Valve Working On Explicit Sync Support For "NVK" NVIDIA Vulkan Driver

[tenchrio]

I'd say its 100% based on Nintendo and their choices.
Their latest choice was to partner with nvidia, and that kept them competitive through 2 generations of offerings from Sony and Microsoft, absolutely demolishing the PS4.

Except that the Switch was released in 2017 and the PS4 and X1 in 2013, it literally entered production later so of course Microsoft and Sony already have a new console ready, which is ignoring the WiiU Nintendo launched in 2012 which had similar performance compared to the Switch (a lot of Switch games are ports from the WiiU running at the same resolution and FPS) but had incredibly bad marketing and a weak line up.

Not to mention that again you are saying this is related to the performance when quite literally the PS4 and Xbox one are graphically stronger and Nvidia still failed with their own tablet lineup running those chips, so again how come Nvidia couldn't keep their own tablet line afloat (let alone that most people even heard of it) and only became a success when Nintendo turned it into a console? It's a rhetorical question, the answer is that Nintendo made the hardware sell-able using their software.

And demolish? The PS4 outsold the Wii, it has an estimated 117 million sales which might be less than the Nintendo switch's 139 million but demolish? My guy, the Xbox one got demolished with its weaker 57.9 million sales but the difference between the PS4 and Nintendo Switch is less than half of that. Don't get me wrong the Switch is a great console with a fun niche but if it didn't have Nintendo written on it, it would have joined the rest of the Shield Tablets in the "Obscure hardware" category.

Which only exist successfully because Nintendo's developer kit is the best, vast majority of that is written by Nvidia.
AMDs developer kit is at least as buggy for consoles as it is for PC, with Sony and Microsoft having to do most of the work.

So uhm, source? Like any actual proof to back that up?

[mSparks]

The PS4 outsold the Wii,

Lol, that sounds a lot like an admission that just being nintendo doesnt automagically create a best selling gaming device.

So uhm, source?

Anyone who has ever used a nvidia developer kit, shouldnt be that hard to find another one.

[bhptitotoss]

Lol, that sounds a lot like an admission that just being nintendo doesnt automagically create a best selling gaming device.



Anyone who has ever used a nvidia developer kit, shouldnt be that hard to find another one.

Can vouch that NVIDIA kits are excellent.

[tenchrio]

Lol, that sounds a lot like an admission that just being nintendo doesnt automagically create a best selling gaming device.

Lol, what? The Wii was still the best selling console of its own generation (7th gen), it just so happened that the PS4 a generation later managed to outsell it while the Switch outsold the PS4 in turn, you know in the same generation, the 8th generation. It was supposed to be an indication of how successful the previous generation of consoles were as a whole and how the PS4 had some pretty solid sales numbers of its own, but apparently I need to really spell everything out for you (doubt it works since you only ever quote less than 25% of the post).

Here is a kicker, the Switch is not Nintendo's best selling console. The DS is with 154.02 million units sold and once again it did not run Nvidia hardware. Not to mention that if you were to combine the PS4 and X1 sales as AMD hardware is present in both than one could easily come to the conclusion that AMD sold more silicon for the consoles than Nvidia did. 117 million + 57 million = 174 million which is greater than 139 million. Hell if we are counting the PS5 and Xbox Series X we get an additional 56 million and 28 million, respectively, of consoles sporting AMD hardware making the total 258 million (by your definition AMD silicon sales for console demolish Nvidia's).
It is fair game, as all of it is AMD silicon. If the Switch's sales aren't Nintendo's doing (which they clearly are) then neither are the PS4/PS5 Sony's or the X1/XSX Microsoft's.

Anyone who has ever used a nvidia developer kit, shouldnt be that hard to find another one.

So you are making shit up as you go. You even call it an Nvidia developer kit instead of a Nintendo Switch developer kit which is what it is (you had it right the first time) and how you would find one if you tried searching for it. You also still have a hard time admitting Nvidia tried to enter the market on their own and failed.

[ssokolow]

Lol, that sounds a lot like an admission that just being nintendo doesnt automagically create a best selling gaming device.

They don't... but, among other things, the Switch was successful because it wasn't just a weak TV console, it was also respectable handheld console.

[mSparks]

could easily come to the conclusion that AMD sold more silicon for the consoles than Nvidia did

And you should.

Same as you should count android devices as linux when looking at OS market share.

But none of them actually started competing with the Maxwell 2.0 architecture, launched in 2015, until 6 months ago or so.

Ho Ra AMD finally has devices out people want more than decade old nvidia, give the kid a medal.

How long do you think that lasts? 18 months at most by my reckoning.

So you are making shit up as you go. You even call it an Nvidia developer kit instead of a Nintendo Switch developer kit which is what it is

The games for the switch all relied on early nvidia vulkan extensions.

Like sure, lots of those extensions became standards and came to AMD several years later, but the meat and veg of the nintendo sdk was and is the nvidia tegra sdk, written by nvidia, not nintendo. nintendo "just" slapped a screen, pads, a nice box and their logo around it, groundbreaking by AMD standards sure, but not the source of the switches success.

Of course, I'm pretty it also helped nintendos bottom line that they could sell the switch at a profit from day 1. like, a lot

https://www.gamesradar.com/platforms/nintendo-switch/nintendos-switch-era-profit-hasnt-just-surpassed-the-wii-and-ds-generation-its-beaten-the-entirety-of-the-publishers-previous-35-years-in-video-games/

not sure only being able to sell devices at a loss counts as competing.

[tenchrio]

And you should.

Same as you should count android devices as linux when looking at OS market share.

But none of them actually started competing with the Maxwell 2.0 architecture, launched in 2015, until 6 months ago or so.

Ho Ra AMD finally has devices out people want more than decade old nvidia, give the kid a medal.

But the PS4 and X1 were released in 2013.... I already told you this... and combined they already outsell the Switch, they always had, when the Switch launched it wasn't even the best selling console of that year, in 2017, the Switch sold 13 million in 2017 but the PS4 sold 19 million.
Screenshot from 2024-05-12 12-55-45.png
It's almost as if the Switch having an increase in more and more games, be it ports from the WiiU or new brand new titles of popular franchises like Pokemon and Mario led to its success (Not almost, it just is). And 2018 was no different, the Switch sold 16 million but the PS4 sold 18 million. In 2019 things finally changed but well no duh Pokemon Sword and Shield, a brand new main line game, released and Pokemon is the highest grossing media franchise, add in other new games that year for Luigi's Mansion, Fire Emblem, Dragon Quest and a Legend Of Zelda remake and you have a pretty strong line up to get people to buy the console. If you were correct (which you aren't) the Switch should have been outselling the PS4 in its first 2 years due to its "hardware" but it didn't until the software made it enticing enough for more customers to care.

Its biggest sales also came during the pandemic, you know when all those kids weren't allowed to go outside so mom and dad had to buy a console preferably the most kid friendly one (fun fact, it still could not break the highest sold console in a single year which was set by the Nintendo DS, selling 29 million in both 2007 and 2008, the Switch wasn't far off in with 28 million in 2020 but it declined back down immediately afterwards).

The Switch was competing with hardware from 2013 with hardware from 2015 and if we go by your rules and combine the total sales of the X1 and PS4, it lost to 2 years older hardware. Not to mention that for 2023 (so sales only that year) the PS5 has the highest sales numbers with 21 million and from 2020 to 2022 it had supply issues and was constantly sold out.

The games for the switch all relied on early nvidia vulkan extensions.

Again how about an actual source kid instead of your playground rumors.
Considering games like Breath of the Wild were the launch title which was launched on the WiiU simultaneously I doubt they are relying on "nvidia vulkan extensions".
And actual sources indicate it uses Vulkan but also OpenGL4.5 and OpenGL ES 3.2, no word though about "The games for the switch all relied on early Nvidia Vulkan extensions", looks like plain old Vulkan conformance to me. Not to mention that its best selling title; Mario Kart 8 Deluxe, is a WiiU port (Breath of the Wild even coming in 4th).

And how would this even matter when again, Nvidia couldn't sell the same hardware under their own name XD

Like sure, lots of those extensions became standards and came to AMD several years later, but the meat and veg of the nintendo sdk was and is the nvidia tegra sdk, written by nvidia, not nintendo. nintendo "just" slapped a screen, pads, a nice box and their logo around it, groundbreaking by AMD standards sure, but not the source of the switches success.

Nintendo actually still made the OS itself, but yes all it took for that hardware to be successful is for Nintendo to slap their logo and software on it as again Nvidia made tablets with these chips before, they even have a product line with Tegra X1 chips, so no lol they aren't successful due to the hardware or else Nvidia's product line wouldn't have been canned. How hard is it for you to get Nvidia tried to use the chips themselves and failed XD

The hardware plays a part in the success but you are grossly overestimating the role Nvidia played in it (since for the millionth time, they couldn't sell the hardware themselves when they tried lol, if the hardware is that good how come you never brought up the Shield Tablets?).

Of course, I'm pretty it also helped nintendos bottom line that they could sell the switch at a profit from day 1. like, a lot

https://www.gamesradar.com/platforms/nintendo-switch/nintendos-switch-era-profit-hasnt-just-surpassed-the-wii-and-ds-generation-its-beaten-the-entirety-of-the-publishers-previous-35-years-in-video-games/

not sure only being able to sell devices at a loss counts as competing.

Holy shit it is amazing how wrong you can be even with a source. Nothing in that article is indicating that Nintendo wasn't selling their consoles for a profit just that the profits from the Switch era were greater compared to before. And that is a keyword there, Switch era, this is including the Switch's Software sales which Nintendo doesn't split as a separate sales figure in its financial statement but we do know that the Nintendo switch has the most software sales of any Nintendo console so far, the DS sold more hardware but had 948 million software sales, the Switch has 1.2 Billion, not to mention that these days Nintendo also releases mobile games for extra profit, something that wasn't the case until 2015. And if you bothered to actually read the article (I know lots of words aren't your area of comfort) you would notice that Nintendo was turning a profit every year except 2012 and 2014.

[qarium]

But the PS4 and X1 were released in 2013.... I already told you this... and combined they already outsell the Switch, they always had, when the Switch launched it wasn't even the best selling console of that year, in 2017, the Switch sold 13 million in 2017 but the PS4 sold 19 million.
Screenshot from 2024-05-12 12-55-45.png
It's almost as if the Switch having an increase in more and more games, be it ports from the WiiU or new brand new titles of popular franchises like Pokemon and Mario led to its success (Not almost, it just is). And 2018 was no different, the Switch sold 16 million but the PS4 sold 18 million. In 2019 things finally changed but well no duh Pokemon Sword and Shield, a brand new main line game, released and Pokemon is the highest grossing media franchise, add in other new games that year for Luigi's Mansion, Fire Emblem, Dragon Quest and a Legend Of Zelda remake and you have a pretty strong line up to get people to buy the console. If you were correct (which you aren't) the Switch should have been outselling the PS4 in its first 2 years due to its "hardware" but it didn't until the software made it enticing enough for more customers to care.
Its biggest sales also came during the pandemic, you know when all those kids weren't allowed to go outside so mom and dad had to buy a console preferably the most kid friendly one (fun fact, it still could not break the highest sold console in a single year which was set by the Nintendo DS, selling 29 million in both 2007 and 2008, the Switch wasn't far off in with 28 million in 2020 but it declined back down immediately afterwards).
The Switch was competing with hardware from 2013 with hardware from 2015 and if we go by your rules and combine the total sales of the X1 and PS4, it lost to 2 years older hardware. Not to mention that for 2023 (so sales only that year) the PS5 has the highest sales numbers with 21 million and from 2020 to 2022 it had supply issues and was constantly sold out.
Again how about an actual source kid instead of your playground rumors.
Considering games like Breath of the Wild were the launch title which was launched on the WiiU simultaneously I doubt they are relying on "nvidia vulkan extensions".
And actual sources indicate it uses Vulkan but also OpenGL4.5 and OpenGL ES 3.2, no word though about "The games for the switch all relied on early Nvidia Vulkan extensions", looks like plain old Vulkan conformance to me. Not to mention that its best selling title; Mario Kart 8 Deluxe, is a WiiU port (Breath of the Wild even coming in 4th).
And how would this even matter when again, Nvidia couldn't sell the same hardware under their own name XD
Nintendo actually still made the OS itself, but yes all it took for that hardware to be successful is for Nintendo to slap their logo and software on it as again Nvidia made tablets with these chips before, they even have a product line with Tegra X1 chips, so no lol they aren't successful due to the hardware or else Nvidia's product line wouldn't have been canned. How hard is it for you to get Nvidia tried to use the chips themselves and failed XD
The hardware plays a part in the success but you are grossly overestimating the role Nvidia played in it (since for the millionth time, they couldn't sell the hardware themselves when they tried lol, if the hardware is that good how come you never brought up the Shield Tablets?).
Holy shit it is amazing how wrong you can be even with a source. Nothing in that article is indicating that Nintendo wasn't selling their consoles for a profit just that the profits from the Switch era were greater compared to before. And that is a keyword there, Switch era, this is including the Switch's Software sales which Nintendo doesn't split as a separate sales figure in its financial statement but we do know that the Nintendo switch has the most software sales of any Nintendo console so far, the DS sold more hardware but had 948 million software sales, the Switch has 1.2 Billion, not to mention that these days Nintendo also releases mobile games for extra profit, something that wasn't the case until 2015. And if you bothered to actually read the article (I know lots of words aren't your area of comfort) you would notice that Nintendo was turning a profit every year except 2012 and 2014.

all his logic ends to this news:

https://www-heise-de.translate.goog/news/Mediatek-entwirft-angeblich-Notebook-Prozessor-mit-Nvidia-Technik-9716676.html?_x_tr_sl=de&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=de&_

in mSparks logic this will be the greatest success ever... Nvidia see so little money in this market that they will not do it themself

Mediatek just puts some cheap and slow ARM Cortex-X3 on the SOC and integrate a Nvidia GPU ...

Samsung did same with put in AMD RDNA2 gpu in a ARM SOC,,,

i am pretty sure this will not compete against a AMD Strix Halo SOC with ZEN5 cpu cores ... and valve will not make a steam deck with ARM cpu cores...

there are only 2 reasons why nvidia gives GPU IP to Mediatek first they fear they lose marketshare in this field and second they see so little money in this field that they do not want to do it themself.

[mSparks]

And actual sources

Ahhhh

gotcha.
This is what winning looks like in your world

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=oIpc8VZ3Bnw&pp=ygUOeGJveCBpbnRlcnZpZXc%3D

everything is clear now. Yes AMDGPU has been doing a lot of that winning too. nvidia not so much, they've been more of the oldschool definition of winning

[tenchrio]

all his logic ends to this news:

https://www-heise-de.translate.goog/news/Mediatek-entwirft-angeblich-Notebook-Prozessor-mit-Nvidia-Technik-9716676.html?_x_tr_sl=de&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=de&_

in mSparks logic this will be the greatest success ever... Nvidia see so little money in this market that they will not do it themself

Mediatek just puts some cheap and slow ARM Cortex-X3 on the SOC and integrate a Nvidia GPU ...

Samsung did same with put in AMD RDNA2 gpu in a ARM SOC,,,

i am pretty sure this will not compete against a AMD Strix Halo SOC with ZEN5 cpu cores ... and valve will not make a steam deck with ARM cpu cores...

there are only 2 reasons why nvidia gives GPU IP to Mediatek first they fear they lose marketshare in this field and second they see so little money in this field that they do not want to do it themself.

Seems like sparks also started having a stroke and just posted a random Xbox video with no mention of Nvidia or AMD and by extension no relevance so I will ignore that troll for now (not to mention the weird and out of context tangent about "winning" he is going on about, my guy should go touch grass).

I remember when Samsung announced that soc (Exynos 2200) and was quite excited to see how it turns out as Exynos was always seen as the weaker chip in Samsung phones. Samsung releasing their S22 Ultra with both Exynos 2200 and Snapdragon 8 Gen 1 variants made for a perfect comparison. From those tests it seemed like the Adreno 730 GPU inside of the Snapdragon 8 Gen 1 had better performance, but it throttled way faster in the S22 Ultra (so the Exynos 2200 might have less peak performance but maintains it performance for far longer taking ~47 minutes before it falls to the same performance as the Snapdragon does in GPU benchmarks due to throttling).

However the gaming phone in those benchmarks (RedMagic 7) manages to score way better while also using the same Snapdragon 8 Gen 1 chip and doesn't have the throttling issue the S22 Ultra Snapdragon variant has, probably due to the fact it has an internal fan showing sometimes there are simple solutions to gain more performance (but I doubt Samsung will put a fan in their phone, if only for aesthetic reasons). So yeah the Exynos 2200 was a bit disappointing.

Mediatek chips have had bad GPU performance for a while (not to mention higher power draw). And their CPU advantage didn't last long despite their attempt to make a flagship chip (not to mention I owned 1 mediatek phone and now avoid it like the plague). So it makes sense they would team up with Nvidia to try and mitigate that shortcoming if even for a short time.

As for a Steam Deck with ARM, I don't know. There are translation layers for X86 like Fex-emu that have managed to get games like God Of War 2018 and Hades running on ARM chips on Linux so it's not impossible. But it does add a layer of extra complexity (and the performance in those videos isn't always perfect). Most likely the Steam Deck 2 will be X86 but with AMD even potentially looking at making ARM chips and the Snapdragon Elite X doing surprisingly well in tests (and Microsoft trying once again, I actually forget that one of the earlier failed Nvidia Tegra devices was the Microsoft Surface RT) the chance for an ARM Steamdeck ever existing can be considered non zero (unlikely but not necessarily impossible).

Strix Point Halo looks incredibly interesting (40CU igpu, over double the gpu cores we usually get in an APU) but I doubt with the TDP leaks (55W-125W) I have seen that it would be used for small size SOC like the steam deck (still this APU would have more CUs than the RX 7600, the performance it will boast as an igpu will be the biggest jump we have ever seen for igpus). Strix Point (non Halo) is also nothing to scoff at it has the low tdp range for low powered mobile SOC (15w-45w) and is confirmed to run with 16CUs which is already higher than the 12 or 11 setup we usually get/see and it will be interesting to see how RDNA 3+ will compare to RDNA3, the Steam deck by comparison has only 8 RDNA2 CUs (both Aerith and Sephiroth socs) so if a Steam Deck 2 were to arrive with Strix Point it would still have a heck of a performance boost with potentially equal power draw/battery life.