Graphics card premiums overprice OpenGL

WHEN COMPARING a given Nvidia Quadro versus its GeForce counterpart, or an ATI FireGL vs an equivalent Radeon, we can't help wondering if all the extra driver validation and software certification support is really worth triple or quadruple the pricing of essentially the same card with the OpenGL functionality unlocked and DeviceID essentially being the only difference.

Yes, it does cost a lot of $$$ to maintain a certification for high-end software like Pro/Engineer or 3DStudio Max - and when you have 30 such apps on the list, the driver has to be more expensive then usual. Without those certifications, the users who paid many thousand quid for the software licence paper, might not be able to get full support from their application vendors.

However, why cripple the OpenGL functionality in the first place? After all, what if we just want to use OpenGL games or generic OpenGL VR viewers at highest possible performance, without all the certified driver 'benefits' which may be plain useless in this case?

One amswer could be to let all the chips really be the same, without the annoying OpenGL crippling. For the high-end users who really need those application certifications and extra support in the driver, well Nvidia and ATI can force them to buy a specific numbered, serialized, "must register" software licence for a "certification-enriched" driver with dedicated support - that will, despite costing few hundred $$$ apiece, still be a small portion of the humongous software application price.

After all, most of those hack jobs converting GeForce into Quadro, or Radeon into FireGL, focus all the while not on using the "certified application support", but simply getting back the GPU's original OpenGL performance that was disabled in the first place.

Now, who will do it first? Nvidia? Not a chance! It feels very comfortable shearing the user base with the currently rather distatesful Quadro pricing, and after all, its "professional" line is well updated, with Quadro 4500 essentially a slower version of GF7800 GTX512. Of course, if you work with IBM, HP or Dell, you'll notice that the OEM Quadro pricing that the big guns pay is way lower, in fact very close to the similar GeForce pricing - so, where have all the driver costs gone then? Simple - the "individual end user buyer" needs his wool sheared for that.

What about ATI, whose Radeon: FireGL parity seems to be long lost? After all, there is no sign of a FireGL version of, say, X1800XT.

Well, ATI may - and should do exactly what I mentioned, to get back its OpenGL workstation lead quickly. Simply, ensure that at least the highest-end Radeon cards at a time (start with say X1800XT PE or its R580 successor) are fully OpenGL enabled, without castrating any functionality. But, the professional application-certified, dedicated support "Catalyst Pro" version for the cards would come as an extra at a suitable price for those who really require it.

The benefits? How about, for a start, instant price performance wins in all OpenGL benchmarks across the board, starting with SPEC ViewPerf, of course (performance vs GeForce, price/performance and possibly pure performance vs Quadro)? Followed by greater preference by system vendors to include the card in both game and workstation configurations? Now, the top gaming machine (where the game is played) and top workstation system (where such game was designed) can be truly identical, down to the last part number if need be - both with uncompromised performance in both DirectX and OpenGL, all the way.

ATI would then get an instant major marker share boost and, riding on their long-known polygon performance lead important for usual solid model visualisation (even X850XT had an advantage there over the first 7800GTX), they may just have a chance to snatch the "pro" leadership. Nvidia would have no choice but to follow - sooner or, hehe, much sooner.

Finally, Linux OpenGL can fully take off then, unrestrained by crippled mainstream chips or the suspected DirectX layer shenanigans on the upcoming Windows Vista. A new breed of apps and games could use OpenGL on Linux as a base for incredible yet reliable and affordable real-time 3D performance for the open source world - OK, not exactly a wish of the US corporate/government gang.

And well, those ritzy users who really need that Extremely Expensive application certification support to please the apps vendors - which always try to blame the problems on something rather than their own buggy app - they can always pay for it separately, can't they?

So, ATI, what are you doing about it? The new chips are coming soon, and a good chance with them. Canadian winters are cold, we all know, but that's no excuse to sit back and think slowly - and no, this is not a paid ATI story, dearest readers. µ