Nvidia - Revision history

SinexTitan: small list of "competitors"

2026-03-08T17:35:05Z

small list of "competitors"

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:35, 8 March 2026
Line 101:		Line 101:

	==See also==		==See also==
			*[[AMD]]
			*[[Intel]]
	*[[Qualcomm]]		*[[Qualcomm]]

SinexTitan: DMY

2026-03-02T15:13:49Z

DMY

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:13, 2 March 2026
Line 8:		Line 8:
	\|Website=https://www.nvidia.com/		\|Website=https://www.nvidia.com/
	}}		}}
	'''{{Wplink\|Nvidia\|Nvidia Corporation}}''' is an American technology company that designs and sells computer components such as {{wplink\|Graphics processing units\|graphics processing units}} (GPUs) for both commercial and enterprise use. It was founded on April 5, 1993, by current CEO (as of 2026) {{wplink\|Jensen Huang\|Jensen Huang}}, Chris Malachowsky, and Curtis Priem. The company is the largest providers of GPUs for both consumer and enterprise.		'''{{Wplink\|Nvidia\|Nvidia Corporation}}''' is an American technology company that designs and sells computer components such as {{wplink\|Graphics processing units\|graphics processing units}} (GPUs) for both commercial and enterprise use. It was founded on 05 April, 1993, by current CEO (as of 2026) {{wplink\|Jensen Huang\|Jensen Huang}}, Chris Malachowsky, and Curtis Priem. The company is the largest providers of GPUs for both consumer and enterprise.

	==Consumer-impact summary==		==Consumer-impact summary==
Line 66:		Line 66:
	===Threatening Gamers Nexus (''2025.05.18'')===		===Threatening Gamers Nexus (''2025.05.18'')===
	{{Main\|Nvidia threatens GamersNexus}}		{{Main\|Nvidia threatens GamersNexus}}
	On May 18, 2025, GamersNexus, a pro consumer tech publication and YouTube channel, uploaded a video to their YouTube channel exposing Nvidia's scheme of threatening them. Nvidia strongly suggested to GN that access to their engineers for future interviews would only be possible if GN underwent an editorial change according to Nvidia's specification. The company's ransom was for more postive and longer emphasis on their new MFG (Multi-frame Generation) technology in GN's future reviews of their GPUs.<ref name=":0">{{Cite web \|last=Nexus \|first=Gamers \|date=2025-05-18 \|title=NVIDIA's Dirty Manipulation of Reviews \|url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AiekGcwaIho \|url-status=live \|archive-date= \|access-date=2025-07-11 \|website=YouTube \|archive-url=https://preservetube.com/watch?v=AiekGcwaIho ~~\|archive-date=23 Feb 2026~~}}</ref>		On May 18, 2025, GamersNexus, a pro consumer tech publication and YouTube channel, uploaded a video to their YouTube channel exposing Nvidia's scheme of threatening them. Nvidia strongly suggested to GN that access to their engineers for future interviews would only be possible if GN underwent an editorial change according to Nvidia's specification. The company's ransom was for more postive and longer emphasis on their new MFG (Multi-frame Generation) technology in GN's future reviews of their GPUs.<ref name=":0">{{Cite web \|last=Nexus \|first=Gamers \|date=2025-05-18 \|title=NVIDIA's Dirty Manipulation of Reviews \|url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AiekGcwaIho \|url-status=live \|archive-date=23 Feb 2026 \|access-date=2025-07-11 \|website=YouTube \|archive-url=https://preservetube.com/watch?v=AiekGcwaIho }}</ref>

	===Acquisition of stake in Intel (''2025.12.29'')===		===Acquisition of stake in Intel (''2025.12.29'')===

Azaydan: Combine previously added two sections into single section about artificial feature segmentation of consumer GPUs.

2026-03-02T05:28:06Z

Combine previously added two sections into single section about artificial feature segmentation of consumer GPUs.

← Older revision		Revision as of 05:28, 2 March 2026
Line 21:		Line 21:
	In Nvidia's terms of service regarding accessing their website, under "Informal Resolution" users are required to agree to resolve legal disputes with Nvidia by arbitration from Judicial Arbitration and Mediation Services (JAMS).<ref>{{Cite web \|title=NVIDIA Legal Notices \|url=https://www.nvidia.com/en-gb/about-nvidia/terms-of-service/ \|access-date=2025-06-19 \|website=NVIDIA \|language=en-gb \|archive-url=http://web.archive.org/web/20260221043438/https://www.nvidia.com/en-gb/about-nvidia/terms-of-service/ \|archive-date=21 Feb 2026}}</ref>		In Nvidia's terms of service regarding accessing their website, under "Informal Resolution" users are required to agree to resolve legal disputes with Nvidia by arbitration from Judicial Arbitration and Mediation Services (JAMS).<ref>{{Cite web \|title=NVIDIA Legal Notices \|url=https://www.nvidia.com/en-gb/about-nvidia/terms-of-service/ \|access-date=2025-06-19 \|website=NVIDIA \|language=en-gb \|archive-url=http://web.archive.org/web/20260221043438/https://www.nvidia.com/en-gb/about-nvidia/terms-of-service/ \|archive-date=21 Feb 2026}}</ref>

	===Artificial ~~FP64 Restriction on Kepler~~ Consumer GPUs (''2013 - ~~2014~~'')===		===Artificial Feature Segmentation of Consumer GPUs (''2013 - Present'')===
	Nvidia's ~~Kepler-generation GK110 GPU contains 64 double precision (FP64) CUDA cores per SMX block on all variants of the chip, including~~ consumer GeForce ~~cards, the GTX Titan,~~ and ~~the~~ enterprise Tesla ~~K40.<ref>{{Cite web \|last=Angelini \|first=Chris \|date=2013-02-19 \|title=GK110: The True Tank \|url=https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/geforce-gtx-titan-gk110-review~~,~~3438-2.html \|url-status=live \|access-date=2026-03-02 \|website=Tom's Hardware}}</ref> On the GTX 780 and GTX 780 Ti, Nvidia forced the FP64 units to run at one eighth of the GPU's clock rate~~, ~~yielding an effective FP64 throughput of 1/24 that of FP32~~, despite the hardware being fully present.<ref>{{Cite web \|last=Angelini \|first=Chris \|date=2013-02-19 \|title=Compute Performance And Striking A Balance \|url=https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/geforce-gtx-titan-gk110-review,3438-3.html \|url-status=live \|access-date=2026-03-02 \|website=Tom's Hardware}}</ref> The GeForce GTX Titan, also based on ~~GK110, shipped with a toggle in the Nvidia control panel under "CUDA~~ - ~~Double precision" that restored the full 1/3 FP64 rate at the cost of disabling GPU Boost, confirming the limitation on other GK110 consumer cards was a deliberate restriction~~ rather than a hardware incapability.<ref>{{Cite web \|last=Angelini \|first=Chris \|date=2017-05-25 \|title=Nvidia Titan Xp 12GB Review \|url=https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-titan-xp,5066-14.html \|url-status=live \|access-date=2026-03-02 \|website=Tom's Hardware}}</ref> The Tesla K40, built on the same GK110 die, delivered the full 1/3 FP64 rate and retailed at several times the price of consumer equivalents. Beginning with the Maxwell architecture in 2014, Nvidia dropped native FP64 throughput to 1/32 of FP32 by physically reducing the number of FP64 cores on consumer dies, ending the firmware restriction but continuing the segmentation through hardware ~~design~~.<ref>{{Cite web \|last=Smith \|first=Ryan \|date=2015-03-17 \|title=GM200: All Graphics, Hold The Double Precision \|url=https://www.anandtech.com/show/9059/the-nvidia-geforce-gtx-titan-x-review/2 \|url-status=live \|access-date=2026-03-02 \|website=AnandTech}}</ref>		Nvidia's consumer GeForce and enterprise Quadro/Tesla product lines frequently share identical silicon, with features differentiated through firmware, driver configuration, or on-die security rather than hardware capability.

	===~~vBIOS Signature Lock via Falcon Security Processor (''2014~~ - ~~Present'')~~===		On the Kepler-generation GK110 GPU, all variants of the chip contain 64 double precision (FP64) CUDA cores per SMX block, but on consumer cards such as the GTX 780 and GTX 780 Ti, Nvidia forced the FP64 units to run at one eighth of the GPU's clock rate, reducing effective FP64 throughput to 1/24 that of FP32.<ref>{{Cite web \|last=Angelini \|first=Chris \|date=2013-02-19 \|title=Compute Performance And Striking A Balance \|url=https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/geforce-gtx-titan-gk110-review,3438-3.html \|url-status=live \|access-date=2026-03-02 \|website=Tom's Hardware}}</ref> The GeForce GTX Titan, also GK110, shipped with a control panel toggle that restored the full 1/3 FP64 rate, confirming the restriction was deliberate.<ref>{{Cite web \|last=Angelini \|first=Chris \|date=2017-05-25 \|title=Nvidia Titan Xp 12GB Review \|url=https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-titan-xp,5066-14.html \|url-status=live \|access-date=2026-03-02 \|website=Tom's Hardware}}</ref> The Tesla K40, built on the same die, delivered full FP64 at several times the consumer price.
	GeForce ~~and Quadro cards frequently share identical silicon~~, with ~~enterprise features differentiated by firmware and driver configuration~~. The GTX 680 and Quadro K5000 ~~both used~~ the GK104 die,<ref>{{Cite web \|last=Smith \|first=Ryan \|date=2012-08-07 \|title=NVIDIA Announces Kepler-Based Quadro K5000 & Second-Generation Maximus \|url=https://www.anandtech.com/show/6140/nvidia-announces-keplerbased-quadro-k5000-secondgeneration-maximus \|url-status=live \|access-date=2026-03-02 \|website=AnandTech}}</ref> and users could cross-flash a Quadro vBIOS onto a GeForce card or modify resistor straps on the PCB to change the PCI device ID, unlocking ~~Quadro driver support and associated~~ features such as 10-bit colour output~~, genlock,~~ and professional OpenGL optimisations.<ref>{{Cite web \|date=2013-03 \|title=Hacking NVidia Cards into their Professional Counterparts \|url=https://www.eevblog.com/forum/general-computing/hacking-nvidia-cards-into-their-professional-counterparts/ \|url-status=live \|access-date=2026-03-02 \|website=EEVblog Forum}}</ref> With the GeForce 900 series ~~Maxwell launch~~ in 2014, Nvidia introduced an on-die security processor codenamed Falcon ~~across all its GPUs, which~~ enforced vBIOS signature verification ~~and prevented~~ cards from booting with unauthorised firmware, ending the cross-flashing practice.<ref>{{Cite web ~~\|last=Sherr \|first=Mark~~ \|date=2023-08-21 \|title=Nvidia vBIOS Modding Is Back After Signature Lock Broken \|url=https://www.tomshardware.com/news/new-nvidia-bios-modding-tools \|url-status=live \|access-date=2026-03-02 \|website=Tom's Hardware}}</ref> In August 2023, modders ~~discovered~~ that Nvidia's own NVFlash utility contained a built-in mismatch bypass and released two tools, OMGVflash and NVflashk, which re-enabled cross-flashing on cards up to the RTX 40 series.<ref>{{Cite web \|date=2023-08-22 \|title=NVIDIA BIOS Signature Lock breakthrough: New tools enable vBIOS modding and crossflash \|url=https://www.igorslab.de/en/durchbruch-bei-nvidia-bios-signature-lock-neue-tools-ermoeglichen-vbios-modding-und-crossflash/ \|url-status=live \|access-date=2026-03-02 \|website=igor'sLAB}}</ref>
			The GTX 680 and Quadro K5000 likewise shared the GK104 die,<ref>{{Cite web \|last=Smith \|first=Ryan \|date=2012-08-07 \|title=NVIDIA Announces Kepler-Based Quadro K5000 & Second-Generation Maximus \|url=https://www.anandtech.com/show/6140/nvidia-announces-keplerbased-quadro-k5000-secondgeneration-maximus \|url-status=live \|access-date=2026-03-02 \|website=AnandTech}}</ref> and users could cross-flash a Quadro vBIOS onto a GeForce card or modify resistor straps on the PCB to change the PCI device ID, unlocking features such as 10-bit colour output and professional OpenGL optimisations.<ref>{{Cite web \|date=2013-03 \|title=Hacking NVidia Cards into their Professional Counterparts \|url=https://www.eevblog.com/forum/general-computing/hacking-nvidia-cards-into-their-professional-counterparts/ \|url-status=live \|access-date=2026-03-02 \|website=EEVblog Forum}}</ref> With the GeForce 900 series in 2014, Nvidia introduced an on-die security processor codenamed Falcon that enforced vBIOS signature verification, preventing cards from booting with unauthorised firmware and ending the cross-flashing practice.<ref>{{Cite web \|date=2023-08-21 \|title=Nvidia vBIOS Modding Is Back After Signature Lock Broken \|url=https://www.tomshardware.com/news/new-nvidia-bios-modding-tools \|url-status=live \|access-date=2026-03-02 \|website=Tom's Hardware}}</ref> In August 2023, modders found that Nvidia's own NVFlash utility contained a built-in mismatch bypass and released two tools, OMGVflash and NVflashk, which re-enabled cross-flashing on cards up to the RTX 40 series.<ref>{{Cite web \|date=2023-08-22 \|title=NVIDIA BIOS Signature Lock breakthrough: New tools enable vBIOS modding and crossflash \|url=https://www.igorslab.de/en/durchbruch-bei-nvidia-bios-signature-lock-neue-tools-ermoeglichen-vbios-modding-und-crossflash/ \|url-status=live \|access-date=2026-03-02 \|website=igor'sLAB}}</ref>

			Nvidia also restricts virtual GPU (vGPU) functionality to enterprise products through a driver-level PCI device ID check rather than any hardware limitation. The RTX 3090 and enterprise RTX A5500 are both built on the GA102 die with near-identical specifications, yet only the A5500 supports vGPU.<ref>{{Cite web \|last=Lozano \|first=Jorge \|date=2025-08-10 \|title=Nvidia locks datacenter features out of consumer GPUs \|url=https://www.xda-developers.com/nvidia-locks-datacenter-features-out-of-consumer-gpus/ \|url-status=live \|access-date=2026-03-02 \|website=XDA Developers}}</ref> The vgpu_unlock project demonstrates this by intercepting driver calls and spoofing the device ID, enabling Maxwell and newer consumer GPUs to run vGPU without hardware modification.<ref>{{Cite web \|last=DualCoder \|title=vgpu_unlock: Unlock vGPU functionality for consumer grade GPUs \|url=https://github.com/DualCoder/vgpu_unlock \|url-status=live \|access-date=2026-03-02 \|website=GitHub}}</ref>

	===Stagnation of Consumer GPU Offerings===		===Stagnation of Consumer GPU Offerings===

Azaydan: In 2014, Nvidia added an on-die security processor called Falcon to the GTX 900 series that enforced vBIOS signature checks, killing a longstanding practice of cross-flashing GeForce cards with Quadro firmware.

2026-03-02T05:20:38Z

In 2014, Nvidia added an on-die security processor called Falcon to the GTX 900 series that enforced vBIOS signature checks, killing a longstanding practice of cross-flashing GeForce cards with Quadro firmware.

← Older revision		Revision as of 05:20, 2 March 2026
Line 23:		Line 23:
	===Artificial FP64 Restriction on Kepler Consumer GPUs (''2013 - 2014'')===		===Artificial FP64 Restriction on Kepler Consumer GPUs (''2013 - 2014'')===
	Nvidia's Kepler-generation GK110 GPU contains 64 double precision (FP64) CUDA cores per SMX block on all variants of the chip, including consumer GeForce cards, the GTX Titan, and the enterprise Tesla K40.<ref>{{Cite web \|last=Angelini \|first=Chris \|date=2013-02-19 \|title=GK110: The True Tank \|url=https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/geforce-gtx-titan-gk110-review,3438-2.html \|url-status=live \|access-date=2026-03-02 \|website=Tom's Hardware}}</ref> On the GTX 780 and GTX 780 Ti, Nvidia forced the FP64 units to run at one eighth of the GPU's clock rate, yielding an effective FP64 throughput of 1/24 that of FP32, despite the hardware being fully present.<ref>{{Cite web \|last=Angelini \|first=Chris \|date=2013-02-19 \|title=Compute Performance And Striking A Balance \|url=https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/geforce-gtx-titan-gk110-review,3438-3.html \|url-status=live \|access-date=2026-03-02 \|website=Tom's Hardware}}</ref> The GeForce GTX Titan, also based on GK110, shipped with a toggle in the Nvidia control panel under "CUDA - Double precision" that restored the full 1/3 FP64 rate at the cost of disabling GPU Boost, confirming the limitation on other GK110 consumer cards was a deliberate restriction rather than a hardware incapability.<ref>{{Cite web \|last=Angelini \|first=Chris \|date=2017-05-25 \|title=Nvidia Titan Xp 12GB Review \|url=https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-titan-xp,5066-14.html \|url-status=live \|access-date=2026-03-02 \|website=Tom's Hardware}}</ref> The Tesla K40, built on the same GK110 die, delivered the full 1/3 FP64 rate and retailed at several times the price of consumer equivalents. Beginning with the Maxwell architecture in 2014, Nvidia dropped native FP64 throughput to 1/32 of FP32 by physically reducing the number of FP64 cores on consumer dies, ending the firmware restriction but continuing the segmentation through hardware design.<ref>{{Cite web \|last=Smith \|first=Ryan \|date=2015-03-17 \|title=GM200: All Graphics, Hold The Double Precision \|url=https://www.anandtech.com/show/9059/the-nvidia-geforce-gtx-titan-x-review/2 \|url-status=live \|access-date=2026-03-02 \|website=AnandTech}}</ref>		Nvidia's Kepler-generation GK110 GPU contains 64 double precision (FP64) CUDA cores per SMX block on all variants of the chip, including consumer GeForce cards, the GTX Titan, and the enterprise Tesla K40.<ref>{{Cite web \|last=Angelini \|first=Chris \|date=2013-02-19 \|title=GK110: The True Tank \|url=https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/geforce-gtx-titan-gk110-review,3438-2.html \|url-status=live \|access-date=2026-03-02 \|website=Tom's Hardware}}</ref> On the GTX 780 and GTX 780 Ti, Nvidia forced the FP64 units to run at one eighth of the GPU's clock rate, yielding an effective FP64 throughput of 1/24 that of FP32, despite the hardware being fully present.<ref>{{Cite web \|last=Angelini \|first=Chris \|date=2013-02-19 \|title=Compute Performance And Striking A Balance \|url=https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/geforce-gtx-titan-gk110-review,3438-3.html \|url-status=live \|access-date=2026-03-02 \|website=Tom's Hardware}}</ref> The GeForce GTX Titan, also based on GK110, shipped with a toggle in the Nvidia control panel under "CUDA - Double precision" that restored the full 1/3 FP64 rate at the cost of disabling GPU Boost, confirming the limitation on other GK110 consumer cards was a deliberate restriction rather than a hardware incapability.<ref>{{Cite web \|last=Angelini \|first=Chris \|date=2017-05-25 \|title=Nvidia Titan Xp 12GB Review \|url=https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-titan-xp,5066-14.html \|url-status=live \|access-date=2026-03-02 \|website=Tom's Hardware}}</ref> The Tesla K40, built on the same GK110 die, delivered the full 1/3 FP64 rate and retailed at several times the price of consumer equivalents. Beginning with the Maxwell architecture in 2014, Nvidia dropped native FP64 throughput to 1/32 of FP32 by physically reducing the number of FP64 cores on consumer dies, ending the firmware restriction but continuing the segmentation through hardware design.<ref>{{Cite web \|last=Smith \|first=Ryan \|date=2015-03-17 \|title=GM200: All Graphics, Hold The Double Precision \|url=https://www.anandtech.com/show/9059/the-nvidia-geforce-gtx-titan-x-review/2 \|url-status=live \|access-date=2026-03-02 \|website=AnandTech}}</ref>

			===vBIOS Signature Lock via Falcon Security Processor (''2014 - Present'')===
			GeForce and Quadro cards frequently share identical silicon, with enterprise features differentiated by firmware and driver configuration. The GTX 680 and Quadro K5000 both used the GK104 die,<ref>{{Cite web \|last=Smith \|first=Ryan \|date=2012-08-07 \|title=NVIDIA Announces Kepler-Based Quadro K5000 & Second-Generation Maximus \|url=https://www.anandtech.com/show/6140/nvidia-announces-keplerbased-quadro-k5000-secondgeneration-maximus \|url-status=live \|access-date=2026-03-02 \|website=AnandTech}}</ref> and users could cross-flash a Quadro vBIOS onto a GeForce card or modify resistor straps on the PCB to change the PCI device ID, unlocking Quadro driver support and associated features such as 10-bit colour output, genlock, and professional OpenGL optimisations.<ref>{{Cite web \|date=2013-03 \|title=Hacking NVidia Cards into their Professional Counterparts \|url=https://www.eevblog.com/forum/general-computing/hacking-nvidia-cards-into-their-professional-counterparts/ \|url-status=live \|access-date=2026-03-02 \|website=EEVblog Forum}}</ref> With the GeForce 900 series Maxwell launch in 2014, Nvidia introduced an on-die security processor codenamed Falcon across all its GPUs, which enforced vBIOS signature verification and prevented cards from booting with unauthorised firmware, ending the cross-flashing practice.<ref>{{Cite web \|last=Sherr \|first=Mark \|date=2023-08-21 \|title=Nvidia vBIOS Modding Is Back After Signature Lock Broken \|url=https://www.tomshardware.com/news/new-nvidia-bios-modding-tools \|url-status=live \|access-date=2026-03-02 \|website=Tom's Hardware}}</ref> In August 2023, modders discovered that Nvidia's own NVFlash utility contained a built-in mismatch bypass and released two tools, OMGVflash and NVflashk, which re-enabled cross-flashing on cards up to the RTX 40 series.<ref>{{Cite web \|date=2023-08-22 \|title=NVIDIA BIOS Signature Lock breakthrough: New tools enable vBIOS modding and crossflash \|url=https://www.igorslab.de/en/durchbruch-bei-nvidia-bios-signature-lock-neue-tools-ermoeglichen-vbios-modding-und-crossflash/ \|url-status=live \|access-date=2026-03-02 \|website=igor'sLAB}}</ref>

	===Stagnation of Consumer GPU Offerings===		===Stagnation of Consumer GPU Offerings===

Azaydan: Added some sources and corrected some imprecision

2026-03-02T05:17:05Z

Added some sources and corrected some imprecision

← Older revision		Revision as of 05:17, 2 March 2026
Line 21:		Line 21:
	In Nvidia's terms of service regarding accessing their website, under "Informal Resolution" users are required to agree to resolve legal disputes with Nvidia by arbitration from Judicial Arbitration and Mediation Services (JAMS).<ref>{{Cite web \|title=NVIDIA Legal Notices \|url=https://www.nvidia.com/en-gb/about-nvidia/terms-of-service/ \|access-date=2025-06-19 \|website=NVIDIA \|language=en-gb \|archive-url=http://web.archive.org/web/20260221043438/https://www.nvidia.com/en-gb/about-nvidia/terms-of-service/ \|archive-date=21 Feb 2026}}</ref>		In Nvidia's terms of service regarding accessing their website, under "Informal Resolution" users are required to agree to resolve legal disputes with Nvidia by arbitration from Judicial Arbitration and Mediation Services (JAMS).<ref>{{Cite web \|title=NVIDIA Legal Notices \|url=https://www.nvidia.com/en-gb/about-nvidia/terms-of-service/ \|access-date=2025-06-19 \|website=NVIDIA \|language=en-gb \|archive-url=http://web.archive.org/web/20260221043438/https://www.nvidia.com/en-gb/about-nvidia/terms-of-service/ \|archive-date=21 Feb 2026}}</ref>

	===Artificial FP64 ~~Limitation~~ on Consumer GPUs (''~~2012~~ - 2014'')===		===Artificial FP64 Restriction on Kepler Consumer GPUs (''2013 - 2014'')===
	On Kepler-~~era~~ GK110 ~~graphics cards, Nvidia used a driver-imposed clock rate restriction to artificially limit~~ double precision ~~floating point~~ (FP64) ~~compute performance~~ on consumer ~~variants~~, ~~despite~~ the ~~hardware being fully capable. The~~ GTX ~~780~~ and ~~GTX 780 Ti share the GK110 die with~~ the Tesla K40, ~~which delivers FP64 at 1~~/~~3 the rate of FP32.~~ On the ~~consumer cards~~, ~~the driver deliberately clocked~~ the FP64 units at ~~1/8~~ of the ~~chip~~'s ~~base~~ rate, yielding a 1/24 ~~ratio~~.<ref>{{Cite web \|last=Angelini \|first=Chris \|date=2013-11-07 \|title=~~Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 Ti Review: GK110, Fully Unlocked~~ \|url=https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/geforce-gtx-~~780~~-ti-review-~~benchmarks,3663~~.html \|url-status=live \|access-date=2026-03-02 \|website=Tom's Hardware}}</ref> The GTX Titan, also based on GK110, shipped with a ~~driver~~ control panel ~~toggle~~ that ~~could unlock~~ the full 1/3 FP64 rate at the cost of disabling GPU Boost, confirming the limitation was a ~~software~~ restriction rather than a hardware ~~one~~.<ref>{{Cite web \|last=Angelini \|first=Chris \|date=~~2013~~-02-19 \|title=~~Compute Performance And Striking A Balance -~~ Nvidia ~~GeForce GTX~~ Titan ~~6 GB: GK110 On A Gaming Card~~ \|url=https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/~~geforce-gtx~~-titan-~~gk110-review~~,~~3438~~-3.html \|url-status=live \|access-date=2026-03-02 \|website=Tom's Hardware}}</ref> ~~From~~ the Maxwell architecture ~~onward~~, Nvidia ~~switched~~ to physically reducing the number of FP64 cores on consumer dies, ending the ~~driver~~ restriction but continuing hardware-~~level segmentation between consumer and enterprise products~~.		Nvidia's Kepler-generation GK110 GPU contains 64 double precision (FP64) CUDA cores per SMX block on all variants of the chip, including consumer GeForce cards, the GTX Titan, and the enterprise Tesla K40.<ref>{{Cite web \|last=Angelini \|first=Chris \|date=2013-02-19 \|title=GK110: The True Tank \|url=https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/geforce-gtx-titan-gk110-review,3438-2.html \|url-status=live \|access-date=2026-03-02 \|website=Tom's Hardware}}</ref> On the GTX 780 and GTX 780 Ti, Nvidia forced the FP64 units to run at one eighth of the GPU's clock rate, yielding an effective FP64 throughput of 1/24 that of FP32, despite the hardware being fully present.<ref>{{Cite web \|last=Angelini \|first=Chris \|date=2013-02-19 \|title=Compute Performance And Striking A Balance \|url=https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/geforce-gtx-titan-gk110-review,3438-3.html \|url-status=live \|access-date=2026-03-02 \|website=Tom's Hardware}}</ref> The GeForce GTX Titan, also based on GK110, shipped with a toggle in the Nvidia control panel under "CUDA - Double precision" that restored the full 1/3 FP64 rate at the cost of disabling GPU Boost, confirming the limitation on other GK110 consumer cards was a deliberate restriction rather than a hardware incapability.<ref>{{Cite web \|last=Angelini \|first=Chris \|date=2017-05-25 \|title=Nvidia Titan Xp 12GB Review \|url=https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-titan-xp,5066-14.html \|url-status=live \|access-date=2026-03-02 \|website=Tom's Hardware}}</ref> The Tesla K40, built on the same GK110 die, delivered the full 1/3 FP64 rate and retailed at several times the price of consumer equivalents. Beginning with the Maxwell architecture in 2014, Nvidia dropped native FP64 throughput to 1/32 of FP32 by physically reducing the number of FP64 cores on consumer dies, ending the firmware restriction but continuing the segmentation through hardware design.<ref>{{Cite web \|last=Smith \|first=Ryan \|date=2015-03-17 \|title=GM200: All Graphics, Hold The Double Precision \|url=https://www.anandtech.com/show/9059/the-nvidia-geforce-gtx-titan-x-review/2 \|url-status=live \|access-date=2026-03-02 \|website=AnandTech}}</ref>

	===Stagnation of Consumer GPU Offerings===		===Stagnation of Consumer GPU Offerings===

Azaydan: Corrections about the Artificial FP64 Limitation on Consumer GPUs

2026-03-02T05:06:59Z

Corrections about the Artificial FP64 Limitation on Consumer GPUs

← Older revision		Revision as of 05:06, 2 March 2026
Line 21:		Line 21:
	In Nvidia's terms of service regarding accessing their website, under "Informal Resolution" users are required to agree to resolve legal disputes with Nvidia by arbitration from Judicial Arbitration and Mediation Services (JAMS).<ref>{{Cite web \|title=NVIDIA Legal Notices \|url=https://www.nvidia.com/en-gb/about-nvidia/terms-of-service/ \|access-date=2025-06-19 \|website=NVIDIA \|language=en-gb \|archive-url=http://web.archive.org/web/20260221043438/https://www.nvidia.com/en-gb/about-nvidia/terms-of-service/ \|archive-date=21 Feb 2026}}</ref>		In Nvidia's terms of service regarding accessing their website, under "Informal Resolution" users are required to agree to resolve legal disputes with Nvidia by arbitration from Judicial Arbitration and Mediation Services (JAMS).<ref>{{Cite web \|title=NVIDIA Legal Notices \|url=https://www.nvidia.com/en-gb/about-nvidia/terms-of-service/ \|access-date=2025-06-19 \|website=NVIDIA \|language=en-gb \|archive-url=http://web.archive.org/web/20260221043438/https://www.nvidia.com/en-gb/about-nvidia/terms-of-service/ \|archive-date=21 Feb 2026}}</ref>

	===Artificial FP64 Limitation on Consumer GPUs (''~~~2013~~ - ~~Present~~'')===		===Artificial FP64 Limitation on Consumer GPUs (''2012 - 2014'')===
	Nvidia ~~manufactures consumer GPUs that share identical or near~~-~~identical silicon with their enterprise Tesla and Quadro product lines, yet~~ artificially ~~restricts~~ double precision floating point (FP64) compute performance on consumer variants ~~through firmware and driver configuration rather than~~ hardware ~~incapability~~. The GTX 780 and ~~the Tesla K40, for instance, both use~~ the GK110 die~~, yet~~ the Tesla K40 delivers FP64 ~~performance~~ at 1/3 the rate of FP32, ~~while~~ the ~~GTX 780 is limited to~~ 1/24.<ref>{{Cite web \|last=~~ArrayFire~~ \|date= \|title=~~Explaining FP64 performance on GPUs~~ \|url=https://~~arrayfire~~.com/~~blog~~/~~explaining~~-~~fp64~~-~~performance~~-on-~~gpus/~~ \|url-status=live \|access-date=2026-03-02 \|website=~~ArrayFire~~}}</ref> The ~~original GeForce~~ GTX Titan ~~briefly~~ shipped with ~~near-~~full ~~FP64 capability enabled, serving both as Nvidia's consumer flagship and entry-level FP64 compute card simultaneously. From Maxwell onward, Nvidia permanently dropped FP64 on consumer parts to~~ 1/32 of ~~FP32 performance~~, ~~fully divorcing consumer and enterprise silicon feature sets despite continued die sharing~~.<ref>{{Cite web \|last=Angelini \|first=Chris \|date=~~2015~~-03-17 \|title=~~GM200~~ - ~~All Graphics, Hold The Double Precision~~ \|url=https://www.~~anandtech~~.com/~~show/9059~~/~~the-nvidia-~~geforce-gtx-titan-x-review/2 \|url-status=live \|access-date=2026-03-02 \|website=~~AnandTech~~}}</ref> ~~This practice steers users requiring~~ FP64 ~~compute toward~~ enterprise products ~~that can cost several times more than equivalent consumer hardware built on the same die~~.		On Kepler-era GK110 graphics cards, Nvidia used a driver-imposed clock rate restriction to artificially limit double precision floating point (FP64) compute performance on consumer variants, despite the hardware being fully capable. The GTX 780 and GTX 780 Ti share the GK110 die with the Tesla K40, which delivers FP64 at 1/3 the rate of FP32. On the consumer cards, the driver deliberately clocked the FP64 units at 1/8 of the chip's base rate, yielding a 1/24 ratio.<ref>{{Cite web \|last=Angelini \|first=Chris \|date=2013-11-07 \|title=Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 Ti Review: GK110, Fully Unlocked \|url=https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/geforce-gtx-780-ti-review-benchmarks,3663.html \|url-status=live \|access-date=2026-03-02 \|website=Tom's Hardware}}</ref> The GTX Titan, also based on GK110, shipped with a driver control panel toggle that could unlock the full 1/3 FP64 rate at the cost of disabling GPU Boost, confirming the limitation was a software restriction rather than a hardware one.<ref>{{Cite web \|last=Angelini \|first=Chris \|date=2013-02-19 \|title=Compute Performance And Striking A Balance - Nvidia GeForce GTX Titan 6 GB: GK110 On A Gaming Card \|url=https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/geforce-gtx-titan-gk110-review,3438-3.html \|url-status=live \|access-date=2026-03-02 \|website=Tom's Hardware}}</ref> From the Maxwell architecture onward, Nvidia switched to physically reducing the number of FP64 cores on consumer dies, ending the driver restriction but continuing hardware-level segmentation between consumer and enterprise products.

	===Stagnation of Consumer GPU Offerings===		===Stagnation of Consumer GPU Offerings===

Azaydan: Nvidia limits FP64 compute on consumer GPUs via firmware despite sharing identical silicon with enterprise Tesla/Quadro cards.

2026-03-02T05:02:23Z

Nvidia limits FP64 compute on consumer GPUs via firmware despite sharing identical silicon with enterprise Tesla/Quadro cards.

← Older revision		Revision as of 05:02, 2 March 2026
Line 20:		Line 20:
	===Forced Arbitration===		===Forced Arbitration===
	In Nvidia's terms of service regarding accessing their website, under "Informal Resolution" users are required to agree to resolve legal disputes with Nvidia by arbitration from Judicial Arbitration and Mediation Services (JAMS).<ref>{{Cite web \|title=NVIDIA Legal Notices \|url=https://www.nvidia.com/en-gb/about-nvidia/terms-of-service/ \|access-date=2025-06-19 \|website=NVIDIA \|language=en-gb \|archive-url=http://web.archive.org/web/20260221043438/https://www.nvidia.com/en-gb/about-nvidia/terms-of-service/ \|archive-date=21 Feb 2026}}</ref>		In Nvidia's terms of service regarding accessing their website, under "Informal Resolution" users are required to agree to resolve legal disputes with Nvidia by arbitration from Judicial Arbitration and Mediation Services (JAMS).<ref>{{Cite web \|title=NVIDIA Legal Notices \|url=https://www.nvidia.com/en-gb/about-nvidia/terms-of-service/ \|access-date=2025-06-19 \|website=NVIDIA \|language=en-gb \|archive-url=http://web.archive.org/web/20260221043438/https://www.nvidia.com/en-gb/about-nvidia/terms-of-service/ \|archive-date=21 Feb 2026}}</ref>

			===Artificial FP64 Limitation on Consumer GPUs (''~2013 - Present'')===
			Nvidia manufactures consumer GPUs that share identical or near-identical silicon with their enterprise Tesla and Quadro product lines, yet artificially restricts double precision floating point (FP64) compute performance on consumer variants through firmware and driver configuration rather than hardware incapability. The GTX 780 and the Tesla K40, for instance, both use the GK110 die, yet the Tesla K40 delivers FP64 performance at 1/3 the rate of FP32, while the GTX 780 is limited to 1/24.<ref>{{Cite web \|last=ArrayFire \|date= \|title=Explaining FP64 performance on GPUs \|url=https://arrayfire.com/blog/explaining-fp64-performance-on-gpus/ \|url-status=live \|access-date=2026-03-02 \|website=ArrayFire}}</ref> The original GeForce GTX Titan briefly shipped with near-full FP64 capability enabled, serving both as Nvidia's consumer flagship and entry-level FP64 compute card simultaneously. From Maxwell onward, Nvidia permanently dropped FP64 on consumer parts to 1/32 of FP32 performance, fully divorcing consumer and enterprise silicon feature sets despite continued die sharing.<ref>{{Cite web \|last=Angelini \|first=Chris \|date=2015-03-17 \|title=GM200 - All Graphics, Hold The Double Precision \|url=https://www.anandtech.com/show/9059/the-nvidia-geforce-gtx-titan-x-review/2 \|url-status=live \|access-date=2026-03-02 \|website=AnandTech}}</ref> This practice steers users requiring FP64 compute toward enterprise products that can cost several times more than equivalent consumer hardware built on the same die.

	===Stagnation of Consumer GPU Offerings===		===Stagnation of Consumer GPU Offerings===

Bananabot: Added archive URLs for 6 citation(s) using CRWCitationBot

2026-02-23T06:48:11Z

Added archive URLs for 6 citation(s) using CRWCitationBot

Rudxain: rm AMD & Intel from "See also", as they're both already linked in this article

2026-02-23T05:56:35Z

rm AMD & Intel from "See also", as they're both already linked in this article

← Older revision		Revision as of 05:56, 23 February 2026
Line 92:		Line 92:

	==See also==		==See also==

	*[[AMD]]
	*[[Intel]]
	*[[Qualcomm]]		*[[Qualcomm]]

Rudxain: link FTC; fix typo

2026-02-23T05:54:49Z

link FTC; fix typo

← Older revision		Revision as of 05:54, 23 February 2026
Line 63:		Line 63:
	On 18 September, 2025, Nvidia and Intel jointly announced in a press release, Nvidia's $5,000,000,000 USD investment into Intel stock.<ref>{{Cite web \|date=2025-09-18 \|title=NVIDIA and Intel to Develop AI Infrastructure and Personal Computing Products \|url=https://nvidianews.nvidia.com/news/nvidia-and-intel-to-develop-ai-infrastructure-and-personal-computing-products \|url-status=live \|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/20251105000000/https://nvidianews.nvidia.com/news/nvidia-and-intel-to-develop-ai-infrastructure-and-personal-computing-products \|archive-date=2025-11-05 \|access-date=2025-11-05 \|website=NVIDIA Newsroom}}</ref> Finalized on December 29, 2025, Nvidia purchased 214.8 million Intel shares at $23.28 per share.<ref>{{Cite news \|last=Carroll \|first=Shannon \|date=Dec 29, 2025 \|title=Nvidia’s $5 billion Intel bet just became official \|url=https://qz.com/nvidia-intel-5-billion-deal-done-ai-partnership \|url-status=live \|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20260102013658/https://qz.com/nvidia-intel-5-billion-deal-done-ai-partnership \|archive-date=Jan 2, 2026 \|access-date=Jan 7, 2026 \|work=Quartz}}</ref> Both Nvidia and Intel develop GPUs for consumer and enterprise applications, making them competitors. In both sectors Nvidia holds the highest market share, dwarfing both AMD and Intel by magnitudes. As a result many have developed concerns over the persistence of Intel's GPU offerings and have branded the investment as Nvidia's attempt at furthering their monopoly by investing in their competitor.		On 18 September, 2025, Nvidia and Intel jointly announced in a press release, Nvidia's $5,000,000,000 USD investment into Intel stock.<ref>{{Cite web \|date=2025-09-18 \|title=NVIDIA and Intel to Develop AI Infrastructure and Personal Computing Products \|url=https://nvidianews.nvidia.com/news/nvidia-and-intel-to-develop-ai-infrastructure-and-personal-computing-products \|url-status=live \|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/20251105000000/https://nvidianews.nvidia.com/news/nvidia-and-intel-to-develop-ai-infrastructure-and-personal-computing-products \|archive-date=2025-11-05 \|access-date=2025-11-05 \|website=NVIDIA Newsroom}}</ref> Finalized on December 29, 2025, Nvidia purchased 214.8 million Intel shares at $23.28 per share.<ref>{{Cite news \|last=Carroll \|first=Shannon \|date=Dec 29, 2025 \|title=Nvidia’s $5 billion Intel bet just became official \|url=https://qz.com/nvidia-intel-5-billion-deal-done-ai-partnership \|url-status=live \|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20260102013658/https://qz.com/nvidia-intel-5-billion-deal-done-ai-partnership \|archive-date=Jan 2, 2026 \|access-date=Jan 7, 2026 \|work=Quartz}}</ref> Both Nvidia and Intel develop GPUs for consumer and enterprise applications, making them competitors. In both sectors Nvidia holds the highest market share, dwarfing both AMD and Intel by magnitudes. As a result many have developed concerns over the persistence of Intel's GPU offerings and have branded the investment as Nvidia's attempt at furthering their monopoly by investing in their competitor.

	The U.S. Federal Trade ~~Commision~~ (FTC) announced in a notice that U.S. antitrust agencies cleared the investment,<ref>{{Cite news \|last=Bajwa \|first=Arsheeya \|date=2025-12-29 \|editor-last=D'Silva \|editor-first=Anil \|title="Nvidia takes $5 billion stake in Intel under September agreement" \|url=https://www.reuters.com/legal/transactional/nvidia-takes-5-billion-stake-intel-under-september-agreement-2025-12-29/ \|url-status=live \|access-date=2026-01-07 \|work=Reuters}}</ref> despite this being anti-consumer and making Nvidia a monopoly.		The U.S. [[Federal Trade Commission]] (FTC) announced in a notice that U.S. antitrust agencies cleared the investment,<ref>{{Cite news \|last=Bajwa \|first=Arsheeya \|date=2025-12-29 \|editor-last=D'Silva \|editor-first=Anil \|title="Nvidia takes $5 billion stake in Intel under September agreement" \|url=https://www.reuters.com/legal/transactional/nvidia-takes-5-billion-stake-intel-under-september-agreement-2025-12-29/ \|url-status=live \|access-date=2026-01-07 \|work=Reuters}}</ref> despite this being anti-consumer and making Nvidia a monopoly.

	===Partnership with [[Palantir]] (''2025.10.28'')===		===Partnership with [[Palantir]] (''2025.10.28'')===

← Older revision		Revision as of 06:48, 23 February 2026
Line 19:		Line 19:

	===Forced Arbitration===		===Forced Arbitration===
	In Nvidia's terms of service regarding accessing their website, under "Informal Resolution" users are required to agree to resolve legal disputes with Nvidia by arbitration from Judicial Arbitration and Mediation Services (JAMS).<ref>{{Cite web \|title=NVIDIA Legal Notices \|url=https://www.nvidia.com/en-gb/about-nvidia/terms-of-service/ \|access-date=2025-06-19 \|website=NVIDIA \|language=en-gb}}</ref>		In Nvidia's terms of service regarding accessing their website, under "Informal Resolution" users are required to agree to resolve legal disputes with Nvidia by arbitration from Judicial Arbitration and Mediation Services (JAMS).<ref>{{Cite web \|title=NVIDIA Legal Notices \|url=https://www.nvidia.com/en-gb/about-nvidia/terms-of-service/ \|access-date=2025-06-19 \|website=NVIDIA \|language=en-gb \|archive-url=http://web.archive.org/web/20260221043438/https://www.nvidia.com/en-gb/about-nvidia/terms-of-service/ \|archive-date=21 Feb 2026}}</ref>

	===Stagnation of Consumer GPU Offerings===		===Stagnation of Consumer GPU Offerings===
Line 37:		Line 37:

	===Data scraping without permission for AI training (''2024 - Present'')===		===Data scraping without permission for AI training (''2024 - Present'')===
	Nvidia is heavily involved in [[Artificial_intelligence/training\|training AI]] models though plagiarism.<ref>{{Cite web \|last=Cole \|first=Samantha \|date=5 Aug 2024 \|title=Leaked Documents Show Nvidia Scraping ‘A Human Lifetime’ of Videos Per Day to Train AI \|url=https://www.404media.co/nvidia-ai-scraping-foundational-model-cosmos-project/ \|url-status=live \|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20250414032908/https://www.404media.co/nvidia-ai-scraping-foundational-model-cosmos-project/ \|archive-date=14 Apr 2025 \|access-date=15 Jun 2025 \|website=404 Media}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web \|last=Morales \|first=Jowi \|date=6 Aug 2024 \|title=Nvidia accused of scraping ‘A Human Lifetime’ of videos per day to train AI \|url=https://www.tomshardware.com/tech-industry/artificial-intelligence/nvidia-accused-of-scraping-a-human-lifetime-of-videos-per-day-to-train-ai \|url-status=live \|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20250211081108/https://www.tomshardware.com/tech-industry/artificial-intelligence/nvidia-accused-of-scraping-a-human-lifetime-of-videos-per-day-to-train-ai \|archive-date=11 Feb 2025 \|access-date=15 Jun 2025 \|website=Tom's Hardware}}</ref> In January 2026, a court filing revealed that Nvidia developers contacted Anna's Archive to evaluate the use of pirated content for training, which management gave [[wikipedia:Greenlight\|green-light]] for despite legality concerns.<ref>{{Cite web \|date=22 Jan 2026 \|title=NVIDIA Contacted Anna’s Archive to Secure Access to Millions of Pirated Books \|url=https://torrentfreak.com/nvidia-contacted-annas-archive-to-secure-access-to-millions-of-pirated-books/ \|url-status=live \|access-date=22 Jan 2026 \|website=torrentfreak}}</ref><!-- Elaborate on the scale of the data collection, companies that also do this, and possibly how it ties into lobbying for no regulation -->		Nvidia is heavily involved in [[Artificial_intelligence/training\|training AI]] models though plagiarism.<ref>{{Cite web \|last=Cole \|first=Samantha \|date=5 Aug 2024 \|title=Leaked Documents Show Nvidia Scraping ‘A Human Lifetime’ of Videos Per Day to Train AI \|url=https://www.404media.co/nvidia-ai-scraping-foundational-model-cosmos-project/ \|url-status=live \|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20250414032908/https://www.404media.co/nvidia-ai-scraping-foundational-model-cosmos-project/ \|archive-date=14 Apr 2025 \|access-date=15 Jun 2025 \|website=404 Media}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web \|last=Morales \|first=Jowi \|date=6 Aug 2024 \|title=Nvidia accused of scraping ‘A Human Lifetime’ of videos per day to train AI \|url=https://www.tomshardware.com/tech-industry/artificial-intelligence/nvidia-accused-of-scraping-a-human-lifetime-of-videos-per-day-to-train-ai \|url-status=live \|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20250211081108/https://www.tomshardware.com/tech-industry/artificial-intelligence/nvidia-accused-of-scraping-a-human-lifetime-of-videos-per-day-to-train-ai \|archive-date=11 Feb 2025 \|access-date=15 Jun 2025 \|website=Tom's Hardware}}</ref> In January 2026, a court filing revealed that Nvidia developers contacted Anna's Archive to evaluate the use of pirated content for training, which management gave [[wikipedia:Greenlight\|green-light]] for despite legality concerns.<ref>{{Cite web \|date=22 Jan 2026 \|title=NVIDIA Contacted Anna’s Archive to Secure Access to Millions of Pirated Books \|url=https://torrentfreak.com/nvidia-contacted-annas-archive-to-secure-access-to-millions-of-pirated-books/ \|url-status=live \|access-date=22 Jan 2026 \|website=torrentfreak \|archive-url=http://web.archive.org/web/20260222073221/https://torrentfreak.com/nvidia-contacted-annas-archive-to-secure-access-to-millions-of-pirated-books/ \|archive-date=22 Feb 2026}}</ref><!-- Elaborate on the scale of the data collection, companies that also do this, and possibly how it ties into lobbying for no regulation -->

	===RTX 50-series GPUs Missing ROPs (''2025 - Present'')===		===RTX 50-series GPUs Missing ROPs (''2025 - Present'')===
Line 50:		Line 50:

	===Disingenious RTX 5070 marketing (''2025.03.01 - Present'')===		===Disingenious RTX 5070 marketing (''2025.03.01 - Present'')===
	Nvidia on stage when introducing the RTX 5070 on stage, branded it as having the same performance as a RTX 4090 but for half the price.<ref>{{Cite web \|last=Leadbetter \|first=Richard \|date=2025-01-13 \|title=DF Weekly: can the new RTX 5070 really match RTX 4090 performance? \|url=https://www.digitalfoundry.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2025-df-weekly-can-the-new-rtx-5070-really-match-rtx-4090-performance \|url-status=live \|access-date=2026-01-15 \|website=Digital Foundry}}</ref> This disingenious marketing was disproven by multiple credible reviewers who showed that the 5070, even when using MFG 4x Frame Generation could not achieve parity with the 4090.<ref>{{Cite web \|last=Burke \|first=Steve \|last2=Gaglione \|first2=Mike \|last3=Makhnovets \|first3=Vitalii \|last4=Phetdara \|first4=Tim \|last5=Thang \|first5=Jimmy \|date=2025-03-13 \|title=NVIDIA is Selling Lies {{!}} RTX 5070 Founders Edition Review & Benchmarks \|url=https://gamersnexus.net/gpus/nvidia-selling-lies-rtx-5070-founders-edition-review-benchmarks \|url-status=live \|access-date=2026-01-15 \|website=GamersNexus}}</ref>		Nvidia on stage when introducing the RTX 5070 on stage, branded it as having the same performance as a RTX 4090 but for half the price.<ref>{{Cite web \|last=Leadbetter \|first=Richard \|date=2025-01-13 \|title=DF Weekly: can the new RTX 5070 really match RTX 4090 performance? \|url=https://www.digitalfoundry.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2025-df-weekly-can-the-new-rtx-5070-really-match-rtx-4090-performance \|url-status=live \|access-date=2026-01-15 \|website=Digital Foundry \|archive-url=http://web.archive.org/web/20251221142730/https://www.digitalfoundry.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2025-df-weekly-can-the-new-rtx-5070-really-match-rtx-4090-performance \|archive-date=21 Dec 2025}}</ref> This disingenious marketing was disproven by multiple credible reviewers who showed that the 5070, even when using MFG 4x Frame Generation could not achieve parity with the 4090.<ref>{{Cite web \|last=Burke \|first=Steve \|last2=Gaglione \|first2=Mike \|last3=Makhnovets \|first3=Vitalii \|last4=Phetdara \|first4=Tim \|last5=Thang \|first5=Jimmy \|date=2025-03-13 \|title=NVIDIA is Selling Lies {{!}} RTX 5070 Founders Edition Review & Benchmarks \|url=https://gamersnexus.net/gpus/nvidia-selling-lies-rtx-5070-founders-edition-review-benchmarks \|url-status=live \|access-date=2026-01-15 \|website=GamersNexus}} ([http://web.archive.org/web/20251006224834/https://gamersnexus.net/gpus/nvidia-selling-lies-rtx-5070-founders-edition-review-benchmarks Archived])</ref>

	===GeForce previews (''2025.03.01 - Present'')===		===GeForce previews (''2025.03.01 - Present'')===
Line 57:		Line 57:
	===Threatening Gamers Nexus (''2025.05.18'')===		===Threatening Gamers Nexus (''2025.05.18'')===
	{{Main\|Nvidia threatens GamersNexus}}		{{Main\|Nvidia threatens GamersNexus}}
	On May 18, 2025, GamersNexus, a pro consumer tech publication and YouTube channel, uploaded a video to their YouTube channel exposing Nvidia's scheme of threatening them. Nvidia strongly suggested to GN that access to their engineers for future interviews would only be possible if GN underwent an editorial change according to Nvidia's specification. The company's ransom was for more postive and longer emphasis on their new MFG (Multi-frame Generation) technology in GN's future reviews of their GPUs.<ref name=":0">{{Cite web \|last=Nexus \|first=Gamers \|date=2025-05-18 \|title=NVIDIA's Dirty Manipulation of Reviews \|url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AiekGcwaIho \|url-status=live \|archive-date= \|access-date=2025-07-11 \|website=YouTube}}</ref>		On May 18, 2025, GamersNexus, a pro consumer tech publication and YouTube channel, uploaded a video to their YouTube channel exposing Nvidia's scheme of threatening them. Nvidia strongly suggested to GN that access to their engineers for future interviews would only be possible if GN underwent an editorial change according to Nvidia's specification. The company's ransom was for more postive and longer emphasis on their new MFG (Multi-frame Generation) technology in GN's future reviews of their GPUs.<ref name=":0">{{Cite web \|last=Nexus \|first=Gamers \|date=2025-05-18 \|title=NVIDIA's Dirty Manipulation of Reviews \|url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AiekGcwaIho \|url-status=live \|archive-date= \|access-date=2025-07-11 \|website=YouTube \|archive-url=https://preservetube.com/watch?v=AiekGcwaIho \|archive-date=23 Feb 2026}}</ref>

	===Acquisition of stake in Intel (''2025.12.29'')===		===Acquisition of stake in Intel (''2025.12.29'')===
Line 66:		Line 66:

	===Partnership with [[Palantir]] (''2025.10.28'')===		===Partnership with [[Palantir]] (''2025.10.28'')===
	During their GTC Washington keynote, Nvidia announced a strategic partnership with [[Palantir]].<ref>{{Cite web \|date=2025-10-28 \|title=Palantir and NVIDIA Team Up to Operationalize AI — Turning Enterprise Data Into Dynamic Decision Intelligence \|url=https://nvidianews.nvidia.com/news/nvidia-palantir-ai-enterprise-data-intelligence \|url-status=live \|access-date=2026-01-19}}</ref>		During their GTC Washington keynote, Nvidia announced a strategic partnership with [[Palantir]].<ref>{{Cite web \|date=2025-10-28 \|title=Palantir and NVIDIA Team Up to Operationalize AI — Turning Enterprise Data Into Dynamic Decision Intelligence \|url=https://nvidianews.nvidia.com/news/nvidia-palantir-ai-enterprise-data-intelligence \|url-status=live \|access-date=2026-01-19 \|archive-url=http://web.archive.org/web/20260115055000/https://nvidianews.nvidia.com/news/nvidia-palantir-ai-enterprise-data-intelligence \|archive-date=15 Jan 2026}}</ref>

	==Products==		==Products==