• 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.

AMD Navi 23 ‘NVIDIA Killer’ GPU Rumored to Support Hardware Ray Tracing, Coming Next Year

Status
Not open for further replies.
KiNgPiN83 said:
He'll be so upset if that's the case. In his latest vid he was actually saying this wasn't a paper launch because there are some other scores from 3800's on 3dmark... The green tinted glasses are strong.
Click to expand...
Those glass are completely opaque. I stopped watching him when he defended Nvidia regarding the GPP controversy. He made several videos...which he took down.

------------------------------------
Edit:
https://youtu.be/7SXmkk_yVMU

I still have the NDA video that he kept live. Which he, again, defends Nvidia about NDA 2.0 when everyone else knew it was nvidia being nvidia and thought it was nefarious.

Now here's the rub. His own lawyer took issue with the nda:
At 6:14 the attorney did reference "..Solely for the benefit of..." as nebulous and he wouldn't draft it that way. Also discussed a similiarity to the term as "on behalf of". IMO that comes off as a custodian of sorts.

At 8:46 he states "for the benefit of..." as odd. He seems to hone in on that phrase. Does that create an agency relationship with the Journalist/Reviewer? IMO the term seems to create ambiguity. One should never wants to be in a contract with ambiguity to it.

Also, at 16:40-17:30 discussion was had about the 5 year term. In which it was mentioned that any product that reaches press within a year. The attorney indicated it to be a weird time frame.

At 25:48 the attorney again talks about "Solely for the benefit of...". He's not sure what that means and states that he doesn't like it. But later on does go back and forth about it.

In all he contradicted his own lawyer and cheered Nvidia on.

He championed Nvidia about NDA 2.0 and GPP. I just can't take him serious enough to be impartial.
 
Last edited:
Not sure the slow RDNA 2 launch and lack of info from AMD is a good thing.

Have we ever had a launch from AMD where they revealed nothing about the specifications, and gave no info away before the launch, which was a massive success and easily beat Nvidia? Maybe, but it must'be been a long time ago.
 
EastCoastHandle said:
Those glass are completely opaque. I stopped watching him when he defended Nvidia regarding the GPP controversy. He made several videos...which he took down.

------------------------------------
Edit:
https://youtu.be/7SXmkk_yVMU

I still have the NDA video that he kept live. Which he, again, defends Nvidia about NDA 2.0 when everyone else knew it was nvidia being nvidia and thought it was nefarious.

Now here's the rub. His own lawyer took issue with the nda:
At 6:14 the attorney did reference "..Solely for the benefit of..." as nebulous and he wouldn't draft it that way. Also discussed a similiarity to the term as "on behalf of". IMO that comes off as a custodian of sorts.

At 8:46 he states "for the benefit of..." as odd. He seems to hone in on that phrase. Does that create an agency relationship with the Journalist/Reviewer? IMO the term seems to create ambiguity. One should never wants to be in a contract with ambiguity to it.

Also, at 16:40-17:30 discussion was had about the 5 year term. In which it was mentioned that any product that reaches press within a year. The attorney indicated it to be a weird time frame.

At 25:48 the attorney again talks about "Solely for the benefit of...". He's not sure what that means and states that he doesn't like it. But later on does go back and forth about it.

In all he contradicted his own lawyer and cheered Nvidia on.

He championed Nvidia about NDA 2.0 and GPP. I just can't take him serious enough to be impartial.
Click to expand...
I still watch his videos, but my favorite is Hardware Unboxed.
 
EastCoastHandle said:
If it turned out that RDNA 2 beats Ampere he'll find a way to still trash it. :p
Click to expand...
Lol. Nah, they seem fair to me, you got to be ultra sensitive to find them unfair imo.

I recon if RDNA2 turns out as good as we all hope and they price it right, I see Hardware Unboxed giving them a glowing review.
 
TNA said:
Sensitive ;)

They are happy to trash Nvidia all the same. Does that mean they are pro AMD?
Click to expand...
I've provided my reasoning of why I don't trust him here.
Which you didn't refute. Or perhaps you did by saying "I still watch his videos, but my favorite is Hardware Unboxed."

Anywhoot, arguing with me about it only shows that it is you who is sensitive about it.
Be that as it may, we will only agree to disagree.
;)
 
Last edited:
EastCoastHandle said:
I've provided my reasoning of why I don't trust him here.
Which you didn't refute. Or perhaps you did by saying "I still watch his videos, but my favorite is Hardware Unboxed."

Anywhoot, arguing with my about it only shows that it is you who is sensitive about it.
Be that as it may, we will only agree to disagree.
;)
Click to expand...
That's gamers nexus, I am talking about hardware unboxed?
 
g67575 said:
Not sure the slow RDNA 2 launch and lack of info from AMD is a good thing.

Have we ever had a launch from AMD where they revealed nothing about the specifications, and gave no info away before the launch, which was a massive success and easily beat Nvidia? Maybe, but it must'be been a long time ago.
Click to expand...
Every pre-release hype in recent memory has been Raja spinning bullcrap and outright lying. That hack is gone now. So lack of tangible leaks is very much a good thing.

What information did Nvidia give about Ampere before their launch? None. Everything we knew, or thought we knew, came from leaks, rumours and assumptions. Why then do you expect AMD to play by a different rulebook?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom