• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

ATI's naming convention sucks the sack

straxusii

straxusii

straxusii

Soldato
Joined
18 May 2003
Posts
4,894
Why the hell do we have 5970, 5870,5830,5770 etc what a load of tosh.

Why not simply have:
5900 (5970)
5800 (5870)
5700 (5850)
5600 (5830)
5500 (5770)
etc

Or is it too dangerous to give the consumer a clear idea of which cards perform best?
 
I thought it would be fairly clear that the 5870 would be better than a 5850?
Besides which the naming pattern seems fine, most of the different series use different architectures and the sub-divisions within each series are the different performers, generally 30 being budget, 50 being middle-class, 70 being upper-class and 90 being the later-release that stays at the top of the series?

Thread of hate to start ...
 
Because it's the HD 5xxx series of graphics cards.


In the series there are a product section of cards to hit each market price point...so high-end (HD59xx), mainstream (HD57xx), low end (HD56xx & lower) etc.


They just have a couple of cards in these sections, and these are named with 5x30, 5x70, 5x90.


It's honestly not hard to understand at all.
 
straxusii said:
Or is it too dangerous to give the consumer a clear idea of which cards perform best?
Click to expand...

Generally - the higher the price, the faster the card.

Anyway, this can be applied to pretty much every songle manufacturer on every single product. What car is bigger, the Focus or the Mondeo, why not number them? What about TV's? Different panels have different numbers. Sometimes its just a single letter that denotes randomly a better TV. Why have letters at all?
 
(5970)
(5870)
(5850)
(5830)
(5770)

Looks simple enough to me, where do you get confused when looking at the above cards and then figuring out which ones perform better/worse than the others. Dyslexia??
 
How is it hard at all, bigger number's = better card. At least they are all different cards, unlike nVidia which sells the exact same one under at least three different names.
 
Their naming convention seems logical and concise enough.

The first number represents the generation, the second represents the market segment (9=extreme, 8=high end, 7= mid range etc), and the last represents the position in that segment (70=top, 50=mid, 30=low). Plenty of information crammed into 4 small digits :)
 
OP would apprently prefer XT, XT PE, GTO, GTX, GTS, GTO2, XL, XTX and OMFGWTFSAUCE because those are really easy to understand :rolleyes:
 
At least it is not as bad as the nvidia lineup. Take the GTS 250 for example, it's a re-badged 9800GTX+, which is a re-badged 8800 GTS with higher clocks and a few more SP, which is a die shrunk and gimped 8800GTX.
 
straxusii said:
Why the hell do we have 5970, 5870,5830,5770 etc what a load of tosh.

Why not simply have:
5900 (5970)
5800 (5870)
5700 (5850)
5600 (5830)
5500 (5770)
etc

Or is it too dangerous to give the consumer a clear idea of which cards perform best?
Click to expand...

I see what you are saying. But they cant really go calling the cards,

5900
5800
5700
5600
5500

As people still remember the Nvidia FX range and would probably run a mile.
 
straxusii said:
Why the hell do we have 5970, 5870,5830,5770 etc what a load of tosh.

Why not simply have:
5900 (5970)
5800 (5870)
5700 (5850)
5600 (5830)
5500 (5770)
etc

Or is it too dangerous to give the consumer a clear idea of which cards perform best?
Click to expand...


I think he wants them to adopt nvidia's naming scam.:rolleyes:

p.s The higher the number the better the performance.. :rolleyes:


mathwat:D
 
Last edited:
I think ATI's is the best GPU naming lineup for years.

nVIDIA's would be fine if it weren't for all the rebadging rubbish.

The last time I can remember it making this much sense was when ATI was vanilla, pro or XT (9xxx series) and nVIDIA was vanilla, GT Ultra (6xxx series). Then you got stuff like the 6800le and 9800 128 bit edition that mucked it all up.
 
Uriel said:
I think ATI's is the best GPU naming lineup for years.

nVIDIA's would be fine if it weren't for all the rebadging rubbish.

The last time I can remember it making this much sense was when ATI was vanilla, pro or XT (9xxx series) and nVIDIA was vanilla, GT Ultra (6xxx series). Then you got stuff like the 6800le and 9800 128 bit edition that mucked it all up.
Click to expand...


+1


mathwat
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom