need the latest GPUs to have a great gaming experience

Couldn't agree more

And even if you ignore AMD, most PCs being sold are cheap computers using whatever integrated hardware Intel is selling for graphics.

I just learned MTG this year because my 11 year old son got into it. I like it. How did it “go to shit”?

Also playing PC video games doesn't even require a Nvidia GPU. It does sorta require Windows. I don't want to use that, so guess I lost the ability to waste tons of time playing boring games, oh no.

Why be happy about the demise of Intel? I'd rather have more chip designers than fewer.

What is the next boom? I honestly can’t think of one. Feels like we are just at the Age of the Plateau, which will be quite painful for markets and the world.

I think the reason you see things like Blizzard killing off Overwatch 1 is because the Lindy effect applies in gaming as well. Some things are so sticky and preferred that you have to commit atrocities to remove them from use.

From a supply/demand perspective, if all of your customers are still getting high on the 5 (or 20) year old supply, launching a new title in the same space isn't going to work. There are not an infinite # of gamers and the global dopamine budget is limited.

Launching a game like TF2 or Starcraft 2 in 2025 would be viewed as a business catastrophe by the metrics most AAA studios are currently operating under. Monthly ARPU for gamers years after purchasing the Orange Box was approximately $0.00. Giving gamers access to that strong of a drug would ruin the demand for other products.

The video game industry has been through cycles like this before. One of them (the 1983 crash) was so bad it killed most American companies and caused the momentum to shift to Japan for a generation. Another one I can recall is the "death" of the RTS (real-time strategy) genre around 2010. They have all followed a fairly similar pattern and in none of them that I know of have things played out as the companies involved thought or hoped they would.

Valve is a private company so doesn’t have the same growth at all costs incentives. To Microsoft, the share price is everything.

> It's a manufactured collapse of the gaming industry. They want to centralize control of the market and make it a service based (rent seeking) sector.

It also won’t work, and Microsoft has developed no way to compete on actual value. As much as I hate the acquisitions they’ve made, even if Microsoft as a whole were to croak tomorrow I think the game industry would be fine.

As much as they've got large resources, I'm not sure what projects they could reasonably throw a mountain of money at and expect to change things, and presumably benefit from in the future instead of doing it to be a a force of chaos in the industry. Valve's efforts all seem to orbit around the store, that's their main business and everything else seems like a loss-leader to get you buying through it even if it comes across as a pet project of a group of employees.

The striking one for me is their linux efforts, at least as far as I'm aware they don't do a lot that isn't tied to the steam deck (or similar devices) or running games available on steam through linux. Even the deck APU is derived from the semi-custom work AMD did for the consoles, they're benefiting from a second later harvest that MS/Sony have invested (hundreds of millions?) in many years earlier. I suppose a lot of it comes down to what Valve needs to support their customers (developers/publishers), they don't see the point in pioneering and establishing some new branch of tech with developers.

If it’s manufactured it implies intent. Someone at Microsoft is doing it on purpose and, presumably, thinks it’ll benefit them. I’m not sure how this can be seen as a win for them. They invested a massive amount of money into buying all those game studios. They also admitted Xbox hardware is basically dead. So the only way they can any return on that investment is third party hardware: either PlayStation or PC. If I were to choose it would be pc for MS. They already have game pass and windows is the gaming OS. By giving business to Sony they would undermine those.

I don’t think nVidia wants gaming collapse either. They might not prioritize it now but they definitely know that it will persist in some form. They bet on AI (and crypto before it) because those are lucrative opportunities but there’s no guarantee they will last. So they squeeze as much as they can out of those while they can. They definitely want gaming as a backup. It might be not as profitable and more finicky as it’s a consumer market but it’s much more stable in the long run.

I've always played a few games for many hours as opposed to many games for one playthrough. Subscription just does not make sense for me, and I suspect that's a big part of the market. Add to this the fact that you have no control over it and then top it off with potential ads and I will quit gaming before switching to subs only. Luckily there is still GoG and Steam doesn't seem like it will change but who knows.

This post is crazy nonsense: Bad games companies have always existed, and the solution is easy: dont buy their trash. I buy mostly smaller indie games these days just fine.

nvidia isn't purposely killing anything, they are just following the pivot into the AI nonsense. They have no choice, if they are in a unique position to make 10x by a pivot they will, even if it might be a dumpsterfire of a house of cards. Its immoral to just abandon the industry that created you, but companies have always been immoral.

Valve has an opportunity to what? Take over video card hardware market? No. AMD and Intel are already competitors in the market and cant get any foothold (until hopefully now consumers will have no choice but to shift to them)

Scalping and MSRP-baiting have been around for far too many years for nVidia to claim innocence. The death of EVGA's GPU line also revealed that nVidia holds most of the cards in the relationship with its "partners". Sure, Micro Center and Amazon can only do so much, and nVidia isn't a retailer, but they know what's going on and their behavior shows that they actually like this situation.

Scalpers are only a retail-wide problem if (a) factories could produce more, but they calculated demand wrong, or (b) factories can't produce more, they calculated demand wrong, and under-priced MSRP relative to what the market is actually willing to pay, thus letting scalpers capture more of the profits.

Either way, scalping is not a problem that persists for multiple years unless it's intentional corporate strategy. Either factories ramp up production capacity to ensure there is enough supply for launch, or MSRP rises much faster than inflation. Getting demand planning wrong year after year after year smells like incompetence leaving money on the table.

The argument that scalping is better for NVDA is coming from the fact that consumer GPUs no longer make a meaningful difference to the bottom line. Factory capacity is better reserved for even more profitable data center GPUs. The consumer GPU market exists not to increase NVDA profits directly, but as a marketing / "halo" effect that promotes decision makers sticking with NVDA data center chips. That results in a completely different strategy where out-of-stock is a feature, not a bug, and where product reputation is more important than actual product performance, hence the coercion on review media.

Think of it this way, the only reason 40 series and above are priced like they are is because they saw how willing people were to pay dueing 30 series scalper days. This over representation by the rich is training other customers that nvidia gpus are worth that much so when they increase it again people won't feel offended.

> Nvidia doesn't earn more money when cards are sold above MSRP

How would we know if they were?

> Scalpers are a retail wide problem. Acting like Nvidia has the insight or ability to prevent them is just silly.

Oh trust me, they can combat it. The easiest way, which is what Nintendo often does for the launch of its consoles, is produce an enormous amount of units before launch. The steady supply to retailers, absolutely destroys folks ability to scalp. Yes a few units will be scalped, but most scalpers will be underwater if there is a constant resupply. I know this because I used to scalp consoles during my teens and early twenties, and Nintendo's consoles were the least profitable and most problematic because they really try to supply the market. The same with iPhones, yeah you might have to wait a month after launch to find one if you don't pre-order but you can get one.

It's widely reported that most retailers had maybe tens of cards per store, or a few hundred nationally, for the 5090s launch. This immediately creates a giant spike in demand, and drove prices up along with the incentive for scalpers. The manufacturing partners immediately saw what (some) people were willing to pay (to the scalpers) and jacked up prices so they could get their cut. It is still so bad in the case of the 5090 that MSRP prices from AIBs skyrocketed 30%-50%. PNY had cards at the original $1999.99 MSRP and now those same cards can't be found for less than $2,999.99.

By contrast look at how AMD launched it's 9000 series of GPUS-- each MicroCenter reportedly had hundreds on hand (and it sure looked like by pictures floating around). Folks were just walking in until noon and still able to get a GPU on launch day. Multiple restocks happened across many retailers immediately after launch. Are there still some inflated prices in the 9000 series GPUs? Yes, but we're not talking a 50% increase. Having some high priced AIBs has always occurred but what Nvidia has done by intentionally under supplying the market is awful.

I personally have been trying to buy a 5090 FE since launch. I have been awake attempting to add to cart for every drop on BB but haven't been successful. I refuse to pay the inflated MSRP for cards that haven't been been that well reviewed. My 3090 is fine... At this point, I'm so frustrated by NVidia I'll likely just piss off for this generation and hope AMD comes out with something that has 32GB+ of VRAM at a somewhat reasonable price.

> Nvidia doesn't earn more money when cards are sold above MSRP, but they get almost all the hate for it. Why would they set themselves up for that?

If you believe their public statements, because they didn't want to build out additional capacity and then have a huge excess supply of cards when demand suddenly dried up.

In other words, the charge of "purposefully keeping stock low" is something NVidia admitted to; there was just no theory of how they'd benefit from it in the present.

Nvidia shareholders make money when share price rises. Perceived extreme demand raises share prices

The fact that we're calling $500 GPUs "midrange" is proof that Nvidia's strategy is working.

10 years ago, $650 would buy you a top-of-the-line gaming GPU (GeForce GTX 980 Ti). Nowadays, $650 might get you a mid-range RX 9070 XT if you miraculously find one near MSRP.

Absolutely right, only AAA games get to showcase the true power of GPUs.

For cheaper guys like me, I'll just give my son indie and low graphic games which he enjoys

I bought a new machine with an RTX 3060 Ti back in 2020 and it's still going strong, no reason to replace it.

I think this is the even broader trend here

In their never ending quest to find ways to suck more money out of people, one natural extension is to just turn the thing into a luxury good and that alone seems to justify the markup

This is why new home construction is expensive - the layout of a home doesn’t change much but it’s trivial to throw on some fancy fixtures and slap the deluxe label on the listing.

Or take a Toyota, slap some leather seats on it, call it a Lexus and mark up the price 40% (I get that these days there are more meaningful differences but the point stands)

This and turning everything into subscriptions alone are responsible for 90% of the issues I have as a consumer

Graphics cards seem to be headed in this direction as well - breaking through that last ceiling for maximum fps is going to be like buying a bentley (if it isn’t already) where as before it was just opting for the v8

Just going to focus on this one:

> DLSS vs FSR, or DLSS FG and Lossless Scaling.

I've used all of these (at 4K, 120hz, set to "balanced") since they came out, and I just don't understand how people say this.

FSR is a vaseline-like mess to me, it has its own distinct blurriness. Not as bad as naive upscaling, and I'll use it if no DLSS is available and the game doesn't run well, but it's distracting.

Lossless is borderline unusable. I don't remember the algorithm's name, but it has a blur similar to FSR. It cannot handle text or UI elements without artifacting (because it's not integrated in the engine, those don't get rendered at native resolution). The frame generation causes almost everything to have a ghost or afterimage - UI elements and the reticle included. It can also reduce your framerate because it's not as optimized. On top of that, the way the program works interferes with HDR pipelines. It is a last resort.

DLSS (3) is, by a large margin, the best offering. It just works and I can't notice any cons. Older versions did have ghosting, but it's been fixed. And I can retroactively fix older games by just swapping the DLL (there's a tool for this on GitHub, actually). I have not tried DLSS 4.

Not quite $500, but at $650, the 9070 is an absolute monster that outperforms Nvidia's equivalent cards in everything but ray tracing (which you can only turn on with full DLSS framegen and get a blobby mess anyways)

AMD is truly making excellent cards, and with a bit of luck UDNA is even better. But they're in the same situation as Nvidia: they could sell 200 GPUs, ship drivers, maintain them, deal with returns and make $100k... Or just sell a single MI300X to a trusted partner that won't make any waves and still make $100k.

Wafer availability unfortunately rules all, and as it stands, we're lucky neither of them have abandoned their gaming segments for massively profitable AI things.

This is one reason, and another is that both Dennard scaling has stopped and GPUs hit a memory wall for DRAM. The only reason AI hardware gets the significant improvements is that they are using big matmuls and a lot of research has been in getting lower precision (now 4bit) training working (numerical precision stability was always a huge problem with backprop).

Yes. In 2021, Nvidia was actually making more revenue from its home/consumer/gaming chips than from its data center chips. Now 90% of its revenue is from its data center hardware, and less than 10% of its revenue is from home gpus. The home gpus are an afterthought to them. They take up resources that can be devoted to data center.

Also, in some sense there can be some fear 5090s could cannibalize the data center hardware in some aspects - my desktop has a 3060 and I have trained locally, run LLMs locally etc. It doesn't make business sense at this time for Nvidia to meet consumer demand.

Not personally offended, but when a company makes a big stink around several gross exaggerations (performance, price, availability) it's not hard to understand why folks are kicking up their own stink.

Nvidia could have said "we're prioritizing enterprise" but instead they put on a big horse and pony show about their consumer GPUs.

I really like the Gamer's Nexus paper launch shirt. ;)

They could be more honest about it though.

I was under the impression that a ton of their sales growth last quarter was actually from consumers. DC sales growth was way lower than I expected.

"It's hard to get too offended by them shirking the consumer"

BS! Nvidia isn't entitled. I'm not obligated. Customer always has final say.

The problem is a lot of customers can't or don't stand their ground. And the other side knows that.

Maybe you're a well trained "customer" by Nvidia just like Basil Fawlty was well trained by his wife ...

Stop excusing bs.

People need to start asking more questions about why the RTX 50 series (Blackwell) has almost no performance uplift over the RTX 40 series (Ada/Hopper), and also conveniently its impossible to find B200s.

[flagged]

Apparently somebody did sue a couple years back. Anyone know what happened with the Lucas Genova vs. nVidia lawsuit?

EDIT: Plantiff dismissed it. Guessing they settled. Here are the court documents (alternately, shakna's links below include unredacted copies):

https://www.classaction.org/media/plaintiff-v-nvidia-corpora...

https://www.classaction.org/media/plaintiff-v-nvidia-corpora...

A GamersNexus article investigating the matter: https://gamersnexus.net/gpus/12vhpwr-dumpster-fire-investiga...

And a video referenced in the original post, describing how the design changed from one that proactively managed current balancing, to simply bundling all the connections together and hoping for the best: https://youtu.be/kb5YzMoVQyw

Also, like, I kind of want to play with these things, but also I'm not sure I want a computer that uses 500W+ in my house, let alone just a GPU.

I might actually be happy to buy one of these things, at the inflated price, and run it at half voltage or something... but I can't tell if that is going to fix these concerns or they're just bad cards.

To emphasize this point, go outside at noon in the summer and mark off a square meter on the sidewalk. That square of concrete is receiving about 1000w from the sun.

Now imagine a magnifying glass that big (or more practically a fresnel lens) concentrating all that light into one square inch. That's a lot of power. When copper connections don't work perfectly they have nonzero resistance, and the current running through them turns into heat by I^2R.

Has anyone made 12VHPWR cables that replace the 12 little wires with 2 large gauge wires yet? That would prevent the wires from becoming unbalanced, which should preempt the melting connector problem.

As a bonus, if the gauge is large enough, the cable would actually cool the connectors, although that should not be necessary since the failure appears to be caused by overloaded wires dumping heat into the connector as they overheat.

> A system from 2017/2018 with an 8700K and an 8GB 2080 performs so closely to the top end, expensive systems today

This is in no way true and is quite an absurd claim. Unless you meant for some specific isolated purposed restricted purely to yourself and your performance needs.

> there are very few use cases I can think of needing more than a 30 series card right now.

How about I like high refresh and high resolutions? I'll throw in VR to boot. Which are my real use cases. I use a high refresh 4K display and VR, both have benefited hugely from my 2080Ti > 4090 Shift.

I mean, most people probably won't directly upgrade. Their old card will die, or eventually nvidia will stop making drivers for it. Unless you're looking around for used cards, the price difference between something low end like a 3060 isn't that much less in price for the length of support you're going to get.

Unless nvidia's money printing machine breaks soon, expect the same to continue for the next 3+ years. Crappy expensive cards with a premium on memory with almost no actual video rendering performance increase.

As I understand it the Disney bots do actually use AI in a novel way: https://la.disneyresearch.com/publication/design-and-control...

So there’s at least a bit more “there” there than the Tesla bots.

Not just you.

I hate being lied to, especially if it's so the liar can reap some economic advantage from having the lie believed.

There's also a very thick coat of hype in https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/glossary/ai-factory/ and related material, even though the underlying product (an ML training cluster) is real.

Not sure why my comment got so upvoted, all my comments are my personal opinion based solely on the publicly streamed video, and as I said, I’ll happily correct or retract my impression.

> I don’t want to jump on nvidia but I found it super weird when they clearly remote controlled a Disney bot onto the stage and claimed it was all using real time AI which was clearly impossible due to no latency and weirdly the bot verifying correct stage position in relation to the presenter. It was obviously the Disney bot just being controlled by someone off stage.

I don't know what you're referring to, but I'd just say that I don't believe what you are describing could have possibly happened.

Nvidia is a huge corporation, with more than a few lawyers on staff and on retainer, and what you are describing is criminal fraud that any plaintiff's lawyer would have a field day with. So, given that, and since I don't think people who work at Nvidia are complete idiots, I think whatever you are describing didn't happen the way you are describing it. Now, it's certainly possible there was some small print disclaimer, or there was some "weasel wording" that described something with ambiguity, but when you accuse someone of criminal fraud you want to have more than "hey this is just my opinion" to back it up.

[dead]

[flagged]

It boggles my mind that an army of the most talented electrical engineers on earth somehow fumble a power connector and then don’t catch it before shipping.

Sunk cost fallacy and a burning (literal) desire to have small artistic things. That's probably also the reason the connector was densified so much, and clearly, released with so VERY little tolerance for error human and otherwise.

They use the 12VHPWR on some datacenter cards too.

IANAL, but knowingly leaving a serious defect in your product at scale for that purpose would be very bad behavior and juries tend not like that sort of thing.

Nitpicking it doesn't change the fact that the 12v2x6 connector _also_ burns down.

Your disillusionment is warranted, but I'll say that on the Mac side the grass has never been greener. The M chips are screamers year after year, the GPUs are getting ok, the ML cores are incredible and actually useful.

What stands out to me is that it's not just the hardware side, software production to make use of it to realize the benefits offered doesn't seem to be running smoothly either, at least for gaming. I'm not sure nvidia really cares too much though as there's no market pressure on them where it's a weakness for them, if consumer GPUs disappeared tomorrow they'd be fine.

A few months ago Jensen Huang said he sees quantum computing as the next big thing he wants nvidia to be a part of over the next 10-15 years (which seems like a similar timeline as GPU compute), so I don't think consumer GPUs are a priority for anyone. Gaming used to be the main objective with byproducts for professional usage, for the past few years that's reversed where gaming piggybacks on common aspects to compute.

I remember when it was a serious difference, like PS1-PS3 was absolutely miraculous and exciting to watch.

It's also fun that no matter how fast the hardware seems to get, we seem to fill it up with shitty bloated software.

Our stock investments are going up so ...... What can we do other than shrug

I get ray tracing at 4K 60Hz with my 4090 just fine

Yeah I was exactly the same as you for years, holding out against what I considered to be unecessary exrtravagence. That was until I got a 4k monitor at work and experienced 4k HDR gaming. I immediately went out and bought an RTX 4070 and a 4k monitor and I will never be going back. The experience is glorious and I was a fool for not jumping sooner.

4K HDR gaming is not the future, is has been the standard for many years now for good reason.

Sounds like an opening for AMD then. But as long as NVidia has the best tech I'll keep buying it when it's time to upgrade.

A revelation on-par with Mac users waking up to learn their computer was made by a phone company.

Yes but why should I care provided the product they have already sold me continues to work? How does this materially change my life because Nvidia doesnt want to go steady with me anymore?

Haven't been for a while. Not since crypto bros started buying up GPUs for coin mining.

Not to mention that they are currently in stock at my local microcenter.

> NVIDIA's control over the GPU compute ecosystem — particularly in AI, HPC

The two largest supercomputers in the world are powered by AMD. I don't think it's accurate to say Nvidia has monopoly on HPC

Source: https://top500.org/lists/top500/2025/06/

Strict antitrust sense don't look at actual monopoly to trigger, but just if you use your standing in the market to gain unjust advantages. Which does not require a monopoly situation but just a strong standing used wrong (like abusing vertical integration). So Standard Oil, to take a famous example, never had more than a 30% market share.

Breaking a monopoly can be a solution to that, however. But having a large part of a market by itself doesn't trigger anti trust legislation.

Thanks ChatGPT!

Agreed. An excellent summary of a lot of missteps that have been building for a while. I had watched that article on the power connector/ shunt resistors and was dumbfounded at the seemingly rank-amateurish design. And although I don't have a 5000 series GPU I have been astonished at how awful the drivers have been for the better part of a year.

As someone who filed the AMD/ATi ecosystems due to their quirky unreliability, Nvidia and Intel have really shit the bed these days (I also had the misfortune of "upgrading" to a 13th gen Intel processor just before we learned that they cook themselves)

I do think DLSS supersampling is incredible but Lord almighty is it annoying that the frame generation is under the same umbrella because that is nowhere near the same, and the water is awful muddy since "DLSS" is often used without distinction

If you've ever watched a GN or LTT video, they never claimed that DLSS is snakeoil. They specifically call out the pros of the technology, but also point out that Nvidia lies, very literally, about its performance claims in marketing material. Both statements are true and not mutually exclusive. I think people like in this post get worked up about the false marketing and develop (understandably) a negative view of the technology as a whole.

> Idiots doing hardware installation, with zero experience, using 3rd party cables incorrectly

This is not true. Even GN reproduced the melting of the first-party cable.

Also, why shouldn't you be able to use third-party cables? Fuck DRM too.

GN were the OG "fake framers" going back to their constant casting shade on DLSS, ignoring it on their reviews, and also crapping on RT.

AI upscaling, AI denoising, and RT were clearly the future even 6 years ago. CDPR and the rest of the industry knew it, but outlets like GN pushed a narrative(borderline conspiracy) the developers were somehow out of touch and didn't know what they were talking about?

There is a contingent of gamers who play competitive FPS. Most of which are, like in all casual competitive hobbies, not very good. But they ate up the 240hz rasterization be-all meat GN was feeding them. Then they think they are the majority and speak for all gamers(as every loud minority on the internet does).

Fast forward 6 years and NVidia is crushing the Steam top 10 GPU list, AI rendering techniques are becoming ubiquitous, and RT is slowly edging out rasterization.

Now that the data is clear the narrative is most consumers are "suckers" for purchasing NVidia, Nintendo, and etc. And the content creator economy will be there to tell them they are right.

Edit: I believe too some of these outlets had chips on their shoulder regarding NVidia going way back. So AMDs poor RT performance and lack of any competitive answer the the DLSS suite for YEARS had them lying to themselves about where the industry was headed. Essentially they were running interference for AMD. Now that FSR4 is finally here it's like AI upscaling is finally ok.

Corporate America actually resembles the state of government a lot too. Deceptive marketing, inflated prices that leave the average Joe behind, and low quality products on top of all that.

I have guessing you have HP "mellanox"? Because Connect-X support are great.

A lot of those Xeon e-waste machines were downright awful, especially for the "cheap gaming PC" niche they were popular in. Low single-core clock speeds, low memory bandwidth for desktop-style configurations and super expensive motherboards that ran at a higher wattage than the consumer alternatives.

> THIS will be the excitement everyone is looking for.

Or TSMC could become geopolitically jeopardized somehow, drastically increasing the secondhand value of modern GPUs even beyond what they're priced at now. It's all a system of scarcity, things could go either way.

Do you have a timeframe for the pop? I need some excitement.

Nice advertorial. I hope you got paid for all of those plugs.

> Fuck the cloud and their ancient Xeon SKUs

Dude, no one talks about this and it drives me up the wall. The only way to guarantee modern CPUs from any cloud provider is to explicitly provision really new instance types. If you use any higher-level abstracted services (Fargate, Cloud Run, Lambda, whatever) you get salvation army second-hand CPUs from 15 years ago, you're billed by the second so the slower, older CPUs screw you over there, and you pay a 30%+ premium over the lower-level instances because its a "managed service". Its insane and extremely sad that so many customers put up with it.

That bit does seem a bit whiney. AMD's latest offerings are quite good, certainly better value for money. Why not buy that? The only shame is that they don't sell anything as massive as Nvidia's high end.

Many of you chose Windows, so, well, yes.

Choosing the vendor locked in, standards hating brand does tend to mean that you inevitably get screwed when they decide do massively inflate their prices and there's nothing you can do about it does tend to make you worse off, yes.

Not that AMD was anywhere near being in a good state 10 years ago. Nvidia still fucked you over.

And no I don’t work for nvidia. I’ve just been in the industry long enough to watch the immense contribution nvidia has made to every. single. field. The work of their researchers is astounding, it’s clear to anyone that’s honestly worked in this field long enough. It’s insane to hate on them.

It pains me to be on the side of "gamers" but I would rather support spoiled gamers than modern LLM bros.

Every kind of TAA that I've seen creates artifacts around fast-moving objects. This may sound like a niche problem only found in fast-twitch games but it's cropped up in turn-based RPGs and factory/city builders. I personally turn it off as soon as I notice it. Unfortunately, some games have removed traditional MSAA as an option, and some are even making it difficult to turn off AA when TAA and FXAA are the only options (though you can usually override these restrictions with driver settings).

I don't know why it says that, but GIMP is an open-source project so it makes sense for fans to advertise it.

Were you on the internet in the 90s? Lots of banners like that on every site.

Yeah, computer graphics has always been "software trickery" all the way down. There are valid points to be made about DLSS being marketed in misleading ways, but I don't think it being "software trickery" is a problem at all.

The article doesn't make the best argument to support the claim but it's true that NVIDIA is now making claims like '4090 level performance' on the basis that if you turn on DLSS multi-frame generation you suddenly have Huge Framerates when most of the pixels are synthesized instead of real.

Personally I'm happy with DLSS on balanced or quality, but the artifacts from framegen are really distracting. So I feel like it's fair to call their modern marketing snake oil since it's so reliant on frame gen to create the illusion of real progress.

>I honestly don't know why nvidia didn't just suspend their consumer line entirely.

It's ~$12 billion a year with a high gross margin by the standards of every other hardware company. They want to make sure neither AMD nor Intel get that revenue they can invest into funding their own AI/ML efforts.