These are the two biggest company's in the GPU business if AMD give Nvidia access to there cards they may as well shut down shop!
Would Nvidia do the same if it were the other way around?
Be serious!
Why are Nvidia not giving CUDA to AMD so they can integrate it themselves?
IMO we need the war to go on as long as possible!
Just look how much the prices of Nvidia cards dropped!!
I think it's Intel's turn!!!

The industry needs to stop supporting at once closed API's and extentions tied to a single vendor who is only going to use them to get higher $$$ from their hardware and little-by-little start making it more and more propietary.

This goes for CPU as well as GPU extentions. If they want to innovate and advance, come up with an open, fully documented and as-neutral-as-possible standard and develop for it. If they others want to follow, fine. If not, at least you tried.

But having Intel push their own extentions or Nvidia or AMD is just wrong, leads to market fragmentation, unfair competition, higher prices and, eventually, LOWER performance once the sellers of "exclusive" extentions get enough market share to push their own agendas and slack in updates and price reductions.

We need competition. We need AMD so that Intel puts out fast and cheap processors instead of slow and expensive. We need ATI/AMD so that Nvidia keeps their price/performance ratio within reason. If we stop supporting one of the two players, it's the end of the game for everyone. Except for the greedy winner.

Even though Nvidia and AMD are in chronos, majority of implementations and ideas are from Nvidia's CUDA as they already have done most of the leg work; and that is true also for DX11. Unlike Nvidia, AMD is mostly assembly code for their streaming stuff, faster but not so high level. In the end CUDA prevails...

AMD is only surviving. They can't grow big cause Intel will always be the big monster that will knock it down. Intel will give AMD a small piece of the market but only enough to keep the government dogs away. If AMD wants to break out of this cycle, they should work with nvidia instead of sitting on the side and waiting for them to fight it out. If nvidia loses and becomes smaller and intel gain a good foot hold into the gpu market, then it is like history repeating itself again (with AMD next). Like back in the days when AMD let Intel grew it revenue quicker than AMD could. Eventually Intel became the big monster it is today.

I think they should both see the forest before the trees. The fact remains that they both share a common enemy that could be defeated if GPGPU becomes mainstream. Let's face it, a GPU smokes a CPU in raw numbers. If I had a choice between a netbook with via processor coupled with either a nvidia or ati GPU, or an intel with integrated graphics, I would be on the fence. But if Nvidia and AMD/ATI standardized either CUDA and/or OCL the choice would be simple. I really like both Nvidia and AMD/ATI, just went from an 8800gt sc to an HD4870, and if the price is right (I paid 129.00 for the HD4870 opened box-couldn't pass it up)I wouldn't hesitate to get a GTX280.
They really need to make the GPU the center of computing before intel makes a decent GPU.

I am not surprised AMD is not willing to give Nivida low level access to its GPUs. Sabotage seems much less likely than poorly optimized. If Nvidia can optimize AMD GPUs better then AMD seriously need to fire their team and/or higher Nvidia's.

OpenCL looks to be much superior than CUDA with ability to load balance between multiple computing resources although I have not yet tried OpenCL.

I see this as an attempt to keep CUDA relevant with the advent of OpenCL.

I recall reading that nvidia will continue development on CUDA and also support the OpenCL standard. Nvidia first to release driver that support opencl. OpenCL is the just vanilla version while CUDA is the vanilla plus the extra chocolate topping on it. imo, I think nvidia choose to support both cause open standards always have a longer cycle between each new version. And nvidia likes to release new revision every few months. So by keeping CUDA, they can update CUDA a lot quicker than making new revision to OpenCL. Do I like it that CUDA is proprietary? No but then all companies have propreitary tech. Intel with their x86 license, AMD going all inhouse: CPU and GPU in fusion, APPLE.. those guys is the king of propreitary. So people bashing nvidia for cuda, yet buys Intel CPU or planning on Fusion but own a ipod, etc... is just hypocrites.

Given that AMD have open sourced their GPU specs so that they can pass the burden of driver development onto the Unix community, is this really true?

"AMD's Gary Silcott told the INQ "they [Nvidia] would intentionally damage performance to make Nvidia GPUs run the same app better." Then, perhaps thinking better of accusing Nvidia of hypothetical, yet outright, sabotage, Silcott added "Even if it wasn't intentional, it would not be optimized for our instruction set architecture like our own SDK."

Err..... running Apps Better is what the Main Great Game is All about, Gary, and one would reasonably expect that to be a Funding Priority for Global Foundry Investors/Sleeping Partners. They wouldn't/shouldn't be too pleased with such a Negative Sub-Prime Approach to a Lead Competitor in Graphic Computation for Head Quarters.

Seems like AMD are missing some Vital Intellectual Property and may therefore be Abusing Arabian Hospitality and Ingenuity?

That is AMD's position, pure and simple. The idea that Nvidia would pull some dirty tricks is a credible one, but it's all about using ATI's market share as a wedge to push developers away from CUDA.

I for one look forward to OpenCL.

I can see these vendor specific APIs dying before they're even weaned, so the point is moot anyway. OpenGL, OpenAL (not Khronos' but put together in the same spirit as the other two) with OpenCL to complete the set. All three have open and published specifications.

In short, the two (three if Intel's Larrabee appears on time) warring parties have hardly anything to gain from this little battle as the Khronos Group has the advantage of being trusted, open, fairly free with documentation and platform/OS neutral. Or, if you prefer the sensationalist headlines, had their target market by the knackers as soon as they released the OpenCL draft.

The one and only company that could save CUDA or Stream is Microsoft, by adopting either. I very much doubt this is going to happen, simply because MS would be alienating a good chunk of its users no matter which of the two it chose. MS is more likely to add a fourth competing API (probably buried in its DirectX package) and force manufacturers to support it as a condition of WHQL certification than adopt someone else's.

I suggest Rich Evans, that instead of complaining!!!! about overuse of said!!! then you go to a library and grab a book!!!! No one is screaming over anyone!!!! you sound like a dull man with nothing more to whinge about than the comment section on here!!!! I quite like the use of!!! there should be more of it!!!!!!!!!!

I'm quite bored with the comment section when it comes to graphics. Everyone overuses exclamation marks !!!!!! in defense of their preferred graphics company. If you want to make a comment, please, calm yourself, and make intelligent arguments in a relaxed and wise manner, instead of screaming your point of view as though you think if you're loud enough, you may win the argument.

DAAMIT is living in fear, I bet they don't want CUDA because it shall focus more attention on the differences between themselves an nVidiot!

A direct comparison of how CUDA runs on cards from both vendors with various applications is the last thing DAAMIT wants. Sticking with gaming statistics and relying on them for performance testing is prefered. As you can at least influence the programmers in the development stage to take advantage of 'your products special features'. There for creating a variable world, where marketing scum loves to thrive and spread there filth. Trying to put spin on Photoshop etc other than yet another game is a lot harder... Bring on CUDA!

DAAMIT can sell more card if they let Nvidiot do what they wana do. I mean why not? Nvidia already granted Intel the use of SLI so what the big deal w/ a company that is not financially stable? I mean Hector left and the new guy still narrow minded? What a bunch of monkeys! Shame on AMD and I still hope that they will overcome stupid ways of thinking or the ugly shadow of bankruptcy will be upon them!

DAMMIT says: Nvidiot leave my cards alone!!!

Nvidians say: CUDA works better in you DAMMIT! lol

I know I know, is all about money.

Tired of the video card fight's. When i need a video card i just get the best bang for the buck. Last video card i got was $69.99 ATI HD 4650 1 Gig mem it was cheep and does what i want it to do. No more 200,300,400,500$ video cards for me. And i am for open standards.