Slashdot Mirror


Nvidia Looks To Gag Journalists With Multi-Year Blanket NDAs (hardocp.com)

The German website Heise reports that Nvidia's new non-disclosure agreements (NDAs) last for five years and are more far reaching than product-specific information. HardOCP explains what NDAs are and shares an excerpt from Heise's report: First and foremost, I should tell you that NDAs in the tech world are nothing new, but those non-disclosure agreements usually are product-specific and date-specific. Say we agree to get a review sample of video card X. Many times we will get an NDA that is specific to releasing any information shared by card X's representative and a date when we can share that information with you, often referred to as the "embargo date."

[Here's the excerpt from Heise about Nvidia's new NDA]: "The NDA should apply to all information provided by Nvidia, so it did not refer to a specific product or information. There was also no concrete expiration date. It was also full of conditions that ran counter to journalistic principles. Our legal department clapped their hands over their heads as they read the document. In other words, journalists are allowed to write only what fits Nvidia in the junk. In doing so, Nvidia downgrades the independent press into a marketing tool."
There are several forums discussing Nvidia's new NDA. HardOCP has shared a copy of the NDA for you to read and make up your own mind.

126 comments

  1. Corporate Success! by viperidaenz · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Nvidia downgrades the independent press into a marketing tool.

    Nvidia will be the envy of all other companies.

    1. Re:Corporate Success! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nvidia? Who's that. I've never read about them in any trade rag.

    2. Re:Corporate Success! by blahplusplus · · Score: 2

      Nvidia downgrades the independent press into a marketing tool.

      Nvidia will be the envy of all other companies.

      The press has always been an arm of big business, this is nothing new.

      Education as ignorance

      https://chomsky.info/warfare02...

      Manufacturing consent (book)

      http://www.amazon.com/Manufact...

      Protectionism for the rich and big business by state intervention, radical market interference.

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

      Manufacturing consent:

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

      https://vimeo.com/39566117

      Testing theories of representative government

      https://scholar.princeton.edu/...

    3. Re:Corporate Success! by epine · · Score: 2

      I bookmarked one of those links, which was new to me.

      You seem to be implying that the situation is so horrible already that abandoning any and all pretense of institutional norms is a distinction without a difference.

      Not even close.

      Those pretences were accomplished at great cost, over many centuries.

      Politically, humans are still wearing animal skins. They might be full of lice and gnats, and washed but once a year (if ever), but even so, I wouldn't toss them onto the garbage heap, just yet.

    4. Re:Corporate Success! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "press has always been an arm of big business"
      Wrong. It is more accurate to say "government has always been an arm of big business". Our modern day press has rendered themselves irrelevant. Once a media source adopts a specific "editorial line" they really have made themselves the enemy of the people. They publish opinions not facts. The are adept at the bait and switch strategy where published content is never supported by the headlines. Someone could take a picture of Trump walking across the Potomac River and the headline would be "Trump can't swim!".

      And every major media conglomeration is owned by a wealthy few who spend their idle time backroom politicking and rubbing elbows with the rich and powerful.

    5. Re:Corporate Success! by blahplusplus · · Score: 1

      You seem to be implying that the situation is so horrible already that abandoning any and all pretense of institutional norms is a distinction without a difference.

      Not even close.

      Except I can tell you the facts and you won't reason to the right conclusion, your brain does not see reality as it is:

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

      Don't think the upper business class is at war with the bottom 90 of the population? See here, former national security advisor of the united states, calling people like you (average citizen) a menace...

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

      Quote from - Between Two Ages: America's Role in the Technetronic Era:

      https://www.amazon.com/Between...

      "The technetronic era involves the gradual appearance of a more controlled society. Such a society would be dominated by an elite, unrestrained by traditional values. Soon it will be possible to assert almost continuous surveillance over every citizen and maintain up-to-date complete files containing even the most personal information about the citizen. These files will be subject to instantaneous retrieval by the authorities."

      Books by Zbigniew Brezinski (former national security advisor of the US).

      The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy and Its Geostrategic Imperatives

      https://www.amazon.com/Grand-C...

    6. Re:Corporate Success! by blahplusplus · · Score: 1

      "press has always been an arm of big business"
      Wrong.

      The US government and big business are not seperate entities. You are historically illiterate and without a clue.

      https://youtu.be/CvZRsdHgxgA?t...

    7. Re:Corporate Success! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's rather Nvidia (or should I spell it "Invidia?), who can't stand anyone else having anyone else having any success, or being portrayed in any other way than the one they want.

      This is nothing new, in fact it's pretty much in line with their previous behaviour, it's just that they now feel they are in such a position that they can get away with even more.

    8. Re:Corporate Success! by sarawillson16 · · Score: 1

      Nvidia downgrades the independent press into a marketing tool.

      Nvidia will be the envy of all other companies.

      Nvidia If you are looking for Gag Journalist with multi-year experience then they almost have a good hand in Product specific Information. Yahoo Tech Support Number

    9. Re:Corporate Success! by mSparks43 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Pretty sure this ends up hurting nvidia more than helping them. Which is a shame because i quite like nvidia.

      If reporters cant report on their products, the only exposure they will get will be overwealmingly negative from normal people reporting problems.

      And at the same time forcing such an nda giving everyone the impression the news from nvidia is more bad than good. never mind I guess, should be another 10 years or so before i want a new gfx card, and who knows what will be on the market by then.

    10. Re:Corporate Success! by Cederic · · Score: 3, Funny

      Except I can tell you the facts and you won't reason to the right conclusion, your brain does not see reality as it is

      Look, I hate to break this to you but for you to be able to make connections that I can't even understand when you tell them to me, your level of intelligence must be so far beyond mine that frankly it's at a level which fewer than a hundred people of the planet have.

      I don't think you're in that very exclusive set, and that means you have no credibility.

    11. Re:Corporate Success! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      well thats exactly what envidia means in spanish: envy

    12. Re:Corporate Success! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      One can only hope it backfires, but it takes the press to have some backbone for it to happen.

      As for liking Nvidia, all I can say is "I've been along long enough, and read enough about their shenanigans to be too keen on them." If you want a pretty good recapitulation let me recommend this video. Fair warning, it's an hour long, and still not exhaustive...

    13. Re:Corporate Success! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Except I can tell you the facts and you won't reason to the right conclusion, your brain does not see reality as it is"

      which is the excuse that most people use when they are unable to break things down into a logical string of ideas in order to properly explain their thoughts. In other words: "i have created this reality from random data points and instead of trying to explain it to you i will feed you a bs line to hide my lack of understanding and faulty logical connections"

      Think about what you said, because logically by your argument how do you know that you are seeing reality as it really is? are you implying that you are super wicked smart? if you are why are you unable to break down the facts and logical conclusions into smaller pieces in order to help those not as mega awesome smart as you?

      You can post all of the links you want but their value as "facts" and "truth" is questionable as you cannot create a logical connection between any of them, you cant win anyone over to your argument by just posting links otherwise school exams would be nothing but quotes and references. The actual truth is that you cannot truthfully say what is going on in the minds of those with the power to change the world. Sure some of them might have opinions and plans that are detrimental to a majority of society for personal gain, but you cannot go on to claim that every one of them is like that, that they are all organized together and then go on to say that you cannot explain how you know this to be true because the logic would be beyond our minds. You doing so makes you sound like a church preacher or at the very least an extreme tinfoil hatter which absolutely kills any credibility you have. your argument (which may be true) is killed by the fact that you sound like a conspiracy theorist trying to link together data points with out any rational and logical connection.

    14. Re: Corporate Success! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      With the way the press treats some companies, can you really blame them?

    15. Re:Corporate Success! by blahplusplus · · Score: 1

      Think about what you said, because logically by your argument how do you know that you are seeing reality as it really is

      Logically it does since people who replied claimed that the press is NOT an arm of big business but yet the press IS a fucking corporation, that's retard level of perceptual breakdown of these peoples brains. It also proves they've never opened a history book in their life. When you or anyone replies to my post I can immediately spot how ignorant you are and whether you know any history at all or have even opened a history book.

      If corporations would do the below, what else might they do? But that might offend your political beliefs.

      "I helped make Mexico, especially Tampico, safe for American oil interests in 1914. I helped make Haiti and Cuba a decent place for the National City Bank boys to collect revenues in. I helped in the raping of half a dozen Central American republics for the benefits of Wall Street. The record of racketeering is long. I helped purify Nicaragua for the international banking house of Brown Brothers in 1909-1912. I brought light to the Dominican Republic for American sugar interests in 1916. In China I helped to see to it that Standard Oil went its way unmolested."[p. 10]

      "War is a racket. ...It is the only one in which the profits are reckoned in dollars and the losses in lives." [p. 23]

      "The general public shoulders the bill [for war]. This bill renders a horrible accounting. Newly placed gravestones. Mangled bodies. Shattered minds. Broken hearts and homes. Economic instability. Depression and all its attendant miseries. Back-breaking taxation for generations and generations." [p. 24]

      From war is a racket:

      http://www.amazon.com/War-Rack...

      On the corporate state"

      https://youtu.be/CvZRsdHgxgA?t...

  2. I'm missing something by farble1670 · · Score: 4, Informative

    You can still review and write articles about Nvidia products without signing the NDA. What's going on is that Nvidia is trading privileged access for control over the articles. Nvidia gives journalists the ability to make money from writing early to press, special access articles about Nvidia products in trade for control over the content.

    1. Re:I'm missing something by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      the issue is they are using this as their standard nda so press who used to do get early access and have their reviews ready for the expiration (because the first 24 hours count towards monetization) would have the hands tired post product release (like they wouldnt be able to say anything bad). This basically means no more insider scoops before it launchs because they would sacrafice their freedom post launch.

    2. Re:I'm missing something by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      If a journalist doesn't get early access, others will and they become irrelevant and don't make any money. "Making money" means "earning a living" as much as "bonus".

      it's either "sign this NDA" or "be irrelevant"

      That's the reality of the market forces. How you could miss this is beyond me - unless you work for NVidia.

    3. Re: I'm missing something by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The only reason day one access MIGHT matter is if the product in question will sell out after 24 hours. Otherwise, most people don't buy stuff the day it comes out. Not even on movies.

      Competitive pro game players who benefit from pre day one map knowledge are the other exception. But for 99.99999% of the world, it doesn't matter.

      Most of us don't pre order games. We don't buy a new car the day it comes out, or a new house the day it is built. Most of our stuff has sat on ships for months, warehouses for weeks and delivery trucks for days before sitting on porches or mail boxes for hours before we get to it.

      Sure, if it is fish i want to eat it within twenty four hours, if at all, but anything else can wait.

    4. Re:I'm missing something by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 2

      You can still review and write articles about Nvidia products without signing the NDA. What's going on is that Nvidia is trading privileged access for control over the articles. ...

      Or everyone could just stop writing anything about Nvidia and let them see how that goes.

      --
      It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
    5. Re:I'm missing something by vlad30 · · Score: 2

      Early access was important when publishing on paper required a lead time for printing now however they can do a unboxing, first impressions and indepth a week later monetizing all versions with ad impressions they just might have to buy the card on their own if they give unfavourable reviews

      --
      Your'e all thinking it, I just said it for you
    6. Re:I'm missing something by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      You can still review and write articles about Nvidia products without signing the NDA. What's going on is that Nvidia is trading privileged access for control over the articles. Nvidia gives journalists the ability to make money from writing early to press, special access articles about Nvidia products in trade for control over the content.

      Apple does the same thing, it's not so much in the order of signing an NDA but if you are pressed by them to alter the wording of things you don't like refusal means you fall out of favour and don't get access anymore. I don't like the practise either way but at least companies like nvidia are explicit about it rather than companies like apple merely suggesting "hey you probably shouldn't write that because we won't like it".

    7. Re: I'm missing something by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      No, the way that day one matters is if the review market sells out on day one.

      Specifically, if your review is not up on day one, sites like reddit and slash dot will not link to it. This massively impacts your revenue.

      Further, because no one is linking to you, your search rank falls, which means that you also donâ(TM)t get hits from google. Now youâ(TM)re in for double trouble on your revenue being hit.

    8. Re: I'm missing something by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you could talk out your ass, or go with actual facts.

      the facts are, when a product comes out people read reviews. the reviews that are available. people don't wait until they are ready to upgrade and then go out and read reviews. there is a long tail but most views are in the first day or so.

    9. Re: I'm missing something by viperidaenz · · Score: 5, Insightful

      To be fair, you can be a week late and slashdot will still post it as breaking news.

    10. Re: I'm missing something by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you're talking out of your ass. FALSE.

    11. Re:I'm missing something by meerling · · Score: 1

      Not "unfavourable reviews", but rather any review.
      If they sign that paper, they are enslaved to Nvidia and can only do a favorable review. That NDA is more of an Usurp your Independence Agreement.
      Nvidia deserves to get raked over the coals for this one

    12. Re: I'm missing something by murkwood7 · · Score: 1
      Not sure what to think about this:

      ... people don't wait until they are ready to upgrade and then go out and read reviews...

      I have far to much a life to be reading the reviews of every cool little gadget or other product on the day of release!

      Besides, with my luck I would read a review on the day of release, remember that review when I wanted to upgrade, then buy a P90! Which I did. I now read reviews when I'm ready to upgrade... This can still result in buying bad products, but at least I feel like I'm trying!

      --
      - X/Y -
    13. Re:I'm missing something by Archfeld · · Score: 1

      I disagree. Develop a reputation for writing fair and true reviews and people will flock to your side. We are all tired of sycophantic reviews that read as ads or rate a crappy product in a favorable light. Buy your own product and write a true review and 'they' will read.
        IDEA - Run a fund me for the price of a card, complete the review and give the card away in a lottery to one of the original funders.

      --
      errr....umm...*whooosh* *whoosh* Is this thing on ?
    14. Re: I'm missing something by hairyfeet · · Score: 1

      Bullshit. Linus Tech Talks, Jayztwocents, they are more than happy to slag the fuck out of a shit product and ya know what? People are MORE likely to watch them because they get the story without the BS so their reviews are worth the time to watch.

      Also if more than a few give Nvidia the Linus Torvalds Salute its not gonna do Nvidia any favors as AMD? Is THE hot shit right now. Don't believe me? Look at how many vids there are singing the praises of the Ryzen 2200g and 2400g, now that the miners aren't sucking them down like tic tacs the RX580, 570, and 560 are VERY competitive again, and of course we recently got the news the PS5 is gonna be running all AMD which means the console ports? Probably gonna run better on an AMD rig.

      With Nvidia not having come out with a new design in quite awhile and AMD already teasing the new GPUs? Yeah plenty for reviewers to talk about without getting the Nvidia chips until release. Remember if they are making enough ad revenue for day 1 to matter? They can probably afford to just buy it and have relationships with suppliers, I'm sure most reviewers won't have any issue getting their hands on the new cards without giving Nvidia a BJ.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    15. Re:I'm missing something by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If a journalist doesn't get early access, others will and they become irrelevant and don't make any money. "Making money" means "earning a living" as much as "bonus".

      it's either "sign this NDA" or "be irrelevant"

      That's the reality of the market forces. How you could miss this is beyond me - unless you work for NVidia.

      You're forgetting the readers. You know, the gamers, the hardware enthusiasts that actually buy Nvidia graphics cards and want an "honest" review by the journalists. Why the fuck would I pay a journalist or his website to read mere propaganda ? I can already do that for free. If I'm going to subscribe to a news website you'd bet I'd want critical review of the hardware.

    16. Re: I'm missing something by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, usually the reviews end up shitposted about on almost every site, regardless of the source site.
      All this will do is impact Nvidia and give a tiny increase in money to the ones quite happy to suck off their entire advertising department.
      The rest, for the most part, will still continue to use the sites they regularly use, except they will tend towards other parties for hardware simply due to sheer exposure.

    17. Re: I'm missing something by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      To be fair, you can be a year late and slashdot will still post it as breaking news.

      FTFY

    18. Re:I'm missing something by war4peace · · Score: 1

      We are all tired

      ...only for very small values of "all".
      Most people are sheep and adore shit reviews with little value, presented in primitive and colorful ways.

      Jayz2Cents' reviews are usually non-scientific, but fun to watch. He has 1.5M subscribers.
      GamersNexus' Steve writes scientific, objective, hard-worked and exact reviews. He has 274K subscribers.

      I'm subscribed to both, but for a true review Jayz2Cents is laughable while GamersNexus have all my attention. For wacky projects or watercooling stuff, Jayz2Cents is the one to go to.

      So, no, we are not "all" tired. Just a few of us with more than half a brain, aka "a small minority".

      --
      ...gis sdrawkcab (usually not responding to ACs; don't bother posting as AC)
    19. Re: I'm missing something by mandark1967 · · Score: 1

      "To be fair, you can be a week late and slashdot will still post it as breaking news. Twice."

      FTFY

      --
      Sig Follows: "Suppose you were an idiot. And suppose you were a member of Congress. But I repeat myself." -- Mark Twain
    20. Re: I'm missing something by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe you... but I don't read reviews of every product that comes out. That would be a waste of energy. I read reviews of products when I'm ready to buy one.

    21. Re: I'm missing something by postbigbang · · Score: 1

      And the AMD fawners are also in a reality distortion field.

      Remember that every Ryzen CPU has hideous unpatched PSP bugs in it. Yes, they make good GPUs, but when your CPU can have both hyperthreading attacks coupled to unknown PSP states, it's not worth used toilet paper. That's not to pimp Intel-- they have their own woes.

      NVIDIA does no one any favors with this draconian NDA.

      --
      ---- Teach Peace. It's Cheaper Than War.
    22. Re:I'm missing something by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Or everyone could just stop writing anything about Nvidia and let them see how that goes.

      Tech news sites depend on having the tech news. That's just not an option for most of them.

      On the other hand, saying in every video about graphics cards "there's more that nVidia won't let us tell you for five years" will definitely help bias the market against nVidia.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    23. Re:I'm missing something by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This. We should keep in mind that these are video card reviews. The vast majority of people don't buy video cards; they buy computers/laptops/etc. The people buying video cards directly should be smart enough to use reputable review sites that disclose whether cards were provided for review or were obtained by retail (most of the ones I've used note when samples were provided, as the true specs could change on official release).

      I'm pretty sure serious review sites already do this sort of thing. They get a sample with NDA, review and benchmark it, and release that review as early as the NDA allows. Then, after the public release, additional reviews are done on those products, with more benchmarks, testing, and details. The former is generally entertaining or educational, but everyone knows to take it with a grain of salt. The latter is where we look when we buy something, because we all have to wait for the public release.

      Hell, just skip the review sample and make some wild speculations and say whatever you want, and do the real reviews of hardware that's actually released. Leave the marketing crap to Nvidia to do themselves... no need to do their work for them!

    24. Re: I'm missing something by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Then I guess Nvidia doesn't get pre-availability reviews, and thus will suffer less launch-day pre-orders and sales, because nobody will know if the card is any good or not.

      I don't read product reviews based on who is first to publish, and I'll bet not a whole lot of other people do either. I read reviews based on if the author / publisher is trustworthy, and not a sellout hack that trades integrity for a "scoop"

    25. Re: I'm missing something by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That was an AMD smear campaign by nvidia.

    26. Re: I'm missing something by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You haven't read the docs, have you?

    27. Re:I'm missing something by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can still review and write articles about Nvidia products without signing the NDA. What's going on is that Nvidia is trading privileged access for control over the articles. Nvidia gives journalists the ability to make money from writing early to press, special access articles about Nvidia products in trade for control over the content.

      You can no longer call it journalism if the content is vetted.

    28. Re: I'm missing something by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That maybe something AMD PR would like you to believe.

  3. "write only what fits Nvidia in the junk" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Looks like someone was heavy on the wood way when they translated that.

    1. Re:"write only what fits Nvidia in the junk" by mrbester · · Score: 2

      You mean when Google translated it, instead of an actual person who speaks German.

      I don't speak much, but on reading TFA I understood the colloquialism.

      --
      "Wait. Something's happening. It's opening up! My God, it's full of apricots!"
  4. Bait and switch by ChrisKnight · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Sign the NDA; so nvidia feels confident in their control of the flow of information. Then, just stop writing about nvidia. Nothing. Some new autonomous car maker is using an nvidia processor? Refer it to as a 'generic industry ML engine'. When writing about AMD, refer to the competitors as 'unspecific reference cards'. Don't give them a single word of free advertising. Let them choke on their own attempt to smother the media.

    --
    -- This sig is only a test. If this were a real sig it would say something witty. --
    1. Re:Bait and switch by Xenx · · Score: 1

      That's a double-edged sword. The journalists rely on being able to provide news about Nvidia as much as Nvidia relies on them to provide that news. If any journalist stop providing news on Nvidia, the readers will turn somewhere else to get it. If another journalist provides all the news they want under one source, the first journalist is likely to start losing viewership.

    2. Re:Bait and switch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No shit. Take the goddamn power back plz.

    3. Re:Bait and switch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This. We the researchers of ML do not absolutely have to use Nvidia GPUs either. If they begin to use repressive information practices, that's good for no one. As a customer, I do not like that.

      This is an excellent strategy.

    4. Re:Bait and switch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Simple solution... refuse to buy their shit.
      It IS shit... it's not opensource drivers, and not opensource hardware.
      That means they (and whoever attacks them or their products before you get them) can do fuck all whatever they want to your internet connected box... including send all your data off to them and the NSA.
      Their prices are artificially high.
      And continuing to give them your money so they can be almost a monopoly over you... is fucking stupid.
      DEMAND better... NOT better performance numbers, but better OPENSOURCE and MORE chipmakers.
      Otherwise you'll end up stuck with effectively one company making shit products for ripoff prices.
      Because that's what closed source, NDA, and all the other BS is.

    5. Re:Bait and switch by jaa101 · · Score: 1

      The journalists rely on being able to provide news about Nvidia as much as Nvidia relies on them to provide that news.

      That's clearly what Nvidia thinks but I seriously doubt it. There are plenty of other things for tech journalists to write about. Also, just because you don't sign the Nvidia NDA and therefore don't have early access to Nvidia propaganda doesn't mean you can't write anything about Nvidia.

      All the same I think a better strategy for journalists is to tell Nvidia that they won't be signing their NDA because it's much too restrictive. Nvidia would get the message much faster that way. You would hope any journalist with integrity would do that anyway.

    6. Re:Bait and switch by Xenx · · Score: 1

      That's clearly what Nvidia thinks but I seriously doubt it. There are plenty of other things for tech journalists to write about. Also, just because you don't sign the Nvidia NDA and therefore don't have early access to Nvidia propaganda doesn't mean you can't write anything about Nvidia.

      First, having other things to talk about isn't going to save journalists.. in of itself. For all its faults, Nvidia is the winner when it comes to video cards. As long as their cards keep coming out on top, that won't change. When it comes to news related to video cards, you just cannot talk about them. It's almost a point of fact. As to the part about not signing the NDA, that's entirely correct. However, I was responding to someone who's idea was to just stop talking about them altogether. It's ideological, not practical.

      All the same I think a better strategy for journalists is to tell Nvidia that they won't be signing their NDA because it's much too restrictive. Nvidia would get the message much faster that way. You would hope any journalist with integrity would do that anyway.

      I fully agree with you there.

    7. Re:Bait and switch by Xenx · · Score: 1

      For clarification "you just cannot NOT talk about them."

    8. Re:Bait and switch by mschwanke97402 · · Score: 1

      Yeah, good plan, people have been saying the same thing about the media and Trump. The trouble is that media companies like money as much as anybody. Get a few outlets to stop covering nVidia (or Trump) and that will just leave the traffic for competitors to hoover up. You grand plan fails if even a few miscreants won’t go along.

    9. Re:Bait and switch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I like how you think... :-)

    10. Re:Bait and switch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      An NDA means you cant discuss or comment. But if a Lawyer signs it, he can tell his friends
      pretty much anything with another NDA. Just make sure its verbal in a public place, nothing electronic.

      Anyway, this latest attempt to not damage Intel for CPU harware design flaws confirms what I expected - tame reviewers get more, honest and objective ones less. As such magazine sales have dived (CT Germany not so) where they pander to advertisers and the like.

  5. Refuse to sign by rgmoore · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The only sensible course is to refuse to sign. Any reviewer can still buy their products at retail without having to sign anything; they just don't get advance access to the products or a chance to pick the company's brains. Their reviews will be a little bit later than those who sign and get to use the product before its official release, but the kind of buyer who wants the new product as soon as it's released wasn't going to listen to reviews anyway.

    The other thing to do is to make it explicit that you didn't sign an NDA to get the product you reviewed. There's a reason the most serious reviewers already make sure to review retail products rather than company provided ones: companies have been known to provide a different product to reviewers from what they sell to the general public. Any reviewer who's signing an NDA and getting what may be a custom, tuned product rather than what an ordinary buyer would get isn't trustworthy anyway.

    --

    There's no point in questioning authority if you aren't going to listen to the answers.

    1. Re:Refuse to sign by bloodhawk · · Score: 1

      most journalists in this space rely on getting sample prior to retail, by the time they are in retail all the reviews and performance tests etc will have already been written by everyone. refusing to buy into the NDA could financially expensive in the lost eyes on sites they get. Sounds like a lose lose situation for them.

    2. Re:Refuse to sign by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That magaznies vs bloggers paradigm fight

      what is this, the early 2000s?

    3. Re:Refuse to sign by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      welcome to the real world, time is money, getting a sample even a day before release is worth thousands of dollars to a web site. Magazines and websites they all rely on the same early access to information.

    4. Re:Refuse to sign by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think a workaround would be to found a separate publishing company with only one or two employees that then proceed to sign the NDA. The reviews they write then get licensed to the "real" publisher, and prefixed with a big fat warning. After the cards are available at retail, the real publisher buys a few and publishes a real, honest review to replace or amend the old one.

    5. Re:Refuse to sign by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What rubbish. "a little bit later"? Well, sure - if you define little as less than a geological epoch. What's a couple million years here or there? Architectural changes/improvements are often available years before any product announcement, and product announcements (aka vaporware) are often months and months before retail introduction, and getting a retail unit can often be difficult for months AFTER introduction. Not to mention that the evaluation process itself can take weeks. Obviously, there is a distribution in the degree of interest that readers have for GPUs. It should also be obvious that once a new graphics card has been reviewed half-a-dozen times, it is no longer "news" and the "buzz" is lost. For those people who are early adopters (and if you think that LATE adopters have a following, what can I say?), several months lag is a non-starter. Just like in politics, it is the activists which determine the narrative. Given the rumors of problems and delays swirling around NVDA's next gen cards, I've got to wonder if this NDA is a reaction to the company's development cycle issues.

  6. Osborn effect by rsilvergun · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I'm guessing they're trying to avoid that. It's been 2 years since they've put out a new card. It'll be 3 or 4 by the time they finally do something. That's going to be a major generational leap, and when it happens it's going to render last gen's cards obsolete. They're worried about folks who stop buying cards waiting for the new stuff.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re:Osborn effect by mentil · · Score: 1

      That's why the CEO said that the next-gen cards are still a long ways off, but the Osborn effect probably has nothing to do with the onerous NDA. It's a general NDA, rather than covering a specific product.

      --
      Corruption is convincing someone that the selfless ideal is the same as their selfish ideal.
    2. Re:Osborn effect by eth1 · · Score: 1

      I'm guessing they're trying to avoid that. It's been 2 years since they've put out a new card. It'll be 3 or 4 by the time they finally do something. That's going to be a major generational leap, and when it happens it's going to render last gen's cards obsolete. They're worried about folks who stop buying cards waiting for the new stuff.

      Most of the gamers I know (including me) have ALREADY stopped buying cards until the next gen comes out.

  7. NDAs have an expiration date? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    The one forced on me was lifetime. They said if you don't sign it, then McDonalds is hiring. I ended up quitting a few years later anyway, the NDA was only to hide their "fuck the customer out of as much money as possible" business practices.

    1. Re:NDAs have an expiration date? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The more restrictive the NDA, the shittier the technology. If a company tries to put one on you, run, run away.

    2. Re:NDAs have an expiration date? by Actually,+I+do+RTFA · · Score: 1

      Or earlier stage the technology. I fully understand when people who have $ and are trying to hire their tech team want an NDA.

      --
      Your ad here. Ask me how!
    3. Re:NDAs have an expiration date? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      An NDA , to be enforceable in a court of law, must have a sunset provision on the contract. Otherwise, it's an impermissible signing away of one's rights under law.

    4. Re:NDAs have an expiration date? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      An NDA , to be enforceable in a court of law, must have a sunset provision on the contract. Otherwise, it's an impermissible signing away of one's rights under law.

      That's easy: the contract ends when you are dead, unlike the one for SeaOrg whereunder you sign away your rights for the next (wait for it) billion years.

      Posting AC because Scientology.

  8. NDA? Meh, anything for a scoop, eh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Regular users can write reviews.. Nvidia has no real competition anyway. Maybe their patents should be "reviewed"..

    1. Re:NDA? Meh, anything for a scoop, eh? by Highdude702 · · Score: 1

      Neither did Intel, and we see how well that's working for them.

  9. Did they share the wrong NDA? by kiminator · · Score: 1

    This reads more like an employment NDA than a journalist NDA. This kind of NDA is pretty common when interviewing for or accepting a job at a tech company.

    1. Re:Did they share the wrong NDA? by Actually,+I+do+RTFA · · Score: 1

      An NDA without a termination date? I mean, for an ongoing employee, sure the termination date is based on when the employer/employee relationship ends. But open-ended like that?

      --
      Your ad here. Ask me how!
    2. Re:Did they share the wrong NDA? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They can be. Sometimes as an employee you'll be part of product or technology development teams for stuff that isn't released until after you quit. The NDA is usually intended to prevent you revealing those unreleased details to a new employer. Suffice to say, though, that the lawyers who write them don't care if you're gagged forever, because their role is wholly and solely about protecting the company. Your rights are not considered at all.

    3. Re:Did they share the wrong NDA? by omnichad · · Score: 1

      You can put whatever you want in a contract. And then if the employee has the time and money to fight it in court they could eventually prove it was unenforceable.

    4. Re:Did they share the wrong NDA? by Actually,+I+do+RTFA · · Score: 1

      Oh, I mean, I get why the company would want it. I've just never seen anyone willing to sign such an open-ended NDA. I've seen people willing to sign one measured in years, but never eternal.

      --
      Your ad here. Ask me how!
    5. Re:Did they share the wrong NDA? by Actually,+I+do+RTFA · · Score: 1

      Far better to just strike it from the contract to begin with than try to get the contract partially fixed later.

      --
      Your ad here. Ask me how!
    6. Re:Did they share the wrong NDA? by omnichad · · Score: 1

      As long as you're OK with the offer being withdrawn at that point.

    7. Re:Did they share the wrong NDA? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You should always be prepared to walk away from a contract with unfavorable terms.

    8. Re:Did they share the wrong NDA? by Cederic · · Score: 1

      I've signed one that's eternal. I got well remunerated for doing so, and the ND clause was explicitly limited to something that I don't have any need or desire to discuss anyway.

      That said, I could probably break it now and nobody would give a shit. The company probably no longer even have a record of it; their data retention policy will have mandated its destruction by now.

    9. Re:Did they share the wrong NDA? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's probably not valid either. AFAIK, even military "NDA"s have a sunset date (like 99 years into the future or so). I doubt they would have bothered if they didn't have to.

  10. Just Don't Sign it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just don't sign it. Why is this even a story?

    1. Re:Just Don't Sign it. by oic0 · · Score: 2

      If you don't sign you don't get a card to review. You have to wait until you can order one online like a pleb. Video cards are often paper launches. Could be months after release before you get your review out.

    2. Re:Just Don't Sign it. by Snotnose · · Score: 2

      If you don't sign you don't get a card to review.

      You mean if I sign this NDA they'll send me free cards so I can write (good things) about them? And keep the card?

      Where do I sign up!

    3. Re:Just Don't Sign it. by Kohath · · Score: 1

      Journalists need to tell you about everything. Just wait for the story about how someone felt when they read this story! It's shocking and your doctor doesn't want you to know!

    4. Re:Just Don't Sign it. by Cederic · · Score: 2

      Well, exactly. It makes this a really interesting way to gauge the integrity of online video card reviewers.

  11. Sure to backfire ! by redelm · · Score: 4, Insightful

    NVidia can ask/require anything they want -- that doesn't mean reputable journalists [where?] will agree. They just won't review NVidia products as early, or at all. NVidia loses the free publicity in a very-short-term effort to reduce negative reviews. Are they going out of business? I thought they had leading vidcards. They must think not.

    The rest of us will know the disreputable journalists by their early NVidia reviews. Just makes me buy Radeon.

    1. Re:Sure to backfire ! by viperidaenz · · Score: 0

      "reputable journalists" don't review video cards, product reviews are not journalism.

    2. Re:Sure to backfire ! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "reputable journalists" don't review video cards, product reviews are not journalism.

      Neither is political bias, being an "influencer," or "trying to change the world." Journalists collect and distribute the facts and only the facts. There are no journalists left. A dead industry with anachronistic titling.

    3. Re:Sure to backfire ! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Amusing anachronistic metrics you're applying there.

      tell us more about how communication doesn't exist and reduction doesn't necessarily lose information...

    4. Re:Sure to backfire ! by redelm · · Score: 1

      "journalism" is a difficult-to-define word. The closest I can come is from the french "journal", newspaper or frequent periodical. Journalists are those who produce the content, hopefully distinct from copywriters who produce the advertisments.

      Put another way, you are saying the NYT review of books and theatre reviews are also not journalism.

    5. Re:Sure to backfire ! by viperidaenz · · Score: 1

      People who review books and plays are called critics, not journalists.

  12. Re:Nvidia is dead money! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Their refusal to open up their specifications to ever increasingly popular Linux systems will be the death of them.

    Their proprietary drivers are still better than the free ones or the free or proprietary AMD drivers...this has been the status quo for well over a decade with no reason to believe it will change, I think they'll be just fine.

    Linux represents a tiny minority of desktop usage and it's only a tiny minority of that minority that use it because all the software is Free Software and even smaller portion of that extremely small set of users cares about cutting edge graphics performance to the point of needing the nvidia driver performance over the nouveau driver performance. That's hardly going to impact the desktop GPU part of the company in any measurable way, much less the company as a whole.

  13. There's the beauty... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...no need to complain about it. No one is forcing them to sign it.

  14. disclosure by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I sold all my Nvidia stock last week.

  15. Increasing Competition, nVidia Falling Behind by nateman1352 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    This is probably nVidia's response to the market heating up.

    First, it looks like AMD Vega 20 is going to outperform Pascal. Based on remarks from nVidia's CEO, the next-gen Turing architecture is probably going to be released in 2019. Since Vega 20 will probably be out this year, for the first time in a while AMD will hold the GPU performance crown for about one year, maybe more if Turning doesn't deliver. On top of that, for the first time in a decade Intel is now a big wildcard. Current rumor is Intel will be releasing a discrete GPU in 2020. Intel hired the guy from AMD that lead the development of Vega, so chances are Intel actually means business this time.

    To sum it all up, things are not looking very good for nVidia right now. So they are acting early to prevent journalists from reporting a possible fall from grace if it were to happen in the near future.

    1. Re:Increasing Competition, nVidia Falling Behind by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So they are acting early to prevent journalists from reporting a possible fall from grace if it were to happen in the near future.

      What journalist publication would even need to consider signing an NDA at all, much less the one in question here, in order to report on what you say there? In fact even if they signed this NDA they would still be able to report what you're talking about.

    2. Re:Increasing Competition, nVidia Falling Behind by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      3DFx was the better company and had better products. The didn't have an unlimited line of credit from the banksters though. After stealing 3DFx's proprietary technology, nVidia kept it all tied up in court until 3DFx was on the brink of bankruptcy. Then they gave the top executives jobs and that was the end of competition in the graphics sector.

      You're not living in a free-market society. The phony fiat currency trickles down to the chosen winners, like super delegates mandating we vote for Hitlary. You really have very little choice.

    3. Re:Increasing Competition, nVidia Falling Behind by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      First, it looks like AMD Vega 20 is going to outperform Pascal.

      Wow, a GPU with no actual release date (but predicted for a second-half 2018 release) might be faster than a competitor's product from mid-2016?! How compelling!

      Based on remarks from nVidia's CEO, the next-gen Turing architecture is probably going to be released in 2019.

      There are reference samples with partners already and even in the links you posted the best guess is that we might not see Turing-based Geforces until 2019.

      Since Vega 20 will probably be out this year, for the first time in a while AMD will hold the GPU performance crown for about one year

      Or one month depending on when they are released or perhaps not at all if the rockpapershotgun author's guess is wrong.

      To sum it all up, things are not looking very good for nVidia right now.

      Really? They have the performance crown in the gaming space, they dominate the datacenter space with P100 and V100 chips and dominate the machine learning space too from datacenter to processors for self-driving cars. Add to that samples of their next generation architecture are already out in the field with partners. The only real threat is the rumor that intel might compete in 2 years time, of course intel does not have a good track record in this space.

    4. Re:Increasing Competition, nVidia Falling Behind by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      nvidia bought 3dfx you fool. The voodoo 3 and later were significantly worse products than the competition in the form of Geforce and Radeon cards and the costly investments in acquiring STB and Gigapixel that didn't pay off at all were what killed 3dfx.

    5. Re:Increasing Competition, nVidia Falling Behind by mentil · · Score: 2

      Lisa Su already said their next-gen consumer graphics cards would release early next year. Apparently Nvidia is sitting on lots of old stock and wants it to clear before they pull the trigger on Turing, which is apparently waiting in the wings. It's also possible they are wary of releasing 12nm Turing now, then a 7nm update in less than a year to compete with AMD's 7nm cards. With no competition now they might just wait a year.

      --
      Corruption is convincing someone that the selfless ideal is the same as their selfish ideal.
    6. Re:Increasing Competition, nVidia Falling Behind by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      You're forgetting one important thing: influence on the industry.

      Case in point, CUDA. CUDA right now is de facto API for parallel computing. Its competitor, OpenCL, is nowhere to be seen. Even Apple left OpenCL. Just look at HPC scene, CUDA is everywhere.

      And then there is PhysX, Iray GPU rendering, etc.

      Now where are Nvidia competitor's offerings?

    7. Re:Increasing Competition, nVidia Falling Behind by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Right, Nvidia bought 3dfx after they had bled them dry with lawsuits. 3dfx did throw the first patent punch. It is too bad for 3dfx that their Voodoo 3 (their first attempt at a flagship 2D/3D combo card) was absolutely utter rubbish, and they decided to produce it all by themselves, in Juarez, Mexico (at the STB facility they'd recently purchased). Additionally, they couldn't make a decent AGP 4x card. So, basically, the dropped their current business plan for a completely untested business plan. Or they took a double-barreled shotgun and carefully aimed at first one foot and then the other.

      As for the patent lawsuits, I was confused. It was Nvidia that stole IP knowledge from SGI (Silicon Graphics Inc). As part of the settlement with SGI, SGI turned over all their IP and graphic engineers to Nvidia.

      Fun factoid: the 'Unix' computer that was used in Jurassic Park was actually an Silicon Graphics Crimson running Irix 6, and that graphical file system navigation tool (FSN) was actually created to help market and sell the Crimson. Sadly, I cannot link to FSN as it appears that the siliconbunny site has gone down.

    8. Re:Increasing Competition, nVidia Falling Behind by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Right, Nvidia bought 3dfx after they had bled

      By bled you mean they filed a patent lawsuit...which of course happened after 3dfx had done exactly the same thing to nvidia.

      them dry

      That link points to a lawsuit filed by the trustees of 3dfx's bankruptcy proceedings against nvidia.

      with lawsuits.

      That link is a lawsuit between nvidia and samsung, it's nothing to do with 3dfx. did you even read it?

      It was Nvidia that stole IP knowledge from SGI (Silicon Graphics Inc).

      Hang on, first you were saying they stole from 3dfx, which is wrong, then you changed it to be that they just sued them into bankruptcy (which actually was started by 3dfx themselves) and now you're arguing that nvidia stole from SGI which was actually patent infringement (which is not theft) and which is what 3dfx first sued nvidia for.

    9. Re:Increasing Competition, nVidia Falling Behind by HannethCom · · Score: 1

      No, nVidia did not buy 3dfx, they bought the intellectual property. 3dfx folded as a company after investors, at the prompting of the CEO Greg Ballard, started bankruptcy proceedings.
      3dfx was actually in a really good position when they folded. They had $500 million owed, a military contract to provide chips for Apache Choppers. Yes, they were out of active capital, but I doubt there would have been any bank that would have refused them a loan.
      The biggest problem was the stupid CEO they hired. The STB purchase probably was not very smart. The Gigapixel one I'm not sure was really a mistake. They had some really good plans for the technology they acquired, unfortunately never got to implement it.
      They hired a "big name marketting CEO," translation, they hired someone who would get the investors the most money in a short period of time.
      Greg Ballard biggest stupid move, apart from convincing the investors to start bankruptcy, was wasting money rebranding the company. I think they spent something like $120 million on changing the logo.
      I also disagree with the Voodoo 3 and 5 being significantly worse products. True, the Voodoo 3 did not have 32-bit output support, but everything inside the card was already being processed in 32-bit. This made its 16-bit output way better than other card's 16-bit output, and you were not going to be playing games on a TNT, or TNT 2 in 32-bit mode anyways. The competition just didn't have the horsepower to run even the simplest games at a playable frame rate in 32-bit. The Voodoo 5 on the other hand could when it came out, and it was competing against the TNT 2.
      Now I will admit, the Voodoo 4 was a bit of a WTF product.

      --
      Microsoft, Apple, Google, Amazon what's the difference? All steal money from devs and control with walled gardens.
  16. nVidia who? by AndyKron · · Score: 1

    So they don't want their cards reviewed. So be it. nVidia who?

  17. Fuck you Nvidia by Tough+Love · · Score: 2

    Fuck you Nvidia. And yes, I am in a position to cost you sales.

    --
    When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
    1. Re:Fuck you Nvidia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Linus, is that you?

  18. Still butthurt about the GPP I guess by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    nVidia is mad that the Geforce Partner Program got scrapped due to negative press. So instead of just taking the L and moving on with life, they're now going to try to ram a different but equally awful idea down journalists' throats instead.

  19. So the GTX 1180 is going to suck, huh? by BLToday · · Score: 1

    Sounds like they’re trying to control the narrative and that’s usually a sign their upcoming product sucks. I’m going to guess it’s really good at compute workload and barely faster than the GTX 1080Ti for gaming.

    1. Re:So the GTX 1180 is going to suck, huh? by mentil · · Score: 2

      They can control the narrative until cards actually ship and independents test them and blow the whistle, which will make them look bad. If reviewers suddenly stop testing in apps/games they always test in, because those benchmarks make Nvidia look bad, then it'll look very suspicious. Nvidia would only make extra money from preorders (and pray people don't return them or resent Nvidia afterward) and thus likely not be worth it.

      --
      Corruption is convincing someone that the selfless ideal is the same as their selfish ideal.
  20. Oh Look, Another Reason To Buy AMD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They were already half as reliable, too cool for mesa, and more expensive. Now the reviews of them are less trustworthy?

  21. Big leap for NVIDIA by Purevoice · · Score: 1

    NVIDIA is really taking a bold step with this one, nice move http://www.naijadailyfeed.com/

    --
    I love to blog http://www.naijadailyfeed.com
  22. Remember the partner program? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They seem to really want to become the master troll. I've put Nvidia on my do-not-buy list.

  23. Is it that bad? by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 3, Informative

    This seems like the product of either Nvidia's lawyers going a but crazy or something not going well on their end:

    It's already the case that tech journalism is strongly 'access' based; whether the company likes you or not pretty much dictates whether you get review samples in time to have a full write-up on release day or get ignored in favor of people who do(which, given how much of the interest is in cutting edge stuff really hurts). However, unlike other 'access' dominated areas(reporting on government or military, say); the window where undesirable 3rd parties can be kept away is limited: you can uninvite them to E3 hype sessions and make sure that they don't have a new product far enough ahead of time to be able to show comprehensive benchmarks on release day; but you are still releasing a consumer product with distribution controlled only by price.

    Someone trying to get a Pentagon story without cooperation could spend years or decades trying to FOIA stuff or have it undergo automatic classification review due to age. Someone writing about video cards can have unlimited physical access to a sample for under $1000(except certain pro/specialty parts) as soon after release day as they can find one in stock.

    Given that, I don't really understand what Nvidia is seeking to achieve here: it's already pretty easy to get tech sites that depend on having day-one hardware reviews and 'exclusive' pre-release to toe the line; but also pretty much impossible to keep a lid on people who are willing to test retail samples without your cooperation; or to clamp down on anonymous sources giving The Register material to write snarky articles about your underfill woes or the like. What is it that isn't currently controlled that Nvidia thinks it needs to(and has any hope of) control?

  24. Talking to an Actual Lawyer on NVIDIA's NDA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SXmkk_yVMU

  25. Turn the tables. Coverage blackout. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Do a coverage blackout. If there is no coverage of the new shiner card, nvidea will lose mindshare. Just stop covering nvidia at all.

  26. Strugling relationship with journalist by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'd call that Pimpidia.

  27. The Media is Already 100% Corporate Marketing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The media is all about marketing, all the time, and I'm not talking about commercials.

    Everything you consume, online, TV, radio, is designed to get you to the next commercial break, and to stay there until the show starts again.

    Local news is 90% ads, cable news isn't much better but it's mostly aimed at promoting one political party or the other.

    We used to have real news, but ending the fairness doctrine, media consolidation, insisting that "news" be a profit center instead of a loss leader, along with moving news organizations under entertainment divisions cost us real news decades ago.

    As far as NVIDIA goes, I worked there years ago, there is nothing they do that isn't calculated AF.

  28. Linus Torvald said it best... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BcxKINWMD8M&feature=youtu.be&t=19

  29. Convinced to go AMD for next CPU, but GPU? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'd like a break from Nvidia (PhysX support in Borderlands 2 was spectacular, but Nvidia's proprietary tech has gone stale/unsupported/super-resource-heavy), and I love how AMD is pushing HBM... but... AMD GPU performance just isnt there, and I was fucked so many times in the past by their drivers.

    AMD also seems to have worse frame-pacing.

    C'mon Vega20. Do something with your miserable life.