Forbes to name Nvidia its 2007 'Company of the Year'

by Griffin McElroy { Dec 30th 2007 at 7:45PM }

Forbes Magazine, or, as it's commonly called, "the Champagne of Business Magazines", will reportedly recognize the processor producing powerhouse Nvidia as its 2007 Company of the Year in an early January edition. Sure, we could list the company's many contributions to gaming over the past few years, but companies don't get awards from Forbes for making contributions to gaming -- no, they get Forbes awards for making ridonkulous amounts of cash money, which Nvidia has done hand over fist.

The company's share prices have shot up 2100% since its initial public offering in 1999, and its profits have increased about 50% every year since the company's inception. With an extremely ambitious CEO, and the increasing popularity of these "computer" things, we feel confident saying Nvidia will see continued growth in the upcoming years -- but we'll leave that kind of conjecture up to the big dogs.

Tags: company-of-the-year, forbes, nvidia, processor

Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)

mr nimblewick @ Dec 30th 2007 7:55PM

I miss my Voodoo 3.

capt_carl @ Dec 30th 2007 9:33PM

I was sadly never that old school, but I do miss my GeForce2.

Ubercharged @ Dec 30th 2007 11:05PM

my first Nvidia card was a TNT

roxxxo @ Dec 30th 2007 11:53PM

i wanted a voodoo but i couldn't afford it off my allowance

Poisoned Al @ Dec 31st 2007 7:36AM

Ha! I have an original Voodoo somewhere! The type that had to be passed though a regaler 2D card to work! Top that!

*Shakes cane*

tcc3 @ Dec 31st 2007 8:54AM

Fuck the Voodoo I'm glad its dead. I had trouble getting mine to work properly and the dummy from tech support actually told me that Tomb Raider II *should* run slower with 3-d hardware accelleration than using software rendering.

Dumb ass.

roxxxo @ Dec 31st 2007 11:17AM

i used to run CS on software, lol

Will @ Dec 30th 2007 8:07PM

Someone go add ATI's logo to the "you got pwned" gif.

CryingTheAnnualKingo @ Dec 30th 2007 9:38PM

Yeah, PC gaming is dead...uh huh...

Abuzar @ Dec 30th 2007 10:22PM

Yeah but any sensible person would get the HD 3870 instead.

Neebs @ Dec 30th 2007 10:34PM

lol, AMD video.

Jeff @ Dec 30th 2007 11:02PM

Any and every sensible person would get an 8800 GT and a Core2duo. AMD is fucked.

Abuzar @ Dec 31st 2007 7:21AM

Why? A core 2 Duo I agree on. I used to be a Nvidia fanboy too, but when there is something better out you go with that. The new drivers give the 3870 almost equal performance with the 8800GT but with much better image quality. Isn't that why we upgrade? To make our games look better?

tcc3 @ Dec 31st 2007 8:58AM

Ati wold have to be substantially better to win me back. Not just a little bit better, a lot. ATI has some of the poorest driver support I've ever seen. They're slow, unstable and use too many resources. Catalyst is a joke.

Not every thing is about minute increases in pure speed. Stability counts for something too.

Abuzar @ Dec 31st 2007 8:20PM

Ok why would it have to be substantially better? I just updated my drivers and they have gotten MUCH better. If you have a card that's cheaper, and better, why would it not get your money? Just because you like one company doesn't mean you ignore the other even though the other had a better cheaper product. I used to be an AMD fan but I didn't hesitate to buy an E6750!

Slaziman (B-B-BRUSHED WITH FAAAAME) @ Dec 30th 2007 9:51PM

If only it wasn't so damn easy to pirate PC games, it would truly shine as a gaming platform. Seriously, the sales Crysis had are abysmal, and I can't imagine how much millions of dollars were invested in it's development. Well, at least Crytek gets money from licensing CryEngine2, else they were dead.

Jeff @ Dec 30th 2007 10:05PM

The users who pirated Crysis wanted to avoid the risk of buying a game and now having the hardware to run it.

Besides that however, nVidia has the 8800GT to thank for the success of their year...that card is hot.

Jeff @ Dec 30th 2007 10:20PM

Jeff, that's utter crap. And I shotty this name =P

Any computer can run UT3, and it is getting pirated just as bad. Us PC gamers are just utter douchebags who want to see our platform die by the time ps4 rolls around.

Games need to start coming with stricter copy protection. Anything that sells well utilizes either starforce, steam... or Call of Duty in the title.

Einhanderkiller @ Dec 30th 2007 11:43PM

Like with music, games would probably sell better with no copy protection. Look at Stardock: GalCiv II had no copy protection, but sold fairly well considering its not-so-well known name and its genre. There are games for the PC that I refuse to purchase simply because the copy protection scheme used is either too restrictive, intrusive, or annoying.

roxxxo @ Dec 31st 2007 12:01AM

i'm with ya einhander. i've shied away from several games because of the annoying protection which would've intruded on my legit purchase

i've pirated (yarr!) a couple of games I wasn't going to buy anyway, same with music

i'm not even going to bother finding a crack of crysis, the demo was pretty laggy on my system on high settings, I doubt I could even try the max settings. and it was fun, but nothing revolutionary

Jeff @ Dec 31st 2007 12:10AM

Music is completely, completely different than games.

And of course annoying copy protection is a no-no... something like Steam should be universal. I was kinda hoping with Windows Vista Microsoft would pick up the torch... but of course not.

But when two of the biggest PC released of the year suffer terrible sales, with more people stealing it than buying it... something needs to be done.

Durinthal @ Dec 31st 2007 12:18AM

Personally, I didn't buy UT3 because I think it's not worth it. Crysis I'm just not interested in at all, except for the engine. I also haven't pirated either of them, but that's just me.

On the other hand, there are a couple of games that I did buy recently. The first is Psychonauts, which is simply humorous and fun to play (and currently very cheap on Steam), and the second is Mount & Blade, which has the best medieval weaponry combat system I've seen.

I guess I'm just one of the weird people that goes for a creative or innovative game instead of more of the same with better graphics or a physics engine.

Jeff @ Dec 31st 2007 1:16AM

I went for Ut3 and Crysis for the gameplay, thank you very much. Neither has disappointed. =)

And I'm sure a lot of people didn't buy them legitimately. I'm not suggesting every PC gamer IRL would have a copy of these games. I'm saying you can google the torrents and see for yourself how many people have stolen these games.

Einhanderkiller @ Dec 31st 2007 2:42AM

To me, copy protection is acceptable as long as it doesn't affect the user in any negative way. Something like Steam I can stand behind since it works well and, at least for me, works flawlessly.

Crono (NDF - Knight of the Old School) @ Dec 31st 2007 10:06AM

PC Gaming is dying, and Copy Protection is the coffin. See for yourselves, with all the various draconian copy protection schemes, the software is still EASILY available for pirating. I've stopped pirating games a few years ago, because I can't justify it, but I won't buy those games for PC either, because I don't want to run the risk of spending 50-60 dollars on a game that may not work because my DVD-ROM isn't the newest, or because I have alchohol 120 running emulation so I don't have to hunt for my discs of Warcraft II and III to play the games.

When it becomes more convenient in the LONG TERM to pirate a game with a NO-CD crack than to actually purchase the game with limited INSTALLS, then there is a major problem. As with gun control laws, copy protection only punishes the people who follow the law.

bVork @ Dec 30th 2007 10:06PM

I think Crysis sales are abysmal because nobody can run the game properly.

Neebs @ Dec 30th 2007 10:09PM

My PC which would have been the envy of gamers two and a half years ago, with one upgrade (a 8600GT) runs it on medium.

Abuzar @ Dec 30th 2007 10:50PM

I don't think an 8600GT was an envy ANY time. No offense but it sucked, it was only marginally better than the 7600GT.

Will @ Dec 31st 2007 6:50AM

@Abuzar: He said it WAS the envy and he UPGRADED to an 8600. And even that can run it on medium. Think, did the 8600 series exist two years ago? Nope! The 5 or 6 series did :P

Also, I can attest what he's saying is probably true. I ran it on medium with a 7900GS well.

Shignami @ Dec 30th 2007 10:23PM

I find this news a bit hard to believe.

Kyouryuu @ Dec 30th 2007 10:31PM

I don't know how people take Forbes magazine seriously. All they care about is whether or not a company makes money hand over fist. It is no reflection about how they accomplish this or the treatment of their employees.

Not that nVidia is suspect of either, but really, Rubbermaid was a Forbes "Company of the Year" too and they were all but dismantled just a few years later.

propanol @ Dec 31st 2007 12:19AM

People keep swallowing this piracy FUD publishers keep putting out in regards to PC gaming going downhill. Yes, it's on a downward slope, but it's not because of piracy; it's more complicated than that. The market for PCs has become much more diverse than it was back in 2001 when PC gaming was at its peak. Back then, there wasn't much of a choice as to what components you'd get etc. depending on what you were going to use your PC for; you needed all the power you could get to have a decent experience - whether you'd be gaming or doing office work didn't matter as much. As a result of this, there were more gaming-capable PCs around, hence the emergence of the PC gaming market.

At this point, however, development has gotten to the point where there are decent OSes and applications that do what most normal users would want (surf the Internet etc.). The average Joe no longer sees a need to upgrade his PC. He might want to play games, but getting a new $2000 PC for that seems inconvenient to him when there are $400-500 consoles around that'll let him do the same.

Further evidence of this development is in the emergence of the market for low-end PCs (which now make up the bulk of stationary computer sales) as well as the laptop market ('people want smaller, not more powerful', making up about 50% of overall PC sales in 07).

At this point, only the hardcore game on PCs. It's shame, because it's the platform where most gameplay concepts have been conceived/developed.

Hamza @ Dec 31st 2007 12:45AM

Only the hardcore go for PC-gaming? I beg to differ. I'd say it's exactly the opposite ... the hardcore go for console gaming. Why? Because:

1) It's the most cost-efficient way to game.
2) There's a LARGER selection of games to play (And no, PC's no longer have a stranglehold over FPSs)
3) It's increasingly becoming easier to play online with a console (arguably easier than PCs because they don't have to worry about incompatible versions).

A hardcore gamer plays more games, therefore, he buys a console. Don't get me wrong though, I'm not ANTI-PC. I have a $2000 rig myself, but I'd be an idiot if I bought it simply for gaming.

Jeff @ Dec 31st 2007 1:24AM

I could build an $800 PC that maxes Ut3 at 60 FPS and can play Crysis nearly maxed at 30 FPS solid. This at 1680 x 1050 on a beautiful widescreen monitor, mind you. PC gaming isn't only for the harcore. If you were in the market for a new PC-- you know, for going on Joystiq, looking at porn and shit-- getting it capable of gaming would only add a couple hundred to the price. Roughly the cost of a Wii-- that can play Crysis.

And Proponal... the piracy argument is backed up by simple fact. Do you know how to work teh googlez? Look at the torrents for Crysis, Ut3... even COD 4, which is selling well regardless, is getting pirated up the ass. Even BioShock, with starforce, and all the Steam games... PC gaming is getting fucked by Piracy.

Sure, there aren't as many PC gamers as Xbots, but there are enough for it to be a profitable market, particularly without having to pay licensing fees. Piracy, of course, ruins this.

Your argument is ridiculous for a couple reasons.
a) Those who want to keep a crappy, barely usable computer are typically older people who would use it for e-mail and word processing. These people, also typically, don't play videogames.
b) The 15-25 age bracket often keeps up with a semi-decent PC... we want to be able to go on joystiq while our Ipod is updating, music playing, limewire stealing us some more music... You get the point. While many in this bracket won't buy top-of-the-line... most could pop in a $250 8800 Gt and be near the peak of PC gaming.
c) Windows Vista, the failure that it is, is forcing many people to buy computers with good videocards... that could easily play games like UT3, or any Valve game. Most PC games scale backwards very well.

And there you have it, gentlemen.

Crono (NDF - Knight of the Old School) @ Dec 31st 2007 10:12AM

Its not the piracy that keeps people from buying the game, but the protections that dick the legitimate user. I would have bought Bioshock for PC, except that the protections on it are unacceptable. So I'll buy it for 360.

Piracy has always been rampant since the internet was born. Copy Protection hasn't stopped it, it hasn't slowed it down, it just made it more fun for those who do the cracking. But insane copy protection combined with insane sys req drives hardcore and casual gamers away.

Vidikron (FU) @ Dec 31st 2007 10:39AM

@Jeff

I know what you're saying... I'm in the process of assembling my own new PC... but you're looking at it too much from the viewpoint of someone that assembles their own PCs. Your average gamer, even those in the 18-25 age bracket, doesn't do that sort of stuff. My own brother is a big gamer, but has zero interest in PC games because he has no interest in opening his PC and doing any upgrades. The simple fact is most people buy PCs off the shelf (which usually means integrated graphics) and use it until it fails or becomes so slow it's unuseable. They want to deal with opening their PCs, researching which video card is the best (which series, which manufacturer, how much video ram, what kind of output... what the fvck is DVI-D, etc...) or attempting to understand stuff like PCI Express x16 and whether their PC has it.

Also, you make it sound like anyone out there can go out and buy an 8800 GT, pop it in their computers and be playing Crysis. Hate to break to you, but not everyone has PCI Express slots in their PC. If everyone did exactly that, the majority would find their PC couldn't even use that card they just bought. It's just more shit that most people care to bother with. I've even seen long time PC gamers get tired of it and give up.

Vidikron (FU) @ Dec 31st 2007 10:42AM

Hmmm... should be a couple of "don't"s in my post above.

Jeff @ Dec 31st 2007 1:13PM

Oh yeah, I finally got forced into upgrading thanks to PCI-express and now PC express 2.0 is coming out. I can fully understand many people's frustrations with PC gaming.

But if you went into Best Buy and bought an $800 dell, it'd have a dual-core processor and a videocard that could play Ut3... all of Valve's games (bless them). Then, if it piqued your interest, google would tell you to get a 8800 GT, and how to pop it in to a slot and plug in a little cord. Then you could play anything with amazing FPS.

That's why I don't think PC gaming is going to die. Many people are going to be buying computers-- with no intention of gaming-- that have more gaming power than an Xbox 360. Vista is forcing people into it. It's ridiculous, obnoxious... but could help PC gaming.

My main dream for the future of PC gaming is that developers decide to take advantage of us. If modding becomes a big deal on the console versions of UT3, perhaps other game companies can follow suite. If 360 allowed it, I'm sure Valve would let people port their mods over.

Anyone who's interested, look up the Krodan map for Ut3. More beautiful than anything that shipped with the game, out within a month... and available on ps3. Modding will be a big deal.

Then, basically, us PC gamers will be the mappers, modders, and beta testers for the users companies make the most money off of: console-gamers. Then piracy isn't as much of an issue, because we're contributing via mods and maps. Idk, that's just a possible future I can see.

propanol @ Dec 31st 2007 1:15AM

Whatever; it all comes down to how you define "hardcore". I was thinking of it more in the sense as "only the people who truly care about X" (where X = the PC as a gaming platform in this case) - guess I should've used a term less likely to be misinterpreted ("hardcore" is kind of a stupid epithet anyway, given how ambiguous it is).

propanol @ Dec 31st 2007 1:17AM

And this was supposed to be a reply to my original post. I really shouldn't bother with this when I'm half asleep.

jynxycat @ Dec 31st 2007 1:17AM

The best part of this is that Nvidia is sticking it to ATI (well, now AMD) and digging their claws pretty hard into the chipset market as well, annoying Intel in the process.

I've been a supporter of Nvidia all the way, even during the dark FX series times, and it's amazing to see how far they've come.

Now with their recent trend of releasing fairly high end cards for almost half the price of the usual new release sticker price, I think it's safe to say that Nvidia will be on top for quite some time.