Love (War) story NVIDIA TWIMTBP v. ATI The Way it Meant To Be Bought??

[bonk]

Tweet

Yap..., betul sekali Pak Bonk..., kalo bisa nantinya untuk VGA Card bisa merender via GPU pada penerapan Aplikasi 3D..., jadi jika kita telah membuat Efek 3D tersebut di Aplikasi 3D..., maka hasil akhir Rendering menggunakan GPU yang notabene dengan fitur CUDA terbukti lebih cepat dibandingkan dengan CPU..., jadi tidak harus menunggu berjam2/berhari2 untuk menyelesaikan Rendering dari Efek 3D tersebut.

utk fungsi yg itu sih, bro sabar aja.... kalo gak pertengahan tahun ini, mungkin akhir tahun ini, bakal keluar MentalRay versi CUDA.

Denger2 sih, NVIDIA emang lagi ngulik2 MentalRay CUDA ini dengan Fermi.
Lha khan eman eman kalo NVIDIA beli Mental Images (pembuat MentalRay), lantas dianggurin aja toh?
Pastinya akan diporting ke CUDA juga seperti hal nya PhysX.

Cuma, gw tetep yakin kalo utk scala kerjaan besar, renderfarm berbasis CPU bakal tetep bertahan, karena lebih mudah di manage.

Sedangkan renderfarm berbasis GPU, mungkin cuma sebatas skala kecil or bahkan cuma utk workstation aja, mengingat utk menjinakan Quad SLI untuk render games aja NVIDIA masih ampun2 banyak bugs di drivernya, apalagi kudu bikin driver yg mampu nangganin ratusan hingga ribuan GPU yg dijadiin 1 system renderfarm ??? :laugh:

Btw, anu... topic kita kok jadi rada melenceng yak ?
NVIDIA TWIMTBP khan artinya slogan NVIDIA utk PC gaming toh?
Lha kok kita jadi mbahas 3D apps????? :laugh:

Ampun Mas Gun Aka Jomblo.... gw jangan di banned yah... karena sering OOT Wakakakaka....
Maklumlah, OOT bin OON itulah gw :laugh:

[chr1stm1]

Tweet

utk fungsi yg itu sih, bro sabar aja.... kalo gak pertengahan tahun ini, mungkin akhir tahun ini, bakal keluar MentalRay versi CUDA.

Denger2 sih, NVIDIA emang lagi ngulik2 MentalRay CUDA ini dengan Fermi.
Lha khan eman eman kalo NVIDIA beli Mental Images (pembuat MentalRay), lantas dianggurin aja toh?
Pastinya akan diporting ke CUDA juga seperti hal nya PhysX.

Cuma, gw tetep yakin kalo utk scala kerjaan besar, renderfarm berbasis CPU bakal tetep bertahan, karena lebih mudah di manage.

Sedangkan renderfarm berbasis GPU, mungkin cuma sebatas skala kecil or bahkan cuma utk workstation aja, mengingat utk menjinakan Quad SLI untuk render games aja NVIDIA masih ampun2 banyak bugs di drivernya, apalagi kudu bikin driver yg mampu nangganin ratusan hingga ribuan GPU yg dijadiin 1 system renderfarm ??? :laugh:

Btw, anu... topic kita kok jadi rada melenceng yak ?
NVIDIA TWIMTBP khan artinya slogan NVIDIA utk PC gaming toh?
Lha kok kita jadi mbahas 3D apps????? :laugh:

Ampun Mas Gun Aka Jomblo.... gw jangan di banned yah... karena sering OOT Wakakakaka....
Maklumlah, OOT bin OON itulah gw :laugh:

nice share bro,OOT dikit asal nambah pengetahuan banyak yah GPP toh

[djantjoek]

Tweet

Super noob question: Bisa ga dibuat "interface" dengan CUDA untuk memprogram individual stream processor? Kalo bisa, kan lumayan tuh jadi "processor" baru dengan ratusan core walaupun per core-nya mungkin ga bakalan sebagus i7/Core2/Atom sekalipun?

[Naomi_17]

Tweet

Super noob question: Bisa ga dibuat "interface" dengan CUDA untuk memprogram individual stream processor? Kalo bisa, kan lumayan tuh jadi "processor" baru dengan ratusan core walaupun per core-nya mungkin ga bakalan sebagus i7/Core2/Atom sekalipun?

Iya bisa tapi software dan aplikasinya kudu make C language dan udah match ama CUDA. Tapi keknya OS Windows bakalan make x86 dan x64

[biz_com]

Tweet

Super noob question: Bisa ga dibuat "interface" dengan CUDA untuk memprogram individual stream processor? Kalo bisa, kan lumayan tuh jadi "processor" baru dengan ratusan core walaupun per core-nya mungkin ga bakalan sebagus i7/Core2/Atom sekalipun?

rasanya tak mungkin bro.. tapi tak tahu juga yah
biar bagaimanapun kekuatan gpu itu keluar ketika data yang diprosesh seluruhnya sama, misal conversi video. sedangkan cpu mengerjakan hampir seluruh prosesnya berbeda. itulah yg membuat adanya perbedaan gpu dengan cpu.
klo emang seperti omongan bro itu terwujud, nvidia ga bakal susah2 bikin cpu x86

[jomblosejati]

Tweet

Wawancara yg sangat menarik antara Bit-Tech.net dgn Richard Huddy, AMD’s Worldwide Developer Relations manager. IMHO, banyak hal2 terkait thread ini yg dijawab di sana dari PERSPEKTIF AMD. Just check it out, you won't regret it.

Interview: AMD on Game Development and DX11; Interview with Richard Huddy, AMD Developer Relations @Bit-Tech.net

.......bit-tech: How is AMD's support for Dirt 2 - where you give a lot of marketing, engineering support and bundling, different from Nvidia's support to Rocksteady with Batman? Nvidia is injecting its own IP into the game - in terms of PhysX, and the game's anti-aliasing method - and then protecting its own business interests, as both are Nvidia-only.

RH: The Rocksteady stuff is interesting from a number of perspectives. For starters, it's a DirectX 9 title so it doesn't push hardware terribly hard, and it certainly doesn't push any of the new capabilities. I won't deny it's a perfectly good game but in terms of using new hardware and using it hard - it doesn't - so it's not insanely exciting to us. However, I have one of my best engineers - one of my most pro-active engineers - and he was getting builds on a regular basis. We did talk to Eidos about the possibility of being a co-marketed title with us, however Nvidia decided it would - to use your phrase - inject its IP into it. It did this in two parts, one of which I've got I've got a reasonable amount of respect for and the other I frankly hold in complete contempt.

[Nvidia] put PhsyX in there, and that's the one I've got a reasonable amount of respect for. Even though I don't think PhysX - a proprietary standard - is the right way to go, despite Nvidia touting it as an "open standard" and how it would be "more than happy to license it to AMD", but [Nvidia] won't. It's just not true! You know the way it is, it's simply something [Nvidia] would not do and they can publically say that as often as it likes and know that it won't, because we've actually had quiet conversations with them and they've made it abundantly clear that we can go whistle.

However, PhysX is a piece of technology that changes the gameplay experience and maybe it improves it. What I understand is that they actually invested quite a lot, Nvidia put in a hefty engineering time and they tried to make a difference to the game. So, in that aspect, I have respect for it; it's a reasonable way to handle the situation given the investment in PhysX. Nvidia wanted a co-marketing deal and put forward PhysX, and Rocksteady and Eidos said, OK, as long as you do it - which they did.

The part that I totally hold in contempt is the appalling way they added MSAA support that uses standard DirectX calls - absolutely nothing which is proprietary in any useful sense. They just did ordinary stuff, a completely standard recommendation that they make and that we make to developers for how to do MSAA, and they put it in and locked it to their hardware knowing it would run just fine on our hardware. And indeed, if you simply spoof the vendor ID in the driver - which we and other people have documented - it runs absolutely fine on AMD hardware. There's nothing proprietary about it in that sense, nothing new. I think that's exceptionally poor.

What I could have done as the Developer Relations guy at AMD is say "actually, what they're doing is a reasonable business investment and I'll do exactly the same thing for all the DirectX 11 code we are adding. We'll just go in an add it, and since I can't QA it on Fermi because all they've got still is a faked up board that they showed off recently, what I'll do is I'll lock it to our hardware." Morally I think that would be reprehensible, but from a business point of view I could argue in favour of it, but we think it's really the wrong thing to do and we've not locked a single line of DirectX 11 code. That's the difference in the way [AMD] works - we work through enablement and open standards. [Nvidia] works through closed standards and disablement, which, to me is inexcusable; it's as bad as that..........

Yupz, The Way It's Meant To Be Gimped & Blocked in action.

......bit-tech: Recently Nvidia disabled PhysX in the drivers if you're using an ATI card as the primary graphics adapter.

RH: They don't want to QA it. The PC is an open platform, though - you're meant to take any two parts and put them together. Intel don't say "we're not prepared to QA our CPUs with Nvidia or AMD's graphics parts" when they obviously spend time QAing them because you want to build a system that works........

PS: Seru juga ya kalo di platform Intel Netbook dgn procie Atom nya, Intel gak mau QA chipset Ion dari nVidia, so tinggal di Vendor ID locked ala taktik nVidia, bye bye Ion.

.....bit-tech: Recently, Saboteur launched without any support for ATI graphics hardware - although it was patched later on. How did that happen?

RH: It was a mess of timing. The developer put in a change at the very last moment which unfortunately relied on a particular behaviour of the driver. Two changes in our driver and [this change] in the game took place at the same time and we didn't catch that - we should have done, and that's a straight forward failing on our part. We worked as closely as we could with the game developer to make the patch available as quickly as possible, but we messed up on that occasion. If you want to catch me on these I'll put my hands up to every one of them. I wouldn't want to try and discourage you from catching me on this because I want you to go catch Nvidia as well so if you've got a list of titles where you think we failed, bring it out because a PC should just work.......

No excuses, stand up and accept the blame like a gentleman.

[jomblosejati]

Tweet

....bit-tech: Is this year’s STALKER better than last year's? We originally gave Clear Sky a 3/10 because it was so buggy, but eventually after four patches it was fixed-

RH: Well, it was an Nvidia 'The Way It's Meant To Be Played' title and when it came over to our program, everything went good.

(Ed: Clear Sky launched as part of the Nvidia 'The Way It's Meant To Be Played' program but then moved to AMD to include DirectX 10.1 from the 1.5.06 patch.)

These types of high profile titles should just work because they are games we care about and it's our responsibility to help the game developer not hinder them. We added DirectX 10.1 via a patch and improved their 10.0 code path with MSAA support as it's a deferred rendering game, which is more difficult to do. Deferred Rendering is a style of creating the content inside the game - games are either forward rendering or deferred rendering and it's very hard to get multisample anti-aliasing into a game that uses deferred rendering as the two fight each other. Well, we not only helped them do that for DirectX 10.1, because 10.1 adds the ability to do it specifically, but we also included the ability to do it on the DirectX 10 code path too. On our hardware, and on Nvidia's hardware. [AMD] believes in enabling......

So, banyak yg ngemeng sampai berbusa kalau TWIMTBP adalah jaminan suatu game akan 100% mulus di hardware nVidia dan sebaliknya di ATi, well, sptnya tidak sesederhana itu kenyataannya, but for simpletons, easy answers are the only thing that can be apprehended, so no surprise there.

Dan terkadang, apa yg sejujurnya putih adalah putih, hitam adalah hitam, dapat menjadi abu2 bila dilihat dari kaca mata fanboism.

.....bit-tech: If people don't know, then as noble as your efforts are they go unregistered and people end up making their own assumptions about what others might think is happening instead.

RH: The reason I don't shout about it more is because I'm engaged in working with the games developers and I'm busy in trying to make their job easier and get them more results, rather than being out here and doing this kind of interview - though I do really appreciate this chance to have a chat - although my priorities are to work with games developers. AMD is not a marketing company like Nvidia is.......

LOLZ, so true, so true. What can you expect out of a company in which the CEO is a proud salesman of a fake product ? (ladies & gentleman, the card in my hand, this puppy is, Fermi -the chopped, sawed, woodscrewed version of it though). :laugh:

.....RH: I remember sending an email to my engineer who had supported them saying "Great job on getting the first DirectX 11 title out there", and then John - the guy who supported BattleForge - came back to me at pointed out that actually, it wasn't the first DirectX 11 title!

bit-tech: At least you got two out there-

RH: -two out there, within a month of the DirectX 11 launch! Give me a single time when a new DirectX has launched and that's happened? That's easy - it's never happened before. It's typically two to three months before the first title arrives and the situation we have now where DirectX 11 shipped with Windows 7 and Vista Service Pack 2 it's unheard of to see these titles launch so close to, let alone before a DirectX version was released.

I can remember talking about DirectX 9 at the time with Chas Boyd, lead architect for Microsoft, and saying, "I think we might be able to get Tomb Raider: Angel of Darkness in time for Christmas," which was four months after DX9's release, and he replied "that will be a major achievement." Well [AMD] has three titles out there already you can buy including a couple of free benchmarks - not from AMD, we're not benchmarking our own hardware - and we have a list of about 20 titles that cover the next nine months........

Buat yg masih ngotot mempertanyakan seberapa pentingnyakah kemajuan teknologi yg didorong AMD lewat adopsi standar API DX 11 dari M$ yg terbaru di card Evergreen family mereka, lewat argumentasi handcount yg terbatas dari game2 yg support API terbaru ini, well, mestinya sudah bisa terjawab oleh tanggapan yg ini. Semua hal harus melalui proses, tapi bila tidak ada yg memulai, lalu kapan roda teknologi itu akan terus berputar ?

[Frananta]

Tweet

nice article,

mengomentari part terakhir, sebenernya ga perlu sampe 20 title untuk menunjukan eksistensi DX11, cukup 3-5 big title aja, gw rasa sudah cukup membuat orang2 mempertimbangkan untuk pindah kubu.

1. Dirt 2
2. Battlefield:bad company II [March 2010], nVidia better catch up soon.
3. Crysis 2 [TBA]
4. Alien vs Predator [Q1 2010]
5. Grid 2 [TBA]

[SANADA]

Tweet

Patut ditunggu jawaban dari pihak Nvidia

Kalau kayak gini kan ini baru dari satu pihak saja

[djantjoek]

Tweet

Iya bisa tapi software dan aplikasinya kudu make C language dan udah match ama CUDA. Tapi keknya OS Windows bakalan make x86 dan x64

Jadi masalahnya di level software kan, bukan hardware. Bisa jadi satu celah buat NVIDIA untuk buktiin omongannya tentang matinya fungsi processor (highend) . Tinggal gimana NV manfaatin duitnya buat masyarakatin C dan CUDA. hehehehehe... (ngayal mode: ON. Maklum NOOB, pikirannya segimanapun rumitnya komputer, tetep bekerja pake sistem biner, listrik on/off, 1 - 0 ).

rasanya tak mungkin bro.. tapi tak tahu juga yah
biar bagaimanapun kekuatan gpu itu keluar ketika data yang diprosesh seluruhnya sama, misal conversi video. sedangkan cpu mengerjakan hampir seluruh prosesnya berbeda. itulah yg membuat adanya perbedaan gpu dengan cpu.
klo emang seperti omongan bro itu terwujud, nvidia ga bakal susah2 bikin cpu x86

Kenapa hanya bisa process data yg sama Bro? Keterbatasan hardware atau software? Kalo prosesor itu satu kalkulator scientific canggih yg programable, GPGPU itu mirip kalkulator cupu dgn program terbatas tapi jumlahnya banyak. Bukannya tinggal gimana caranya catch up speed dan ketelitian kalkulator scientific sama gimana supaya kalkulator cupu tadi bisa diprogram dgn lebih baik? (sekali lagi: Ngayal mode ON. Maklum habis baca artikel penemu mouse di CHIP)

CMIIW