• 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.

Dark days, AMD share price at lowest ever.

Type_R said:
It was 50% in pcars on my Xfire 290s.

Call it 20% seeing as your so into defending AMD...but it was 20% more than AMD could be bothered to get out of their own drivers. Didn't leave me very impressed! Oh and does Freesync even work today for Xfire users...what a joke!
Click to expand...


this is another good point. AMD made so much fuss about Nvidia and project cars and threw out all sorts of unfounded accusations which both nvidia and the game developer quickly disproved. Turns out there were just driver issues affect AMD cards, but now we have a situation where some review sites purposely ignore project cars as if it is some kind of purposeful nvidia sabotage. that then gives a completely unfair picture of the performance.

Do we see AMD making a public apology that it wasn't Nvidia's fault but a driver issue on their side?


Same with hairworks in Witcher 3. All sorts of nonsense thrown out by AMD which the fanboys lap up. FuryX is released with something like twice the tessellation performance due to architectural tweaks. Now the Witcher 3 with hairworks switched on is one of the games AMD does best, switching hairworks on increases the performance over Nvidia, that is where they see some of the biggest performance gains. Yet some how AMD get away with their PR shenanigans blaming Nvidia sabotage.

The companies are bad as each other and are both trying to do nothing more than maximise profits. Buy what ever works for you. Since I use linux that typically means Nvidia, but my current machine is a Mac i27" with anAMD GPU.
 
Rroff said:
There is everything wrong with selling it intentionally knowing that only 3.5GB is full speed IMO - in the past that was advertised as x + x "turbocache" :S
Click to expand...

If you buy a standard had disc the performance varies all over the platter, no one ever complained then.

It is incredibly common in computer system to have some variable performance. Was really common with system ram in the 80s and 90s, the first liek 512K would be way faster than the second 512K , things like that.

All that was needed was to make customers aware in reviews that the final 12% of memory is slower than the other 88%, look at review and go make up your mind.
 
D.P. said:
If you buy a standard had disc the performance varies all over the platter, no one ever complained then.

It is incredibly common in computer system to have some variable performance. Was really common with system ram in the 80s and 90s, the first liek 512K would be way faster than the second 512K , things like that.

All that was needed was to make customers aware in reviews that the final 12% of memory is slower than the other 88%, look at review and go make up your mind.
Click to expand...

If all HDDs were normally sold doing a sustained speed of say 200MB/s over the entire platter then someone tried to sell one which did 20MB/s for the last 20% of the drive they'd never live it down and rightly so.
 
The 970s were going back left, right and centre with extra cash, for the more expensive 980s when vram-gate was discovered.

The FXs are going back left, right and centre, due to pump-gate, also for the 980s, as they much cheaper, or the way faster 980 Tis, which are also now cheaper than em.

:(
 
Last edited:
D.P. said:
Your loss.

Pretty much every GPU in history has had salvaged parts with disabled components for the lower end chips.
Click to expand...

That's not exactly the same thing.
There's literally no defense on Nvidia's VRAM thing. If there wasn't a real issue regarding it, then refunds wouldn't have been given by E-tailers. Nvidia's entire handling was poor.

They're completely free to have that set up (Although I'd have to be under the influence to agree it has any benefit) for the VRAM, but if they're breaking convention, they should have damn well informed those buying the GPU's.
 
r7slayer said:
AMD are DOOOOOOMED :D
Click to expand...

They're dying a slow, agonising death, and have been for years.

Simply because both their CPU and GPU products are inferior to the competition.

AMD used to be good. They used to design affordable products which performed well.

In the last few years they lost the ability to make products that performed well (vs the competition). And very lately, they have stopped trying to offer better value also.

So to recap... yes, they're doomed. It's no less true just because it's taking a long time for them to actually go under.

If they keep failing to produce products people want to buy, how can they survive...
 
Nvidia did say that the 970 ram issue was a "miscommunication by their marketing dept". Apparently nobody at nvidia reads any reviews and noticed it was being advertised as a "full" 4 gig card. Not exactly believable.
 
Brilliant, thread about amd and their dwindling share price, let's offset that by discussing how nvidia handled the 970 vram issue :rolleyes:

Gotta love this place sometimes :D
 
Martini1991 said:
That's not exactly the same thing.
There's literally no defense on Nvidia's VRAM thing. If there wasn't a real issue regarding it, then refunds wouldn't have been given by E-tailers. Nvidia's entire handling was poor.

They're completely free to have that set up (Although I'd have to be under the influence to agree it has any benefit) for the VRAM, but if they're breaking convention, they should have damn well informed those buying the GPU's.
Click to expand...

I'm not defending Nvidia at all, their handling of the situation was very poor and I have said that earlier in this thread. But that doesn't make the 970 a bad product, a broken product, an inferior broken, a flawed product, etc. It was genuinely a good way to give a full 4GB VRAM with 3.5GB at full speed versus a 3GB card that would more liekly hit the VRAM limit..

I have repeatedly said their error was not making this extremely clear to reviewers and then not handling refunds without questions asked. There is no excuse for the latter. Refunds were then eventually given to make a ends,albeit too late, but that had nothing to do with the product being broken.

The 970 is still a great card.
 
Gerard said:
Nvidia did say that the 970 ram issue was a "miscommunication by their marketing dept". Apparently nobody at nvidia reads any reviews and noticed it was being advertised as a "full" 4 gig card. Not exactly believable.
Click to expand...


It is a 4GB card though, and even the slower 0.5GB is very useful and a good benefit to consumers.

I agree though that upon seeing the reviews they should have alerted the reviewers and made a press release.

At the of the end day the performance was exactly as was shown in reviews. There was no underhand cheating or unscrupulous driver behavior.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom