I haven't read the whole article but a few things to remark:

* The prices for Nvidia GPUs are insane. For that money you can have an extremely good PC with a good non Nvidia GPU.

* The physical GPU sizes are massive, even letting the card rest on a horizontal motherboard looks like scary.

* Nvidia has still issues with melting cables? I've heard about those some years ago and thought it was a solved problem.

* Proprietary frameworks like CUDA and others are going to fall at some point, is just a matter of time.

Looks as if Nvidia at the moment is only looking at the AI market (which as a personal belief has to burst at some point) and simply does not care the non GPU AI market at all.

I remember many many years ago when I was a teenager and 3dfx was the dominant graphics card manufacturer that John Carmack profethically in a gaming computer magazine (the article was about Quake I) predicted that the future wasn't going to be 3dfx and Glide. Some years passed by and effectively 3dfx was gone.

Perhaps is just the beginning of the same story that happened with 3dfx. I think AMD and Intel have a huge opportunity to balance the market and bring Nvidia down, both in the AI and gaming space.

I have only heard excellent things about Intel's ARC GPUs in other HNs threads and if I need to build a new desktop PC from scratch there's no way to pay for the prices that Nvidia is pushing to the market, I'll definitely look at Intel or AMD.

The article complains about issues with consumer GPUs but those are nowadays relegated to being merely a side hobby project of Nvidia, whose core business is enterprise AI chips. Anyway Nvidia still has no significant competition from AMD on either front so they are still getting away with this.

Deceptive marketing aside, it's true that it's sad that we can't get 4K 60 Hz with ray tracing with current hardware without some kind of AI denoising and upscaling, but ray tracing is really just _profoundly_ hard so I can't really blame anyone for not having figured out how to put it in a consumer pc yet. There's a reason why pixar movies need huge render farms that take lots of time per frame. We would probably sooner get gaussian splatting and real time diffusion models in games than nice full resolution ray tracing tbh.

> The competing open standard is FreeSync, spearheaded by AMD. Since 2019, NVIDIA also supports FreeSync, but under their “G-Sync Compatible” branding. Personally, I wouldn’t bother with G-Sync when a competing, open standard exists and differences are negligible[4].

Open is good, but the open standard itself is not enough. You need some kind of testing/certification, which is built in to the G-Sync process. AMD does have a FreeSync certification program now which is good.

If you rely on just the standard, some manufacturers get really lazy. One of my screens technically supports FreeSync but I turned it off day one because it has a narrow range and flickers very badly.

Aks. "Every beef anyone has ever had with Nvidia in one outrage friendly article."

If you want to hate on Nvidia, there'll be something for you in there.

An entire section on 12vhpwr connectors, with no mention of 12V-2x6.

A lot of "OMG Monopoly" and "why won't people buy AMD" without considering that maybe ... AMD cards are not considered by the general public to be as good _where it counts_. (Like benefit per Watt, aka heat.) Maybe it's all perception, but then AMD should work on that perception. If you want the cooler CPU/GPU, perception is that that's Intel/Nvidia. That's reason enough for me, and many others.

Availability isn't great, I'll admit that, if you don't want to settle for a 5060.

If you are a gamer, you are no longer NVIDIA's most important customer.

NVidia won?

Not for me. I prefer Intel offerings. Open and Linux friendly.

I even hope they would release the next gen Risc-V boards with Intel Graphics.

Because they won't sell you an in-demand high-end GPU for cheap? Well TS

It’s reasonable to argue that NVIDIA has a de facto monopoly in the field of GPU-accelerated compute, especially due to CUDA (Compute Unified Device Architecture). While not a legal monopoly in the strict antitrust sense (yet), in practice, NVIDIA's control over the GPU compute ecosystem — particularly in AI, HPC, and increasingly in professional content creation — is extraordinarily dominant.

With the rise of LLM training, Nvidia’s main revenue stream switched to datacenter gpus (>10x gaming revenue). I wonder whether this have affected the quality of these consumer cards, including both their design and product processes:

https://stockanalysis.com/stocks/nvda/metrics/revenue-by-seg...

This was an efficient, well written, TKO.