261–270 of 520 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Heat is bad, but MTTF at usually achievable temperatures is hundreds or thousands of years. Electromigration matters on the order of 100 years.
Well, tell that to my chipset's SATA controllers (Sandbridge generation). Intel messed up their life expectancy calculations, and thus they died after 2~3 years. I think 2 are still alive.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
'One of the biggest contributors to climate change' - this is so far from being even remotely true
Perhaps overstated, but it is a noticeable percentage of global electricity use spent on what is at best an enabling technology for the somewhat quixotic pursuits of a tiny fraction of the population. You should of course make your own judgments, but many people do not consider that a good tradeoff.
Out of total energy production that's closer to 0.07% (~170,000 TWh in 2019 https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/global-energy-substitutio...).
I wonder if open source drivers will eventually circumvent this limit?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Citation needed? My understanding was that gaming cards are pushed far harder, at higher temps, with fluctuating power and thermals, which causes more issues than a single stable power limit and temperature
Mining cards are run near always, while gaming cards are usually pushed only a small number of hours per day. I have no data to back this up but anecdotally this makes a huge difference in wear.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I thought this was long ago disproven. That at very early stages yes breakeven or small loss happens. But rapidly becomes mildly profitable per unit
Is this as a result of how the r&d expenses are deducted against revenue, or manufacturing process improvements?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't disagree, but I suppose the structure of my comment didn't convey the message correctly, that is, that NVDA is just maximizing profits while screwing over gamers because a) they can get away with it and b) they are an ever decreasing portion of their revenue.
Wait, how did you arrive at ‘screwing over gamers’ when this whole thing was done to keep 3060 cards available to gamers at reasonable prices?
NVDA's stance is that miners are the reason for scarce GPUs, but it is not. There has been scarcity since the 3xxx series was announced, similarly for AMD. The reality is that there is simply not enough silicon being produced; with AAPL hogging TSM's 5nm for a year, AMD and NVDA competing for 7nm wafers for AMD's CPUs, GPUs, and the console's SOCs and for NVDA's GPUs, and soon to be joined by INTC.
By cutting 3xxx production for gaming to accommodate crypto they ensure that there won't be second hand gpus flooding the market and eating their profits once the craze is over. Why is that? because it will not be as cost effective to miners to buy 3060s instead of the dedicated chips because of lower performance per watt. Once the craze is over, the miners won't be able to liquidate their dedicated cards, thus, the demand for GPUs for gaming remains intact, thus, they will be able to sell their 3xxx series and 4xxx series without getting screwed over by second hands and they will not be stuck with a huge inventory as was the case in 2018.
Edit:
Infact, the second hand 3060s would outcompete anything NVDA could offer in 1080p and 1440p gaming and anything NVDA could release with their 4xxx cards. In addition, there isn't enough incentive to even go beyond 1080p or 1440p for gaming. Which is why you will see NVDA pushing how great 4k and even 8k gaming is with their recent publicity stunt for 8k gaming on a 3090.
I have no sympathy for miners, but purely from software freedom perspective this is maximally evil: closed-source software that decides what you can use your hardware for. The CMP version is a straight-to-landfill product. As soon as it stops being profitable for mining it will have zero resale value, and become e-waste.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Is this really good news, or is this just Nvidia playing both sides? To be clear, these CMP cards are still the same exact silicon that goes into GeForce and Quadro graphics cards. They don't have video outputs, cooling should be improved (for large-scale data center mining operations), and they're better tuned for efficiency. But every single GPU sold as a CMP card means one less GPU sold as a graphics card. What'…
They're actively not winning good pr because gamers realize they're being screwed despite nvidia's rhetoric, and miners can now no longer recoup some money from old cards they no longer need by reselling to gamers. And, everyone realizes how shit this is for the environment. You can say Nvidia is making a smart business decision (questionable) but to say this isn't anything other than a pr disaster imo is incorrect.…
Ah, you’re a miner? You’re worried about their ability to make money?
> gamers realize they’re being screwed
How, exactly?
I have no sympathy for miners, but purely from software freedom perspective this is maximally evil: closed-source software that decides what you can use your hardware for. The CMP version is a straight-to-landfill product. As soon as it stops being profitable for mining it will have zero resale value, and become e-waste.
I have no sympathy for miners, but purely from software freedom perspective this is maximally evil: closed-source software that decides what you can use your hardware for. The CMP version is a straight-to-landfill product. As soon as it stops being profitable for mining it will have zero resale value, and become e-waste.
> The CMP version is a straight-to-landfill product. As soon as it stops being profitable for mining it will have zero resale value, and become e-waste. Like literally every other piece of Bitcoin or crypto mining technology. It’s straight to the landfill every 6 months. Bitcoin generates 100 GRAMS of ewaste for every transaction. Every 2 transactions consumes as much energy as driving a Tesla from SF to NY [edit for…