"nVidia activates a supercomputer in your PC..."

On Mon, 19 Feb 2007 20:30:08 +0000, Shawk
wrote:

John Lewis wrote:
See:-

http://www.tgdaily.com/2007/02/16/nvidia_cuda/


"CUDA may help to accelerate seismic model applications, financial model
processing as well as fluid dynamics. He also imagines that graphics
cards could simulate neuron cells, the behavior of cellphone waves and
enable breakthroughs in the medical field: For example, the technology
could pave the way to real-time x-rays, assisting doctors in what may
soon be knows as 3D surgery"


...wot? No cure for Cancer?

"*estimated* to achieve..."

"mainstream applications *aren't quite ready* to take advantage"

"CUDA *may* help accelerate..."

"he also *imagines* that graphics cards *could*..."

"still some *hurdles to overcome*..."

"This *limitation* is also *present* in NVidia's recently unveiled
teraflop processor *project*"


Surely you mean Intel's teraflop processor project...


Hmm.... almost definite then John.

We shall see. Not that I am in any hurry to update my rig.

Plans call for a new PC ~ Fall 2007. In time for competitive prices
on the following:- Quad-Core, Dx10-capable cards (with drivers that
work on both DX9 and Vista/Dx10), dual/quad-core motherboards
Gices some time to see how physics-processing and AI-processing
solutions will mesh with CPU and GPU technology. Of course, the Ageia
PPU is dead-duck. Time also to see maturity the shift to exclusively-
motherboard audio , with digitally-streamed output(s) of course. No
hope of decent analog s/n on a modern high-end motherboard with
hundred of amps of peak-spike ground current. Also enough time to
ensure that the a/v hardware is fully "DRM-capable".....grrrrrr.. The
battles over DRM this year are going to be long and bloody... at least
in the US, where the courts refused to follow the precedence of the
cassette and video-tape copyright wars of the 70's and 80's with
regard to private fair-use.

John Lewis

John Lewis wrote:

"This *limitation* is also *present* in NVidia's recently unveiled
teraflop processor *project*"


Surely you mean Intel's teraflop processor project...


Whoops - I do indeed


Hmm.... almost definite then John.

We shall see.


Oh... erm.. good. Your post came across like the guarantee of the
arrival of the new messiah ;-)


Not that I am in any hurry to update my rig.

Plans call for a new PC ~ Fall 2007. In time for competitive prices
on the following:- Quad-Core, Dx10-capable cards (with drivers that
work on both DX9 and Vista/Dx10), dual/quad-core motherboards
Gices some time to see how physics-processing and AI-processing
solutions will mesh with CPU and GPU technology. Of course, the Ageia
PPU is dead-duck. Time also to see maturity the shift to exclusively-
motherboard audio , with digitally-streamed output(s) of course. No
hope of decent analog s/n on a modern high-end motherboard with
hundred of amps of peak-spike ground current. Also enough time to
ensure that the a/v hardware is fully "DRM-capable".....grrrrrr.. The
battles over DRM this year are going to be long and bloody... at least
in the US, where the courts refused to follow the precedence of the
cassette and video-tape copyright wars of the 70's and 80's with
regard to private fair-use.


Problem being of course that in Fall 2007 there'll likely be
announcements that will promise to make the rig you planned obsolete...
never a good time but I'm with you on waiting on DX10 etc. Also
interested to see how the whole soundcard/Vista issue raised recently in
here (I've forgotten by who) will pan out. Around Autumn (I'm British)
I'll also be looking to get a new mobo, DX10 card and maybe Vista. I'll
be keeping the existing Core 2 Duo E6600 for a while.

On DRM... we'll be OK... Jobs is on the job..

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/6353889.stm

On Tue, 20 Feb 2007 16:50:18 +0000, Shawk
wrote:

John Lewis wrote:

"This *limitation* is also *present* in NVidia's recently unveiled
teraflop processor *project*"


Surely you mean Intel's teraflop processor project...


Whoops - I do indeed


Hmm.... almost definite then John.

We shall see.


Oh... erm.. good. Your post came across like the guarantee of the
arrival of the new messiah ;-)


Not that I am in any hurry to update my rig.

Plans call for a new PC ~ Fall 2007. In time for competitive prices
on the following:- Quad-Core, Dx10-capable cards (with drivers that
work on both DX9 and Vista/Dx10), dual/quad-core motherboards
Gices some time to see how physics-processing and AI-processing
solutions will mesh with CPU and GPU technology. Of course, the Ageia
PPU is dead-duck. Time also to see maturity the shift to exclusively-
motherboard audio , with digitally-streamed output(s) of course. No
hope of decent analog s/n on a modern high-end motherboard with
hundred of amps of peak-spike ground current. Also enough time to
ensure that the a/v hardware is fully "DRM-capable".....grrrrrr.. The
battles over DRM this year are going to be long and bloody... at least
in the US, where the courts refused to follow the precedence of the
cassette and video-tape copyright wars of the 70's and 80's with
regard to private fair-use.


Problem being of course that in Fall 2007 there'll likely be
announcements that will promise to make the rig you planned obsolete...
never a good time

Autumn ( Fall ) 2007: A price/performance/future-proof/wide-choice
combination sweet-point. Have not truly seen that since Autumn 2005.
The return of cut-throat pricing on medium/high-end CPUs and
graphics-cards: Intel vs AMD's K8L, both dual and quad-core; nVidia
vs AMD/ATi, Dx10. Also DDR2 memory will be fully main-stream by then
and even the high-end versions will under competitive price-pressures
from multiple quality vendors. CPU, graphics, memory -- the biggest
cost-levers in a high-performance PC.

John Lewis

but I'm with you on waiting on DX10 etc. Also
interested to see how the whole soundcard/Vista issue raised recently in
here (I've forgotten by who) will pan out. Around Autumn (I'm British)
I'll also be looking to get a new mobo, DX10 card and maybe Vista. I'll
be keeping the existing Core 2 Duo E6600 for a while.

On DRM... we'll be OK... Jobs is on the job..

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/6353889.stm

John Lewis wrote:


Autumn ( Fall ) 2007: A price/performance/future-proof/wide-choice
combination sweet-point. Have not truly seen that since Autumn 2005.
The return of cut-throat pricing on medium/high-end CPUs and
graphics-cards: Intel vs AMD's K8L, both dual and quad-core; nVidia
vs AMD/ATi, Dx10. Also DDR2 memory will be fully main-stream by then
and even the high-end versions will under competitive price-pressures
from multiple quality vendors. CPU, graphics, memory -- the biggest
cost-levers in a high-performance PC.

On a side note I see DDR2 has dropped substantially from the price I
paid for it back in October..... damn. Maybe good news for others though.

"Skybuck Flying" wrote in message
...

"John Lewis" wrote in message
...
See:-

http://www.tgdaily.com/2007/02/16/nvidia_cuda/

Please note the last paragraph of the article, specifically the last
two lines. Seems as if nvidia has something even more spectacular up
their graphics/computation sleeve for later this year. Might want to
consider holding off on that 8800 (or X2900) purchase for a while. The
DX10 and Dx9 drivers for both of these new architectures are going to
take a few more months to sort out anyway. Early adoption of first-gen
Dx10-architecture video cards is for the very rich, or very foolish,
or both... IM(ns)HO.

John Lewis

Thanks dude this is gonna be interesting =D

Bye,
Skybuck


You know, I read the article and the talk of CUDA and the 64-bit cards and
all of that hype.

But, for me who has always had Nvidia hardware, I am so disappointed at the
current state of affairs with their drivers, lack of SLI and Vista support,
how I can only think 64bit and teraflops! You've got to be joking. They
can't get 32-bit Vista and their own control panel useable. Current pieces
of Nvidia hardware tout themselves as Vista ready or some nonsense which
they obviously aren't. I find it unacceptable that a company like Nvidia who
knew of Vista several years before its release couldn't get it right for Jan
30th.

The drivers they have released since Vista seem to have solved some problems
and created others.

I have not been affected by the lack of workable drivers, SLI support, etc.,
because I have not purchased the computer I planned to buy. It's because of
this very issue.

All I can say, is that I don't appreciate corporate and intellectual
dishonesty.

I don't think I am bashing Nvidia unfairly, but I will make my decision
about future purchase of their products, by how they redeem themselves. I
could not find any place on the web that they have given a reasonable
explanation of why the current situation exists. Oh, I suppose the Microsoft
detractors can blame Microsoft, but on the other hand, Microsoft didn't
build the Nvidia architecture.

For me, I will hold on to my WinXP, GeForce 6800 computer, thank you very
much.

Now, I feel better. ;-)

D.

"DotNettie" wrote in message
...

"Skybuck Flying" wrote in message
...

"John Lewis" wrote in message
...
See:-

http://www.tgdaily.com/2007/02/16/nvidia_cuda/

Please note the last paragraph of the article, specifically the last
two lines. Seems as if nvidia has something even more spectacular up
their graphics/computation sleeve for later this year. Might want to
consider holding off on that 8800 (or X2900) purchase for a while.
The
DX10 and Dx9 drivers for both of these new architectures are going
to
take a few more months to sort out anyway. Early adoption of
first-gen
Dx10-architecture video cards is for the very rich, or very foolish,
or both... IM(ns)HO.

John Lewis

Thanks dude this is gonna be interesting =D

Bye,
Skybuck


You know, I read the article and the talk of CUDA and the 64-bit cards
and all of that hype.

But, for me who has always had Nvidia hardware, I am so disappointed
at the current state of affairs with their drivers, lack of SLI and
Vista support, how I can only think 64bit and teraflops! You've got to
be joking. They can't get 32-bit Vista and their own control panel
useable. Current pieces of Nvidia hardware tout themselves as Vista
ready or some nonsense which they obviously aren't. I find it
unacceptable that a company like Nvidia who knew of Vista several
years before its release couldn't get it right for Jan 30th.

The drivers they have released since Vista seem to have solved some
problems and created others.

I have not been affected by the lack of workable drivers, SLI support,
etc., because I have not purchased the computer I planned to buy. It's
because of this very issue.

All I can say, is that I don't appreciate corporate and intellectual
dishonesty.

I don't think I am bashing Nvidia unfairly, but I will make my
decision about future purchase of their products, by how they redeem
themselves. I could not find any place on the web that they have given
a reasonable explanation of why the current situation exists. Oh, I
suppose the Microsoft detractors can blame Microsoft, but on the other
hand, Microsoft didn't build the Nvidia architecture.

For me, I will hold on to my WinXP, GeForce 6800 computer, thank you
very much.

Now, I feel better. ;-)

D.

You can't only bash nVidia for this unreadiness in time for the retail
release of Vista. ATI/AMD, HP/Compaq, Hauppauge, Epson and others have
only beta drivers (if that much even!) out for a number of their
products. The least messy systems with this seem to be the retail off
the shelf computers with Vista preinstalled. Get it home, add your own
printer and/or scanner...sometimes. Seems to be like this with every
new version of Windows that comes out. This isn't new. It's just been
a while. It was like this when I got XP Pro and then XP Pro x64.
Best thing to do is see if the hardware you want to run really does have
solid Vista drivers already available.
McG.

"McG." wrote in message
...

You know, I read the article and the talk of CUDA and the 64-bit cards
and all of that hype.

But, for me who has always had Nvidia hardware, I am so disappointed at
the current state of affairs with their drivers, lack of SLI and Vista
support, how I can only think 64bit and teraflops! You've got to be
joking. They can't get 32-bit Vista and their own control panel useable.
Current pieces of Nvidia hardware tout themselves as Vista ready or some
nonsense which they obviously aren't. I find it unacceptable that a
company like Nvidia who knew of Vista several years before its release
couldn't get it right for Jan 30th.

The drivers they have released since Vista seem to have solved some
problems and created others.

I have not been affected by the lack of workable drivers, SLI support,
etc., because I have not purchased the computer I planned to buy. It's
because of this very issue.

All I can say, is that I don't appreciate corporate and intellectual
dishonesty.

I don't think I am bashing Nvidia unfairly, but I will make my decision
about future purchase of their products, by how they redeem themselves. I
could not find any place on the web that they have given a reasonable
explanation of why the current situation exists. Oh, I suppose the
Microsoft detractors can blame Microsoft, but on the other hand,
Microsoft didn't build the Nvidia architecture.

For me, I will hold on to my WinXP, GeForce 6800 computer, thank you very
much.

Now, I feel better. ;-)

D.

You can't only bash nVidia for this unreadiness in time for the retail
release of Vista. ATI/AMD, HP/Compaq, Hauppauge, Epson and others have
only beta drivers (if that much even!) out for a number of their products.
The least messy systems with this seem to be the retail off the shelf
computers with Vista preinstalled. Get it home, add your own printer
and/or scanner...sometimes. Seems to be like this with every new version
of Windows that comes out. This isn't new. It's just been a while. It
was like this when I got XP Pro and then XP Pro x64. Best thing to do is
see if the hardware you want to run really does have solid Vista drivers
already available.
McG.


I know that Nvidia is not the only one with issues, but it is the only one
that concerns me because I wanted a super-duper PC with GeF8's in SLI
running with the new OS.

I don't see as much ATI with the "in your face" behavior like Nvidia's. Or,
maybe I haven't looked for ATI stuff as much because I have always used
Nvidia stuff. I see that ATI is holding off on their DX-10 cards until the
end of next month, I think I read. It will be interesting to see how the
drivers for their cards work out.

I see that there are Nvidia WHQL certified drivers posted either late
yesterday or early today that still don't work properly

I had intended to buy a new custom built PC with the new OS installed, but
am holding off for the next several months to see what comes about from this
mess.

I too got XP Pro when it came out but I don't remember the video drivers
being that messed up. I got a PC with the Nvidia drivers installed and
updated them as I needed to with not a complaint from this PC. But it
doesn't seem to be to much to ask to write a reasonably stable driver for an
OS that they've known about for the last several years.

Anyhow, now I will be watching to see what happens over the next several
months and reading the Nvidia forums with interest. I wonder if anyone here
dropped a note to the Nvidia Quality Assurance board and got a response to
an inquiry......

I still hope that I will be able to buy with confidence.

D.

On Wed, 21 Feb 2007 06:56:10 -0500, "DotNettie"
wrote:


"Skybuck Flying" wrote in message
...

"John Lewis" wrote in message
...
See:-

http://www.tgdaily.com/2007/02/16/nvidia_cuda/

Please note the last paragraph of the article, specifically the last
two lines. Seems as if nvidia has something even more spectacular up
their graphics/computation sleeve for later this year. Might want to
consider holding off on that 8800 (or X2900) purchase for a while. The
DX10 and Dx9 drivers for both of these new architectures are going to
take a few more months to sort out anyway. Early adoption of first-gen
Dx10-architecture video cards is for the very rich, or very foolish,
or both... IM(ns)HO.

John Lewis

Thanks dude this is gonna be interesting =D

Bye,
Skybuck


You know, I read the article and the talk of CUDA and the 64-bit cards and
all of that hype.

But, for me who has always had Nvidia hardware, I am so disappointed at the
current state of affairs with their drivers, lack of SLI and Vista support,
how I can only think 64bit and teraflops! You've got to be joking. They
can't get 32-bit Vista and their own control panel useable. Current pieces
of Nvidia hardware tout themselves as Vista ready or some nonsense which
they obviously aren't. I find it unacceptable that a company like Nvidia who
knew of Vista several years before its release couldn't get it right for Jan
30th.

The drivers they have released since Vista seem to have solved some problems
and created others.

I have not been affected by the lack of workable drivers, SLI support, etc.,
because I have not purchased the computer I planned to buy. It's because of
this very issue.

All I can say, is that I don't appreciate corporate and intellectual
dishonesty.

I don't think I am bashing Nvidia unfairly, but I will make my decision
about future purchase of their products, by how they redeem themselves. I
could not find any place on the web that they have given a reasonable
explanation of why the current situation exists. Oh, I suppose the Microsoft
detractors can blame Microsoft, but on the other hand, Microsoft didn't
build the Nvidia architecture.

For me, I will hold on to my WinXP, GeForce 6800 computer, thank you very
much.

Now, I feel better. ;-)

D.




The problem is not nVidia's. The root problem is Microsoft's abysmal
support of 3rd-party developers. Survey the state of utilities,
3rd-party applications and add-in hardware across the PC industry with
regard to their Vista readiness. Atrocious. Take a look at Adobe or
Matrox for example. Common denominator --- Microsoft. Usable build of
Vista were very late and the documentation was very poor.

And the high-end graphics-card vendors have an additional layer of
problems since they also have to interface with a brand-new API...
called DX10/SM4.x, but a complete break in its graphics handling from
anything that has gone before, requiring ground-up design of
compatible HARDWARE, with the drivers for that brand-new
hardware-architecture not only having to support Dx10 but also fully
support Dx9 for complete current (and legacy) software compatibility.
Besides providing Vista-compatible drivers for current Dx9/SM3
hardware. Also, Microsoft saw fit to support OpenGL in Vista only
with an inefficicent DirectX wrapper.... which leaves the
graphics-card vendors to fill this hole too.

John Lewis

"John Lewis" wrote in message
...

The problem is not nVidia's. The root problem is Microsoft's abysmal
support of 3rd-party developers. Survey the state of utilities,
3rd-party applications and add-in hardware across the PC industry with
regard to their Vista readiness. Atrocious. Take a look at Adobe or
Matrox for example. Common denominator --- Microsoft. Usable build of
Vista were very late and the documentation was very poor.

And the high-end graphics-card vendors have an additional layer of
problems since they also have to interface with a brand-new API...
called DX10/SM4.x, but a complete break in its graphics handling from
anything that has gone before, requiring ground-up design of
compatible HARDWARE, with the drivers for that brand-new
hardware-architecture not only having to support Dx10 but also fully
support Dx9 for complete current (and legacy) software compatibility.
Besides providing Vista-compatible drivers for current Dx9/SM3
hardware. Also, Microsoft saw fit to support OpenGL in Vista only
with an inefficicent DirectX wrapper.... which leaves the
graphics-card vendors to fill this hole too.

John Lewis

Thank you for your concise explanation of Microsoft's involvement in this
mess.

D.

On Wed, 21 Feb 2007 16:30:45 -0500, "DotNettie"
wrote:


"John Lewis" wrote in message
...

The problem is not nVidia's. The root problem is Microsoft's abysmal
support of 3rd-party developers. Survey the state of utilities,
3rd-party applications and add-in hardware across the PC industry with
regard to their Vista readiness. Atrocious. Take a look at Adobe or
Matrox for example. Common denominator --- Microsoft. Usable build of
Vista were very late and the documentation was very poor.

And the high-end graphics-card vendors have an additional layer of
problems since they also have to interface with a brand-new API...
called DX10/SM4.x, but a complete break in its graphics handling from
anything that has gone before, requiring ground-up design of
compatible HARDWARE, with the drivers for that brand-new
hardware-architecture not only having to support Dx10 but also fully
support Dx9 for complete current (and legacy) software compatibility.
Besides providing Vista-compatible drivers for current Dx9/SM3
hardware. Also, Microsoft saw fit to support OpenGL in Vista only
with an inefficicent DirectX wrapper.... which leaves the
graphics-card vendors to fill this hole too.

John Lewis

Thank you for your concise explanation of Microsoft's involvement in this
mess.


Thanks for your appreciation.

My purely personal estimate of fault distribution on Vista readiness:
80% Microsoft, 20% nVidia....

nVidia does have to bear part of the blame, as they could have
prepared their customer-base much better, such that people would be
publicly well-informed on the state of the drivers with a list of the
outstanding issues and a proposed schedule for resolution. Informed
purchase decisions would have come from that openness and much better
customer-relations.

John Lewis

D.