Hacker News Reader

Comment by onphonenow | Hacker News Reader

Nvidia delivered a good solution with cuda. You are whining about them not investing as hard in opencl. What if focusing on cuda was what they thought would let them deliver a good result for users? Lack of focus and sustained investment is part of issue w amd and others. If openCL is the hot thing that nvidia supposedly purposely delaying was a great opportunity for amd and intel to eat their lunch. Where were they?

View on HN

I stopped believing in the well-intentions of NVIDIA a long time ago. Mind you, I didn't stop buying their products. But, they repeat the same shitty stuff all the time. I get why they do it, I get why it works, it's just annoying that people defend it as if it is altruistically motivated (not accusing you of this in particular, but in general).

And, as I said, AMD didn't, and still doesn't do a great job in the compute department. And, NVIDIA spent a lot of money developing good solutions with CUDA, their proprietary technology, cannot be anything but a good thing, right?

Invest money to "help" universities. Lock core software to your proprietary solutions. Jack up prices.

If they only did it in this instance, I'd perhaps give them the benefit of the doubt. But, off the top of my head:

- cuda - phys-x - gsync - Gameworks in general - rtx - dlss

There is really nothing uniquely special about any of these technologies, other than being (mostly) software solutions tied to NVIDIa hardware, and being pushed heavily onto both developers and researchers.

It's the same playbook as "give MatLab/<Any AutoDesk Product> for free to students". These good deeds are not altruistic, they are investments in market capture.

Why haven't Intel and AMD did that then?

One player playing dirty does not imply the rest are saints?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com