They're just another rank monopolist. We should celebrate their fall, maybe there will be room for some real competition.
How are you going to get more competition when the entry cost is so high? The only competition will be the Chinese willing to dump endless cash into this but they are not doing it out of the goodness of their hearts either and it will still take years. If NVIDIA starts to falter then in the short term things will get even more painful for consumers as AMD becomes the new crummy company people love to hate.
At which point customers are buying for hardware price/performance or performance/watt rather than because they care which vendor they're getting it from.
And then you'd still have the biggest companies making the highest performance hardware, but you could also get something from the RISC-V people which had e.g. half or a quarter the performance of the enterprise GPUs but the same amount of VRAM, for less money.
People seemed to be programmed to be sycophants or at least willing victims to rich and powerful people and companies, even as they royally screw them and empty their pockets. I never understood it. As the song goes: we'd make great pets.
The barriers to entry are not capital costs they are compatibility moats. Wake up and smell the coffee.
I also had the displeasure to work with nvidia. After years of pushing gaming cards on us for compute, the years I spent working with nvidia was full of conversations where they would list silly excuse after excuse as to why we should use the expensive enterprise-grade cards instead. All the while, we begged them to unlock driver features that were available to Quadro cards but not GeForce cards, features as simple as hardware acceleration pass-through on a remote desktop connection. It took them a full-on epidemic, where remote work became super common, to allow some of those features to GeForce cards.
So it's really on brand that they tried creating a fake scarcity to keep their prices up. I don't envy the situation Jensen is in but I won't be sorry for him.
That's no longer the case.
Connected. Complete lack of integrity.
If he cheats on his wife, and on his customers, he'll probably cheat on his shareholders. Hence having to quit before he's pushed.
But customers having to pay more due to NVIDIA milking them - now that's something that really would require mandatory jail time for all NVIDIA folks involved here, IF true and verified in court (right now we can only speculate, even if we have extremely convincing proof; the courts would have to come to such a conclusion at the end of the day; and for this, the court systems have to work. I have severe doubts the courts work in the USA right now. It seems a billionaires-controlled court. Why is the whole Epstein network not investigated? Why is only Ghislaine in jail? A single person master-minded +5000 sex slaves over some 20 years or so? How is that even logistically possible?).
It’s the task of every capitalist business in existence to “milk” their customers for the maximum amount of money they can for any given product. Everyone in business would be in jail by your metric.
Business are absolutely free to set as their task things like “long term sustainability”, or “quality” if they so choose
The society can easily change this simply by actually enforcing the anti-trust laws that are already on the books.
Such a complete failure of the market that NVIDIA hasn’t had any real competition. All of the vendors abandoned PC gamers though. Though the price choke point is memory, not cores.
Which makes me curious, if AMD did another HBM-based card like the Vega series, would that RAM be cheaper now than GDDR?
They do not. SR-IOV is only available on Arc Pro cards.
https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/support/articles/000...
many have asked why AMD doesn't make its GPUs cheaper.
lisa su and jensen huang not competing with each other on price and being related is as much of a coincidence as wuhan having a virology institute experimenting on COVID-19 and being the center of the COVID-19 outbreak
Wasn’t this debunked years ago?
[0]: https://www.dw.com/en/covid-pandemic-likely-unleashed-by-lab...
In any case, I'd wager no non-Chinese intelligence agency has the evidence to ascertain COVID-19 origin one way or the other. Both the initial confidence in natural origin and now this new certainty in declaring the lab leak hypothesis a fact seem nonsensical to me.
https://usrtk.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/11/ODNI-3-November...
> CIA now joins DOE and FBI in assessing the more likely cause of the first human COVID-19 infection was a research-related incident.
> CIA has low confidence in this judgment
> Given CIA's low confidence, credible new intelligence reporting or open-source information could prompt CIA to change its assessment.
> Four agencies and the National Intelligence Council (NIC) continue to assess that natural contact with an animal infected with SARS-CoV-2—or a closely related progenitor virus—was the most likely cause of the first human COVID-19 infection.
It's interesting that the BND has higher confidence in its assessment but not sufficient to support your statement that the lab leak hypothesis has "been confirmed by agencies around the world"
Weirdly, Youtube has labelled that video as "AI".
Which is kinda hard to imagine, seeing as it was released 10 years ago.
Nah.
From what I've heard from folks who used to do bricks and mortar distribution, that 30% is _way_ better than what you'd get cut out in that system. [0] From the perspective of the person publishing a video game, you also get waaaaaaaaaaay more for your cut with Valve than you'd get in a B&M distribution. _So_ much more. The same is true for the purchaser and player of video games.
[0] If for no other reason [1] than the fact Valve will sell your game forever, unless some government or powerful payment processor very strongly demands that it not be sold.
[1] ...and there are many other reasons...
Yes, they could drop the price for indies but they do have progressive tiering, at top you pay 20% to them and by revenue split it's much closer to taking 20% cut on average than 30%. But yes, indies are being a bit screwed there.
... if not for the fact every single cheaper platform will still get you massively less sales just because they can't compete on feature, let alone popularity of Steam.
Also the 30% funded ability to play games at all on my Linux box so I'm fine with paying the extra.
Companies price based on perceived value and customer willingness to pay, not on cost to produce.
HP weren't alone. About the same time, modifying one of IBM's line printers to the more expensive, faster model was done by changing out a couple of gears.
Have they been pushy? Hell yes, I guess everyone have a different line on this. But on the scale of business partnership and leaving money for its ecosystem, Nvidia is far from the worst. Just look at Apple, or in other industry, Walmart. ( Note: Steve Jobs used to be pretty good at that, the same as Jensen. It was actually Tim Cook who pushed this to previously unseen level )
>And then completely shafting gamers when crypto and AI markets opened up?
I believe Jensen was the one who continue to push capacity in Geforce for consumer market when they could have done 100% AI. And there just isn't enough capacity for everyone. And had AI and Crypto not been that popular the R&D cost of amortised over GPU would have been far higher on leading edge node with Big GPU design, often pushed to Reticle limit. Not only have I recounted exactly zero appreciation on any technical forums, consumer simply want their GPU to be faster, cheaper and widely available every single time regardless of its cost, when it was Nvidia who is pushing the whole GPU industry forward.
Investors like it (a lot) if you have diversified income streams. Sure, currently gaming is not the profit driver for Nvidia but it still adds to the valuations and having a Cuda capable GPU in a lot of homes is great for the ecosystem.
You are in a comment thread related to an article about Huang intentionally engineering that shortage by investing into AI startups. Why do you need to defend a billionaire?
And if they didn't wanted dual use "problem" they could've chilled on AI cores in their chips and went all in on 3D performance.
Nvidia is a business but them having a (near) monopoly has absolutely been horrible for gamers.