NVIDIA Terminates GeForce Partner Program

by Ryan Smith on 5/4/2018 8:00 PM EST
Comments Locked

92 Comments

Back to Article

  • ಬುಲ್ವಿಂಕಲ್ ಜೆ ಮೂಸ್ - Friday, May 4, 2018 - link

    Super
  • milkywayer - Friday, May 4, 2018 - link

    Finally some feedback knocked these effers back into their senses. Now time to adapt open sync or make free the gsync platform. I use mainly nvidia cards but loathe the lockdown to gsync
  • Alexvrb - Saturday, May 5, 2018 - link

    If by "feedback" you mean "mountains of really negative PR from virtually everyone", then yes, they responded to feedback. :P

    Basically GPP was an overreach and it backfired. They realized trying to double down and fight it out in public would only make them look like even bigger jerks.
  • Opencg - Saturday, May 5, 2018 - link

    The warcry of idiots against gsync continues. If you understood the technology then you would understand that gsync is the way it is because it is simply better. Having the nvidia certification means that any gsync monitor will have the best possible pixel response, input lag, and if the monitor has blur reduction then that will be configured for optimal crosstalk and colors. Its a certification that is worth the money. Having things like line buffering can cut off a frame time of input lag. Having properly configured overdrive means that pixel response and overshoot will be more ideal. You get these every time with gsync and often times you dont with other vrr tech. I'll pay more for gsync and I wont look back.
  • Azunia - Saturday, May 5, 2018 - link

    The problem isn't Gsync.

    The problem is their refusal to support adaptive refresh with non Gsync displays.
  • milkywayer - Saturday, May 5, 2018 - link

    You are a nice person. I might be an idiot but want to be able to use open sync on my 1080 ti. I don't like companies locking us down but looking at the partner program coming out of nvidia, i'm not holding my breath.
  • Alexvrb - Saturday, May 5, 2018 - link

    Nobody cares that Gsync exists. Nobody cares about the certification or hardware components. What they care about is that it's completely proprietary and locked to Nvidia. You can only use Gsync with Nvidia graphics cards, and simultaneously Nvidia refuses to support open standards. But if you understood the technology better you would understand that Gsync is the way it is because it is simply better for Nvidia to lock users in.

    Reducing consumer choice is Nvidia's main strategy, and it actually only benefits Nvidia. What's hilarious is that their most diehard fanboys convince themselves that having LESS choice makes the tech better. It doesn't. If Nvidia supported both kinds of adaptive sync that wouldn't affect you AT ALL, but it would benefit lots of other Nvidia users who just don't have the cash for a super high end monitor. The kinds of people that buy 1050s and 1060s and get crapped on by Nvidia when it comes to adaptive sync. No adaptive sync for you, peasants.
  • euskalzabe - Saturday, May 5, 2018 - link

    Well said.
  • ಬುಲ್ವಿಂಕಲ್ ಜೆ ಮೂಸ್ - Sunday, May 6, 2018 - link

    "What they care about is that it's completely proprietary and locked to Nvidia."

    If that were true, they must REALLY hate Microsoft's Locked-In, Proprietary. DRM'd Spyware Platform with Extortionary Licensing tactics and hardware requiring Secure Boot!

    If it were true!
  • Alexvrb - Sunday, May 6, 2018 - link

    "Hey I heard you don't like oranges, WELL WHAT ABOUT THIS APPLE!?" - ಬುಲ್ವಿಂಕಲ್ ಜೆ ಮೂಸ್

    MS doesn't lock me to a specific vendor's hardware to obtain access to a feature of a different vendor's hardware. They also doesn't prevent me from installing hardware or software from any vendor. I can even dual boot Linux. I can even run a Linux subsystem ON Windows. Not sure what flavor of anti-MS crack you smoke to find yourself being "extorted". You also conflate telemetry with spyware, hilarious. Yet probably use Google services which are far more invasion in their data collection, they collect basically everything and most of their income is generated using your data for targeted ads. Troll again, I mean try again.
  • Opencg - Sunday, May 6, 2018 - link

    Hey try putting windows 10 on a non secure boot system dumbass. Proved wrong.
  • ಬುಲ್ವಿಂಕಲ್ ಜೆ ಮೂಸ್ - Sunday, May 6, 2018 - link

    You proved exactly NOTHING!

    Putting Spyware Platform 10 on any system is a dumb idea even though you can do it

    Why would you put a backdoored Spyware/Extortionware Platform on any computer?

    That is beyond dumb
  • Alexvrb - Sunday, May 6, 2018 - link

    You continue to spread misinformation. There's no extortion. There's no spyware, and if you're paranoid you can disable telemetry yourself if you know what you're doing (or really even if you don't).

    There's no Nvidia Gsync-like vendor-lock. NONE. I don't know why you people bring up secureboot, but you don't need secureboot, even if that polite genius Opencg says you do.
  • ಬುಲ್ವಿಂಕಲ್ ಜೆ ಮೂಸ್ - Sunday, May 6, 2018 - link

    "You continue to spread misinformation. There's no extortion. There's no spyware, and if you're paranoid you can disable telemetry yourself if you know what you're doing"
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    If you are locked into the Windows eco-system, you must agree to the terms of the License just to use what you already have (Windows Software)
    Agreeing to hand over any information Microsoft wants for any purpose without compensation or the ability to reject the license and still use your software is EXTORTION

    You may choose to call it Blackmail if you like but it is most likely both

    You are not allowed to block Microsoft from accessing your Data and continue using the Internet due to Microsofts Backdoor

    Blocking forced updates with the Windows firewall will also kill your Internet access

    If you are online, Microsoft has access to anything on your computer, AND, you gave them permission to access whatever they want just to continue using the software you already have in the Windows eco-system

    If "Telemetry" were just non-identifiable data to improve Windows, then why is it not improving?

    They must have enough telemetry at this point to stop collecting "mandatory telemetry data" and actually start improving Windows with all the data they already have

    How much data do they need?

    Opting-in to telemetry is fine and I support that but this is not an option
    instead, they turn it on by default and make it impossible to completely opt-out?
    (and NO, you cannot completely disable telemetry and still maintain Internet access)

    Alexvrb, why you continue to spread misinformation is baffling

    Spyware Platform 10 is a direct threat to everyones security, not just National Security!

    As far as I can tell, Microsoft has done far worse than anything NVidia has (so far)

    Now, it's time for you to once again deny the evidence and stick your head back in the sand as any co-conspirator would do

    So get to it!
  • ಬುಲ್ವಿಂಕಲ್ ಜೆ ಮೂಸ್ - Sunday, May 6, 2018 - link

    Backdoor(s)
  • timecop1818 - Monday, May 7, 2018 - link

    I'm trying to figure out what is your "solution" to all this. You bring up "problems" but what's next? What's the fix? You're a few posts away from calling it Micro$oft, and then what?

    Surely you're not implying that installing lunix is the solution??? hahahah
  • PeachNCream - Monday, May 7, 2018 - link

    "Surely you're not implying that installing lunix is the solution???"

    He's not advocating that. In the past, using the screen name Bullwinkle J Moose, his approach has been to tout the use of a read only copy of Windows XP. He's also claimed (trolled) that he's a security expert despite not demonstrating any applied information security knowledge. Others have suggested using a Linux-based solution which he's either ignored or balked at as it doesn't fit the attention-seeking narrative -- something all of us are guilty of encouraging by responding to him and discussing him.
  • ಬುಲ್ವಿಂಕಲ್ ಜೆ ಮೂಸ್ - Monday, May 7, 2018 - link

    Thats nice...
    Can you show us all where I ignored or balked at using a Linux-based solution?

    I'm using Linux Mint right now and prefer Linux for sensitive online passwords

    It is not "THE" solution, as passwords are being stolen from online Corporations at a fantastical rate these days

    Read Only XP is only used for security research where sensitive passwords are never used

    The only time I ever test anything with Windows 10 these days is on an OFFLINE computer

    There are programs available to make Windows 10 "basically" a Read Only O.S. but with the backdoors and spyware built into Win10, it becomes a worthless solution

    .......and I only know all this because I "am" a Windows security expert

    I just avoid "modern" versions of Windows (online) for actual security reasons outlined here and in other topics at this site

    If you'd like to learn more, just ask the expert!
    and have a nice day! :)
  • Alexvrb - Tuesday, May 8, 2018 - link

    Oh he's THAT troll. Nevermind that explains everything! Good ol' "security expert" Trollwinkle. Good times.
  • hescominsoon - Sunday, May 6, 2018 - link

    I do have and continue to install Windows 10 on non secureboot systems. Windows works just fine without being on secureboot.
  • VoraciousGorak - Sunday, May 6, 2018 - link

    I have installed, right now, Windows 10 x64 on a Pentium D 965XE box.
  • Opencg - Sunday, May 6, 2018 - link

    Yet nobody cares about the locked bios because they are idiots. Just look at the comments nobody even knows what you are talking about. And yet they are so dumb they still reply.
  • Opencg - Sunday, May 6, 2018 - link

    Lol not well said. At all. There are tons of people who care about the advantages of gsync. Anyone who cares about responsiveness in gaming. Input lag. Pixel overdrive. Minimal blur reduction crosstalk and color quality. Fact is that without a nvidia certification many vendors would continue to misrepresent these. Lol it has "1ms pixel response" tho. Without websites that go deep in measurements with osciloscopes of which there are few and fewer reviews still, and without spending ALOT of money testing out monitors or using only the monitors your friends can show you, you would have no way of knowing if you are buying something with good or crap tech driving the panel. I mean you are still caught up on open vrr though thats fine. I may buy an amd card some day but when I do I'll still be happy to have my gsync screen. Yeah vrr is great but it doesnt mean much if your monitor is blury and laggy compared to the gsync one.
  • nerd1 - Monday, May 7, 2018 - link

    Who cares if their stuffs are proprietary? Their GPU are simply better for gaming and computation.
  • Creig - Tuesday, May 8, 2018 - link

    Well, Nvidia GPU's are "better" for computation only if you don't care whether they actually give you the correct answer or not.

    https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/03/21/nvidia_ti...
  • nikon133 - Monday, May 7, 2018 - link

    Diehards are the biggest sheep, on average. It is not only Apple's El Dorado.
  • darkchazz - Sunday, May 6, 2018 - link

    So if I want a VRR monitor for my PC using an nvidia card, I'm locked to a few select gaming brands nvidia deem worthy right?

    Even if I want a simple 4k60 IPS monitor with VRR I only have a couple of choices. Monitors that look straight out of a transformers movie.
    Why can't I use the inferior open standard VRR if I don't want an over-the-top gaming monitor?
  • Alexvrb - Sunday, May 6, 2018 - link

    "Why can't I use the inferior open standard VRR if I don't want an over-the-top gaming monitor?"

    Bingo. Although the same problem applies to gaming monitors too. If you're a gamer on a budget you want speed first and foremost. You can get a fairly fast (~144hz) display with FreeSync for ~$100-200 less than an equivalent Gsync panel. Yes, it's not as good... but if you don't have the money, FreeSync is a LOT better than No Sync. The problem is that if you're eyeing a low- or mid-range Geforce and you don't have the money for Gsync, you end up with No Sync regardless of your display's capabilities. It's a crock.
  • piroroadkill - Monday, May 7, 2018 - link

    I have a 1080 Ti. I don't give a shit if GSync is better, and I'm happy for NVIDIA to keep supporting it, but I would really like VESA Adaptive Sync support on my 1080 Ti. Thanks.
  • Mark42 - Saturday, May 5, 2018 - link

    The Program so obviouisly violates EU (and probably other) regulations. See the Intel case.
    So what where they thinking?
    Was Nvidia so silly that they were not awere of that?
    Or did they want to try it anyway and by the time the EU tells them "you can't do that" they officially cancel / change the program. But by then the the partners have already invested so much in their new brands that they keep them and Nvidia still has achieved their goal?
  • Dragonstongue - Saturday, May 5, 2018 - link

    they wouldn't want to openly support anyone else's work especially if they have to take a knee to follow AMD way of doing it, if they cannot screw with the software/hardware to give themselves an advantage they want none of it.

    so many things I can point at to prove what am saying, but they (Nv) as a company are not worth it.

    GPP should have never been brought up seeing as they had the program before it was announced under the GPP branding, but, if you didn't sign it and basically give your "gaming brand" Ngreedia exclusivity you lost out on everything they used to give for "free" as a "thank you for helping us to sell our brand"

    they really are a POS corporation that takes everyone else's hardwork to pass it off as their own, if it was not for AIB and consumers, they would not even exist, they seem to forget this everytime they sell a more inferior product then they do
    (build quality, drive quality control, screwing with software/hardware that equally screws with someone else's product (namely AMD) etc etc etc)

    GPP might be "dead" but I seriously doubt the way they do thing (and have always done them) are even remotely close to being over.
  • Dr. Swag - Friday, May 4, 2018 - link

    It's still possible the damage has already been done though. Who knows, Asus may end up continuing with the Arez brand instead...
  • Simon_Says - Friday, May 4, 2018 - link

    My gut tells me that seperate branding may actually be a good thing in the long run.
  • JasonMZW20 - Saturday, May 5, 2018 - link

    Why?

    AIB vendors spent time and money building their enthusiast gaming brand image through sponsorships of gaming events (Nvidia believes it's solely because of their GPUs given their narrative - having majority marketshare/mindshare makes that an easy claim to make). Asus was going to align ROG, their most well-known enthusiast brand, with Nvidia. Hijacking an AIB's brand like that with GPP is highly anti-competitive and monopolistic behavior. Nvidia obviously sweetened the pot with priority resources, marketing support, and well, money.

    Asus should have given Nvidia cards DOG branding. Dictatorship of Gamers. That's essentially what they represent with GPP and their closed-source middleware like GameWorks, which has almost always negatively impacted AMD GPUs' performance. PhysX could be accelerated on AMD GPUs, but Nvidia will never allow it. G-sync didn't gain standardization from VESA like Freesync did via VRR in HDMI 2.1.

    Dividing brands creates a Premium/Generic type of issue and pushes mindshare further into Nvidia's territory. AREZ is unknown; granted it's a few new stickers on the card and a different name on the box as they're currently just renamed from previous ROG offerings; imagine things further down the road when new cards need to be designed. I'd bet AREZ would take a back seat to ROG in build quality. What do most people buy? What they know (or whatever reviewer or tech friend recommends).
  • Dragonstongue - Saturday, May 5, 2018 - link

    I almost agree with this sentiment only for the fact that if Nv wants to play a big douche the AIB should come up with an AMD specific branding for graphics cards and an Nv specific branding for them as well, this way here (possibly) they can really go to town on making them the best they possibly can be to support the companies design as best as possible.

    Knowing the way Nv has done things since they came into business it would not have surprised me AT ALL if they had in the fine print a specific "branding" such as Asus ROG could not be "better" if it were using Radeon technology than if it were to use Geforce, the proof, look at the crud the pull with every game that comes attached with the "powered by Geforce...the way it is meant to be played" BS.
  • Sttm - Friday, May 4, 2018 - link

    I still do not understand what damage that causes. Its branding! Who buys a GPU because its a ROG, and not because of the chip/cooling?
  • WorldWithoutMadness - Saturday, May 5, 2018 - link

    Why do people still buying fancy luxury watches for lots of money when there are better performing watches? and why do people keep on buying one brand rather others? Some still like coke more than pepsi when they can't even tell the difference when blindfolded.

    Now you ask again that question of yours to yourself.
  • Peter2k - Saturday, May 5, 2018 - link

    If it were a nigliable part of the market then why do other manufacturers feel they need to have a gaming brand, Aorus comes to mind, MSI Gaming Series
    ROG is a bit older already
  • BurntMyBacon - Monday, May 7, 2018 - link

    I imagine people buying discrete graphics cards are a little more informed and consequently less effected by branding than those buying gaming laptops/desktops/etc. For this reason, I consider the larger issue the fact that the associated branding could be used to lock out AMD from products beyond just discrete GPUs. ROG branded desktops, laptops, or any other product where nVidia competes were out of bounds for AMD GPUs. Granted AMD didn't have much traction in gaming laptops lately, but it seems particularly questionable to be able to lock them out of ROG branded laptops. ROG actually has a fair amount of traction with people looking for gaming laptops.
  • Tams80 - Friday, May 4, 2018 - link

    I hope they don't and then get some compensation from NVIDIA.
  • ElvenLemming - Sunday, May 6, 2018 - link

    Considering that RoG isn't really a separate "line" of products so much as one of many descriptors, it wouldn't surprise me if they just add the RoG branding back to the AMD cards while keeping the Arez name as well.
  • BurntMyBacon - Monday, May 7, 2018 - link

    This. I don't think it would hurt Asus to continue with distinct sub brands for their AMD and nVidia lines while keeping the primary branding consistent to the type of product.

    The bigger issue in my mind has always been the gaming laptops. Granted there hasn't been much interest in AMD's mobile gaming chips lately. However, the ability to lock AMD out of ROG laptops just because it uses the brand nVidia hijacked for their discrete GPU line was a particularly questionable result.
  • cmvrgr - Friday, May 4, 2018 - link

    I hated the GPP program and I said that I will not buy an Nvidia gpu again. If they kill GPP that blackmailing piece of shit I will consider again buying one.
  • BurntMyBacon - Monday, May 7, 2018 - link

    I think I'll still wait a little while yet before recommending their products to people, but I won't hesitate to use them as the situation calls for it now that they've abandoned GPP. I'll wait perhaps as much time as the program was active to allow for some small alteration back towards AMD and then it's back to entirely value based recommendations.
  • guidryp - Friday, May 4, 2018 - link

    Translation: Rather than risk a lawsuit for anti-competitive behavior, we have decided to cancel the program.
  • ಬುಲ್ವಿಂಕಲ್ ಜೆ ಮೂಸ್ - Friday, May 4, 2018 - link

    AMD's response to NVidia should be "Freedom of Choice (Unconditionally)"

    or......

    FOC-U!
  • ads295 - Saturday, May 5, 2018 - link

    Is that Telugu?
  • ಬುಲ್ವಿಂಕಲ್ ಜೆ ಮೂಸ್ - Saturday, May 5, 2018 - link

    Oh No's

    FOC-U is from the Cross Cultural Language of Middle Fingas
  • ratbert1 - Friday, May 4, 2018 - link

    ^ this
  • seamonkey79 - Friday, May 4, 2018 - link

    Yea, too little, too late. On top of that, the 'reasoning' with no further explanation kind of implies that all the bad views of GPP were more correct than the few details we got from them directly. Nice transparency. It's going to be awhile before I'm in the market to replace my 1080, but something major is going to have to happen to ruin AMD in the meantime before I'll buy Nvidia again.
  • ToTTenTranz - Friday, May 4, 2018 - link

    "The termination of the GeForce Partner Program presumably leaves the door open to ASUS folding these products back into their existing brands. However what they’ll actually do remains to be seen. "

    Not really. Asus' US and UK website has already taken down the "Arez" graphics cards and Radeon cards can already be found inside the ROG branding.
    Within the last few hours, people have been getting ads for the new "Vega ROG" cards.

    Gigabyte's website has also reinstated Radeon cards within their Aorus brand.
  • Kepe - Friday, May 4, 2018 - link

    So, instead of "battling misinformation" by showing what the GPP agreement is like, they just canceled the whole thing. This is a clear sign that GPP would've been found illegal.
    Then they talk about wanting people to be "crystal clear on what they buy". Well then, why does Nvidia have multiple versions of the GTX 1060 with different numbers of cores and two Titan XPs? That doesn't exactly give customers a crystal clear image of what they are buying.
    Nvidia also says they spend billions on R&D to keep new tech coming to gamers. If they want to keep new tech coming, then why do they just sit on their asses instead of releasing new architectures? They could've released Volta-based gaming cards last year, but skipped that. Now they're just waiting, doing nothing with Ampere/Turing/whatever. Because they don't have to and all the GPUs they can produce are bought by cryptocurrency miners at ridiculously marked-up prices. How does this show love for the gamers? They couldn't care less who buys their stuff as long as it just sells.
    I really wish AMD and Intel could come up with some real competition in the high-end gaming GPU market.
  • euskalzabe - Saturday, May 5, 2018 - link

    Yup.
  • HStewart - Friday, May 4, 2018 - link

    This is smart move by NVidia, with the bad press of this program and more important if they loose vender support - they can use their existing support based to continue without loosing customers.

    They know they have a good based of customers and support for their products - they also aware that they have competition and even though they are the leader in high end - that could change one day especially if venders don't like the policies or even appearance that they wrong.
  • Tams80 - Friday, May 4, 2018 - link

    Great.

    Really pathetic behaviour by NVIDIA though. Post something general, that seems anti-competitive. Then complain that there is 'mis-information' or even 'lies' going around about it. They only have themselves to blame. The they have/had the cheek to claim they were and are being 'transparent' and care about the consumers.

    Utter greedy cretins.
  • Arbie - Friday, May 4, 2018 - link

    How could Mr NVidia Teeple write all that text without a single sincere word? It's quite an accomplishment and may help restore what must be a seriously tarnished reputation. Personally, I hope they fire him.
  • jtd871 - Saturday, May 5, 2018 - link

    Like this was all one person's doing - unless that person is Jen-Sen.
  • Arbie - Sunday, May 6, 2018 - link

    Like Jen-Sen would take the fall.
  • PeachNCream - Friday, May 4, 2018 - link

    Oh gosh that announcement combined with the vague way the program was described initially really does seem to validate a lot of suspicions about why GPP existed. The cancellation was almost akin to a little kid throwing his toys down and saying, "Well, I never wanted to play this stupid game anyway so there!"
  • WereCatf - Saturday, May 5, 2018 - link

    "A lot has been said recently about our GeForce Partner Program. The rumors, conjecture and mistruths go far beyond its intent. Rather than battling misinformation, we have decided to cancel the program." -- "You were all right about the GPP and what we were trying to do with it, but we failed and now we'll just try to sweep it all under the rug as quickly and unceremoniously as possible."
  • WereCatf - Saturday, May 5, 2018 - link

    "A lot has been said recently about our GeForce Partner Program. The rumors, conjecture and mistruths go far beyond its intent. Rather than battling misinformation, we have decided to cancel the program." -- "You were all right about the GPP and what we were trying to do with it, but we failed and now we'll just try to sweep it all under the rug as quickly and unceremoniously as possible."
  • Chaitanya - Saturday, May 5, 2018 - link

    Lets hope they still get investigate and fined for pulling this BS on consumers.
  • BenSkywalker - Sunday, May 6, 2018 - link

    Antitrust violations require you to be a monopoly.

    Antitrust violations require you to be a monopoly.

    Antitrust violations require you to be a monopoly.

    People get that? The level of ignorance people, Kyle being the chief among them, are spewing on this subject is comical. nVidia is not legally capable of committing an antitrust violation- Intel/AMD own 100% of the x86 market and 81% of the GPU market. What would be an actual violation is if they say teamed up to try and force nVidia out of a market segment using their monopoly power- like they are actually doing.

    If some chain of car dealerships decided they want to market a Camaro as a Lexus none of the companies involved would be OK with it- it simply would not be allowed. Somehow though, nVidia wanting branding to compete against the predatory competition in the GPU space is some huge violation?

    It's just an entirely different level of fanboy stupid.

    When the kiddies grow up and work in the real world they will realize how shockingly dumb this all is- nVidia was trying to get branding in line with what every other segment in every other industry already has.

    As far as pulling stupid BS on the consumers in particular- AMD piggybacking and trying to get sales off of nVidia's vastly superior mind share could certainly be viewed as anti competitive using the hyper ignorant [H] logic, the problem is by themselves they are not a monopoly.

    Legally nVidia is entirely within their rights to tell partners they either sell nVidia exclusive parts, or they don't sell nVidia at all. Again, their competition has monopoly status- it wouldn't be remotely close to being in the vicinity of an anti trust violation.

    AMD managed to find a member of the press challenged enough to not have a clue about antitrust laws with a big enough mouth to whip the AMD diehard fanboys into a tizzy and nVidia didn't like the PR backlash.
  • Tams80 - Sunday, May 6, 2018 - link

    "Antitrust violations require you to be a monopoly."

    No it doesn't.

    "nVidia was trying to get branding in line with what every other segment in every other industry already has"

    No, they wanted exclusive use of AIBs' gaming brands that those partners have spent years and millions building up. Those brands include products that have nothing to do with Nvidia, AMD, or Intel.

    "If some chain of car dealerships decided they want to market a Camaro as a Lexus none of the companies involved would be OK with it- it simply would not be allowed. "

    Useless analogies aside; it's more like a dealership comes up with a brand and decides to sell several car manufacturers under that brand. That brand is the dealership's and it is not okay for the car manufacturers to coerce the dealership to only sell their cars under that brand. They can demand that their products aren't sold under that brand, but not that only it can.
  • BenSkywalker - Monday, May 7, 2018 - link

    Sherman Act, Clayton Act or the FTC Act- which one are you implying allows antitrust action to be taken against a company that is not a monopoly?

    I'll give you a hint- none of the above. They are quite explicit in exactly what is required to constitute action in terms of market position and types of actions.

    You are way out of your league in this discussion. Go back to amdownzjoo4evah and fantasize with other ignorant fools who take legal advice from someone who doesn't know a thing about the law and almost nothing about technology.

    nVidia, using the most favorable to them numbers possible, has 19% of the PC GPU market. Two other companies control the other 81% and they have now teamed up making their graphics effort in marketplace terms function as one.

    Seriously, how dumb do you have to be to equate 19% to antitrust actionable? Honest question, I don't often interact with people that have capabilities that limited.
  • prisonerX - Sunday, May 6, 2018 - link

    Antitrust violations do not require you to be a monopoly. They require use dominant market power to reduce competition.

    Take about ignorant - you're it.
  • HStewart - Sunday, May 6, 2018 - link

    Monopoly if define from one frame of reference is not a true monopoly, if you look at CPU one could say Intel has monopoly for x86 based processors - but then include cpus in tables and phone, one could save that ARM has monopoly in that environment - yes there is different manufactures of but they are based on same architecture. But x86 or ARM don't have a monopoly in customer markets.

    In same boat there is different types of GPU's for example on this XPS 15 2in1 it has both Intel and AMD GPU working together for a different purpose. And my Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 has Adreno 530 from Qualcomm - but all 3 are GPU.

    One could possibly say AMD has a Monopoly in Console CPU/GPU but one also needs to include the Nintendo also and than what about older versions

    All I am stating that in computers in today's world - it is harder to say a single company has monopoly. Also computers has many different components and processors run different parts of systems - For example Apple iMac supposedly use ARM based components to run displays and such.
  • HStewart - Sunday, May 6, 2018 - link

    II would say as it comes to monopoly there is probably one company that has a Monopoly more than other company if one defines it as allow other manufacture to create hardware products - this would be Apple, but then if you look out of frame of reference, for phone you need to include Android devices and for desktop/laptop include Windows based or Linux based,
  • HStewart - Sunday, May 6, 2018 - link

    For the iMac for example have AMD GPU but for a long as time they had NVidia GPU. And even though there current iMACs are Intel based - they were once PowerPC - but Apple would probably not be existence if they kept PowerPC because Windows compatibly.

    Microsoft has try many times for non x86 based versions of OS, but it hard to get rid of huge software based, This was done with Windows RT, even Windows Pocket PC and a long time Alpha and Mips version of Windows NT, And recently Windows for ARM which will likely failed.

    Apple knows that PC industry is important - they want people to believe iPad Pro is PC replacement but in reality it is oversize iPad which is oversize iPhone, just as my Galaxy Tab S3 is oversize Galaxy Phone. Onely that iPads and Tab S3 don't have phone calling,
  • BenSkywalker - Monday, May 7, 2018 - link

    Luxury markets are not covered by antitrust laws. The PC has been classified as an essential tool for commerce and as such it is a market that is governed by antitrust laws- Intel and Microsoft are both classified as monopolies.

    ARM doesn't produce SoCs- they license technology. Now, if Apple were to buy ARM to attempt to stop ARM from licensing to others, then that could, *could*, be an actionable offense due to the ARM platform having a monopoly position(although not ARM itself since it doesn't actually produce chips). Since ARM openly licenses to a variety of competitors, it isn't a valid comparison to the other companies discussed.

    Console market is considered a luxury market, antitrust doesn't impact it at all.
  • stanleyipkiss - Saturday, May 5, 2018 - link

    Poor Kyle Bennett at HardOCP. Most tech press ignored the issue until the absolute breaking point. And even then mostly just glanced over it. Not to say that nVidia pays them all, but they sure didn't want their relationship with nVidia damaged so they all kept their distance. Which is a sad state of affairs for any press -- this inter-dependence on one of the big manufacturers make them incapable of keeping objective. Imagine if the Washington Post felt like they had to skirt the White House for fear of retribution. Hell, it might even happen with some multi-billion dollar companies who own the news outlets but it really shouldn't. The tech press should know better, be better funded as to not care about nVidia's potential blacklisting and they should have better... judgement.
  • PeachNCream - Monday, May 7, 2018 - link

    HardOCP and other tech review sites make it a priority to publish reviews on the day the NDA is lifted because they depend on advertisement revenue (and referral purchase links to resellers) from visitors to continue to operate. Tech journalists depend on getting access to sample hardware ahead of the release date in order to have a review ready to go as early as possible. They also have limited budgets that make it difficult or impractical to purchase hardware and manufacturers aren't inclined to send free samples to companies that paint their products in a negative light. There's inherent bias in the system as a result of that compulsion which makes it difficult for sites like HardOCP to do anything but kowtow to the various OEMs out there.
  • AZDougness - Wednesday, May 9, 2018 - link

    Incorrect. HardOCP often releases it's reviews after NDAs are lifted. They frequently purchase several brands' hardware through retailers as they are no longer included in "sampling" due to past negative reviews. It makes me wonder about how other review sites are eligible to review those brands still... I personally take [H]'s reviews to be more accurate because of this.
  • jjj - Saturday, May 5, 2018 - link

    You are portraying the program in a hugely misleading way.

    The clear goal was to capture all the marketing dollars invested in those brands over many years by forcing their partners to join GPP and exclusivity.
    This was unethical and illegal in multiple ways and your attitude is appalling.
    The question now is, did they actually cancel it, if any exclusive brands stay alive, it will mean that they did not.
  • 0siris - Saturday, May 5, 2018 - link

    I like how they're now pretending that they're the victims of false information being spread, because even if that is true, it's their own fault for creating a contract which no-one can verify. In the same vein, the very reason for the "rumours and conjecture" is their own shady behind-closed-doors operation which is leaving everyone guessing.

    "ensuring that gamers know what they are buying and can make a clear choice"
    "the GPU brand should be clearly transparent"
    Give me a break. If you wanted to do that you would just put for example "ASUS with nvidia 1070" on the box instead of "ASUS ROG STRIX GeForce GTX 1070". Speaking of ensuring that gamers know what they are buying, notice how that doesn't even say nvidia in the product name? So much for "making sure gamers who want NVIDIA tech get NVIDIA tech".

    The only reason they're coming back on this is because it backfired and created a load of negative PR and possibly an avenue for litigation, let's not pretend like any of this is to benefit their consumers. Simply disgusting.
  • Lord of the Bored - Saturday, May 5, 2018 - link

    Seriously. I mean, who was accidentally buying Radeons when they meant to get GeForces? nVidia's argument seems to be "we thought you had the brains of turnips".
    ...
    Actually, given they expected everyone to be okay with this, they probably DID.
  • SaturnusDK - Saturday, May 5, 2018 - link

    There's an old saying: "You can't unring that bell".
    Nvidia showed their true colours and told gamers; "we couldn't give a rats arse about you as long as we rake in cash".
    Don't give a company like Nvidia that treats you, the costumer, as worthless trash any of your money.
  • benedict - Saturday, May 5, 2018 - link

    Kudos to Anandtech and all Purch sites for voicing their concerns with GPP so loudly and constantly being so critical of it. GPP is over thanks to you guys.
  • willis936 - Saturday, May 5, 2018 - link

    Not a single word of “sorry” or “oops” or “we won’t do it again”? They basically just said they’d rail us in the ass if it weren’t illegal and care about nothing. And this is supposed to be someone selling us the idea that nvidia is a company people want to support?
  • boozed - Saturday, May 5, 2018 - link

    "Rather than battling the inevitable anti-trust charges, we have decided to cancel the program”

    FIFH
  • cocochanel - Saturday, May 5, 2018 - link

    What should really scare us is the cynicism behind Nvidia's thinking. Sure, it's nice to know that GPP failed. But I doubt that they won't try another devious scheme in the future. On the software side, they have been doing it for years:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O7fA_JC_R5s
    I really hope Intel will go after them. They have the financial muscle and the engineering needed. AMD doesn't have that.
    Don't get me wrong, Nvidia makes good cards. But that is as far as it goes.
    My next gaming machine will be AMD based. A Ryzen 2 with an AMD card and FreeSync monitor.
    Hurt them where it counts.
  • MrSpadge - Saturday, May 5, 2018 - link

    "The rumors, conjecture and mistruths go far beyond its intent."

    they may go beyond the "intent" of the program, but not against the facts in the contract, doesn't it? Otherwise it would have been easy to counteract the issue by publishing the contracts when first news arrived.
  • AnnonymousCoward - Saturday, May 5, 2018 - link

    "NVIDIA creates cutting-edge technologies for gamers. We have dedicated our lives to it. We do our work at a crazy intense level – investing billions to invent the future"

    And yet you can't even support the VESA sync standard! Pathetic. If you actually wanted to dedicate your life to me, the gamer, you'd allow my GTX 1070 to output frames in sync with my 43" 4K monitor that supports VESA Adaptive-Sync.
  • wr3zzz - Sunday, May 6, 2018 - link

    Before we all pad ourselves on the back for getting Nvidia to "listen", the likely reason that GPP is out is because companies like Asus showed how pathetic the idea was in the first place. Nvidia was basically paying for a few letters that Asus will just replace in their AMD boxes. Nvidia cannot legally force Asus not to build AMD cards.
  • Peter2k - Monday, May 7, 2018 - link

    The outcome of GPP to just rebrand AMD cards was so obvious I'm sure Nvidia knew.
    Maybe they didn't care, they do have the cash to burn, as long as it's just not the same brand as Nvidias.

    Also
    Nvidia can't force Asus from staying away from AMD, but they can make sure Asus doesn't get Nvidia hardware.
    That was the crux of the GPP program.
    Vendors would lose "first priority" status if they don't follow.
  • willis936 - Tuesday, May 8, 2018 - link

    According to gamers' nexus it seems more likely that the actual goal of GPP was try to box Intel/AMD out of the laptop dGPU space since the new Intel/Vega package is very competitive. Companies don't care about gamers. They're a tiny, high margin segment. Companies make money on volume. GPP wasn't made for you or ASUS, it was made for Dell.
  • just4U - Sunday, May 6, 2018 - link

    Well.. we've seen similar stuff like this before out of Nvidia and I am sure it ticks them off to no end seeing Motherboard Manufacturers putting the emphasis on their built up brands rather than the chip inside.. Pretty sure they'd like it if there was more exclusivity like they have with Evga or Amd has with Sapphire.. but that was always a mixed bag as some of those partners no longer exist and big guns like XFX which used to be major players with Nvidia cards walked away or shut down.
  • jwcalla - Monday, May 7, 2018 - link

    What a big nothingburger.
  • Gunbuster - Tuesday, May 8, 2018 - link

    I see this as a severe blow to graphic designers who were hoping to design terrible new mascots for all the spin-off AMD gaming brands that were in the pipeline... RIP Arez chicken
  • 0ldman79 - Tuesday, May 8, 2018 - link

    If Nvidia really wanted to make the video card industry less confusing to the victims... er, customers, why don't they change the names of the new 1030 with DDR3 and the 1060 3GB and 1060 6GB?
  • LarsBars - Tuesday, May 8, 2018 - link

    "GPP had a simple goal – ensuring that gamers know what they are buying and can make a clear choice."

    NVIDIA, if you wanted gamers to know what they were getting, why do you allow the 1060 3GB and 6GB cards to have different shader counts?

    If you wanted gamers to know what they were getting, why do you have two differently-performing MX150 products with the same name?

    If you wanted gamers to know what they were getting, why do you have two differently-performing GT 1030 products with the same name?

    NVIDIA, it does not appear that you care about the gamer knowing what they are getting.
  • davide445 - Wednesday, May 23, 2018 - link

    Apart all the other things there is a further benefit in this program, AMD can count who of his distributors is definitely proactive in being against his interests. Just as example the Asus AMD dedicated Arez brand: pretty obvious a completely new brand will have to start from 0 in term of media coverage and strength, opposite to the well established ROG brand who will benefit only Nvidia from all the past investments in term of communication. This moves will show who AMD need to support more.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now