https://wccftech.com/ftc-eu-commission-zero-in-on-nvidia-gpp-calls-for-investigation-complaints/
 
It appears there has been many complaints from consumers already about NVIDIA's GPP. The FTC and EU are investigating NVIDIA. I personally predict the EU will be much more intensive in their investigation.

kram36
How can consumers complain about something they have not read?
 
The EU is nothing but a money sucking system. The EU should be dissolved.
 
I'm going to make my call on this, nothing will happen to nVidia over the GPP...period.

If NVIDIA is breaking anti-competitive laws in North America or the EU then there will be a trial.

rjohnson11

kram36
How can consumers complain about something they have not read?
 
The EU is nothing but a money sucking system. The EU should be dissolved.
 
I'm going to make my call on this, nothing will happen to nVidia over the GPP...period.

If NVIDIA is breaking anti-competitive laws in North America or the EU then there will be a trial.

How, exactly is nVidia breaking anti-competitive laws?

rjohnson11
https://wccftech.com/ftc-eu-commission-zero-in-on-nvidia-gpp-calls-for-investigation-complaints/
 
It appears there has been many complaints from consumers already about NVIDIA's GPP. The FTC and EU are investigating NVIDIA. I personally predict the EU will be much more intensive in their investigation.

No bet! They usually are more strict than the FTC. 

Xavier Zepherious
i find AMD/Intel deal more anti-competitive
ie the "your GPU on my cpu" deal - cutting out low level gpus from nvidia to tablets and netbooks/notebooks
 
now if AMD and intel said sure you can put your gpu(AMD/INTEl/AMD/others) on our cpu - then i wouldn't make a fuss
but with intel not allowing any other than AMD and their own - then remove onboard PCIe lanes (which is purposed) or crimp it - or due to size the PCIe bus(MXM) and overhead take up make it less attractable for mobile
the main point than infinity fabric or the onchip bus from intel offers a faster bus than PCU with less overhead and room - perfect for mobile
 
is an unfair practice and colluding with each other to squeeze out nvidia
 
 
look if intel and amd can work that - then Nvidia can to the same in the gaming sector- Intel and AMD should look at there own practices before shooting off
or maybe they should start playing fair and say heck yeah - lets put your gpu(anyones) on our CPU - let consumers make the choices they want or disallow APU's
or make amd/intel core licensing free so intel and AMD can't get anymore revenue from licensing or crosslicensing
this will allow anyone in the cpu market again
 

Actually, it’s being very competitive, because both are willing to work with others while Nvidia has terminally always done everything in-house. You’d never see an Nvidia GPU on an Intel CPU die because it’s not the culture that Nvidia lives by. Nvidia is a lot like Apple. It’s their way or the highway.

Interesting...

rjohnson11

kram36

rjohnson11

kram36
How can consumers complain about something they have not read?
 
The EU is nothing but a money sucking system. The EU should be dissolved.
 
I'm going to make my call on this, nothing will happen to nVidia over the GPP...period.

If NVIDIA is breaking anti-competitive laws in North America or the EU then there will be a trial.

How, exactly is nVidia breaking anti-competitive laws?

You're not allowed under both EU and USA anti-competitive laws to have any agreements which puts competitors at a disadvantage especially if you have a monopoly position. Intel did the same thing years ago with AMD and they got caught. They had to pay over a billion Euros damage.

Have you read the GPP contract?

Yes it is
 
AMD and Intel are in a duopoly - or would you rather say monopoly since Intel controls 85% or more of CPU market
by using the cpu to squeeze out Nvidia is anti- competitive - even if you work with AMD
 
one could make this argument - and force AMD and Intel deal dead
 
 

panzlock

Xavier Zepherious
Yes it is
 
AMD and Intel are in a duopoly - or would you rather say monopoly since Intel controls 85% or more of CPU market
by using the cpu to squeeze out Nvidia is anti- competitive - even if you work with AMD
 
one could make this argument - and force AMD and Intel deal dead
 
 

No, it's not.
 
AMD and Intel are a duopoly in the desktop segment only. They have more competition elsewhere from the likes of Qualcomm, ARM, MediaTek, etc...
 
The fact that Nvidia decided to concentrate their efforts on GPU's is not Intel's nor AMD's fault. What AMD and Intel ARE doing is combining their respective technologies so they are able to compete with Nvidias GPU's by providing a cheaper option for end users. Nvidia could have done the same with either of their competitors if they wished, I'm sure. But, as it is, Intel has a significant disadvantage in GPU technology. What better way to enter this particular market than partnering with a company that has extensive knowledge in this area? And why AMD? Probably because it was a cheaper option for Intel.
 
Again, if it was a partnership between Intel and Nvidia, or Nvidia and AMD I wouldn't be concerned. But what we have with the GPP is essentially one company telling their EXISTING PARTNERS what they can and cannot do with the products they bought, paid for and own. Not sure why you aren't seeing the differences between the GPP and Intel/AMD partnership.

So the word "partnership" makes everything okay. What does GPP stand for? GeForce Partnership Program.

transdogmifier
I'm no fan of the EU....and frankly this whole "monopoly" thing gets way over used..
 
If you can't compete, sucks to be you.
 
Are "Exclusive titles on PS4/XBox" a problem for the EU? If not..shut up. (and yes...that is a form of a 'monopoly'...I want
some PS4 titles on my PC..but guess what...not gonna happen...)
 

Uh oh, don't give the EU any ideas.
 
The GPP is not cutting anyone out, like the Intel cpu/AMD gpu deal for laptops or PS4/Xbox game exclusive deals.

panzlock

kram36
 
So the word "partnership" makes everything okay. What does GPP stand for? GeForce Partnership Program.

They are telling their partners how they will be marketing their products. Still sound like a partnership?
 
Caitlyn Jenner calls herself a woman. Doesn't make it so, does it?

Hum, I guess you do not understand what partnerships are? You agree on a contract, that creates the partnership. If you don't agree, you don't sign the contract to become partners.
 
Bruce Jenner is a man, you're calling him a woman by using the name Caitlyn and saying "herself". Bow down to your PC master lords.

I wonder how smart it would be to partner with AMD in the first place. Sure you can say it’s anti competition but history shows that AMD hasn’t really done that great. I would almost always look for NVIDIA over AMD for a graphics card in every generation for the past 20 years.

panzlock

Xavier Zepherious
Yes it is
 
AMD and Intel are in a duopoly - or would you rather say monopoly since Intel controls 85% or more of CPU market
by using the cpu to squeeze out Nvidia is anti- competitive - even if you work with AMD
 
one could make this argument - and force AMD and Intel deal dead
 
 

No, it's not.
 
AMD and Intel are a duopoly in the desktop segment only. They have more competition elsewhere from the likes of Qualcomm, ARM, MediaTek, etc...
 
The fact that Nvidia decided to concentrate their efforts on GPU's is not Intel's nor AMD's fault. What AMD and Intel ARE doing is combining their respective technologies so they are able to compete with Nvidias GPU's by providing a cheaper option for end users. Nvidia could have done the same with either of their competitors if they wished, I'm sure. But, as it is, Intel has a significant disadvantage in GPU technology. What better way to enter this particular market than partnering with a company that has extensive knowledge in this area? And why AMD? Probably because it was a cheaper option for Intel.
 
Again, if it was a partnership between Intel and Nvidia, or Nvidia and AMD I wouldn't be concerned. But what we have with the GPP is essentially one company telling their EXISTING PARTNERS what they can and cannot do with the products they bought, paid for and own. Not sure why you aren't seeing the differences between the GPP and Intel/AMD partnership.

PC  it is
 
for server/datacenter Intel still is #1
 
PowerPC, ARM and China's chip are small portion of market
X86 is still 96%
ARM is 3%
thats 1% for anything else
 
And you need no GPU's here
other than simple single low end chip to run a single Screen
 
unless you are making Cuda AI monster or a TPU AI monster or even use AMD crunching or Intel knights landing
and there its fair because they are all add in boards
 
for mobile
https://www.statista.com/statistics/233415/global-market-share-of-applications-processor-suppliers/
 
and that means apple qualcomm and mediatek
and qualcomm is near 50% so that means near 50% adreno GPU
 
this is mostly phone 
and phones didn't need serious GPU processor until lately with VR

this does not include cars or netbooks/notebooks or Game stations
 
 
one could say if Nvidia push their Arm chip with THEIR GPU more.. you might see a mobile phone from them or uses their chip
but i think they they are more focused on putting their APU and GPU's in every car 
 
 
 
so for the most part Intel is a monopoly(88% intel/12% AMD) - and all x86 is a monopoly/duopoly
and by using a APU to only put Intel and AMD (or AMD/AMD) on a chip to the exclusion of all others would be anti-competitive
and moreover if you limited the bus(or offer a internal CPU bus that is far superior to PCie) - or external PCi lanes and/or try to put everything on the chip(no outside lanes) - to push out Nvidia entirely
it would become apparently clear it's colluding to eliminate a competitor from a market
 
specially if it targeted at Mobile desktop market - laptops
 
we are not talking mobile phones here