Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 33,188
I think there is probably a LOT of little technical oddities that get left out of specs like some memory is used a little differently, we'd probably be shocked if someone did a deep honest recap of every trick in the book in the past decade of GPU's from both sides.
But physically having only 56 rops enabled and advertising that there are 64 is not particularly technical. End users really have very little idea what rops, tmus and shaders do internally, we have abbreviations for things and a high level look at architectures to make it more palatable which is fine. But being misleading about the top level simplified numbers is really dodgy as hell.
I'm not too fussed about the 0.5GB of 'slow' memory thing that much but saying a card has more rops, shaders, tmus or different clocks than it has in reality is way way passed the level of being honest.
As for marketing, that couldn't be a bigger pile of BS, if the technical specs say 56 rops are working and that is what marketing knows that is what they'd say. When has marketing ever had a problem with showing reduced numbers of rops on previous cut down cards? Never is the answer, so why now. This seems to me to be pretty deliberate, when someone announces these cards on stage and says it has 64 rops that is just lying. I'd bet Jensen somewhere is on video at some launch saying it has 64 rops(though in fairness he's a marketing guy as well).
EDIT:- Reading through the Anandtech article on it, wow, their excuses for not disclosing this information of finding out about their mistake is laughable. Not one technical person(including Jensen) read or checked reviews of the 970 and caught the problem even though it's basic and obvious.
This is the kind of thing big companies spot and front up to and dodgy companies try and pretend never happened, but it's not new for Nvidia. bumpgate, they would have known LONG before things started failing from their own testing of products that failures were going to happen yet they didn't announced it, no recall, no warning AND they denied it and went to the dogs with everyone in court for years avoiding the problem.
Intel had a dodgy chipset, announced it upfront and dealt with it and the costs. AMD had a bug, announced it and lost sales because of it so lost money. Intel recently announced the TSX thing, where it basically didn't work on a huge number of chips across several generations. When the found out it didn't work right in this one instance they announced it even though it looked terrible. Many companies, from the best and most successful to ones who struggle will actively announce problems upfront, Nvidia just hides, then lies and tries to get out of it never taking any blame for anything. Their attitude has always and seemingly continues to stink. Intel(while being cheaters and paying for a monopoly many many times) still realise they have to be upfront about the products and any problems they have with them. Nvidia has no excuse, and to pretend that just nobody spotted it in months is ridiculous.
But physically having only 56 rops enabled and advertising that there are 64 is not particularly technical. End users really have very little idea what rops, tmus and shaders do internally, we have abbreviations for things and a high level look at architectures to make it more palatable which is fine. But being misleading about the top level simplified numbers is really dodgy as hell.
I'm not too fussed about the 0.5GB of 'slow' memory thing that much but saying a card has more rops, shaders, tmus or different clocks than it has in reality is way way passed the level of being honest.
As for marketing, that couldn't be a bigger pile of BS, if the technical specs say 56 rops are working and that is what marketing knows that is what they'd say. When has marketing ever had a problem with showing reduced numbers of rops on previous cut down cards? Never is the answer, so why now. This seems to me to be pretty deliberate, when someone announces these cards on stage and says it has 64 rops that is just lying. I'd bet Jensen somewhere is on video at some launch saying it has 64 rops(though in fairness he's a marketing guy as well).
EDIT:- Reading through the Anandtech article on it, wow, their excuses for not disclosing this information of finding out about their mistake is laughable. Not one technical person(including Jensen) read or checked reviews of the 970 and caught the problem even though it's basic and obvious.
This is the kind of thing big companies spot and front up to and dodgy companies try and pretend never happened, but it's not new for Nvidia. bumpgate, they would have known LONG before things started failing from their own testing of products that failures were going to happen yet they didn't announced it, no recall, no warning AND they denied it and went to the dogs with everyone in court for years avoiding the problem.
Intel had a dodgy chipset, announced it upfront and dealt with it and the costs. AMD had a bug, announced it and lost sales because of it so lost money. Intel recently announced the TSX thing, where it basically didn't work on a huge number of chips across several generations. When the found out it didn't work right in this one instance they announced it even though it looked terrible. Many companies, from the best and most successful to ones who struggle will actively announce problems upfront, Nvidia just hides, then lies and tries to get out of it never taking any blame for anything. Their attitude has always and seemingly continues to stink. Intel(while being cheaters and paying for a monopoly many many times) still realise they have to be upfront about the products and any problems they have with them. Nvidia has no excuse, and to pretend that just nobody spotted it in months is ridiculous.
Last edited:
