80
NVIDIA's Neural Texture Compression Cuts VRAM Use From 6.5 GB to 970 MB (www.techpowerup.com)
submitted 7 months ago by to c/hardware@lemmy.world
33 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 23 points 7 months ago (4 children)

I really hope the competition steps up their game soon… this monopoly is cancer and nvidia gets better at tech and shittier as a company by the second. At this point only DLSS 5 seems to scratch on their invincibility cloak. Jensen needs to be brought down to earth.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 17 points 7 months ago (2 children)

    Problem is that even when the competition is ahead, people continue to buy Nvidia.
    Texture compression is nothing new, and back in the day ATI was ahead of Nvidia on this.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 7 months ago (1 child)

    Not really. They went back and forth, though. I'd argue Nvidia has generally had more efficient and aggressive memory compression(not just textures!)

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 5 points 7 months ago

    You obviously isn't aware of the sales statistics, AMD may win a tiny bit of marketshare when they are in the lead against Nvidia, but even when AMD was the clearly better cards and value, Nvidia maintained the bigger market share.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent