For the most part, I have believed the Inq is doing a public service by educating users on the many failures of Vista. I tend to agree when the Inq brings to light issues with software.

I disagree with the tone, motive and viewpoint of this article. The Inquirer has a history of pumping up ATi graphics, simply because for whatever reason, some on staff despise Nvidia graphics. Petty team rivalry is beneath the Inquirer these days - you have great visibility.

At this point, we all know Ati, Intel and the hasbeens don't get the gamer dollar, simply because NVidia makes better products. I could make polygons faster with a pencil and a piece of paper than an Intel graphics chipset.

And feature the logo quite prominently on the F1 cars, I might add.

Intel? the best graphics in the world. i810, i946, G965, G35... all with flawless drivers that enabled full functionality from day 1, and enough performance to run current games at least at medium to low settings.

Oh wait - that doesn't sound quite right...

Not that nVidia is any better when it comes to its products, but at least some of them work out of the door. If you count the 9800GX2s constant resolution problems as 'working'. If I dropped 200 quid on a graphics card, I'd at least expect it to remember the last resolution I used.

I see this as a surefire way to get all high-end consumers to stop buying hardware and waiting for the dust to settle. I personally stalled my purchases and went for minimal upgrades to ride out this wave of graphic cards with castrated 256-bit memory buses


Intel is and has been a continual problem for graphics on the PC platform. 

As they offer low budget under-performing GPUs to help low end markets, yet there are just as cheap solutions that provide 'adaquate' gaming performance that could or should be used instead.

Intel is the sole reason Gaming on PC is still dodgey, as families and new users buy Intel Video based computers not realizing how crippled the machine is in terms of video performance.

Intel's integrated technologies perform at speeds almost 8-10 years behind other low end integrated or GPU options. 

This screws consumers, and even OEMS as the integrated chipset choices they get from Intel force them to dump money into a dedicated video solution, instead of having more options with IGD from ATI and NVidia that can perform basic gaming easily.

One of the biggest fights between Intel and Microsoft have been over the Intel GPUs, and is why MS shoved some of the Vista features to a higher level than what Intel was offering (as some of the intel GPUs were rendering PS&VS functions in the software driver).

By MS shoving Vista Aero to require 'hardware' level PS 2.0 support, they at the very least forced Intel to bring their basic chipsets up to bottom of the line gaming abilities.

This is why MS and Intel fought hard over Vista, and why there was bad blood between them going into this, as MS wants to try to keep the PC as gaming consistent and friendly as possible, and with DX10 and other technologies should be able to do this.

Having Intel as the worlds largest supplier of graphics chips is tragic. I've had a couple of laptops "powered" by Intel graphics and it's just a parody of graphics technology. A mockery of all that is good. If I was in the business of making graphics chips I too would be sulking in a dark corner...

as a programmer, i want to write code to process some data, 
and some of it gets displayed, preferably without the rigmarole 
of being shlepped along by feeble minded custom undocumented pretentiously 
os dependent misguided hidden agenda binary driver chips.

The funniest thing about all this is how much this will confuse the nVidia and Intel fanbois." OH NOES, WHICH COMPANY DO I BROWN NOSE!"

All though I have to say, the INQ is way too favourable towards Intel, well except for charlie lol.

That's a piece of writing brilliance!

Laughabee!, lol, good one :D

The man from Nvidia has a point INTEL may seem like they want to enter the market for graphics and try to beat Nvidia.

But thats just rubbish it's all about the money always had been for any business. Nvidia now have Ageia and could possibly create a CPU/GPU them selves with seriously advanced physix in.

INTEL could they now own Havok so it's just a simple wait and see what brings. 

Off topic: I have a 6600GT but will be buying a ATi 3850 because it's got better HDTV support than Nvidia has.

on topic: AMD have Fusion which is the same concept so 3 companies 1 goal lets see who wins later in the next few years of developement.

hah! one of those golden articles :P

that stupid jap or whatever doesn't even know what expects him

... welcome to AMD's world. Not so fun, is it? ;)

Now that $vidia has seen how $ntel treats competitors, maybe they would change their evil and illegal monopolist ways but i doubt it very much.

Take a look at how $vidia "dominates" in the graphics industry... the same way that $ntel "dominates" in the cpu domain.

Anyone with half a brain cell know that $vidia abuses its position to engage in anti-competitive business practices.

Even in the best of times, ATi never stood a chance... even in the Cheatforce FX days, when ATi solutions were superemely superior, it made very little headway... same as AMD and their Athlon 64's.

People that think $vidia is some underdog haven't got a clue.

Whenever !any! corporation engages in behavior that harms the public (consumers) we need to be vocal about it and assing blame where it belongs.

I don't want to make it seem like ati/amd are angels but compared to $ntel/$vidia, there are nowhere near as bad.

I will purchase $ntel and $vidia products again... when they change their predatory/illegal business practices... or when hell freezes over... given that hell has a quantum probability greater than zero, that would be my pick.

http://www.dailytech.com/NVIDIA+CEO+Were+Going+to+Open+a+Can+of+Whoop+Ass/article11448.htm

Note the last line... where NVIDIA's CEO Jen-Hsun Huang, (accusing Intel) asks: "How much faster can you render the blue screen of death?"

I would have thought that NVIDIA would have a pretty good idea of the answer, as they've apparently been working on it for a long time.

LOL oh wow. LOL


Long go the times where a graphics card was something to be excited about...

These days it's all about crappy differences and under valued performance.

Nvidia is having a ball sticking consumers with marginally good devices with nothing new to show off. There's no point in spending a truckload of cash to buy a G-Force "##"#" G2 or whatever to get 5 10 more frames on something.

The last card that blew my mind was 3DFX voodoo 2 and 3 where performance was not only noticiable as well as astounding... Their SLI tech is a underdeveloped rip off of 3DFX own tech.

If Intel can develop a solution nearly as good as the discrete graphics from AMD or Nvidia I'll definitly stick to it. Nvidia and AMD are both boring me to death with their "Most powerfull graphics solution ever" crap.

Time to slap their wrists for a change

Is there some sort of policy at the Inquirer that says the writers have to spin every story about Nvidia to make them sound as negative as possible or is it just retribution for Nvidia giving you guys the middle finger so often and you just felt like giving it back?

Wow, the author of this article has managed to be even more silly and childish than the person she was trying to attack.

Lame. Shame on you, TheInquirer.

...you sound like an 8 year old trying to make the nVidia chief sound foolish. I can only presume that this is somehow related to the UK Press' penchant for stretching the truth.

If Nvidia are going to call themselfs the Ferarri of the video card industry then release the Geforce 10 already.. we are sick of having almost the same performance again and again..

Geforce 8, the new Geforce 8, Geforce 9 (the third Geforce 8) =)

What's up with Inq's hate-on toward NV? You guys have no idea how well Larrabee will perform. Why the blind assumption that Intel will bury NV with it? Why all the Intel propoganda? Can't you just give us an objective article without the obsurdly biased op-ed?

He's simply trying to not play the game that Intel is trying to push them into. Microsoft and many large corporations do this. They manipulate words in order to make it harder to debate.

What does this guy do? He comes right out and says it like it is. Intel graphics suck, there's no competition here. Intel would have to make world shaking strides to compete with nvidia.

Customers can think for themselves and don't like being manipulated by corporate PR.

Simply put, nvidia wins. Intel looses. This isn't their market. It took AMD to create the pressure necessary to get Intel to create better processors. Intel would have soaked the customers for years had AMD not upped the ante.

Nvidia is simply setting things straight.

Your money grubbers just like Chipz, you can't even address a minor issue such as "driver stuck in infinite loop" which has been a major grip from your loyal fan base .While your at cleaning house, get your pricing in-line with what your selling . No real big purrformance gains to warrant a card change every few months at a whopping $5-600 us. You guys sound like Mobil/Exxon on your pricing .

Were the f*** you've been!?!! Uranus? Intel's been BUCK FUTTING everyone for a long, long time!!

Well if a 780G integrated chipset from ATI can take on nVidia's best then Intel cannot be far behind.
nVidia thou days art numbered (why just look at the calendar!)

Hilarious article! I am worried about Larrabee and graphics more integrated with the CPU though, will it render the likes of Nvidia and DAAMiT obsolete? Intel sounds really confident about Larrabee, which is a bunch of Pentium MMX's from what I understand. I'd really like to think that Nvidia's next core, and R700/R800 will be able to keep up but I don't know...