TheUn4seenthere are way too many of them already.

Which means if there're too many people, their lives are of no value and are ready to kill at will? With all due respect, this is the most ridiculous opinion about lives I've ever heard. Or maybe that's not the point you're suggesting. But let me rephrase, if Huang is gonna take your life to develop his company, are you willing to? Or rather, if Huang is giving you an extreme graphics card in exchange for your life, are you willing to? We at least need A LIFE to enjoy everything we've created, eh?

NBC...

I got that award right here

RidiculousOwOWhich means if there're too many people, their lives are of no value and are ready to kill at will? With all due respect, this is the most ridiculous opinion about lives I've ever heard. Or maybe that's not the point you're suggesting. But let me rephrase, if Huang is gonna take your life to develop his company, are you willing to? Or rather, if Huang is giving you an extreme graphics card in exchange for your life, are you willing to? We at least need A LIFE to enjoy everything we've created, eh?

I totally agree with you...
Because of The4unseen idk how to say and not to be rude it would be good if we had dislikes here on tpu to dislike stupid and offensive comments

Chomiqgpuopen.com/fidelityfx-denoiser/

Oooops.

developer.nvidia.com/nvidia-rt-denoiser

Double oooops.

Exactly, and why do they need them?

Low ray count per pixel, ergo, to hide trickery, the input is noise.

TheUn4seenThe thing is the only rule to follow is "revenue by any means necessary". And honestly if by that you destroy a few lives, well, whatever, there are billions more where they come from. In other words, the planet will cope with that. Humans probably won't, but who cares, there are way too many of them already.

I for one read this as you playing devil's advocate here. And you're not wrong either, disgusting as this POV is, its true in many minds in business towers. Something we'd do well to recognize.

TheUn4seenThe thing is the only rule to follow is "revenue by any means necessary". And honestly if by that you destroy a few lives, well, whatever, there are billions more where they come from. In other words, the planet will cope with that. Humans probably won't, but who cares, there are way too many of them already.

Easy to say when you aren't one of the ones who die. Would "There are too much of us already." be enough for you to accept that being your fate? If so... can't exactly stop you, but I hope it pays well. If not, that framework for people REALLY doesn't serve you. It only somewhat works for people with lots of power. Everyone else kinda just suffers for it. Someone bigger than you, with that same mindset, could just turn it on you, cast you off. If you're okay with that, then you can truly live with this mindset. If not, I don't really advise it.

I mean, unless you're speaking on what you see as the CEO mindset, I truly do not understand how this notion serves anything that anybody here is really gonna appreciate all that much. Know what I'm saying? You seem to understand this, and yet you say it anyway. In doing so, you embody the mindset of the sort of person who would consume your OWN life if it suited them. Again, only works for people with a certain level of power. I can't get with this "let em burn" attitude. I know that I burn just as easily. I think of people around me that I care about and ask "Would you say that about them?" Could you really look people in the eye and tell them that? I ask because I really don't think I could, and wouldn't wish to. And I kinda doubt that you go around saying this sort of stuff to people.

"Saving the planet" is about saving the people on it, anyway. This is going in a very weird and dark direction.

mobiuusI totally agree with you...
Because of The4unseen idk how to say and not to be rude it would be good if we had dislikes here on tpu to dislike stupid and offensive comments

I think it is always better to use your words when you can find them. Steel your patience when you can't. I screw it up all of the time, but just trying to is worth being able to honestly speak your mind and still be understood in the end.


ALL of that aside, I kinda just tend to see Huang as but a man. Nvidia does a lot of shiesty things, as a company. A company of ~20000 people. I don't think whether or not he gets another award really counts for much. If anything it goes to show that maybe awards in general aren't always that meaningful. We don't often have insight into how these decisions are reached. Nvidia is a company with hands in a lot of new, growing tech. It's not surprising in that light. What they really manage is another debate.

This stuff is all pretty superficial to me. I never cared for all of these "best person in the universe" type of awards. It's great to plant flags in big accomplishments, show people what counts for a lot, inspire them to aspire to do bigger things. But at the same time, I've never seen an established reward institution really hold their own principles down entirely. They always wind up a little too detached from things as time passes. Or perhaps it is us who are detached. This isn't like the Oscars or the Grammys. We aren't talking art and entertainment, where we all see. There may be reasons that are consistent with the usual tenets of the award, but they may not have the same framework that consumers may have.

I mean, does Nvidia have a bad reputation over in the business world? Are they really frowned upon there? I get where gamers come from... nvidia goes on my list for crap they pull all of the time, even owning an RTX card. I just don't know if the people choosing who gets this award are factoring in the same things.

robot zombieEasy to say when you aren't one of the ones who die. Would "There are too much of us already." be enough for you to accept that being your fate? If so... can't exactly stop you, but I hope it pays well. If not, that framework for people REALLY doesn't serve you. It only somewhat works for people with lots of power. Everyone else kinda just suffers for it. Someone bigger than you, with that same mindset, could just turn it on you, cast you off. If you're okay with that, then you can truly live with this mindset. If not, I don't really advise it.

I mean, unless you're speaking on what you see as the CEO mindset, I truly do not understand how this notion serves anything that anybody here is really gonna appreciate all that much. Know what I'm saying? You seem to understand this, and yet you say it anyway. In doing so, you embody the mindset of the sort of person who would consume your OWN life if it suited them. Again, only works for people with a certain level of power. I can't get with this "let em burn" attitude. I know that I burn just as easily. I think of people around me that I care about and ask "Would you say that about them?" Could you really look people in the eye and tell them that? I ask because I really don't think I could, and wouldn't wish to. And I kinda doubt that you go around saying this sort of stuff to people.

"Saving the planet" is about saving the people on it, anyway. This is going in a very weird and dark direction.


I think it is always better to use your words when you can find them. Steel your patience when you can't. I screw it up all of the time, but just trying to is worth being able to honestly speak your mind and still be understood in the end.


ALL of that aside, I kinda just tend to see Huang as but a man. Nvidia does a lot of shiesty things, as a company. A company of ~20000 people. I don't think whether or not he gets another award really counts for much. If anything it goes to show that maybe awards in general aren't always that meaningful. We don't often have insight into how these decisions are reached. Nvidia is a company with hands in a lot of new, growing tech. It's not surprising in that light. What they really manage is another debate.

This stuff is all pretty superficial to me. I never cared for all of these "best person in the universe" type of awards. It's great to plant flags in big accomplishments, show people what counts for a lot, inspire them to aspire to do bigger things. But at the same time, I've never seen an established reward institution really hold their own principles down entirely. They always wind up a little too detached from things as time passes. Or perhaps it is us who are detached. This isn't like the Oscars or the Grammys. We aren't talking art and entertainment, where we all see. There may be reasons that are consistent with the usual tenets of the award, but they may not have the same framework that consumers may have.

I mean, does Nvidia have a bad reputation over in the business world? Are they really frowned upon there? I get where gamers come from... nvidia goes on my list for crap they pull all of the time, even owning an RTX card. I just don't know if the people choosing who gets this award are factoring in the same things.

Dont sweat it. Talk is cheap and internet talk is theee cheapest of all. I gare unn tee in the real world none of these silly "let the weak die" hypotheticals have ever passed his lips.
Dont forget, online, everybody is only a version of themselves they want the world to believe.

maxflyDont sweat it. Talk is cheap and internet talk is theee cheapest of all. I gare unn tee in the real world none of these silly "let the weak die" hypotheticals have ever passed his lips.
Dont forget, online, everybody is only a version of themselves they want the world to believe.

Oh I agree.

But online, I would say everybody is only the version of themselves that appears when they are alone. Sentiment matters. Thoughts in your head influence your decisions and the linkages aren't always straightforward. So I think some things are just worth calling out, even if just to get the thought out. It's just a bad sentiment. What is a community with no willingness for challenge? I tend to be live and let live, too. But I don't expect to go unchallenged on everything that I say within whole communities of people. I have my framework for reality, just like anyone else. It is a framework that acknowledges that there are many others only somewhat like it. Sometimes you bump into somebody that just has this weird framework and messing with it will mess with yours, and then you're living in noise, because you argue from different reference points - contradictions begin to form within your own words. Your thoughts are being hijacked by their thinking and it keeps either of you from adequately expressing yourselves - you're not truly talking about the same things, even when it seems like you might be. It's just the wrong kind of mixing of ideas, and the internet is prone to spawning it, though sometimes I think it's our own conception and usage that's the problem.

I'm still teaching myself to spot that and step away. It's tricky, because I also think that what you see is what you get and if you treat your interactions online as throwaways with no meaning, that is how they will appear to you. But even that is just your conception. It doesn't touch the actual effect these things might have on you. We tell ourselves all sorts of things about our interactions to get by, but it doesn't make them true. It doesn't define all that they are.

There are times when I don't mind that whirling a little, though. I kind of just think that if there are people out there who are comfortable saying these things, and the internet has room for THAT, there ought to be room for those comfortable to challenge those things. Maybe those checks need to exist so that we don't all lapse into frameworks of madness in our quasi-solitude. I think there is value in being critical. Every now and then I see someone else doing so and it changes my thinking. It doesn't take much energy either. But it's a matter of where you're at internally, what you can really handle emotionally. Don't worry! Me angry is a bitter jerk, truly. If I'm explaining things at all, I'm probably good with the conversation. That was me trying to respectful, honest. It's easy to make it an angry conversation, but then it really does sit on the lowest level of human interactions, like the arguments you see scrawled on the side of a bathroom stall. THAT is an interaction I will pretty much bow out of on a dime. It's never worth it. So long as people are actually talking and not simply indulging themselves, I don't have an issue with people simply expressing these views. That's the gist.

Another thing I like to remind myself, there is more than what you see in all of these interactions. You only see a reaction that has been chosen by the recipient, from behind barriers across distance. I think more stuff lands inside of people than any of us seem to want to so much as consider... the net impact of the things you say and do... the interactions that you have every day. How do they influence you, what places do you go to in your mind, and how do you find the land? Is this a place where humans can live? A space that you can inhabit and grow in? Are you happy there? Or is it more like a prison, so intricately constructed through series of experiences that it can no longer be found to have points of ingress... or escape?

That to me, is the great psychic danger of internet interactions. Of being influenced to construct a framework for reality that basically amounts to subjective entrapment. There are things that can happen online that can leave a person really stuck. I call it 'the noise'. Essentially, it is a watershed of reference points, a convolution of one's subjectivity, wholly undecipherable by the one experiencing it. You become lost in dissonant notions... all of this stuff whirling around you with no good way to navigate it except to cloister down to where there is almost nothing. Cruelly enough, it makes everything seem meaningless. You lose the nuance in the shifting artifacts of that noise you sense, as the reference points you've passively acquired via grazing the net betray you.

I do think that stuff matters. It's all about the little things when it comes to one's running frame of mind and reference points. And this stuff gets built up thought by thought, conversation by conversation. It's stuff that plays out within and beyond all of us, every single waking moment. We have to pay attention to the things said by ourselves and one another, and be able to approach them with sincerity. It's practically our most ancient, unspoken tradition. This didn't change just because we found another new style of interacting.

I guess the award for services to leather jackets.

If he was CEO of AMD you would be worshipping him blindly.... AMD raises the prices on their CPU and GPU you applause, when Intel & Nvidia does it, you denounce them....

AMD mybe ryzes prices, but they don't prevent open linux drivers, they don't limit they technology to their own walled garden milking station (nvidea didn't gived DLSS/RT to all, AMD did gived the faildelityFX to all), they don't limit what you can and can't do with your video card, they even give they own programmers to work on open source technologies (from they own money).....and this list go on

TheUn4seenNo, for the fact that he is willing to destroy everyone and everything in the name of corporate progress. That's the corporate benchmark, not some touchy-feely sentiment

People seem childish in the way they try to believe a fantasy of companies having any reason to exist other than to make money. If nVidia could make money by kidnapping you or your children and selling organs on the black market, they would absolutely do it. I have a small, insignificant company and yet, If I could make a deal with an omnipotent entity to get a guaranteed 1000% yoy growth for a decade by personally poisoning half of the world's population and destroying half of the endangered species of flora and fauna, I would take the deal with no second thought. "Any means necessary" is a great thing when talking about a CEO, becauce a CEO's only obligations lie with shareholders. Consumers are just a means to an end and are of little significance once they played their part.

While I completely agree with you, I can't say that I like, or consider this kind of corporate greed praiseworthy. Let corporations grow and make profit the way they want (with some constraints of common sense of course), but praising them for it is by no means necessary. I get no praise for doing my daily job, either.

TurmaniaIf he was CEO of AMD you would be worshipping him blindly.... AMD raises the prices on their CPU and GPU you applause, when Intel & Nvidia does it, you denounce them....

Praise AMD for raising price when? No common consumers love to spend more money than they would. It's true that AMD is like every other company trying hard to make every bit of money and selling products at high or higher prices when they are able to, but compared to nv, AMD have done something "relatively good" to the industry. Just think how many companies have discontinued cooperation with nv...
No companies are friends to consumers. They are not charities, anyway.
By the way, I'm totally disappointed with the market now and don't really expect prices to drop. Plague, shortage, inflation... There's nothing really we can help...

TurmaniaIf he was CEO of AMD you would be worshipping him blindly.... AMD raises the prices on their CPU and GPU you applause, when Intel & Nvidia does it, you denounce them....

At what point in this thread did you get the impression that the YOUs were implying that?

ManoaAMD mybe ryzes prices, but they don't prevent open linux drivers, they don't limit they technology to their own walled garden milking station (nvidea didn't gived DLSS/RT to all, AMD did gived the faildelityFX to all), they don't limit what you can and can't do with your video card, they even give they own programmers to work on open source technologies (from they own money).....and this list go on

AMD did all that because they were not on top. why did you think AMD going with open source solution? because they know they cannot compete with nvidia if they go with proprietary route the same way nvidia did. not limit their tech to others? what AMD try to do with mantle says other wise. true they did give mantle to MS and khronos but their main idea is to influence both Direct X and OpenGL Next (that eventually become vulkan) to be advantageous to their hardware first leaving other IHV in disadvantage. AMD give their own money to their programmers to work on open source project? don't joke about that. AMD go open source so they can reduce company spending. a few years ago when their linux effort becoming much more establish and have much bigger community AMD end up letting go several people from the linux division first.

AMD ? is not on top ? excuse me have you follow the news ? newsflash: zen 3 cleans the florr with intel in power in performance and just about anything, 6900 XTLC IS the top video card on the planet.... and just because nvidea don't know how to write vulkan drivers doesn't mean AMD sabotage them. AMD has programmers that write open source drivers for linux if you need a newsflash go find out about it....

renz496AMD did all that because they were not on top.

AMD is currently wiping their basement floor with Intel.
EPYC destroys Xeons.
Threadripper destroys X299/HEDT.
Ryzen destroys Rocket Lake.
The competition with GPUs is close, but the 6900 XT with XTXH silicon can beat an RTX 3090.

ManoaAMD ? is not on top ? excuse me have you follow the news ? newsflash: zen 3 cleans the florr with intel in power in performance and just about anything, 6900 XTLC IS the top video card on the planet.... and just because nvidea don't know how to write vulkan drivers doesn't mean AMD sabotage them. AMD has programmers that write open source drivers for linux if you need a newsflash go find out about it....

RealKGBAMD is currently wiping their basement floor with Intel.
EPYC destroys Xeons.
Threadripper destroys X299/HEDT.
Ryzen destroys Rocket Lake.
The competition with GPUs is close, but the 6900 XT with XTXH silicon can beat an RTX 3090.

You need a lot more than that to be on the top.

AusWolfYou need a lot more than that to be on the top.

Keep in mind that AMD has been competitive for ~2 years now, and most people gaming on Steam are using old laptops from relatives which 99% of have Intel chips.
Heck, I have 4 AMD CPUs in my house, a 1600X, a 3600, a Phenom II X4 955, and an Am486 DX2-80. Everything else is Intel or IBM - my Pentium III, Pentium 4, Mac mini 2011, school Chromebook, XP laptop, W7 laptop, and iMac G5. If you count everything else in our house that's 13 Intel, 4 AMD, and I own everything AMD.

EDIT: Forgot GPUs.

We have 2 AMD GPUs. And they're not even AMD's, we have an ATI 3D Rage II +DVD and ATI Radeon 9250 AGP. Everything else is Intel (iGPU) or NVidia (1660 Ti Max-Q, GTX 690, 2x GTX 650 Ti BOOST).

ManoaAMD ? is not on top ? excuse me have you follow the news ? newsflash: zen 3 cleans the florr with intel in power in performance and just about anything, 6900 XTLC IS the top video card on the planet.... and just because nvidea don't know how to write vulkan drivers doesn't mean AMD sabotage them. AMD has programmers that write open source drivers for linux if you need a newsflash go find out about it....

i'm talking about AMD for the past 10 years not just recently. the initiative to go with open source more than 10 years ago is to save money for AMD. did you think AMD go open source was some sort of charity for open source community? and where did you get this nvidia don't know how to write vulkan drivers? their vulkan driver is just fine. vulkan like opengl allow for use of extension. just because you saw some AMD sponsored vulkan tittle perform better on radeon meaning AMD is better at vulkan than nvidia. extension allows for hardware specific optimization which can makes the sponsored game to run better on the IHV hardware that sponsored the game.

AusWolfYou need a lot more than that to be on the top.

That makes a good point.
But I still want to say I think it's hard for AMD to be "on the top" of the Steam hardware survey results... Since most of Intel processors are modern ones or rather the ones in recent years, which can run in systems that support recent games. While AMD ones are not. Who is still using AM386 or Barton 2500+ to run modern games? I don't think that's good experience or even playable...
And now I have lost interest in all market share reports since nobody is able to tell the exact number. Different results appear in different occasions, just like Steam's represents mainly gamers.

RidiculousOwOThat makes a good point.
But I still want to say I think it's hard for AMD to be "on the top" of the Steam hardware survey results... Since most of Intel processors are modern ones or rather the ones in recent years, which can run in systems that support recent games. While AMD ones are not. Who is still using AM386 or Barton 2500+ to run modern games? I don't think that's good experience or even playable...
And now I have lost interest in all market share reports since nobody is able to tell the exact number. Different results appear in different occasions, just like Steam's represents mainly gamers.

That's true.

My point is, to be "on the top", you need to be continuously on the top for years on several markets. Releasing a good line of products is nice, but winning a battle doesn't mean you won the war.