# AdoredTV at it again - Over an hour long video about Nvidia's business practices.



## GlacierNine (Jun 15, 2018)

It's not quite, in my opinion, as clearcut and simply damning, as his companion video about Intel. A lot of what he talks about, well, he has the evidence for it, but from the tech press, devs, etc, whereas in the Intel video he often relied on actual court transcripts and documents released during lawsuits that Intel ultimately lost.

In any case, there's definitely a lot of truth in what he's talking about here and it's well worth watching.


----------



## looniam (Jun 15, 2018)

hard pass.

i've seen enough of his tabloid trash editorials with cherry picked facts presented for fuel for the hate train. i'd rather clamp down a vice on my penis than watch his vids anymore.


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Jun 15, 2018)

cucker tarlson said:


> Adoretv ranting about nvidia and intel is not news. It's not worth 10 minutes of my time, let alone an hour. Funny he mentions mx150 having two variants, but forgets rx 560.
> Again,this guy is to Amd's Alex Jones. He has a very specific audience he targets at, and it pays off.


7 mins watched and the guy's both accurate and telling it how it is , exactly why I have boycoted Nvidia from my pick list for the last 5 year's, and it should have been sooner but i loved my herculese prophet 2 Gts and it blinded me to their Bs, watch and learn about the real Nvidia because im sorry if it hurts's but that's life and this is how business works or do you think it's all about innovation , daring doo and business guile.

If Nvidia were your mate , he'd be the one who turned up drunk , slept on your couch after a three hour pissed chat  you didnt need at 1Am ,nicked your stone rose's or rolling stones cds then got cosy with your wife in the morning while you were in the shower before buggering up the toilet plumbing and suing you for straining his nut sack.  Imho. was a jk


----------



## Vya Domus (Jun 15, 2018)

Oh boy did this turn instantly in a fanboy shit show. Good job everyone , the clock is ticking on this thread.

As pointed out above , the guy tells the truth and gives his own opinion on the matter. Nothing more nothing less.


----------



## GlacierNine (Jun 16, 2018)

It really is remarkable how often people reach for the "But, <competitor> did x too!" card in relation to stuff like this.

Sure they did. But the video isn't a retrospective of the graphics card industry's history of litigation and business practices. Its a history of the litigation and business practices of a single company within that industry, just like the Intel video was the same thing for that company, not an attempt to articulate a complete history of the CPU industry.

If you want to try and take on the task of producing any such retrospective of your own in this much depth then by all means I'd love to see it. But in this instance, saying "but what about what the competitor did" is a bit like the defendant in a murder trial trying to get off the hook by pointing out the victim was also a murder suspect. That may well be, but its not the crime on trial.


----------



## jboydgolfer (Jun 16, 2018)

still love my 980, 970, 750ti, etc . Frankly, as it stands now, i dont care how the cow is killed, as long as i get my steak. 

srsly tho, I cant get into stuff like this, mainly due to bias's pushed by presenters. For that reason i avoid most OpEd stories, etc (not something about this particular topic, just in general), i find it angers me often.


----------



## Easy Rhino (Jun 16, 2018)

GlacierNine said:


> It's not quite, in my opinion, as clearcut and simply damning, as his companion video about Intel. A lot of what he talks about, well, he has the evidence for it, but from the tech press, devs, etc, whereas in the Intel video he often relied on actual court transcripts and documents released during lawsuits that Intel ultimately lost.
> 
> In any case, there's definitely a lot of truth in what he's talking about here and it's well worth watching.



Somebody actually spent time on this? It has zero impact. SAD!


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Jun 16, 2018)

he needs to do one on Amd and IBM too , both for even ness and they too would be interesting i watched it all , bit of bias since a film/rant about one company is going to be,but having lived through seen and messed with most of the things mentioned and even read those same forums at the time they happened its right.
easily pause readable on any written part , i did they are as factual as any need be including any litigation and the anti-tec slur, they just are ,Ifit suits their business, I do get that.


----------



## cucker tarlson (Jun 16, 2018)

I endorse what jboydgolfer said 100%. I've had nvidia cards since maxwell and g-sync  (was an amd supporter before), and they're killing it since then. Anti-consumer ? I am a consumer. If I choose to wait a year for V64 just to get 1080 perfromance at 1080 SLI power draw and more expensive, I am choosing the most anti-consumer thing I could do to myself. AMD plays the "nvidia came and did things to our fanny " card more than anything else, and that's why guys like adoredtv thrive. They've had cpu overhead issues on dx11 games, instead of fixing it they blamed gameworks. That was the last straw that made me switch teams. I ain't buying cards from crybabies. Nvidia has a problem - they fix it. AMD will whine and do nothing. 
Adored's goal is obvious here: AMD have no cards to compete with geforce.... so what about that time when nvidia wanted async removed from aots.... do you think it morally right to buy their product now ?


----------



## xkm1948 (Jun 16, 2018)

I am tired of spending same amount of money for inferior product. No matter how much someone may hate Nvidia, their tech is top notch. 

Don’t blame your own failure on others success. Survival of the fittest. You got good tech you got good lawyers you profit, simple capitalism.


----------



## cucker tarlson (Jun 16, 2018)

They've got 7nm ready, they could release something to outperform 1080Ti. I bet they're gonna focus on consoles and workstation though and leave their V64 limping behind Pascal, release the 7nm gaming GPUs in 2019 long after the green team roll out 11- series, then call nvidia anti-progress and anti-consumer.

It's not that I respect adored from the professional standpoint. I think he's very incisive and meticuouls. It's just the fact he's full of s**t that puts me off.


----------



## xkm1948 (Jun 16, 2018)

cucker tarlson said:


> They've got 7nm ready, they could release something to outperform 1080Ti. I bet they're gonna focus on consoles and workstation though and leave their V64 limping behind Pascal, release the 7nm gaming GPUs in 2019 long after the green team roll out 11- series, then call nvidia anti-progress and anti-consumer.




GCN is way too old. Neither good for gaming nor good for GPU accelerated computing (99% researchers use CUDA). RTG need a completely new GPU design overhaul and that takes time. David Wang just took over. At least those “hype train” during Raja’s reign is now gone. I hope that means they actually are working on solid tech instead of “poor volta” or “make some noise” cringe marketing.


Personally i have supported ATi/AMD/RTG far too long. Buying exclusively team red GPU since R300 days. I will be going green for the up coming 1180 series.


----------



## cucker tarlson (Jun 16, 2018)

cucker tarlson said:


> It's not that I respect adored from the professional standpoint. I


What they've got to do is make their got damn tile based rendering working like they promised with Vega and never did. They're gonna keep getting their ass handed to them in the enthusiast semgent as long as nvidia has an advantage here.


----------



## kruk (Jun 16, 2018)

If anyone wonders why I dislike nVidia: this video lists all the reasons. They were shady ~20 years ago and nothing seems to have changed since then. 

And the worst part of all: instead of people forcing them to change and score a huge win for *all* consumers, they defend everything they do, blame the competition and so on ...


----------



## cucker tarlson (Jun 16, 2018)

kruk said:


> If anyone wonders why I dislike nVidia: this video lists all the reasons. They were shady ~20 years ago and nothing seems to have changed since then.
> 
> And the worst part of all: instead of people forcing them to change and score a huge win for *all* consumers, they defend everything they do, blame the competition and so on ...


How is me buying a vega instead of 1080/1080Ti a win for anyone else than AMD who manages to sell an inferior product for the same price as the competition. You people have lost your minds.


----------



## kruk (Jun 16, 2018)

cucker tarlson said:


> How is me buying a vega instead of 1080/1080Ti a win for anyone else than AMD who manages to sell an inferior product for the same price as the competition. You people have lost your minds.



You know why AMD couldn't deliver the best products in recent times? Because they have been struggling with acquiring enough R&D money. And talking sh*t about their products, blaming them for anything nVidia does wrong, and so on, certainly won't help them becoming competitive on the high end again.

Buy the card that best suits you, I don't care, but don't spread misinformation*. Change the mindshare (AMD sucks*) and in long term everyone wins, it's really simple.

* this is not directed at you specifically, but spoken generally ...


----------



## dorsetknob (Jun 16, 2018)

kruk said:


> Buy the card that best suits you,  it's really simple.



THIS ^^^^ And from what is available in your price Range


----------



## cucker tarlson (Jun 16, 2018)

kruk said:


> You know why AMD couldn't deliver the best products in recent times? Because they have been struggling with acquiring enough R&D money. And talking sh*t about their products, blaming them for anything nVidia does wrong, and so on, certainly won't help them becoming competitive on the high end again.
> 
> Buy the card that best suits you, I don't care, but don't spread misinformation*. Change the mindshare (AMD sucks*) and in long term everyone wins, it's really simple.
> 
> * this is not directed at you specifically, but spoken generally ...


Calm the hell down. I get what you're saying. I just don't believe in it. Not in the slightest. They forged their own fate. They're a CPU maker that bought a GPU company,which was doing great without them, and thought they could control everything, including consoles. They're reaping what they sowed.
Nvidia is the company whose clear scope is on PC gaming, that's why I'm supporting them. AMD better decide who they cater for, cause I doubt it's enthusiast pc gamers anymore. When they get back on the right track I'll support them again.


"Buy the card that best suits you " after a tirade about how I'm wrong about choosing nvidia is borderline split personality stuff.


----------



## Xzibit (Jun 16, 2018)

xkm1948 said:


> GCN is way too old. Neither good for gaming nor good for GPU accelerated computing (99% researchers use CUDA). RTG need a completely new GPU design overhaul and that takes time.* David Wang just took over. At least those “hype train” during Raja’s reign is now gone*. I hope that means they actually are working on solid tech instead of “poor volta” or “make some noise” cringe marketing.



*PCWorld: AMD's new graphics engineer pledges yearly GPU releases to make PCs fun again*


----------



## cucker tarlson (Jun 16, 2018)

“maybe incremental architecture changes.”


----------



## eidairaman1 (Jun 16, 2018)

dorsetknob said:


> THIS ^^^^ And from what is available in your price Range



Yup many forget that when the Life Force Leaves the body you can't take anything from this realm with you. So Elitist thinking is pretty pointless since we are here for a pretty short time anyway.


----------



## cucker tarlson (Jun 16, 2018)

eidairaman1 said:


> we are here for a pretty short time anyway.


So what's the point of a boring life then .....


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Jun 16, 2018)

I considered NVIDIA shady since they created closed-source CUDA and bought out Aegia.


----------



## eidairaman1 (Jun 16, 2018)

FordGT90Concept said:


> I considered NVIDIA shady since they created closed-source CUDA and bought out Aegia.



Sli, forcing card makers into gpp which didnt bode well for them either.


----------



## cucker tarlson (Jun 16, 2018)

BTW OT (or maybe a little bit on topic tho) : I heard rumours from several sources that nvidia is bringing back "hot clock" this gen.


----------



## the54thvoid (Jun 16, 2018)

Evil company makes items to let grown adults play games. And also creates arguably the best cards for HPC and scientific research into cancer cures and other beneficial causes.
Bad Nvidia...


----------



## cucker tarlson (Jun 16, 2018)

the54thvoid said:


> Evil company makes items to let grown adults play games. And also creates arguably the best cards for HPC and scientific research into cancer cures and other beneficial causes.
> Bad Nvidia...


My toy is broken,so I demand you break yours. Now we're even.


----------



## Vya Domus (Jun 16, 2018)

FordGT90Concept said:


> I considered NVIDIA shady since they created closed-source CUDA and bought out Aegia.



CUDA is technically partially closed source , though in fact there wouldn't be much to be gained from having it fully open source.


----------



## ypsylon (Jun 16, 2018)

AdoredTV, yeah... A lot of time there is so much honey dripping off the screen when bloke is talking AMD that I have to clean the room 5 times. Its certainly not my prime destination when learning about stuff. I was watching it few times after Ryzen and then Threadripper hit the market. He did good materials on boards for TR4 in one block instead chopping and jumping between channels and that's about it. However...

Guy is so blinded to the shades of grey that its very difficult to take a lot (most?) of his "research" seriously. Hard fact is: *every* single corporation would do that the *same* thing if it was in nVidia place. Swap AMD where NVidia and nVidia for AMD is and channel would be: nVidia AdoredTV then...

So put at least 5 tons of salt for every ton of honey and sugar he puts in front of you. Remove the blinkers and think for yourself. If anything AdTV is very entertaining comedy channel a lot of times. Guy have good grasp of "propaganda machine".  AMD incarnation of Lord Haw-Haw (no offense, just a joke)


----------



## RejZoR (Jun 16, 2018)

I don't see his videos like that. Then again, people accused me of being AMD fanboy while not having any AMD hardware in my system and then even went the length of justifying how that even works. Go figure...


----------



## Vya Domus (Jun 16, 2018)

ypsylon said:


> Guy is so blinded to the shades of grey that its very difficult to take a lot (most?) of his "research" seriously.



It's not really research , he's just stating facts and inferring things from them. All of you get annoyed by him because you don't understand there's nothing more to it.


----------



## ShurikN (Jun 16, 2018)

xkm1948 said:


> Don’t blame your own failure on others success. Survival of the fittest. You got good tech you got good lawyers you profit, simple capitalism.


AMD had better hardware in the Athlon days, and we all know how Intel played that, and the epilogue of it.


----------



## Vya Domus (Jun 16, 2018)

ShurikN said:


> AMD had better hardware in the Athlon days, and we all know how Intel played that, and the epilogue of it.



They had better and cheaper hardware on the GPU side as well during the first and second gen Kepler days. Nvidia steered the industry , market and the press into a direction where they could still win no matter what.

I remember how ridiculous the reviews were for the 290X, reviewers didn't like it because it was *very power hungry  and hot *(less than 10% more power vs the first Titan) and it didn't have a fancy metal shroud and quieter fan.


----------



## ShurikN (Jun 16, 2018)

Vya Domus said:


> They had better and cheaper hardware on the GPU side as well during the Kepler and first gen GCN days. Nvidia steered the industry , market and the press into a direction where they could still win no matter what.


I think they were on par during first GCNs, but they did have superior products in the 5000 series. It's funny how every time AMD is close to 50% market share, "something" happens, to give the competitors and edge. Food for thought.


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Jun 16, 2018)

There is the usual crowd here jumping up and down on Nvidias side , and not one single fact in the video rebutted by Fact because it's still ,The truth.
I agree with buy what you want to, but as has been said missinform and expect a debate, note the paid shills in forum's are very likely still a thing , I'm not accusing with that point just stating facts.


----------



## droopyRO (Jun 16, 2018)

I'`m about half way thru the video. Ok nVidia and Intel are bad.
But as a consumer, who bought a Freesync monitor in 2016 to run a AMD card, i' waiting still for a AMD card to buy. RX 480 is inferior to my 980 Ti. DirectX 12 or Vulkan games have not major advantage to DX11. Vega is expensive compared to the price and power consumption compared to nVidia.
There is no 3rd player on the GPU market. SO what the F*** am i supposed to buy to boycott Nvidia ?


----------



## Vya Domus (Jun 16, 2018)

droopyRO said:


> But as a consumer, who bought a Freesync monitor in 2016 to run a AMD card



Freesync is open source and free to use. Ironically enough , you can thank Nvidia as well for this situation and for their refusal to support it. They really are sacrificing the expansion and availability of variable refresh rate technology to more consumers in an effort to maximize their profits.


----------



## GlacierNine (Jun 16, 2018)

droopyRO said:


> I'`m about half way thru the video. Ok nVidia and Intel are bad.
> But as a consumer, who bought a Freesync monitor in 2016 to run a AMD card, i' waiting still for a AMD card to buy. RX 480 is inferior to my 980 Ti. DirectX 12 or Vulkan games have not major advantage to DX11. Vega is expensive compared to the price and power consumption compared to nVidia.
> There is no 3rd player on the GPU market. SO what the F*** am i supposed to buy to boycott Nvidia ?


Nobody is asking you to boycott anyone.

The video exists so that as a more educated consumer you can take these things into account when deciding to purchase a product. 

A lot of people in this thread are very short term minded, and I don't blame them for the fact Nvidia presently makes superior product. However I will absolutely blame them for the fact that they seem to think that absolves Nvidia of wrongdoing and exploitative or monopolistic business practices. Those things should be part of the landscape of deciding to make a purchase. If the benefits outweigh the negatives then yes, buy the product. But don't assume that because the benefits outweight the negatives, that means the negatives don't exist. 

I have an Intel and Nvidia based system myself, but I am absolutely in favour of AMD having a stronger market position versus both of those companies, because as we're seeing with HEDT right now, competition breeds MASSIVELY faster product improvement, and lower pricing for consumers.


----------



## the54thvoid (Jun 16, 2018)

theoneandonlymrk said:


> There is the usual crowd here jumping up and down on Nvidias side ,



And the opposite is also true...

Also, not quoting you but @Vya Domus instead, do you recall when AMD went honey-nut-loops crazy about Fermi's power draw? Nvidia was hugely 'roasted' about that Fermi blunder. So on your part, it's massively disingenuous to say the 290X power draw and heat issues were unfair.  In fact, it was Fermi that brought Nvidia to where it is. They dropped the hot'n'hungry hippo that was compute (and mostly unnecessary for games) and increased clocks. They went leaner. Then AMD dropped the ball with the first HD7970 (should've released the GHz edition) and they stopped being budget friendly. Nvidia released the now historically odd GK104 (GTX680) and not a GK100.

That whole episode allowed Nvidia to release the not so top tech card as the initial enthusiast part, raking in the $$$, at the same time AMD tried and failed to match it (and in some cases they did, but in the perf/watt metric (and acoustic), they were losing big time. Plus, while we're being factually accurate, the crossfire issues AMD had meant incorrect fps measures (read: inflated performance results) that meant I dumped 2 x 7970's and haven't been back to AMD since (not for GPU anyway).  They fixed CF but the damage was done.

No matter what shady practices are shown, AMD, with its popular exploitative PR machine tends to keep aiming at its own foot. Jokes about Fermi being hot - then releases super hot'n'hungry chips itself. Recent 'Poor Volta' viral PR stunts, whoops! And the list goes on.

We all want AMD to get it right, hell, or else I hope Intel does in 2020.  All I know is, I won't move from my 1080ti until I absolutely need to because the inflated prices are the biggest crime.

And I can't watch the video because, as a Scot, that accent is an aberration of dialect... Sorry dude.


----------



## Vya Domus (Jun 16, 2018)

the54thvoid said:


> Also, not quoting you but @Vya Domus instead, do you recall when AMD went honey-nut-loops crazy about Fermi's power draw? Nvidia was hugely 'roasted' about that Fermi blunder. So on your part, it's massively disingenuous to say the 290X power draw and heat issues were unfair.  In fact, it was Fermi that brought Nvidia to where it is. They dropped the hot'n'hungry hippo that was compute (and mostly unnecessary for games) and increased clocks. They went leaner. Then AMD dropped the ball with the first HD7970 (should've released the GHz edition) and they stopped being budget friendly. Nvidia released the now historically odd GK104 (GTX680) and not a GK100.



GTX 480 used close to or more than 100W watts compared to the 5870 , we are talking about such a horrendous power draw metric that AMD's dual GPU 5970 still used less power. If you think that me calling out the press for grossly exaggerating about how 10% more power draw is a deal breaker for a product that is cheaper and just as fast is "massively disingenuous" then all all I have to say is that you simply fail to put things into perspective and as such your perception is just thoroughly skewed.

This conclusion of yours that it's "fair" without properly looking at the context is honestly yet another confirmation as to how much has Nvidia managed to screw with the market.


----------



## Vayra86 (Jun 16, 2018)

kruk said:


> You know why AMD couldn't deliver the best products in recent times? Because they have been struggling with acquiring enough R&D money. And talking sh*t about their products, blaming them for anything nVidia does wrong, and so on, certainly won't help them becoming competitive on the high end again.
> 
> Buy the card that best suits you, I don't care, but don't spread misinformation*. Change the mindshare (AMD sucks*) and in long term everyone wins, it's really simple.
> 
> * this is not directed at you specifically, but spoken generally ...



The reason AMD couldn't deliver is because they *decided not to deliver*. Its really that simple and its really obvious as well. If you can read between the lines and judge the product at face value, they even say so themselves. - Polaris: 'We will focus on the midrange where volume of sales is highest'. Vega: 'we are primarily making a HPC product, not a gaming GPU'. GCN: 'we need an architecture not specifically for gaming but for everything'.

Its entirely their own fault their GPU division is where it is. Nvidia doesn't have anything to do with that. In the meantime, Nvidia just does what it does best: refinement after refinement that translates to solid products that are very cost effective and lucrative for them at every price point. Nvidia's approach has made them money. AMD's approach has been ruining their margins ever since they acquired ATI. What follows is a fanbase that takes everything AMD says for granted, keeps looking at 'the next best thing' that, every time it gets to market, is already obsolete or never really translates to performance or the revolutiionary change in the landscape. I mean look at DX11 > Mantle / DX12 and éven Vulkan. When the RX480 arrived and the refreshed driver model got traction, everyone yelled 'omg look at the DX12 perf'. Today, nobody cares about any sort of difference in DX12 performance between Nvidia and AMD. Simply because in the end, it never really translated to noticeable performance differences, but AMD managed to fix the discrepancy in performance on DX11 (or in fact, the API fixes it for them). There is not ONE situation where an AMD card of a lower tier gets to a performance level of an Nvidia card that is one or half- a tier above it.

Its a great example of how the AMD fanbase keeps inflating arguments to 'improve the AMD mindshare'... but its counterproductive because every time we see the actual product and performance, it is a letdown. Between Hawaii, Fury X and Vega, all of the high end GPUs were overinflated and performed 'meh' in a big way. Be it on temps, relative performance, OC capability, noisy stock coolers and crappy AIOs or very bad hardware optimization with Vega; there's always something substantial failing.

In the end thát is what people remember, and they also see an AMD crowd that follows up with a myriad of fixes and workarounds 'to make it better'. Here's the kicker: 95% of all consumers doesn't want to make it better, they just want it working right out of the box. It would serve AMD a lot better if people slowed the hype train, especially the fans themselves. Its no longer credible and it actually never really was.

Note, I talk of fans - not fanboys - this is never intended to spark that worthless back and forth. Its just the trend that I'm seeing when it comes to 'mindshare'.



GlacierNine said:


> Nobody is asking you to boycott anyone.
> 
> The video exists so that as a more educated consumer you can take these things into account when deciding to purchase a product.
> 
> ...



This right here is a perfect example of how the support for AMD is harming them. The long term reality is that the company is NOT providing what it set out to provide, not three years ago, not two, and not one year ago. Not this year. And not even next year. What really needs to happen is for this ship to sink, and to get recovered by a company that IS willing and able to compete with Nvidia. A company also that knows how to play the market in the same, merciless way Nvidia does it.

All of that does not change anything about the fact that yes, when Nvidia 'is at it again' with blatant lies or misrepresented facts (3.5 GB & GPP, looking at you) they deserve the community backlash. And that backlash is effective. GPP is shot, and they lost a case on the 3.5GB. AdoredTV's whine and rant about this company has very little to add to that. The complaints about Gsync and Gameworks for example are ridiculous. Nothing stopped AMD from doing similar. Nvidia has made serious investments that pay off, and that is all that really is. Investments, also, that have improved gaming in real ways. FreeSync would not have existed if it wasn't for Gsync. Tech like TXAA and FXAA similarly are results of Gameworks that benefit us all. Nvidia has many engineers that go out to visit devs and support them to optimize performance. Those are real investments that deserve, and create real payoffs and its really odd to criticize a company for doing that, because 'its competitor doesn't do it'.


----------



## chaosmassive (Jun 16, 2018)

I literally watched the whole video just few minutes ago


----------



## the54thvoid (Jun 16, 2018)

Vya Domus said:


> GTX 480 used close to or more than 100W watts compared to the 5870 , we are talking about such a horrendous power draw metric that AMD's dual GPU 5970 still used less power. If you think that me calling out the press for grossly exaggerating about how 10% more power draw is a deal breaker for a product that is cheaper and just as fast is "massively disingenuous" then all all I have to say is that you simply fail to put things into perspective and as such your perception is just thoroughly skewed.
> 
> This conclusion of yours that it's "fair" without properly looking at the context is honestly yet another confirmation as to how much has Nvidia managed to screw with the market.




Okay, let'stalk about todays cards as well, to keep perspective. 

GTX1080 = 166w
RX Vega = 292w

And arguably, Vega performs as well as a GTX1080.

So yes, I think a 128watt power draw difference for the same performance is relevant. But your penchant for argument makes you vulnerable to hypocrisy.


----------



## Folterknecht (Jun 16, 2018)

Vya Domus said:


> I remember how ridiculous the reviews were for the 290X, reviewers didn't like it because it was *very power hungry  and hot *(less than 10% more power vs the first Titan) and it didn't have a fancy metal shroud and quieter fan.



Can't hear u


----------



## cucker tarlson (Jun 16, 2018)

Vayra86 said:


> The reason AMD couldn't deliver is because they *decided not to deliver*. Its really that simple and its really obvious as well. If you can read between the lines and judge the product at face value, they even say so themselves. - Polaris: 'We will focus on the midrange where volume of sales is highest'. Vega: 'we are primarily making a HPC product, not a gaming GPU'. GCN: 'we need an architecture not specifically for gaming but for everything'.


They want to use same architecture on everything, competition to: nvidia's V100 (tesla/quadro), competitor to GP102 and GP104, cheap ass APUs, low-end APUs (intel hades canyon) and consoles. 
This is the thing that makes me boycott AMD and support nvidia. Their "masterplan" to water down PC enthusiast market down to console level. Nvidia has a purely PC gaming oriented GPU line-up.
If it wasn't for nvidia's desire to introduce g-sync, we would never have freesync on PC, and in consequence never have it on console like it's now made possible. AMD wants to do things other way round. They do not give a crap about innovating pc gaming market if it doesn't at the same time mean they can profit with consoles.


----------



## the54thvoid (Jun 16, 2018)

Folterknecht said:


> Can't hear u



I remember a great vid from a reviewer where his vacuum cleaner was outgunned by the 290X.

But then, I've lost perspective.


----------



## silentbogo (Jun 16, 2018)

AdoredTV was fun for a short time, but when his videos pop-out frequently, you notice a heavy bias towards AMD.
Just for fun I watched some of his AMD-related "research" and it starts with something like talking about some "back in a day AMD fuckup" for 2 minutes and slowly gets siderolled into yet another 20-minute NVidia or Intel rant.



FordGT90Concept said:


> I considered NVIDIA shady since they created closed-source CUDA and bought out Aegia.


If NVidia did not acquire Ageia, it would end up in the same place as their Cellfactor Evolution. If you don't remember or if you are not familiar with it, it's a showcase game for PhysX accelerators. It started as a AAA game project with bad-ass graphics, lots of real-time physics, action-packed multiplayer etc. etc. Halfway through the development of both PhysX SDK and the game they've ran out of money cause no one wanted to spend $200+ on a PPU (with a final nail in a coffin being BFG going out of business). The game ended up being released years later as a generic C-grade PS3 shooter (really awkward considering it was originally built for PC), and the remaining PPUs became a collectors item even before they hit a "5-years since release" mark.

Plus, the argument about Cuda and Gameworks is pointless. It's their SDKs, and they are meant to work on their cards, with no obligation to optimize it for their competitors hardware. Gamedevs choose Gameworks, Hairworks or PhysX because it's available in a nice and intuitive package, it's free, it has a huge library of sample code. If AMD or Intel had an alternative, I'm sure devs would use it as soon as they can. ATM there's no alternatives. Havok is shareware and is currently buried in one of the MS backburner closets. TressFX is only a counterpart to Hairworks, and when it comes to other Gameworks alternatives - there is none.
Also, CUDA library has grown so much that you can find a ready-to-use library for pretty much anything. The only viable alternative to combat NV PhysX is an open-source Bullet physix, which only entered an early stage of testing OpenCL accelerated physics. And even then it may not become a silver bullet (pun intended), cause OpenCL's many layers of abstraction and aim at being "felxible and universal" makes it significantly slower than CUDA in most use cases.


----------



## Vya Domus (Jun 16, 2018)

the54thvoid said:


> Okay, *let'stalk about todays cards* as well, to keep perspective.



Let's _*not *_, we were talking about something else. Seeing you trying to shift the focus to something else many years down the line in a completely different context just so you can find something that fits with your narrative is rather disappointing.


----------



## cucker tarlson (Jun 16, 2018)

When will people learn that 10% hotter, 10% more power hungry and 10% slower still makes the 10% cooler, 10% less power hungry and 10% faster a better buy. When I had my 290X I still wanted a 780Ti like hell, but never once did I bitch and whine how unfair it was that reviewers still put nvidia on the pedestal or other people could afford it but I didn't.


----------



## qubit (Jun 16, 2018)

I could only be bothered to watch about 30 seconds of this video, since it's clearly conspiracy trash. All that stuff about the company's name, puh-lease.


----------



## GorbazTheDragon (Jun 16, 2018)

The situation AMD is in is entirely their own making, there are several videos on the same channel about where they have screwed up their marketing and development priorities.

That video quite objectively points out a lot of the dirty practices that have made NVidia successful, however I will likely keep buying NVidia cards in the future unless AMD does actually present a compelling alternative or NVidias practices become so disgusting I don't want to continue to throw money into the gaming industry.


----------



## RejZoR (Jun 16, 2018)

R9-290X was "so bad" that AMD was able to rehash it as R9-390X and still compete against NVIDIA GTX 980... Only terrible R9 290X were reference ones. Where we can say the same for reference GTX 980. They were all rather crap.


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Jun 16, 2018)

the54thvoid said:


> And the opposite is also true...
> 
> Also, not quoting you but @Vya Domus instead, do you recall when AMD went honey-nut-loops crazy about Fermi's power draw? Nvidia was hugely 'roasted' about that Fermi blunder. So on your part, it's massively disingenuous to say the 290X power draw and heat issues were unfair.  In fact, it was Fermi that brought Nvidia to where it is. They dropped the hot'n'hungry hippo that was compute (and mostly unnecessary for games) and increased clocks. They went leaner. Then AMD dropped the ball with the first HD7970 (should've released the GHz edition) and they stopped being budget friendly. Nvidia released the now historically odd GK104 (GTX680) and not a GK100.
> 
> ...


I agree with you here ,ill say this first.


But again and not you per say , loads of tangential arguments from Nvidia fan's but No hard facts countering those in the video, just opinions, which is ok but none are noted as such??.


----------



## Fluffmeister (Jun 16, 2018)

RejZoR said:


> R9-290X was "so bad" that AMD was able to rehash it as R9-390X and still compete against NVIDIA GTX 980... Only terrible R9 290X were reference ones. Where we can say the same for reference GTX 980. They were all rather crap.



It did kinda compete:

https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/MSI/R9_390X_Gaming/30.html

But at the expense of even more horrendous power consumption:

https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/MSI/R9_390X_Gaming/28.html


----------



## OneMoar (Jun 16, 2018)

/me gets some popcorn


----------



## GorbazTheDragon (Jun 16, 2018)

That was 3 years ago...

Let me know when VEGA is a compelling gaming option


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Jun 16, 2018)

silentbogo said:


> If NVidia did not acquire Ageia, it would end up in the same place as their Cellfactor Evolution. If you don't remember or if you are not familiar with it, it's a showcase game for PhysX accelerators. It started as a AAA game project with bad-ass graphics, lots of real-time physics, action-packed multiplayer etc. etc. Halfway through the development of both PhysX SDK and the game they've ran out of money cause no one wanted to spend $200+ on a PPU (with a final nail in a coffin being BFG going out of business). The game ended up being released years later as a generic C-grade PS3 shooter (really awkward considering it was originally built for PC), and the remaining PPUs became a collectors item even before they hit a "5-years since release" mark.


Microsoft probably would have swooped in to buy it to make it part of DirectX.  Instead, we had to wait over a decade for Intel to buy out Havok, do absolutely nothing with it, then sell Havok to Microsoft while NVIDIA gave up trying to monetize PhysX because hardware-specific middleware doesn't work (3dfx Glide anyone?).



silentbogo said:


> Plus, the argument about Cuda and Gameworks is pointless. It's their SDKs, and they are meant to work on their cards, with no obligation to optimize it for their competitors hardware.


And so you get it: this was the beginning of NVIDIA writing software to make people buy their hardware.



silentbogo said:


> Gamedevs choose Gameworks, Hairworks or PhysX because it's available in a nice and intuitive package, it's free, it has a huge library of sample code.


No, they did it because of Market Development Funds (should sound familiar).  Developers who agree to use Gameworks can get free hardware and programming support from NVIDIA.  Why? Because it sells hardware for NVIDIA down the road.



silentbogo said:


> ATM there's no alternatives.


Except the dozens of OpenCL alternatives.  Additionally, a lot of these GameWorks features wouldn't be used at all if they weren't getting paid (via support) to do it.  HairWorks is #1 on that list.  How many games actually use it?  10?  That feels generous. 

PhysX is specifically a problem because major engines like Unreal Engine have embedded the middleware in their core.  Developers making a game based on an engine will overwhelmingly use what's there over trying to jury-rig an alternative on.  Very, very few of these games actually require/use GPU acceleration so PhsyX in practice ends up being no better than Havok (which is still used in a lot of games).


----------



## RejZoR (Jun 16, 2018)

Fluffmeister said:


> It did kinda compete:
> 
> https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/MSI/R9_390X_Gaming/30.html
> 
> ...



The only objectionable issue was desktop and BluRay playback. Gaming consumption, who cares. It's like worrying how efficient a Ferrari is. But is a bit annoying if it's chugging too much when standing still, idling...


----------



## cadaveca (Jun 16, 2018)

GlacierNine said:


> It's not quite, in my opinion, as clearcut and simply damning, as his companion video about Intel. A lot of what he talks about, well, he has the evidence for it, but from the tech press, devs, etc, whereas in the Intel video he often relied on actual court transcripts and documents released during lawsuits that Intel ultimately lost.
> 
> In any case, there's definitely a lot of truth in what he's talking about here and it's well worth watching.


Any large business with excessive amounts of money to invest operates in this fashion. This is called success.


Welcome to the real world, enjoy your stay. Souvenirs are available at the gift shop.



Its not like we have recent GPUs or CPUs filling landfills, do we? Products are sold out? So I don't see where the actual problem here (other than the distribution of wealth) is?


----------



## kruk (Jun 16, 2018)

Vayra86 said:


> The reason AMD couldn't deliver is because they *decided not to deliver*. Its really that simple and its really obvious as well. If you can read between the lines and judge the product at face value, they even say so themselves. - Polaris: 'We will focus on the midrange where volume of sales is highest'. Vega: 'we are primarily making a HPC product, not a gaming GPU'. GCN: 'we need an architecture not specifically for gaming but for everything'.



That are all cost cutting measures and IMO they were a smart way for RTG to survive until more cash flows in. This has finally happened, so they can put GCN to rest. We will see what RTG under the new leadership can do.

I will not reopen the mindshare debate again, because it has been debated to the death, but IMO it is a big factor: just ask non-enthusiast people around you ... for them gaming === GeForce and it has been like that for years, even when AMD/Ati had much better products.



Vayra86 said:


> What really needs to happen is for this ship to sink, and to get recovered by a company that IS willing and able to compete with Nvidia. A company also that knows how to play the market in the same, merciless way Nvidia does it.



Or that company would say: »Forget PC gaming, we will only waste money there ... let's only compete in HPC/Pro markets where the margins are significantly higher.« 
Game over with the bad ending for all PC gamers ... I would not like to risk it ...



Vayra86 said:


> Investments, also, that have improved gaming in real ways. FreeSync would not have existed if it wasn't for Gsync. Tech like TXAA and FXAA similarly are results of Gameworks that benefit us all. Nvidia has many engineers that go out to visit devs and support them to optimize performance. Those are real investments that deserve, and create real payoffs and its really odd to criticize a company for doing that, because 'its competitor doesn't do it'.



They do that now when they have boatloads of money and PC gaming has become their playground, but in the past they have been holding back progress for years. I don't mind if they optimize performance for their architectures, but I do mind if in the process they intentionally harm the competition ...


----------



## RejZoR (Jun 16, 2018)

AMD/ATi has done great through times. The HD4800 series doubled the performance of old gen. HD5800 doubled it again compared to HD4800. HD7900 was also a huge success and R9 290X, despite higher thermals, it was a brutal machine that lasted for ages thanks to raw throughput. Things like this aren't insignificant and people tend to forget them just because AMD wasn't a "top dog" for a while. Also look at Ryzen. Bulldozer architecture was more or less a flop. And Ryzen/Threadripper is now one of the most competitive designs on the market. It's not impossible for RTG to rise again. AMD has done it several times. They were forced to do it right with CPU, same is happening to their GPU segment. They are forced to make it a success. Ryzen was a bit of a thinking outside of the box. Navi is suppose to be similar outside of box thinking as Ryzen, but it's all a mystery for now. We'll see.


----------



## Fluffmeister (Jun 16, 2018)

RejZoR said:


> The only objectionable issue was desktop and BluRay playback. Gaming consumption, who cares. It's like worrying how efficient a Ferrari is. But is a bit annoying if it's chugging too much when standing still, idling...



That card is literally using more than TWICE the power to achieve the same peformance as a stock reference GTX 980, but I guess as you say it does "compete" with it. People like efficiency, less power consumption means less heat, which means less noise. This particular issue doesn't have to be brand fanboy related, hell who wouldn't want GTX 1080/Vega 64 performance at say a maximum of 100W?

But I digress, Nvidia are mean in this free market for sure.


----------



## GlacierNine (Jun 16, 2018)

cadaveca said:


> Any large business with excessive amounts of money to invest operates in this fashion. This is called success.
> 
> 
> Welcome to the real world, enjoy your stay. Souvenirs are available at the gift shop.



This is not a justification. At one point it was part of "Success" and "the real world" that slavery was an institution, upon which large businesses success depended. 

The same can be said to a greater or lesser degree of serfdom, divine right, etc. The simple fact is that in the intervening centuries between the founding of those ideas, their abuse, and today, we elected that they were not morally justifiable. Monopolistic practices, and the use of a dominant market position to crush the competition, are no different. 

As inescapable as the reality is, the fact remains that it is tautological and invalid to imply that could ever be a good reason for it to remain reality.


----------



## RejZoR (Jun 16, 2018)

Fluffmeister said:


> That card is literally using more than TWICE the power to achieve the same peformance as a stock reference GTX 980, but I guess as you say it does "compete" with it. People like efficiency, less power consumption means less heat, which means less noise. This particular issue doesn't have to be brand fanboy related, hell who wouldn't want GTX 1080/Vega 64 performance at say a maximum of 100W?
> 
> But I digress, Nvidia are mean in this free market for sure.



It's like 2 generations older card, of course it's not so power efficient. But it was so powerful it was able to compete performance wise with the latest and greatest from NVIDIA. What does that tell you?


----------



## MrGenius (Jun 16, 2018)

They had me pretty much back on their team. Right up until GPP. As soon as I saw that I said "you know what? FUCK YOU!!! You just lost a potential customer. Probably for life!". Stupid assholes. Yes...I will by an "inferior" product. Even if it costs more. And I'll be perfectly happy with it. So long as it doesn't have your filthy ass name on it!

Can't wait to pick up a Vega 64 now that it can be had at MSRP. GTX 1080 is better for same price? Good for you. Don't care. Not in the least. Truth is I don't really need something as good as either one. Had my eye on a GTX 1070. Now I'm just gonna throw as much money as I can AMD's way just to prove a point. Take that bitches!


----------



## Fluffmeister (Jun 16, 2018)

RejZoR said:


> It's like 2 generations older card, of course it's not so power efficient. But it was so powerful it was able to compete performance wise with the latest and greatest from NVIDIA. What does that tell you?



Check out the GTX 980's performance per watt vs 14nm Polaris:

https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/RX_480/25.html

It tells me the GM204 was a gem.


----------



## Divide Overflow (Jun 16, 2018)

Thread and video aren't about if nVidia has a good performing product.  It's about the dirty, underhanded and disgraceful business practices that nVidia employs.  The facts brought up in the video can be ignored but nobody has been able to refute them.


----------



## RejZoR (Jun 16, 2018)

Fluffmeister said:


> Check out the GTX 980's performance per watt vs 14nm Polaris:
> 
> https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/RX_480/25.html
> 
> It tells me the GM204 was a gem.



Polaris was literally made with specific thing in mind. To fit in a very specific price bracket at expense of things while still performing well. I can't believe people don't understand this even today. And if it wasn't for stupid mining garbage, nearly every gaming box would be running a Polaris. Because of mining, literally every mining rig was running a Polaris...


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Jun 17, 2018)

Yup, RX480/RX580 are fantastic cards for 1920x1080 gaming.  Better at it than the R9 390/R9 290X it replaced for less money/power.

But yeah, off topic.  NVIDIA has been wrapped in shady business for a over a decade now.


----------



## HTC (Jun 17, 2018)

I've watched the video in full. With that out of the way, i say this: nVidia is totally ruthless, much more then i thought they were!

Nobody can deny nVidia currently has the best gaming cards (performance and power usage wise) and this is so for the last 2 - 3 years: that's not a problem, by itself. That *they used and continue to use shady practices* is the problem.

Don't agree?

Picture this scenario:

- AMD makes some new architecture that outpaces nVidia's
- they create some libraries that get general adoption and run great on their architecture but cripple nVidia's
- they make those libraries proprietary
- they "convince" game devs to force the use of these libraries for games to "run properly" knowing full well those that had GPUs from the competition would be hurt, performance wise, and in some cases quite severely

Would you not cry foul?


----------



## Fluffmeister (Jun 17, 2018)

RejZoR said:


> Polaris was literally made with specific thing in mind. To fit in a very specific price bracket at expense of things while still performing well. I can't believe people don't understand this even today. And if it wasn't for stupid mining garbage, nearly every gaming box would be running a Polaris. Because of mining, literally every mining rig was running a Polaris...



Heh i remember the dodgy marketing, VR is not for the 1%! What nonsense.

----------------------------

Picture this scnerio, Intel take GPU land serious and push AMD down into third place, that would be a riot.

Whataboutisms and all that.


----------



## ShiBDiB (Jun 17, 2018)

jboydgolfer said:


> Frankly, as it stands now, i dont care how the cow is killed, as long as i get my steak.



This x1billion

Who cares? Brand loyalty is the dumbest thing, buy the best product for what you're trying to do regardless of it has a red or green sticker. These companies don't care about you, so you shouldn't care about them.


----------



## GorbazTheDragon (Jun 17, 2018)

ShiBDiB said:


> This x1billion
> 
> Who cares? Brand loyalty is the dumbest thing, buy the best product for what you're trying to do regardless of it has a red or green sticker. These companies don't care about you, so you shouldn't care about them.


To me this has nothing to do with brand loyalty, rather the fact that NVidia has continually pushed dishonest market practices well beyond what should be considered acceptable.

I buy their cards out of necessity and because I am well informed enough to not waste my money on cards that do not perform in the workloads I need or are sold under those dishonest market practices. But turning a blind eye to these practices that we manage to dodge and get around will only exacerbate the problem to the point that the PC gaming market will not be worth spending money on.


----------



## R-T-B (Jun 17, 2018)

RejZoR said:


> R9-290X was "so bad" that AMD was able to rehash it as R9-390X and still compete against NVIDIA GTX 980... Only terrible R9 290X were reference ones. Where we can say the same for reference GTX 980. They were all rather crap.



Hawaii was probably AMD's last decent card.  Yes, AMD can indeed point to it and be proud of it on it's own accomplishments, but it feels so very long ago now...


----------



## cucker tarlson (Jun 17, 2018)

MrGenius said:


> They had me pretty much back on their team. Right up until GPP. As soon as I saw that I said "you know what? FUCK YOU!!! You just lost a potential customer. Probably for life!". Stupid assholes. Yes...I will by an "inferior" product. Even if it costs more. And I'll be perfectly happy with it. So long as it doesn't have your filthy ass name on it!
> 
> Can't wait to pick up a Vega 64 now that it can be had at MSRP. GTX 1080 is better for same price? Good for you. Don't care. Not in the least. Truth is I don't really need something as good as either one. Had my eye on a GTX 1070. Now I'm just gonna throw as much money as I can AMD's way just to prove a point. Take that bitches!


And that attitude I can respect. At least you have the ballls to admit you're boycotting nvidia out of spite. I can't liten to this "if you choose amd it's a win for all gamers" nonsense anymore.


----------



## R-T-B (Jun 17, 2018)

cucker tarlson said:


> I can't liten to this "if you choose amd it's a win for all gamers" nonsense anymore.



It's not so much "you should go buy AMD" in particular for me as support competition.  That said, for you to support competition, a product must first be competitive.  VEGA isn't.

I'd really like Samsung or Intel to dip their toes into graphics.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Jun 17, 2018)

Intel is but I still don't understand how from a licensing perspective. I still think they're in it as a SIMD alternative to Xeon Phi.


----------



## Flyordie (Jun 17, 2018)

This video just explains why I held out on the GPU front for so long. HD5770, 780Ti and now an RX Vega64 Liquid card. (got a hand 2nd hand reference 780Ti from a great guy on R3D, that I passed onto a neighbor along with a 550W Seasonic PSU, during the Crypto-Crunch for his small business.. he does AUTOCAD work making expansion joints for critical use applications.. he was using an HD4250....)

I just can't give money to unethical companies if I can help it. I buy what I can afford from companies I feel are less evil overall.  AMD currently fits that bill on both fronts.  I am one of those consumers that just wants what works and is reliable for a good price. I don't need top of the line performance. I wan't a card that will be supported in general for 2-3 years after release in terms of drivers. Which from the looks of it, RX Vega will be as its base architecture will be kept in Navi although it will be an overhaul to make it more suited for gaming.


----------



## TheGuruStud (Jun 17, 2018)

Nvidia fangirls didn't watch the video and are crying, big surprise. Just STFU and masturbate to Mr. Leather Jacket since you love him so much.

fun fact: Jim doesn't say anything about ATI/AMD, b/c that's not the focus of the video (he points that out). Had you watched it (or any of his vids), then you'd realize he's not fanboying or choosing sides, but simply delivering a message based in REALITY (I know, NV fangirls have a hard time with this). If you think he hasn't slammed AMD before...you're dead wrong. Some people must have missed the intel videos, b/c their fanboys got destroyed even when it was just comparing FX series LOLOLOLOLOLOL

You know our society is a dead end when just pointing out facts is met with aggression, complete denial and redirection of blame. Hmmm, sounds like AMD, NV and Intel CEOs should run for offices!


----------



## R-T-B (Jun 17, 2018)

TheGuruStud said:


> Nvidia fangirls didn't watch the video and are crying, big surprise. Just STFU and masturbate to Mr. Leather Jacket since you love him so much.
> 
> fun fact: Jim doesn't say anything about ATI/AMD, b/c that's not the focus of the video (he points that out). Had you watched it (or any of his vids), then you'd realize he's not fanboying or choosing sides, but simply delivering a message based in REALITY (I know, NV fangirls have a hard time with this). If you think he hasn't slammed AMD before...you're dead wrong. Some people must have missed the intel videos, b/c their fanboys got destroyed even when it was just comparing FX series LOLOLOLOLOLOL
> 
> You know our society is a dead end when just pointing out facts is met with aggression, complete denial and redirection of blame. Hmmm, sounds like AMD, NV and Intel CEOs should run for offices!



And here I thought we were doing good avoiding fanboyism, you just killed it...



FordGT90Concept said:


> Intel is but I still don't understand how from a licensing perspective.



I mean this is a totally wild guess and I could be wrong but...  don't they have like, a metric button of cash?

I doubt licensing costs is a worry.


----------



## TheGuruStud (Jun 17, 2018)

R-T-B said:


> And here I thought we were doing good avoiding fanboyism, you just killed it...



Not from what I read on the first page. It's like people are mad that NV got busted by someone that garners attention. If L1Techs does it, then it's crickets.


----------



## Vya Domus (Jun 17, 2018)

So to sum up this thread , people can't tell the difference between brand loyalty/fanboysm and genuine discontent with practices that do not benefit consumers. Disappointing but unsurprising.



R-T-B said:


> I'd really like Samsung or Intel to dip their toes into graphics.



Samsung has no IP , other than whatever they licensed from ARM and Intel already tried that (granted they are trying again). So , it doesn't look particularly likely.


----------



## GlacierNine (Jun 17, 2018)

Vya Domus said:


> So to sum up this thread , people can't tell the difference between brand loyalty/fanboysm and genuine discontent with practices that do not benefit consumers. Disappointing but unsurprising.


More to the point, they're trying to rebrand the latter as if it's the former.


----------



## Vayra86 (Jun 17, 2018)

MrGenius said:


> They had me pretty much back on their team. Right up until GPP. As soon as I saw that I said "you know what? FUCK YOU!!! You just lost a potential customer. Probably for life!". Stupid assholes. Yes...I will by an "inferior" product. Even if it costs more. And I'll be perfectly happy with it. So long as it doesn't have your filthy ass name on it!
> 
> Can't wait to pick up a Vega 64 now that it can be had at MSRP. GTX 1080 is better for same price? Good for you. Don't care. Not in the least. Truth is I don't really need something as good as either one. Had my eye on a GTX 1070. Now I'm just gonna throw as much money as I can AMD's way just to prove a point. Take that bitches!



Aren't you being a little bit of a hypocrite now?

You are literally admitting you don't need the performance beyond what a 1070 has to offer. So the middle finger to Nvidia only applies because you don't 'need them'.. What happens when AMD cannot offer the performance you want? Still going to remain loyal? I doubt that. Or will you pick up on Raja's advice to crossfire a number of AMD cards to rival the competition ? Some food for thought I think... And its not directed at you personally but more in a broad sense: with all those people having principles, we still see Nvidia monopolizing the market. How is that possible, simple: people are hypocrites.

There is another way to do this: get the pitchforks out every time *either* company does things that really shouldn't happen and create a storm that cannot be ignored. I mean, let's look at recent AMD blunders too: RX560D, the very misleading FreeSync+Vega deal and launch MSRP that virtually no one managed to get his hands on... it doesn't really shine with honesty either does it? The only real difference I see is that AMD is just not good at it... and Nvidia is, although GPP was almost AMD-level PR stupid. The reason it got shot is because a storm was raised. Thát is where consumers have power these days and where collective effort has weight; direct response through social media. A boycot is not nearly as effective, especially when gamers are not the primary source of income for these companies. But losing face and brand strength? That hurts throughout each division.

In that sense I applaud videos such as these, they add to the storm we 'need'. But its also easy to create a storm with the wrong arguments. (Example: Gameworks I feel is a wrong argument, GPP and 3.5GB were valid arguments).



TheGuruStud said:


> Nvidia fangirls didn't watch the video and are crying, big surprise. Just STFU and masturbate to Mr. Leather Jacket since you love him so much.
> 
> fun fact: Jim doesn't say anything about ATI/AMD, b/c that's not the focus of the video (he points that out). Had you watched it (or any of his vids), then you'd realize he's not fanboying or choosing sides, but simply delivering a message based in REALITY (I know, NV fangirls have a hard time with this). If you think he hasn't slammed AMD before...you're dead wrong. Some people must have missed the intel videos, b/c their fanboys got destroyed even when it was just comparing FX series LOLOLOLOLOLOL
> 
> You know our society is a dead end when just pointing out facts is met with aggression, complete denial and redirection of blame. Hmmm, sounds like AMD, NV and Intel CEOs should run for offices!



Why do you have to do this? You've just lowered the value of this topic to close-worthy with a single post. Complete with full caps and fangirl comments... You're awfully close to my ignore list like this. Grow up man. Your last sentence, is that a retrospective on yourself or what?


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Jun 17, 2018)

@Vayra86 you like to point to others posts as biased yet reply in biased tones??

How about getting On topic instead of mearly defending your own biases , with finger pointing.


----------



## Vayra86 (Jun 17, 2018)

theoneandonlymrk said:


> @Vayra86 you like to point to others posts as biased yet reply in biased tones??
> 
> How about getting On topic instead of mearly defending your own biases , with finger pointing.



I am on topic. Bias? This is only about tone of voice and opening up a discussion versus shutting it down.


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Jun 17, 2018)

Vayra86 said:


> I am on topic. Bias? This is only about tone of voice and opening up a discussion versus shutting it down.


So to recap the Op is about Nvidias anti consumer anti tech stance , in what way is your biased But But Amd rant on topic?


----------



## Vayra86 (Jun 17, 2018)

theoneandonlymrk said:


> So to recap the Op is about Nvidias anti consumer anti tech stance , in what way is your biased But But Amd rant on topic?



Its called putting things in perspective and it is essential in any discussion about two opposites. I also touch on Nvidia's wrongdoings in a similar way. Take it to PM though, we don't need this back and forth here.


----------



## Mr.Mopar392 (Jun 17, 2018)

feelings are being hurt because nvidia fanboys don't want to know the truth so they rather avoid than wasting their green time watching. some claim amd is crying wolf when playing nvidia titles but thats ok even when its a proven issue. i want best tech out atm is the slogan nvidia fanboys hinds behind when bias is seeping out their mouth.


----------



## cucker tarlson (Jun 17, 2018)

Lol we've just begun dragging the discussion down to an embarrassing level, and there's new accounts already. Would not be surprised if that was AMD's doing, like the whole adored channel and his fabricated comments section.

Getting the best tech out is literally the whole point of running a company like nvidia and amd. Sorry their long term master plan didn't work out with incremental changes to the same architecture we've had for 7 years. Who could have predicted that except for virtually everyone.

I have a lot of faith in Mr.Wang,but he has to show me he really cares about pc gaming. Then he can have all my money. Prioritizing HPC and consoles ain't giving him much credit in my eyes tho.


----------



## GlacierNine (Jun 17, 2018)

cucker tarlson said:


> Lol we've just begun dragging the discussion down to an embarrassing level, and there's new accounts already. Would not be surprised if that was AMD's doing, like the whole adored channel and his fabricated comments section.
> 
> Getting the best tech out is literally the whole point of running a company like nvidia and amd. Sorry their long term master plan didn't work out with incremental changes to the same architecture we've had for 7 years. Who could have predicted that except for virtually everyone.
> 
> I have a lot of faith in Mr.Wang,but he has to show me he really cares about pc gaming. Then he can have all my money. Prioritizing HPC and consoles ain't giving him much credit in my eyes tho.



There is a deep, deep irony in the fact Nvidia quite literally is shown to have paid forum posters to shill for them, within the video, and here you are accusing AMD of that tactic.


----------



## Vya Domus (Jun 17, 2018)

I find it so interesting how people who claim all they care about is getting fast video cards and can't be bothered by anything else are on like their 10th comment here.


----------



## cucker tarlson (Jun 17, 2018)

GlacierNine said:


> There is a deep, deep irony in the fact Nvidia quite literally is shown to have paid forum posters to shill for them, *within the video*, and here you are accusing AMD of that tactic.



Well I thought AdoredTV would've mentioned if he is sponsored to counter the case he's making against nvidia in his video.
Lol. This is the best comment so far.


----------



## GlacierNine (Jun 17, 2018)

Vya Domus said:


> I find it so interesting how people who claim all they care about is getting fast video cards and can't be bothered by anything else are on like their 10th comment here.


The obvious answer is that making all these comments is how they intend to get the fast video cards. Hoping to attract the attention of big green for some of that sweet marketing money maybe?


----------



## cucker tarlson (Jun 17, 2018)

Vya Domus said:


> I find it so interesting how people who claim all they care about is getting fast video cards and can't be bothered by anything else are on like their 10th comment here.


Yet you find it normal that the person with highest post/day count in the thread is you?


----------



## Vayra86 (Jun 17, 2018)

GlacierNine said:


> The obvious answer is that making all these comments is how they intend to get the fact video cards. Hoping to attract the attention of big green for some of that sweet marketing money maybe?



I found that an interesting bit in the video and one I can definitely recognize when I read online comments (not on TPU btw but elsewhere). I've always found it rather strange how people jump on each (top end) release from the moment its announced even before knowing anything about the product.



cucker tarlson said:


> Well I thought AdoredTV would've mentioned if he is sponsored to counter the case he's making against nvidia in his video.
> Lol. This is the best comment so far.



Sponsor him? Its painful to listen to the guy, let alone for a full hour. I endured, but I'll admit I skipped some of it. Never again tho.

75% of the video, especially the stuff around the time of 3dfx is... highly questionable to say the least. Many GPU makers of old have died and in the vid it sounds like all of this was Nvidia's doing, while in reality 3dfx itself was the cause for its own demise. This market doesn't deal well with fragmentation, especially not on such a low-level tech - recap to the present with Mantle/Vulkan/DX12. Its very hard for something like this to take off unless it has broad support. Nvidia realized very early in the game that consolidation was necessary because the product is characterized by high development and R&D expenses with a very high risk, because if a product fails, you can almost kiss your entire business goodbye. Thát is why many old GPU companies died; they betted on the wrong horse, got burned, and could not recover. AGEIA is similar in that regard, but in the video, the twist is not Ageia made the wrong choices and became prey for takeover; its much more juicy to state it was all Nvidia being evil.



dorsetknob said:


> Yup you got that wrong
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Imagine... I even edit my posts most of the time to keep the count down.


----------



## dorsetknob (Jun 17, 2018)

cucker tarlson said:


> Yet you find it normal that the person with highest post/day count in the thread is you?


 Yup you got that wrong
  


*Vayra86*
*



*


                                                                                         Joined                            Sep 17, 2014                                                                                                                      Messages                            4,989     (3.64/day)                                                                                                                      Likes                            3,986                                                                                                                                                                Location                                                                                                 Duiven, Netherlands 
*Vya Domus*
*



*


                                                                                         Joined                            Jan 8, 2017                                                                                                                      Messages                            2,447     (4.66/day)                                                                                                                      Likes                            1,628


----------



## Vya Domus (Jun 17, 2018)

cucker tarlson said:


> Yet you find it normal that the person with highest post/day count in the thread is you?



What is that even supposed to mean ? Are you implying I shouldn't be here commenting because I have a high post/day or that there is something wrong with that ? Some of the stuff you say is truly mind-boggling and nonsensical.



Vayra86 said:


> Many GPU makers of old have died and in the vid it sounds like all of this was Nvidia's doing



I don't know if it was all Nvidia's doing but you should watch some of Jensen's talks , he likes to mention how they managed to become the last independent fabless GPU manufacturer a lot.


----------



## cucker tarlson (Jun 17, 2018)

Vya Domus said:


> So to sum up this thread , people can't tell the difference between brand loyalty/fanboysm and genuine discontent with practices that do not benefit consumers.


So one can't be loyal to nvidia, that's fanboysm. One can only be loyal to AMD, you can't go wrong with that.
How beneficial to the consumer was Raja lying about DSBR and primitive shaders in vega,running game tests with fps counter turned off on 1080Ti and Vega, AMD insisting to us consumers that Vega is great for gamers before revealing a card whose clear purpose is compute work. The only reason why AMD might get my pass and I'm once again interested to see what they deliver is that lying Raja is out of there. If he stayed I would not even consider buying AMD as long as that man is there. I was gonna buy 1080Ti in april, before the mining craze got here, but amd baited me into waiting. Then prices went sky high and amd delivered an absolute turd considering it was 1080Ti price with 1080 performance and 350W of power draw. Yeah,that was really pro consumer..... seriously, get some perspective from both sides or get out here man.


----------



## John Naylor (Jun 17, 2018)

US Business ptactices best analogy is two wild animals fighting over a carcas ... it's no where close to warm and fuzzy.... it's kill or be killed.  So put ya big boy pants on and make the grown up choice of picking the product that has the best specs.   Why punish yourself or your customers because you think one side isn't playing fair ... fair is not part of the American capitalist model as evidences by AMDs mimicking Intel / nVidia product line naming, claiming Freesync = G-Sync (even tho it has no hardware module for MBR tech) and whining "anti-competitive" when competition calls them on it and tries to prpotect their branding.  What do you cal a company board that spends billions on R & D for new groundbreaking technology and then licenses it to the competition ?  ...  Answer: "Replaced"


----------



## Vayra86 (Jun 17, 2018)

Vya Domus said:


> What is that even supposed to mean ? Are you implying I shouldn't be here commenting because I have a high post/day or that there is something wrong with that ? Some of the stuff you say is truly mind-boggling and nonsensical.
> 
> 
> 
> I don't know if it was all Nvidia's doing but you should watch some of Jensen's talks , he likes to mention how they managed to become the last independent fabless GPU manufacturer a lot.



That's the thing I don't get emotional for even 1% when  a company 'is admittedly evil'. All companies are evil its how you survive in any business, its how the world/evolution/everything simply works. Call it a reality check if you will... Survival of the fittest. Is it desirable to do things like that? NO. But it IS reality and I've learned that believing in utopia is not going to get you anywhere and ideals in business exist only to get abused. I draw the line wherever it hurts my own interests directly.

Look at Google's old punchline, it summarizes this perfectly.

https://gizmodo.com/google-removes-nearly-all-mentions-of-dont-be-evil-from-1826153393



FordGT90Concept said:


> Microsoft probably would have swooped in to buy it to make it part of DirectX.  Instead, we had to wait over a decade for Intel to buy out Havok, do absolutely nothing with it, then sell Havok to Microsoft while NVIDIA gave up trying to monetize PhysX because hardware-specific middleware doesn't work (3dfx Glide anyone?).
> 
> 
> And so you get it: this was the beginning of NVIDIA writing software to make people buy their hardware.
> ...



I missed this little gem of a post but this right here is a perfect, realistic view on what's what.


----------



## Vya Domus (Jun 17, 2018)

cucker tarlson said:


> So one can't be loyal to nvidia, that's fanboysm. One can only be loyal to AMD, you can't go wrong with that.



Inferring things which I never once even hinted at ? No thanks , I'm not lettings myself being dragged in this nonsense.



cucker tarlson said:


> The only reason why AMD might get my pass and I'm once again interested to see what they deliver is that lying Raja is out of there.



Get your pass ?  Didn't you say AMD's products are clearly inferior why would you give them a "pass" , a pass from what , why do you care about that ? It's this contradictory stuff that baffles me.



Vayra86 said:


> All companies are evil its how you survive in any business, its how the world/evolution/everything simply works. Call it a reality check if you will... Survival of the fittest.



It's not that I do not know that or that I wish for an Utopian scenario. I do not care , I don't run these business I don't care how successful or how much money they make. I only care what sort of technologies and products are being made available and who is trying to sacrifice some of that for profits. There is a company that keeps putting out new stuff but at the same time causing regressions and stagnation in other areas more than anyone else (well maybe not everyone , hint : blue) , it just so happens that they are called Nvidia , could have been AMD or even ATI back in the day.


----------



## cucker tarlson (Jun 17, 2018)

A pass from all the dick moves they pulled off with Vega. You're completely detatched from this situation cause you were never torn between choosing 1080Ti or waiting for Vega, that's why you don't seem to fully comprehend what AMD did to consumers this round. Yet you somehow think you along with adoredtv have the leverage to stop me from calling their actions for what they are - anti-consumer.


----------



## Vya Domus (Jun 17, 2018)

cucker tarlson said:


> Yet you somehow think you along with adoredtv have the leverage to stop me from calling their actions for what they are - anti-consumer.



Leverage ? What are you talking about ? 

Ain't nobody stopping you from claiming anything. Doesn't mean you are right though , which you aren't. But that's another story which I would like not to fill this thread with , also knowing it wouldn't change anything.


----------



## cucker tarlson (Jun 17, 2018)

30. That's how many triple A games I played since I bought my gtx 1080. You know where adoredtv can stick his shenanigans. Rooting for the underdog is not for me, and a smart person like you should comprehend it fully.


----------



## Vya Domus (Jun 17, 2018)

cucker tarlson said:


> You know where adoredtv can stick his shenanigans.



You keep mentioning AdoredTV in the same context as me as if we are part of some sort of organization trying to leverage ... something. Trying to paint me as a fanboy every step along the way and failing horribly , very ineffective and I suggest you stop doing that as it doesn't get you anywhere. Let's leave it at that.


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Jun 17, 2018)

cucker tarlson said:


> 30. That's how many triple A games I played since I bought my gtx 1080. You know where adoredtv can stick his shenanigans. Rooting for the underdog is not for me, and a smart person like you should comprehend it fully.


So why Are you in this debate??

What point do you still have to make,??


----------



## Mr.Mopar392 (Jun 17, 2018)

Vayra86 said:


> I found that an interesting bit in the video and one I can definitely recognize when I read online comments (not on TPU btw but elsewhere). I've always found it rather strange how people jump on each (top end) release from the moment its announced even before knowing anything about the product.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


it make perfect sense why rate my comment -1 lol looking at your system specs and your comments you might as well type you sentences in green. come out the closet already. oh by the i'm planning on getting the next nvidia card! @Vayra86


----------



## cucker tarlson (Jun 17, 2018)

theoneandonlymrk said:


> So why Are you in this debate??
> 
> What point do you still have to make,??


Nice. Hurts to see me write what I and other guys honestly feel about AMD much ? No one has to root for the underdog, especially one that wanted to have it all to themselves and failed miserably, pulling out every dick move they could to sway people. I got burnt by believing Raja's lies, along with many people I know. It's my fault cause I should've known better, but this still doesn't justify rtg's false marketing.


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Jun 17, 2018)

cucker tarlson said:


> Nice. Hurts to see me write what I and other guys honestly feel about AMD much ? No one has to root for the underdog, especially one that wanted to have it all to themselves and failed miserably, pulling out every dick move they could to sway people. I got burnt by believing Raja's lies, along with many people I know. It's my fault cause I should've known better, but this still doesn't justify rtg's false marketing.


So you now have some personal vendetta to repay?? , Oh.

Well given the topic I'll just ignore you from now on.

It's not hurting just boring.


----------



## cucker tarlson (Jun 17, 2018)

I got it now. I was silly, I admit. I never really realized adoredtv and you guys are running a scheme to make people buy Vega's to get nvidia some competition and be able to buy gtx cards at lower price yourselves. I must admit you're frickin brilliant. Thanks to one person for removing the cataracts I had on my eyes, you know who you are.


----------



## xkm1948 (Jun 17, 2018)

John Naylor said:


> US Business ptactices best analogy is two wild animals fighting over a carcas ... it's no where close to warm and fuzzy.... it's kill or be killed.  So put ya big boy pants on and make the grown up choice of picking the product that has the best specs.   Why punish yourself or your customers because you think one side isn't playing fair ... fair is not part of the American capitalist model as evidences by AMDs mimicking Intel / nVidia product line naming, claiming Freesync = G-Sync (even tho it has no hardware module for MBR tech) and whining "anti-competitive" when competition calls them on it and tries to prpotect their branding.  What do you cal a company board that spends billions on R & D for new groundbreaking technology and then licenses it to the competition ?  ...  Answer: "Replaced"




Gonna be hard man. Reality is not suited for everyone and it probably feels safer to stay in fantansy land where everything is fair and everyone is holding hands and singing
Kumbaya


Also @Vya Domus where is your Vega64 man? Ain't you supporting the underdog? Why are you sporting the evil green 1060? Burn that shit man buy yourself a proper GPU, a 580 or a Vega64! Remember, don't sell your 1060, burn it. Evil dies with fire!


----------



## cucker tarlson (Jun 17, 2018)

Holy crap he has a 1060 ? I never knew that.He's seriously confused. I myself would do anything for the cause.

Is someone suggesting that people who buy AMD just to boycott nvidia are NOT on their own vendettas ? 







Nvidia better release amd's async at once or face being court martialled.


----------



## xkm1948 (Jun 17, 2018)

cucker tarlson said:


> Holy crap he has a 1060 ? I never knew that.He's seriously confused. I myself would do anything for the cause.



hypocrisy at its best. I always insisted @RejZoR to buy a Vega64 since he always fiercely defend RTG. Too bad he went with a 1080Ti    


be like @theoneandonlymrk  if you REALLY wanna support the underdog and stomp on the evil by choosing with your wallet. If you running around defend RTG while sporting the "EVIL NVIDIA" GPU you are your own enemy. Smash or burn the evil NVIDIA GPU lads! Show us how serious you are instead of being just a keyboard warrior.


----------



## cadaveca (Jun 17, 2018)

GlacierNine said:


> This is not a justification. At one point it was part of "Success" and "the real world" that slavery was an institution, upon which large businesses success depended.
> 
> The same can be said to a greater or lesser degree of serfdom, divine right, etc. The simple fact is that in the intervening centuries between the founding of those ideas, their abuse, and today, we elected that they were not morally justifiable. Monopolistic practices, and the use of a dominant market position to crush the competition, are no different.
> 
> As inescapable as the reality is, the fact remains that it is tautological and invalid to imply that could ever be a good reason for it to remain reality.


No.  You know, my comment is more about the competitive nature of how business is run in general, and how when you reach the height of competitiveness, you MUST expect things to take this shape, NO MATTER WHAT COMPANY. We have executives from all those companies going from one to the next on a regular basis, which is who should be taking the blame for things like this, not the company itself. It is the executives that approve and OK such tactics, and these people work for their competition often.


This isn't a problem with NVidia; it's a problem with every company out there, and until you realize that, there's no point, from where I sit, in complaining about it. It is better to invest that energy into actually doing something abut it, rather than hoping you rile up others to do it for you.

Me I'm doing something about it. Notice I don't cover many brands in my reviews... and I constantly tell people, if we didn't cover it, you shouldn't buy it.

There's a difference from actively working towards a better future, and simply complaining about it. You'll note I'm not denying there is a problem here, I am merely stating that this problem is far bigger than any, including yourself, seem willing to admit. With that in mind, you can't fix things by just approaching a little part of it.. you have to approach the entire problem and not its fingertips.


----------



## cucker tarlson (Jun 17, 2018)

That I can understand, theoneandonlymrk has my respect now. I wish I knew his name so I could address him by his first name, like they do with adoredtv, insisting to call him "Jim" as if they knew him. It's so much more convincing to strangers, it's like a big red family.


----------



## Recus (Jun 17, 2018)

MrGenius said:


> They had me pretty much back on their team. Right up until GPP. As soon as I saw that I said "you know what? FUCK YOU!!! You just lost a potential customer. Probably for life!". Stupid assholes. Yes...I will by an "inferior" product. Even if it costs more. And I'll be perfectly happy with it. So long as it doesn't have your filthy ass name on it!
> 
> Can't wait to pick up a Vega 64 now that it can be had at MSRP. GTX 1080 is better for same price? Good for you. Don't care. Not in the least. Truth is I don't really need something as good as either one. Had my eye on a GTX 1070. Now I'm just gonna throw as much money as I can AMD's way just to prove a point. Take that bitches!



So you destroy "fair customer" term and going straight into "anti-consumer". AdorkedTV, yes you read it right, mentioned: "Nvidia customers buying Nvidia no matter what though it's slower, more expensive...". And you just looking for excuse to buy AMD.

Why Activision doesn't change CoD? Because gamers buying it no matter what. So AMD could releasing slower cards not because they lack of R&D but because you and AdorkedTV shills will buy it anyway.

Why people complaining about just 35% performance increase of new GPUs? Because there is no point to push more. Read r/AMD "I wish AMD give me GTX 1080 performance" and something like that. What if AMD won't deliver GPU which can reach Nvidia's? Boycott Nvidia because they are too fast? So not buying GTX 1080 because Nvidia is evil or not buying new card at all. AMD fanboys just buy slower card and claim they are fighting against corporations greed. That's pure Apple loyalty though iPhone CPU/GPU are fast.

Forgot to add Techpowerup is using Nvidia Geforce Experience shady practices.





Techpowerup is pro-Nvidia website. All AMD fans must departure ASAP!!!!!!


----------



## xkm1948 (Jun 17, 2018)

cadaveca said:


> Me I'm doing something about it. Notice I don't cover many brands in my reviews... and I constantly tell people, if we didn't cover it, you shouldn't buy it.
> 
> There's a difference from actively working towards a better future, and simply complaining about it.



Which brands of motherboard or RAM have you not covered? Just to make sure to note those down on my naughty list.



Recus said:


> AMD fanboys just buy slower card and claim they are fighting against corporations greed. That's pure Apple loyalty though iPhone CPU/GPU are fast.



There is a reason for such a huge flock of iSheep


----------



## cucker tarlson (Jun 17, 2018)

Sorry @dorsetknob, I just finally feel free to comment on adored's video since every comment I write under his videos on youtube somehow disappears or I get slammed. I remember him calling 5 gen Intel CPUs a failure in one of his videos, and absolutely shitting on me when I pointed out that broadwell-c and broadwell-e were actually great at gaming at very low power, even slightly better than their kabylake and skylake-x counterparts. I think the Jim they know is a different person from the adoretv I met.


----------



## Vya Domus (Jun 17, 2018)

This is some proper textbook thread crapping , some of you are completely out of touch with anything that resembles a proper discussion. Expected nothing less.

This new Wccftech 2.0 looks sick.


----------



## Vayra86 (Jun 17, 2018)

cadaveca said:


> No.  You know, my comment is more about the competitive nature of how business is run in general, and how when you reach the height of competitiveness, you MUST expect things to take this shape, NO MATTER WHAT COMPANY. We have executives from all those companies going from one to the next on a regular basis, which is who should be taking the blame for things like this, not the company itself. It is the executives that approve and OK such tactics, and these people work for their competition often.
> 
> 
> This isn't a problem with NVidia; it's a problem with every company out there, and until you realize that, there's no point, from where I sit, in complaining about it. It is better to invest that energy into actually doing something abut it, rather than hoping you rile up others to do it for you.
> ...







Recus said:


> So you destroy "fair customer" term and going straight into "anti-consumer". AdorkedTV, yes you read it right, mentioned: "Nvidia customers buying Nvidia no matter what though it's slower, more expensive...". And you just looking for excuse to buy AMD.
> 
> Why Activision doesn't change CoD? Because gamers buying it no matter what. So AMD could releasing slower cards not because they lack of R&D but because you and AdorkedTV shills will buy it anyway.
> 
> ...



Lol, get out from under the rock.. Read up a little, it concerns you too (I'm not even joking, your comment says you have no handle on the reason behind TPU disclosing that info):

https://www.eugdpr.org/

Oh and another thing, TPU is about tech. If you think its about Nvidia, boy that is some real tunnelvision on your part. There isn't even an Nvidia fan topic here, and I even think the AMD subsection in graphics is more vibrant than the Nvidia section is...



Mr.Mopar392 said:


> it make perfect sense why rate my comment -1 lol looking at your system specs and your comments you might as well type you sentences in green. come out the closet already. oh by the i'm planning on getting the next nvidia card! @Vayra86



Two posts out of two on this forum from you now contain zero content and only serve to flamebait and troll. Another one means you're going on ignore. If you have nothing to add except personal attacks, go elsewhere, thanks. The -1 you got from me is precisely because of these reasons.



cucker tarlson said:


> This is an adoredtv thread, stop acting like I'm the odd one here.





cucker tarlson said:


> 30. That's how many triple A games I played since I bought my gtx 1080. You know where adoredtv can stick his shenanigans. Rooting for the underdog is not for me, and a smart person like you should comprehend it fully.



With respect, this is not about you or your buying preference nor is it about anyone elses... That is the eternal trap of these topics. We (not just you) should stop applying everything said to ourselves as if its an attack on our purchase decisions. Nor is it necessary to yell how you're not or really are going to buy brand A or B. Its really not relevant... We can look at market share for our answers on that - and market shares don't lie.

My personal stance on all of this: I observe, analyze the information, and draw conclusions on that analysis. Does that affect my next purchase? Not really... When I want to buy something I gaze at benchmarks.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Jun 17, 2018)

Most people buy graphics cards at $300 or less.  That's RX 580/GTX 1060 territory (RX 580 comes out on top).  Who makes the better $1000 card doesn't matter to the vast majority of gamers out there.

If high-end gaming is your goal, it is easy to make the argument that Vega 64 + FreeSync will get you a better gaming experience than keeping your old monitor (because $200 G-Sync tax) and buying a GTX 1080 Ti.

AMD may not having bragging rights but they really don't need to either.  They're selling lots of cards to gamers and said gamers are pleased with their purchase.  That's really all AMD needs to accomplish.



I haven't watched the video yet but it's on my todo list.


----------



## Recus (Jun 17, 2018)

Vya Domus said:


> This is some proper textbook thread crapping , completely out of touch with anything that resembles a proper discussion. Expected nothing less from you all (well not all ).
> 
> This new Wccftech 2.0 looks sick.



Not even close.


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Jun 17, 2018)

cucker tarlson said:


> I got it now. I was silly, I admit. I never really realized adoredtv and you guys are running a scheme to make people buy Vega's to get nvidia some competition and be able to buy gtx cards at lower price yourselves. I must admit you're frickin brilliant. Thanks to one person for removing the cataracts I had on my eyes, you know who you are.


Right so if i ignore you your just going to make bullshit up about me.

Your constant derailer ,shit posting is starting to wear thin.


And is totally irrelevant balls


----------



## xkm1948 (Jun 17, 2018)

FordGT90Concept said:


> Most people buy graphics cards at $300 or less.  That's RX 580/GTX 1060 territory (RX 580 comes out on top).
> 
> AMD may not having bragging rights but they really don't need to either.  They're selling lots of cards to MINERS and said MINERS are pleased with their purchase.  That's really all AMD needs to accomplish.



There. Fixed for you. 

Crypto miners LOVE RTG GPUs.


----------



## cucker tarlson (Jun 17, 2018)

This is an adoredtv thread, stop acting like I'm the odd one here.


----------



## xkm1948 (Jun 17, 2018)

Recus said:


> Not even close.




Those people need to move out of their parents' basement and either get some proper STEM education or a get a job. Sending death threats over brand loyalty, man that is some seriously twisted brain.


----------



## sneekypeet (Jun 17, 2018)

Many reports coming in for the activity in this thread. Clean it up please, or we will be forced to ban users or lock the thread.


----------



## cucker tarlson (Jun 17, 2018)

Good night everybody !


----------



## Nuckles56 (Jun 17, 2018)

@mods just close this thread, it's too out of control and nothing new and relevant is being said here any more


----------



## MrGenius (Jun 18, 2018)

Vayra86 said:


> Aren't you being a little bit of a hypocrite now?
> 
> You are literally admitting you don't need the performance beyond what a 1070 has to offer. So the middle finger to Nvidia only applies because you don't 'need them'.. What happens when AMD cannot offer the performance you want? Still going to remain loyal? I doubt that. Or will you pick up on Raja's advice to crossfire a number of AMD cards to rival the competition ? Some food for thought I think... And its not directed at you personally but more in a broad sense: with all those people having principles, we still see Nvidia monopolizing the market. How is that possible, simple: people are hypocrites.


I can't see how I'm being hypocritical. I'm being something. But I don't think that's it. Not in this case anyway. I do agree that people are hypocrites though. Myself included. What I do know, for sure, is GPP royally pissed me off. And, believe it or not, I'd be just as pissed at AMD if they'd done it.

As far as AMD not coming up with something that I can buy that works good enough for me...that hasn't happened yet. Almost. But not quite. As I  wouldn't settle for anything less than a Vega 56 ATM. Anyway, I'm still getting a Vega 64. Mostly because I think anyone would be stupid not to(it's a considerably better card for not very much, if any, more money). But if they don't release something in about 3-4 years that's at least 2x as good as that...then no. I'm not very likely to even consider buying it as a reasonable upgrade. They probably will though.


----------



## moproblems99 (Jun 18, 2018)

I must be strange since I love my Vega.  Paid the same for it as 1070 Ti and it runs my 3440x1440 really well.  180Watts and quiet, and cool.

As far as I am concerned, AMD made the right decision to not focus on gamers because gamers gave them a big FU when they had products that were on par or better than the competition.  However, it is arguably their fault because their PR team sucks.

The fact of the matter is that people need to just buy what works for them.  The majority of companies don't care about you, at least until your warranty runs out anyway.  Nvidia, AMD, Intel, etc, all of them.


----------



## GlacierNine (Jun 18, 2018)

cadaveca said:


> No.  You know, my comment is more about the competitive nature of how business is run in general, and how when you reach the height of competitiveness, you MUST expect things to take this shape, NO MATTER WHAT COMPANY. We have executives from all those companies going from one to the next on a regular basis, which is who should be taking the blame for things like this, not the company itself. It is the executives that approve and OK such tactics, and these people work for their competition often.
> 
> 
> This isn't a problem with NVidia; it's a problem with every company out there, and until you realize that, there's no point, from where I sit, in complaining about it. It is better to invest that energy into actually doing something abut it, rather than hoping you rile up others to do it for you.
> ...



"You'll note I'm not denying there is a problem here"

I find that to be something of an about-face, given that your previous post attempted to justify by implying or outright stating that this behaviour (Which you have just described as a problem) is known as "success" and "reality" - which is to say, something inherent to both of those things and therefore cannot or indeed should not be challenged or changed.

There is an answer to these issues and it is not only to vote with your wallet, it is to take part in not only encouraging others to vote with theirs, but also making direct commentary to companies doing unacceptable things, to show that they are unacceptable. It is voting for government that is willing to legislate against these excesses. It is in being, as a human being, consistent in your condemnation of it and forming part of a larger whole that can and will enact change. For some issues that will simply be words, and for other issues that will be larger actions, according to your particular investment and your particular resources and ability.

There are many things, I am quite sure, within your life, that you vocally disagree with but simply do not have the time, resources, or energy to devote the same level of focus to, compared to this issue where you are very much needlessly touting your credentials regarding your contributions to TPU and it's reviews. They may take the form of any throwaway comment about, let's say, wasteful plastic packaging, or you may see a product that doesn't justify it's price in another field - who hasn't told someone they know "That's not worth the money, buy this instead" to someone who has nevertheless bought the inferior product anyway for some facile reason?

In each of those interactions you are nevertheless in some small way an agent for change, and it's, frankly, a bit rich, to be telling other people that when they make their own comments or contribute however they see fit, to any sort of effort to enact change as a consumer, that they are somehow doing it incorrectly simply because they have not elected to (or don't have the opportunity to, after all, we all have our lives to live and they're all quite different in their demands) go out of their way to the same degree you have, in order to make the same point or a similar point to the one you are making.

Also, I must admit, "if we don't review it don't buy it" may work for sites that ruthlessly champion the consumer's interest, like Gamer's Nexus, who are willing to throw themselves under the bus of a manufacturer's spite in order to call out bullshit as they see it, (Resulting in them being shut out by Cooler Master for a time, and not being sampled on recent AMD launches) but TPU has always taken a rather safe and placating stance towards product. In some instances the information must be pulled out of a review by the reader to note a flaw. In the case of TPU case coverage, it's barely more than an advertisement, as Darksaber seems incapable of having a bad word to say about any product, even that which contemporaries have already reviewed and found lacking.


----------



## cadaveca (Jun 18, 2018)

GlacierNine said:


> "You'll note I'm not denying there is a problem here"
> 
> I find that to be something of an about-face



There's no about-face at all. I stated earlier that it was normal, and welcome to the real world, to shorten what I said. I simply didn't say why I felt this way. Nice try though.



GlacierNine said:


> There are many things, I am quite sure, within your life, that you vocally disagree with but simply do not have the time, resources, or energy to devote the same level of focus to, compared to this issue where you are very much needlessly touting your credentials regarding your contributions to TPU and it's reviews. They may take the form of any throwaway comment about, let's say, wasteful plastic packaging, or you may see a product that doesn't justify it's price in another field - who hasn't told someone they know "That's not worth the money, buy this instead" to someone who has nevertheless bought the inferior product anyway for some facile reason?



Actually, you could not be more wrong about this either. We can start with me complaining about ASUS's forcing an boosted turbo profile when XMP is enabled on many boards, and we can see now that they don't, without giving you the option of running a normal Turbo profile. These companies actually listen to us as enthusiasts. There's lots that goes on in the background, too. There are several products on stores shelves today that were either designed by or largely affected by staff here at TPU. I'm rather proud to be surrounded by such success, success that you don't hear about. That makes it even more awesome.



GlacierNine said:


> Also, I must admit, "if we don't review it don't buy it" may work for sites that ruthlessly champion the consumer's interest, like Gamer's Nexus, who are willing to throw themselves under the bus of a manufacturer's spite in order to call out bullshit as they see it, (Resulting in them being shut out by Cooler Master for a time, and not being sampled on recent AMD launches) but TPU has always taken a rather safe and placating stance towards product. In some instances the information must be pulled out of a review by the reader to note a flaw. In the case of TPU case coverage, it's barely more than an advertisement, as Darksaber seems incapable of having a bad word to say about any product, even that which contemporaries have already reviewed and found lacking.


Criteria for reviews won't be the same from site to site, never mind from reviewer to reviewer. I agree that there should be some sort of standard, yet at the same time, if we all just did the same review, the whole review side of the industry would be nothing but an echo-chamber. So the fact that we might sometimes have a different perspective here at TPU rather than at other, much smaller sites, is exactly what I want to see, and I am glad you can find what you are looking for elsewhere if you find certain reviews to be lacking. After all, we link as many reviews from other sites on our front page every day, because we aren't competing with any other site. There's plenty of room for all of us, and more.

The perfect example of this is the current RGB fad. I really like it. I know many do not. But companies are making these products all RGB because RGB is helping them sell, even if the popular opinion given on forums is that RGB LEDs are horrible. If everyone felt that way, these companies would not be making every single thing they can RGB... so clearly there is room for differing ideas of what's right when it comes to hardware design... along with how a business should, is, and could be, run.


I'm also not one that buys into the idea of "if they had more money for R&D they could make better products" either. But then, I'm also one of those people that makes money on the internet and makes my own hours, so my opinion isn't ever going to be a common one.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Jun 18, 2018)

Watched it and learned a few things (especially early NVIDIA history).  Their corporate culture is worse than I thought.

I hope the FTC is continuing to investigate GPP.  NVIDIA is long past due for trust busting.


Maxwell is literally the first good architecture NVIDIA ever made.  I can't help but wonder if those stolen documents had something to do with that.  AMD could have and should have had a new architecture by now but Ryzen development so drained AMD's coffers they couldn't afford to do it.  Now that AMD is on a more solid financial foundation, here's hoping a brand new, fantastic architecture will debut in several years.


----------



## RejZoR (Jun 18, 2018)

NVIDIA had quite few good architectures in the past as well. RivaTNT, RivaTNT2, GeForce 256, GeForce 2, 3 and 4, GeForce 6000, 7000 and 8000 series were excellent. Things got a bit meh (not bad, just "meh") when they started using GTX up till GTX 700 series which were very good and then GTX 900 which was really excellent.

ATI (now AMD) was a bit rubbish up till the release of Radeon series which were a breakthrough for ATi and they really started excelling when they made a right decision with pixel shaders during Radeon 9000 era (the GeForceFX thing). Then they had X1800 and X1900 which were superb and then some meh till amazing HD4000 and HD5000 series. HD6000 was a bit meh except the HD6900 which had VLIW4 instead of VLIW5 which gave it a nice boost over HD6800 series. And of course the legendary HD7000 series and R9-290. Polaris is by no means bad or a flop. I'd certainly count it with the best of AMD. R9 Fury and RX Vega however, I wouldn't say they are bad, they were quite capable cards, but they were just like first few generations of GTX. "Meh".

So, bottom line, they both had ups and downs. It's just that NVIDIA is at the "ups" phase right now and AMD isn't. Things can change and most likely will.


----------



## xkm1948 (Jun 18, 2018)

Someone forgot the crappy HD2900XT.

R300 was the chip that got me into ATi. X800,X1900, HD4870, 5870 and 6870 were all decent GPUs

Navi will still be GCN without MCM, which has already been confirmed by David Wang. So don’t expect RTG to be competitive until 2020 when the completely new design is ready


----------



## R-T-B (Jun 18, 2018)

GlacierNine said:


> The obvious answer is that making all these comments is how they intend to get the fast video cards. Hoping to attract the attention of big green for some of that sweet marketing money maybe?



I find it ludicrous people even believe in "hired fanboys" as if that actually happens.

The reality is much more pathetic.



xkm1948 said:


> Someone forgot the crappy HD2900XT.



I haven't.

NEVER FORGET!


----------



## lexluthermiester (Jun 18, 2018)

looniam said:


> i've seen enough of his tabloid trash editorials with cherry picked facts presented for fuel for the hate train.


With you on that one. I prefer objective, reasonable and logical rational over agenda laden BS.


----------



## INSTG8R (Jun 18, 2018)

xkm1948 said:


> Someone forgot the crappy HD2900XT.



Yeah and to think I had planned to buy a 2nd and Crossfire it...It was pretty anyway...


----------



## dj-electric (Jun 18, 2018)

My 2 cents on the video:
I gave up watching after a few minutes. I just can't take this too seriously. There's so much hatred and raw incitement that no wonder that fanboys get so fanatic and radical these days.

I'm afraid this video does way more harm than good.


----------



## GlacierNine (Jun 18, 2018)

cadaveca said:


> There's no about-face at all. I stated earlier that it was normal, and welcome to the real world, to shorten what I said. I simply didn't say why I felt this way. Nice try though.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



1 - You omitted a detailed description of your personal view, is your claim here, and therefore everyone should have assumed that by criticising the position of "Consumers should be vocally unhappy with any company that competes in an unfair way", you were in fact making no excuse for them. Frankly I believe this claim is dubious at best given the way you phrased your response (Condescendingly towards those making that point), and the context in which you posted it.

As for " could not be more wrong" - the entire paragraph of your response appears to have been placed after a quote of a paragraph of my post, to which your words are inapplicable. My paragraph states that consumers are not duty bound to take DIRECT action against companies whose business practices they  disagree with, as, quite simply, nobody on earth has the time to be able to take such action in every instance. This is in response to YOUR criticism of "complaining", which characterises complaining as a useless and ineffectual act.

For you to then quote that paragraph, and then provide an example of your own in relation to it that only bolsters my exact point, betrays a fundamental misreading of my argument, by you.

Finally, you then present TPUs reticence to criticise product in any meaningful way as a positive.

I put it to you that the purpose of reviews, review sites, and the entire segment of the industry of which TPU is a part, is to enable customers to wisely spend their money on product that fits their needs as closely as possible and with the fewest compromises.

That aim is not achieved by glossing over or ignoring clear flaws with a product - doing so only harms the consumers ability to wisely spend their money, and I frankly consider any reviewer that is reticent to criticise product, to be complicit not in the creation of a meaningful and useful review, but in a marketing effort at best, and at worst, guilty of throwing the consumer to the lions for their own benefit.

Clearly there is room for debate about what constitutes a flaw, but it should be a warning sign that if the vast, vast majority of coverage is jot just positive, but positive in a glowing manner, that the review is no longer fulfilling that original purpose of assisting the consumer in making a better decision than they would have been able to without the review, as they are now forced to read between the lines and cross reference reviews in order to extract useful information - put simply, the review can no longer be trusted in its conclusions - instead it becomes something out of which the truth must be sieved, never a lie but neither the whole truth it purports to be.


----------



## Vayra86 (Jun 18, 2018)

GlacierNine said:


> 1 - You omitted a detailed description of your personal view, is your claim here, and therefore everyone should have assumed that by criticising the position of "Consumers should be vocally unhappy with any company that competes in an unfair way", you were in fact making no excuse for them. Frankly I believe this claim is dubious at best given the way you phrased your response (Condescendingly towards those making that point), and the context in which you posted it.
> 
> As for " could not be more wrong" - the entire paragraph of your response appears to have been placed after a quote of a paragraph of my post, to which your words are inapplicable. My paragraph states that consumers are not duty bound to take DIRECT action against companies whose business practices they  disagree with, as, quite simply, nobody on earth has the time to be able to take such action in every instance. This is in response to YOUR criticism of "complaining", which characterises complaining as a useless and ineffectual act.
> 
> ...



Gamer Nexus 'and consumer at heart'... come on man. Surely you too can see how todays' 'influencers' are exactly that - they are being used to influence us. Honestly, any Youtube 'reviewer' should be taken with a truckload of salt and most of the reviews are questionable all over the place in one way or another. Let's just face it... almost no one is free of bias in that sense. They even say so themselves and those who don't... really aren't all that credible. You become part of an ecosystem of suppliers, users and colleagues and its just like working within any kind of business: there is a culture and its hard to escape that culture entirely. The longer you stay in it, the more it infects your brain. There is but a tiny handful (and those are not the ones shouting it out loud, mind you) that can withstand that and really remain true to their principles for 100%.

You can literally point to each 'Youtuber' and see the flaws in their reasoning, their montage or even things that are factually wrong. AdoredTV, by the way, is leading the pack along with Linus in that sense. Its almost like real TV - the motivation for 90% of its content is getting as many viewers as possible, because subs and views = $$$. This Adored video is 100% in that category too and frankly, a product review, even if it gets a 9+ no matter what (TPU style), really isn't even close to that. To drive that home: go compare a random Youtube review with a TPU written one, especially the amount of data you get on each one. It should tell you more than enough, and numbers simply don't lie. I don't need a reviewer telling me something's bad, I can tell by the benchmarks. 

The problem with people criticizing TPU reviews in general is because they've insta-scrolled to the conclusion, read a 9+, and ran out of attention span. Its a trend you see everywhere and the problem is with the reader, not the content.


----------



## Space Lynx (Jun 18, 2018)

I didn't watch entire video, but eh. One part in the video he states, "which shows Nvidia is merciless in dealing with in competition". I am no expert, but I am pretty sure that is the very definition of capitalism and free markets. lol, no big surprise for me here. Just the way of the world. 

I personally am just waiting for a 2019/2020 AMD GPU that can manhandle 4k 60 FPS, and I have every intention of doing Ryzen 3800x and Vega 2 or 3, full AMD just like the glory days of my teenage years.

ATI was cheap enough to allow me to game as a teenager 18 years ago, and for that I will always be thankful, that is the single and only reason I intend to return to the red team someday.


----------



## GlacierNine (Jun 18, 2018)

Vayra86 said:


> Gamer Nexus 'and consumer at heart'... come on man. Surely you too can see how todays' 'influencers' are exactly that - they are being used to influence us. Honestly, any Youtube 'reviewer' should be taken with a truckload of salt and most of the reviews are questionable all over the place in one way or another. Let's just face it... almost no one is free of bias in that sense. They even say so themselves and those who don't... really aren't all that credible. You become part of an ecosystem of suppliers, users and colleagues and its just like working within any kind of business: there is a culture and its hard to escape that culture entirely. The longer you stay in it, the more it infects your brain. There is but a tiny handful (and those are not the ones shouting it out loud, mind you) that can withstand that and really remain true to their principles for 100%.
> 
> You can literally point to each 'Youtuber' and see the flaws in their reasoning, their montage or even things that are factually wrong. AdoredTV, by the way, is leading the pack along with Linus in that sense. Its almost like real TV - the motivation for 90% of its content is getting as many viewers as possible, because subs and views = $$$. This Adored video is 100% in that category too and frankly, a product review, even if it gets a 9+ no matter what (TPU style), really isn't even close to that. To drive that home: go compare a random Youtube review with a TPU written one, especially the amount of data you get on each one. It should tell you more than enough, and numbers simply don't lie. I don't need a reviewer telling me something's bad, I can tell by the benchmarks.
> 
> The problem with people criticizing TPU reviews in general is because they've insta-scrolled to the conclusion, read a 9+, and ran out of attention span. Its a trend you see everywhere and the problem is with the reader, not the content.


I think you're unfairly lumping GN in here.

Firstly, their youtube video review of the Fractal Define R6 (A case they liked), is literally thumbnailed with big bold text that reads "FINALLY SOMETHING DECENT".

Secondly, here are some quotes from the BODY of their article on the Bitfenix Enso (Not the conclusion, to which someone may scroll and read a 9+ as you put it):

"The front panel is a mess of filters, LEDs, wires, plastic reinforcement, and steel. It’s surprisingly heavy for an otherwise lightweight case, and it’s certainly sturdy, bordering on overbuilt--there’s even a thick reinforcing frame of plastic behind the steel. In other words, the front panel has had a lot of design work and presumably money put into it, but somehow nobody thought to put a vent in. We’ll elaborate more on this in the thermal section, but this is where the Enso’s problems really begin."

"The PSU has to be inserted from the side, not the back, which made the cage’s placement even more inconvenient. If they haven’t already, Bitfenix undoubtedly plans to use this chassis as the basis for more enclosures, which is fine--but it’s frustrating to see evidence of missing features like this."

"Again, we’ve tested cases with worse stock deltas, but even the Antec P8 was capable of showing improvement with extra fans. The Enso doesn’t have this headroom, and as a result it’s stuck performing little better than the stock Spec-04 at GPU cooling, a case that came with only one fan and retails for $50."


Now compare their Bitfenix Enso conclusion to TPU's - And note that the in-line link leads to a video of GN criticising the _entire case industry at once_.



Spoiler: GN Conclusion - Enso



We’ve had concerns about the Enso for as long as we’ve been aware of it, but we were told that the version shown at Computex wasn’t necessarily final and that additional ventilation was being considered. We were also initially told that Bitfenix was shooting for a $60-70 price, which would be competitive even for a complete lemon. Instead, the Enso followed the exact trajectory of the Antec P8, another budget tempered glass case that we were told would cost $70, released at $90, had poor ventilation, and felt very much budget-tier. In fact, the P8 came with three (admittedly ineffective) fans and had a trickle of airflow, which could be increased by adding higher-quality fans. The Enso’s unique selling points are addressable RGB, glass, and a nicely done white paint job, which covers looks and nothing else. Even in that regard the Enso is pedestrian next to Bitfenix’s unique-looking Portal, Shogun, or Aurora cases.



Hell, they even made this video: 








Wherein they not only swipe at a multitude of other youtubers who produced sponsored content, but also take a further swipe at the Cooler Master H500P, by _literally calling it a large piece of trash._

And they're known for this even when referenced by the other youtubers who may be guilty of what you say - The recent computex booth coverage "controversy" for example - Luke on the WAN show literally *laughed* at the fact Gamers Nexus were included in the list that was tweeted, because (And I attempt to quote from memory) "They will savage _anyone_"


----------



## Space Lynx (Jun 18, 2018)

GlacierNine said:


> I think you're unfairly lumping GN in here.
> 
> Firstly, their youtube video review of the Fractal Define R6 (A case they liked), is literally thumbnailed with big bold text that reads "FINALLY SOMETHING DECENT".
> 
> ...




I have to agree. GamersNexus have even admitted they are losing money I think, which is why they are selling more and more stuff in their own store, because they are not being sent samples anymore.


----------



## GlacierNine (Jun 18, 2018)

lynx29 said:


> I have to agree. GamersNexus have even admitted they are losing money I think, which is why they are selling more and more stuff in their own store, because they are not being sent samples anymore.


I don't recall that particular claim, although yes, they are attempting to become completely non-reliant on sponsor income and manufacturers, and the modmats and store are part of that.

Steve has also gone on record as saying he would rather piss off a manufacturer than his audience, and that he doesn't lose sleep over pissing off a company like Cooler Master, because their PR representatives cycle around the industry so much and so often that it will almost always be a temporary state of affairs, with that manufacturer eventually coming back to GN willing to work with them. 

I believe that may already have happened with CoolerMaster in fact, as they seemed to have been sampled along with the rest of the tech press, for their review of the H500M, and their computex coverage included some conversations with CM staff where there seemed to be some remaining ice, but broadly speaking, a thawed attitude.


----------



## IceShroom (Jun 18, 2018)

Recus said:


> Not even close.


Always the AMD fanboys.
But my five years in several tech sites says different.


----------



## Vayra86 (Jun 18, 2018)

GlacierNine said:


> I think you're unfairly lumping GN in here.
> 
> Firstly, their youtube video review of the Fractal Define R6 (A case they liked), is literally thumbnailed with big bold text that reads "FINALLY SOMETHING DECENT".
> 
> ...



Of course, and this is how GN sells itself now, as the nasty bugger that doesn't care about anything. Its another way to get views and subs and above all: stand out. The problem is, nuanced opinions don't get a lot of views, and generally, those are the most valuable opinions. Its not rocket science. These reviewers are about the show, not the content.

You see, that R6 review: even that is a full caps, and attention seeking headline. 'Finally' something decent. As if all other cases are shit, which they really aren't - far from it. Its the same screaming headline with the same unfounded type of statements. Everything is an extreme... even when its 'decent'. Spoiler: Fractal has made an R4, R5 and R6 and all you see here are small tweaks and improvements. 'Finally' something decent... just like all the ones that came before it 

You have to understand these are all just business models. Every event has its controversy, so every influencer can take his stance on it and garner attention. Every product has its fans and haters, because strong opinions spark debate. Everything is yanked into overdrive. Just like this topic based on AdoredTV's little video. So yes, I lump GN right in there with the rest of them. They even had the gall to mimic HardOCP's recent statements on Nvidia to get their subs up - zero work, maximum exposure. Blegh.


----------



## GlacierNine (Jun 18, 2018)

Vayra86 said:


> Of course, and this is how GN sells itself now, as the nasty bugger that doesn't care about anything. Its another way to get views and subs and above all: stand out. The problem is, nuanced opinions don't get a lot of views, and generally, those are the most valuable opinions. Its not rocket science. These reviewers are about the show, not the content.
> 
> You see, that R6 review: even that is a full caps, and attention seeking headline. 'Finally' something decent. As if all other cases are shit, which they really aren't - far from it. Its the same screaming headline with the same unfounded type of statements. Everything is an extreme... even when its 'decent'. Spoiler: Fractal has made an R4, R5 and R6 and all you see here are small tweaks and improvements. 'Finally' something decent... just like all the ones that came before it
> 
> You have to understand these are all just business models. Every event has its controversy, so every influencer can take his stance on it and garner attention. Every product has its fans and haters, because strong opinions spark debate. Everything is yanked into overdrive. Just like this topic based on AdoredTV's little video. So yes, I lump GN right in there with the rest of them. They even had the gall to mimic HardOCP's recent statements on Nvidia to get their subs up - zero work, maximum exposure. Blegh.


So what you're saying is that by making it marketable to critically review product, thus providing the consumer with _all of the viewpoints the manufacturers would prefer were not public_, Gamers Nexus are in some way mistreating the consumer?

What insane planet are you living on? What GN have done is find a way to be fiscally viable as a business, without having to compromise their ethics or the function of a review in order to keep manufacturers happy. It is the exact model of what review sites and critics in every industry, not only computing, should be doing - Unhooking themselves from the teat of the people they are supposed to be criticising.

Edit: And as for "Mimicing HardOCP's statements" - They rather pointedly did not run a story of their own on GPP until *after* the program had been pulled, because they were corroborating their information with industry sources, rather than jumping the gun and simply regurgitating as truth, the single source that most people were working with, which was Kyle's article. Once the GPP had been pulled they released a video containing the information they had been able to corroborate from multiple sources. Before that, their GPP coverage had been limited to covering what other people were saying about it, and a couple of short Ask GN segments where he stated that GN were attempting to get more information from industry sources before running a more in-depth video.

In what way is any of that "Mimicing HardOCP's statements" ?


----------



## Vayra86 (Jun 18, 2018)

GlacierNine said:


> So what you're saying is that by making it marketable to critically review product, thus providing the consumer with _all of the viewpoints the manufacturers would prefer were not public_, Gamers Nexus are in some way mistreating the consumer?
> 
> What insane planet are you living on? What GN have done is find a way to be fiscally viable as a business, without having to compromise their ethics or the function of a review in order to keep manufacturers happy. It is the exact model of what review sites and critics in every industry, not only computing, should be doing - Unhooking themselves from the teat of the people they are supposed to be criticising.



It was always marketable to critically review products, don't act like GN figured out some magical way of doing that. Written reviews have done this for quite some time now, including TPU. The reality is, most of the time, products are quite fine and generally, reviews are insanely boring. Motherboards for example. You can do a roundup and conclude 95% will provide precisely the same performance, in a price range from lower midrange all the way up to enthusiast level. Look at the Z370 roundup on Anandtech, its a good example of that, and it represents the real world where most parts are OEM based.

The kicker is, its marketable to critically review products EVEN without making companies hate your guts. The reason 'tubers get removed from the free stuff lists is because of tone of voice and feeding the hype or hate trains. That is also what @cadaveca was referring to with his example of ASUS and working with them on improving stuff. The real progress doesn't happen in the open playground but in constructive dialogue, well outside the range of sweaty keyboard heroes spamming comments under a video.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Jun 18, 2018)

GlacierNine said:


> _all of the viewpoints the manufacturers would prefer were not public_


Information that is already pubic.


GlacierNine said:


> Gamers Nexus are in some way mistreating the consumer?


Mistreating? You must mean misleading. More on that in a moment..


GlacierNine said:


> What GN have done is find a way to be fiscally viable as a business, without having to compromise their ethics or the function of a review in order to keep manufacturers happy.


What they've done is made money from providing misinformation and creating needless aggravation by twisting facts and the truth to fit their narrow, agenda based narrative.


----------



## GlacierNine (Jun 18, 2018)

Vayra86 said:


> It was always marketable to critically review products, don't act like GN figured out some magical way of doing that. Written reviews have done this for quite some time now, including TPU. The reality is, most of the time, products are quite fine and generally, reviews are insanely boring. Motherboards for example. You can do a roundup and conclude 95% will provide precisely the same performance, in a price range from lower midrange all the way up to enthusiast level. Look at the Z370 roundup on Anandtech, its a good example of that, and it represents the real world where most parts are OEM based.



I think you struggle with the word "critically". It does not mean to baselessly harp on a products flaws. It means to look at all aspects of a thing and take account of them when forming an opinion.

Again, the purpose of a review to the consumer, is to provide them with the information they need, to be able to make a purchasing decision that addresses their particular needs. I can certainly review, say, a Crosshair VI, and come away convinced that that the board is an excellent board. But I would not be writing a critically sound review of that product if I didn't address, for the benefit of my audience, the fact it is also a very expensive motherboard that _most consumers do not need_. I would also be doing a disservice to my audience if I were not able to identify areas of the board that were exceptionally good in the price class, and areas of the board that were sub-par. Even if my review were to be greatly positive, no product is perfect and those flaws should be appraised.

Conversely, if I reviewed either of the ASUS PRIME motherboards based on the A320 chipset, I would not be writing an appropriately critical review if I did not judge it by appropriate metrics - In this case, price, robustness of build and design, and the inclusion of appropriately desirable features rather than features of no real value to the kind of consumer that buys an A320 board - For example, I would be critical of an A320 board that had a 10 phase VRM, as it would be cost in the product that doesn't pass on an appropriate benefit to the consumer when the board is not capable of overclocking. Despite the feature being, in theory, a good thing, it is not appropriate for that product or class of product - Conversely, the "downgrade" of the ASUS A320M-A which has a 6 phase VRM, is an appropriate and laudable thing in that price class, presuming the cost has been reduced in that area in order to provide a greater benefit elsewhere.

It is very true that both of these products are suitable for their intended audiences, however a review *must address their flaws and suitability* to be worthwhile. Simply working on the basis that "most boards are suitable" is making a mockery of any reviewer's assumed purpose - to help the consumer.



lexluthermiester said:


> Information that is already pubic.
> 
> Mistreating? You must mean misleading. More on that in a moment..
> 
> What they've done is made money from providing misinformation and creating needless aggravation by twisting facts and the truth to fit their narrow, agenda based narrative.



1 - That information would not be public without reviews that actually address the flaws. Take a look at other H500P coverage around the web. Bitwit, Paul's Hardware, Linus Tech Tips, etc, did not comment on the poor airflow of that case, or at least glossed over it as rapidly as possible. They also barely mentioned the poor mechanism for the side window, the poorly designed/attached front fascia, the cheap feeling plastic, or the creaking. In the absence of GN's coverage (or similar, I don't follow every tech site, I'm sure other people did their jobs properly too), there would have been hardly any awareness of these issues save for a comparitively invisible core of people on forums who had bought the case and were providing much less structured and much more subjective criticism.

2 - I know what I said, thankyou very much. 

3 - I would absolutely adore an actual example of misinformation and needless aggravation, fact twisting or truth twisting. From GN. I'd also absolutely love to know exactly what narrow agenda is being served by any examples of such you can point me towards. Or rather, I should say - I would love to know how that "agenda" is unjustifiable or morally bankrupt, as you seem to be implying.


----------



## Vayra86 (Jun 18, 2018)

GlacierNine said:


> I think you struggle with the word "critically". It does not mean to baselessly harp on a products flaws. It means to look at all aspects of a thing and take account of them when forming an opinion.
> 
> Again, the purpose of a review to the consumer, is to provide them with the information they need, to be able to make a purchasing decision that addresses their particular needs. I can certainly review, say, a Crosshair VI, and come away convinced that that the board is an excellent board. But I would not be writing a critically sound review of that product if I didn't address, for the benefit of my audience, the fact it is also a very expensive motherboard that _most consumers do not need_. I would also be doing a disservice to my audience if I were not able to identify areas of the board that were exceptionally good in the price class, and areas of the board that were sub-par. Even if my review were to be greatly positive, no product is perfect and those flaws should be appraised.
> 
> ...



We're saying the same thing here, just wording it differently I think. The examples you give are being put to practice for decades now, always have been, so I do not see the problems here. You have to understand though that there is also a target audience for each reviewer and even each class of board - and reviewers seek to best serve that target audience. Because let's face it, that Crosshair example? Nobody needs that for ANY use case except maybe LN2 and extreme cooling OCs. Just like how people don't need a car that can shoot to 0-100 km/h in a few seconds, its literally useless in most situations yet people still want it. I have said this before and I will say it again: the problem is with the receivers not the senders. People need to learn to read, analyze data objectively and base their conclusions on that - again, all you need for that is benchmarks and a good testing methodology and in that GN is doing nothing special at all. And most if not virtually all serious reviewers do put things in perspective, but most people just didn't read it. The format matters, and the video format cán be an advantage but it really isn't because its too much like TV, where those who scream loudest get attention.


----------



## DeathtoGnomes (Jun 18, 2018)

Vayra86 said:


> It was always marketable to critically review products, don't act like GN figured out some magical way of doing that. Written reviews have done this for quite some time now, including TPU. The reality is, most of the time, products are quite fine and generally, reviews are insanely boring. Motherboards for example. You can do a roundup and conclude 95% will provide precisely the same performance, in a price range from lower midrange all the way up to enthusiast level. Look at the Z370 roundup on Anandtech, its a good example of that, and it represents the real world where most parts are OEM based.
> 
> The kicker is, its marketable to critically review products EVEN without making companies hate your guts. The reason 'tubers get removed from the free stuff lists is because of tone of voice and feeding the hype or hate trains. That is also what @cadaveca was referring to with his example of ASUS and working with them on improving stuff. The real progress doesn't happen in the open playground but in constructive dialogue, well outside the range of sweaty keyboard heroes spamming comments under a video.


What you are saying is all those reviews that show critical flaws yet gave the reviewed product high even raving marks is ok to do. You can clearly see where a sponsored review is going to give a product a good showing before even watching or reading it. The reviewer has already agreed to giving a good review by accepting any kind of gain, more or otherwise, which makes the review bias and IMHO not worth a grain of salt.


----------



## GlacierNine (Jun 18, 2018)

Vayra86 said:


> We're saying the same thing here, just wording it differently I think. The examples you give are being put to practice for decades now, always have been, so I do not see the problems here. You have to understand though that there is also a target audience for each reviewer and even each class of board - and reviewers seek to best serve that target audience. Because let's face it, that Crosshair example? Nobody needs that for ANY use case except maybe LN2 and extreme cooling OCs. Just like how people don't need a car that can shoot to 0-100 km/h in a few seconds, its literally useless in most situations yet people still want it. I have said this before and I will say it again:* the problem is with the receivers not the senders.* People need to learn to read, analyze data objectively and base their conclusions on that - again, all you need for that is benchmarks. And most if not virtually all serious reviewers do put things in perspective, but most people just didn't read it.



I *fundamentally *disagree with the bolded statement here.

I keep saying this, over and over - the purpose of reviews is to _serve the consumer, not the manufacturers._

It is possible to read a substandard review and read between the lines to determine the flaws and weaknesses of a product, but _if a consumer must do that in order to be informed, then the reviewer has either failed in their purpose or has abandoned it intentionally._

It's also somewhat bizarre that, given my harping on about case reviews, you ultimately mention and rely on benchmarks for the purposes of your point, given that TPU's case reviews feature absolutely no benchmarking and I have consistently praised GN in this thread and others, for doing any benchmarking of cases in a marketplace where most publications seem unwilling to measure any objective element of performance for this class of product.


----------



## DeathtoGnomes (Jun 18, 2018)

Vayra86 said:


> We're saying the same thing here, just wording it differently I think. The examples you give are being put to practice for decades now, always have been, so I do not see the problems here. You have to understand though that there is also a target audience for each reviewer and even each class of board - and *reviewers seek to best serve that target audience*. Because let's face it, that Crosshair example? Nobody needs that for ANY use case except maybe LN2 and extreme cooling OCs. Just like how people don't need a car that can shoot to 0-100 km/h in a few seconds, its literally useless in most situations yet people still want it. I have said this before and I will say it again: the problem is with the receivers not the senders. People need to learn to read, analyze data objectively and base their conclusions on that - again, all you need for that is benchmarks and a good testing methodology and in that GN is doing nothing special at all. And most if not virtually all serious reviewers do put things in perspective, but most people just didn't read it. The format matters, and the video format cán be an advantage but it really isn't because its too much like TV, where those who scream loudest get attention.



This should NOT be the reviewers job to target an audience. A reviewer should review without bias, like thats actually gonna happen...


----------



## Vayra86 (Jun 18, 2018)

DeathtoGnomes said:


> What you are saying is all those reviews that show critical flaws yet gave the reviewed product high even raving marks is ok to do. You can clearly see where a sponsored review is going to give a product a good showing before even watching or reading it. The reviewer has already agreed to giving a good review by accepting any kind of gain, more or otherwise, which makes the review bias and IMHO not worth a grain of salt.



No what I'm saying is people need to read the body text and not the conclusion plus a number. Which the vast majority evidently fails to do. The world of today is filled to the brim with examples of that.

Even a flawed product can be great in many ways. If the flaw doesn't affect your use case, for example. Many product 'flaws' are tradeoffs. Either in cost, or in advantages in other areas, which can also be an aesthetic aspect. Its up to the reader (receiver!) to decide how important each pro and con really is.



DeathtoGnomes said:


> This should NOT be the reviewers job to target an audience. A reviewer should review without bias, like thats actually gonna happen...



I disagree. As long as manufacturers have target markets and quality/premium feel is valued by different types of customers, reviewers need to adapt to that. As with all forms of communication, it needs to be suited to the moment and subject matter. A good example is game reviews and the endless discussion on ratings on games. A casual gamer has a completely different frame of reference than I would have, with ~20 years of experience on many platforms and broad knowledge of concepts and mechanics.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Jun 18, 2018)

GlacierNine said:


> I would absolutely adore an actual example of misinformation and needless aggravation, fact twisting or truth twisting. From GN. I'd also absolutely love to know exactly what narrow agenda is being served by any examples of such you can point me towards. Or rather, I should say - I would love to know how that "agenda" is unjustifiable or morally bankrupt, as you seem to be implying.


I could do that, but why? The only one arguing the point in favor of GN is you. Not worth my time to prove. Even if I did, you would rationalize and marginalize everything I say like you've been doing to everyone else. So no thank you. Seems to me like something else is going on here. I have a theory; *G*lacier*N*ine=*G*amers*N*exus. It would explain a lot here.


----------



## DeathtoGnomes (Jun 18, 2018)

Vayra86 said:


> No what I'm saying is people need to read the body text and not the conclusion plus a number. Which the vast majority evidently fails to do. The world of today is filled to the brim with examples of that.


I agree the world is full of gullible people. Here is a fine example; Back in the day of MaximumPC magazine ( with free discs!), a lot of associates concluded that thier reviews were always 100% accurate so eventually just skipped everything and went right to the end and just read the conclusions and bought hardware based of those ratings. They eventually stopped doing things that way. #hardknocks



lexluthermiester said:


> I could do that, but why? The only one arguing the point in favor of GN is you. Not worth my time to prove. Even if I did, you would rationalize and marginalize everything I say like you've been doing to everyone else. So no thank you. Seems to me like something else is going on here. I have a theory; *G*lacier*N*ine=*G*amers*N*exus. It would explain a lot here.


I dont agree with you on some points, but yet agree with @GlacierNine on many of his in this thread, does that make me a GamersNecus employee. 

Remember if you are pointing phingers as someone, 3 are pointing back at you.


----------



## GlacierNine (Jun 18, 2018)

lexluthermiester said:


> I could do that, but why? The only one arguing the point in favor of GN is you. Not worth my time to prove. Even if I did, you would rationalize and marginalize everything I say like you've been doing to everyone else. So no thank you. Seems to me like something else is going on here. I have a theory; *G*lacier*N*ine=*G*amers*N*exus. It would explain a lot here.



So in other words, you have no intention of making a cogent point or an argument worth anyone's time, and instead you'd rather advance unfounded conspiracy theories that wouldn't even change the substance of this debate even if they were true. 

For the sake of making a clear statement about it - No, I have absolutely no affiliation with GN or any other tech review site. I don't even work in the tech sector. I have no horse in this race besides the one running for the benefit of consumers. 

I could of course advance the opposite conspiracy theory of you - While I have provided to the best of my ability, reasoned argument for why I believe GN really does have consumers interests at heart, you have attacked them repeatedly without substance or evidence. I would not be unjustified in questioning whether your interests lie with an involved party in this discussion - Although, of course, it would be baseless of me to accuse you of that, and besides which it would only form a distraction from the actual discussion that is ongoing.


----------



## DeathtoGnomes (Jun 18, 2018)

Vayra86 said:


> I disagree. *As long as manufacturers have target markets* and quality/premium feel is valued by different types of customers, reviewers need to adapt to that. As with all forms of communication, it needs to be suited to the moment and subject matter. A good example is game reviews and the endless discussion on ratings on games. A casual gamer has a completely different frame of reference than I would have, with ~20 years of experience on many platforms and broad knowledge of concepts and mechanics.


Yes manufacturers have target markets but its still not the job of the reviewer to do that for them. A good reviewer would focus on doing an accurate and honestly unbiased review, not play nurse-maid to manufacturers wishes. Trust me when I say I dont watch LinusTech for the reviews.

I think game reviews are whole other class of ... let leave that for another thread sometime.


----------



## Vayra86 (Jun 18, 2018)

GlacierNine said:


> I *fundamentally *disagree with the bolded statement here.
> 
> I keep saying this, over and over - the purpose of reviews is to _serve the consumer, not the manufacturers._
> 
> ...



You've never seen me saying I go to TPU for my case reviews though. But for hardware components such as GPU, motherboards, yes, I do. There are many more written reviews that do case reviews very well and include tons of data. Much more so than GN does too - that doesn't make their reviews bad, and you won't see me saying that either - but it certainly isn't new or special like you make it sound. Its not a unicorn. Rather, GN is possibly closest to a written review's quality level in a broad sense. But still falls short of it most of the time, simply due to the format and its position in between the screaming nerds like Linus.

If GN wants my vote, what they need to do is provide a detailed written review and tone it down on the screaming headlines. Until then its same shit different name to me.


----------



## DeathtoGnomes (Jun 18, 2018)

GlacierNine said:


> ***
> 
> It's also somewhat bizarre that, given my harping on about case reviews, you ultimately mention and rely on benchmarks for the purposes of your point, given that TPU's case reviews feature absolutely no benchmarking and I have consistently praised GN in this thread and others, for doing any benchmarking of cases in a marketplace where most publications seem unwilling to measure any objective element of performance for this class of product.


When it comes to cases, what is there really to benchmark? How do you bench a case with water cooling? I can see Airflow being an issue like some Fractal designs and others. Do you benchmark PSU placement? I mean you are talking about actual benchmarking vs a feature review not just some guys opinion of this or that case feature?

I look for features and airflow path restrictions, airflow itself doesnt matter if you can do simple modding.

How about benchmarking how deep a case can indent the carpeting in, say 1 months time? or even how much dust you can collect vs your vacuum cleaner?



Vayra86 said:


> You've never seen me saying I go to TPU for my case reviews though. But for hardware components such as GPU, motherboards, yes, I do. There are many more written reviews that do case reviews very well. Much more so than GN does too - that doesn't make their reviews bad, and you won't see me saying that either - but it certainly isn't new or special like you make it sound. Its not a unicorn. Rather, GN is possibly closest to a written review's quality level in a broad sense. But still falls short of it most of the time, simply due to the format and its position in between the screaming nerds like Linus.
> 
> If GN wants my vote, what they need to do is *provide a detailed written review *and tone it down on the screaming headlines. Until then its same shit different name to me.


The do more in video than written. The written part is usually a summary of whats in the video.


----------



## GlacierNine (Jun 18, 2018)

DeathtoGnomes said:


> When it comes to cases, what is there really to benchmark? How do you bench a case with water cooling? I can see Airflow being an issue like some Fractal designs and others. Do you benchmark PSU placement? I mean you are talking about actual benchmarking vs a feature review not just some guys opinion of this or that case feature?
> 
> I look for features and airflow path restrictions, airflow itself doesnt matter if you can do simple modding.
> 
> How about benchmarking how deep a case can indent the carpeting in, say 1 months time? or even how much dust you can collect vs your vacuum cleaner?


You already seem familiar with GN's testing methodology, so I'll presume you're asking for a theoretical ideal case testing methodology, where appropriate resources to achieve it are not a concern. I'll spoiler this because it turned into a somewhat mammoth post as I expanded on it and this thread has already veered well off course as is.



Spoiler: Pipedream Testing Methodology



In that case, I would say the ideal testing methodology for a case is to have a quiet, temperature controlled room - Ideally one of a similar standard to say, a studio control room - We're not talking anoechoic chamber, as no system other than a completely passive one would require a noise floor that low, but we are talking about something where the room is suspended to reduce noise, appropriately sound dampened and where there is effective diffusion in place to ensure minimal resonance or unexpected audio phenomena. The room should be a minimum of 10mx10m, so that sound can propagate appropriately and not interfere with measurements.

The noise floor should be kept as low as possible without sacrificing the temperature control aspect.

At the base level, a consistent, high-heat-output system should be installed in the case (Though I'm sure some elaborate test rig could be devised that would replace an actual system, with a controlled synthetic heat output, to eliminate more variance), and the case would be run with it's fans at their lowest operating speed until the system is completely heat-soaked (Which I would define as seeing the system temperatures deviate by no more than 2C over a 10 minute period)

After this the temperature would be measured, and each natural step in fan speed would be tested for a further 20 minutes and the resultant temperatures measured logged and plotted at 1 second intervals. At max fan speed the test would continue to run for as long as necessary, until the temperatures measured deviated by no more than 2C over a 10 minute period, representing the maximal heat soak of the case at full fan speed with the included fans.

Note that by natural steps in fan speed, I mean EITHER, each speed setting on a manual fan controller if the case comes with one, or if the case uses PWM fans, setting the PWM to the minimum amount, and then increasing to 100% over five evenly spaced steps. (So for a 50-100% duty cycle, that'd be 50%, 62.5%, 75%, 87.5%, and 100%)

This sequence would be repeated 3 times, allowing the system to return to ambient between each to provide more reliable test data.

Secondly, the stock fans in the case would be replaced with a set of same-sized reference fans, with known characteristics - all of these fans would be airflow optimised designs, not static pressure optimised. The case would then be re-tested with these to provide a picture of how the case performs thermally as a case, versus as a product entirely.

Thirdly, the case would be tested a final time with the aforementioned reference fans, but with every fan position filled in the case in a standard front-bottom to rear-top airflow layout. This would provide a picture of the theoretical maximum performance of the case in it's stock format.

I did ponder also using an ATX standard (150x86x140mm) PSU, but I will admit this is somewhat unrealistic, as a great number of PSUs in 2018 are FAR deeper than 140mm, including the majority of budget units.

Noise would also be logged throughout at 1s intervals using 5 calibrated microphones - each placed 1m away from a panel on the case, dead center, and 45 degrees off-axis.

For non-noise and temperature benchmarking of a case, I don't have any explicit recommendations - yet. However I do think you could institute mandatory functional testing, for example removing and replacing all screws in a case one at a time in order to check for malformed threads or excessive installation torque. This would be recorded as a simple percentage (Number of screws with issues/Number of screws total*100), with no further comment.

It would also be relatively quick to use a pair of calipers or dividers to quickly check fan hole spacing for compatibility, to measure case clearance between components and fan mounts, to keep a radiator with fittings on hand to test in-situ the practical clearance of say, a top radiator mount. Lots of similar quick yes/no tests that could be put on a checklist and run through to provide objective, fact based observations of certain kinds of hardware compatibility.


This is all, of course, extremely excessive for most people's purposes, and doubtless too expensive to implement in terms of time, wages, material costs, etc. But this is what an ideal at least starts to look like in my head, and most of the industry not only does none of this, but doesn't even attempt to do any of this, and that's really something of a shame. Even simply recording temperatures under load once, with your test system after 20 minutes, would be massively better than we see from most case reviews.


----------



## cadaveca (Jun 18, 2018)

GlacierNine said:


> You already seem familiar with GN's testing methodology, so I'll presume you're asking for a theoretical ideal case testing methodology, where appropriate resources to achieve it are not a concern. I'll spoiler this because it turned into a somewhat mammoth post as I expanded on it and this thread has already veered well off course as is.



OK, but I think you're being highly critical of certain things, while not being critical of others.

Let me give you an example to illustrate a point:

I gave the ASRock X370 Taichi a perfect 10/10 score. It might be the most successful board for that platform because I did. Yet in posting that review, and giving that board that score, I completely wiped out any chance at getting a single other board for that platform from any other brand... there was no point in them bothering when their products obviously were going to get a lesser score... And that review was ready for the day the platform launched to all of you guys.

I cut myself off from a lot of samples and money for doing reviews by posting that review with that score. I took a big risk in doing that, at a personal financial loss.


This is a way of being critical of all other products, without ever having addressed them directly. I took a loss to make that point to board makers that I would find any added features superfluous, and a problem. And I did it, without being negative about all those other products, too. It also made it so now, if I want a board sample, I need to ask for it. The board makers aren't just going to send me every board they make like they used to... but they'll gladly send me exactly what I ask for. Sometimes being critical of an product directly actually has the opposite effect of what you might be after.

However, many may look at that review, have had a bad experience with that board, and say I'm playing favorites. That really could not be further from the truth.

There are many ways to get the success you are after. In business, finding out what works, and what doesn't, and what just leaves things just as they were, usually leads to many of the issues that are complained about by the video in the OP, but again, I find it hard to blame the company as a whole, because there are 1000's of people that work for NVidia, and I can guarantee that not all of them think like that video wants you to believe. I also think there are better ways to approach situations like this. I have a review waiting to be posted... I hope it works out the way I intended.


----------



## GlacierNine (Jun 18, 2018)

OK, I see your reasoning and I cede that in the scope of your post, it makes a kind of sense. I could still very much take issue with it, so by no means presume I am ceding the entire point, but I really want to bring this discussion back to some sort of more fundamental ground rather than get bogged down in individual events.

So, taking your particular explanation as read, I am left with one particular observation -

I have spent a great portion of this thread arguing that the first and primary purpose of a review is to serve the consumer. I even went so far as to say that "It is possible to read a substandard review and read between the lines to determine the flaws and weaknesses of a product, but _if a consumer must do that in order to be informed, then the reviewer has either failed in their purpose or has abandoned it intentionally._ "

And yet you have just posted an explanation that doesn't actually mention a single consumer-centric talking point. Not one.

I can certainly see that yes, you have undertaken an action that undermines to a certain extent the willingness of board makers to sample you, and I suppose I'll take at face value your claim that you did this to send a clear message to the industry.

But to consumers, the people who I have contended a review's primary purpose is to serve, this action was invisible. It was a rare figure, but considering the average score of a motherboard review on TPU is 9.1 (Yes, I did the math, 9.104032 to be exact), and the preceding review a 9.2, I contend that a consumer would very much have had to "read between the lines" as I mentioned before, to glean significant meaning from the disparity between that review, and most any other on TPU.

This entire thread, and all of the discussions that have grown out of it, have been focused massively on whether the industry is wont to take advantage of consumers and abuse their trust - from reviewers to youtubers to the companies themselves, this has been the single primary criticism of everyone involved.

I am amazed and surprised that despite the fact you're clearly no idiot, you have managed to respond to that discussion without actually managing to address, how your actions are in the interests of the consumers.


----------



## dorsetknob (Jun 18, 2018)

GlacierNine said:


> I have spent a great portion of this thread arguing that the first and primary purpose of a review is to serve the consumer.



Actually your wrong
 the first and primary purpose of a review " is to Offer an Opinion"


----------



## cadaveca (Jun 18, 2018)

GlacierNine said:


> I am amazed and surprised that despite the fact you're clearly no idiot, you have managed to respond to that discussion without actually managing to address, how your actions are in the interests of the consumers.


That's because I know that no matter what I do, I cannot meet the needs of everyone, all the time. Therein lay the crux of the issue; there needs to be an examination into the actual intent businesses have when making moves that seemingly undermine consumer's confidence, rather than an all-out accusation of malintent.

And actually, the very first example I gave, where in every review I report whether a board is using default Turbo clocks, or running a boost profile, therein deceiving the end user as to actual performance, shows my direct actions in the benefit of all consumers, and honesty from the company. And guess what... they listened and changed things This is something nobody else was talking about. Yet again, it's about your approach that sees results or failure.

I could give numerous other examples, but to what end? I'm not here to talk abut myself really, but to illustrate my point that the only thing I can honestly draw from is my own experiences, because I do know the full details of what happened. Like, why don't you give us examples of how what YOU are doing is in the best interest of consumers? I don't think posting this thread actually does that... in fact, quite the opposite. You can infer all you like in a one-sided conversation, but without approaching the entity in question and seeing their response, any conclusions drawn from a video such as this can only be done in bias.



dorsetknob said:


> Actually your wrong
> the first and primary purpose of a review " is to Offer an Opinion"



Right, and that opinion doesn't have to be accurate in order for the content to be called a "review". It could be a parody. We kinda strive here to base our opinion on facts, and those facts are generally shown by benchmarks, but what if a brand is cheating?

How come, for all those years, ASUS was cheating at benchmarks (as were others, but that's besides the point), and I was the first to say something? There's something to be said about everyone else missing this, and simply saying that a board performs better because it's better designed, when really, it's some BIOS trickery... There's very good reason I removed most benchmarks from my reviews... again, it's in the consumer's best interests, removing a place where brands were cheating, and not even giving them the opportunity to try...


----------



## Vayra86 (Jun 18, 2018)

GlacierNine said:


> for the consumer



The problem with your stance is the idea that 'the consumer' is a single entity with one, singular desire. This is not the case. As I tried to point out with the analogy of game reviews and reviewers. You can clearly see a difference in how experienced a reviewer is, in style of writing but also in the things he does or does not pick up on in the game and even around it. If I put forward some arguments as to why a game still in production is going to be absolute crap, many people stare in disbelief - only to get my point proven after it is released and they fell for it, and got to experience it themselves. A recent example of that is Destiny 2 (and Destiny prior to that). I receive flak for those statements pre-launch, and post launch all I have to do is reiterate what was said earlier, and get nods of approval (ironically, sometimes from the very same people). At the same time there is a (much less experienced) group of younger gamers that doesn't even understand that concept _today._ Nor would they understand it if I pointed it out. Different audience.

In the same vein, this is true for hardware reviews. Many Youtube reviews get about as far as tossing a crapload of benchmarks your way, but then fail to draw the right conclusions about those benchmarks, and steer the viewer away from the truth. A good example of that is how to gauge CPU performance in games. Many reviewers put twenty shooters in their results (plus, perhaps the obligatory Ashes bench) and conclude all is fine. But they forget a vast group of consumers who don't ever play shooters but prefer, for example, (grand) strategy, heavily modded games, and other CPU heavy endeavours. Its gaming, yes. But it requires a completely different approach from the reviewer. And most Youtube reviewers fail miserably doing that. Call it lack of experience, or lack of common sense, but to me those reviews are worth exactly nothing. Or another TPU-based example: the inclusion of 720p benchmarks in CPU tests. Even *with* a specific explanation as to why those results are included its not enough to silence the idiots who persist its not 'a real world scenario' and thus should not be tested. They want their CPU benches at 1440p 'because thats the monitor they have'. Different audience, different level of understanding of hardware performance. They don't _want_ to analyze data, they want the analysis handed on a silver platter.

Another aspect of reviewing is how you choose to approach whatever you'd pick up on as a reviewer. And for that I will use another analogy: the angry customer that calls the service rep versus the calm customer calling the same service rep with the exact same problem. Its an easy question, but who do you think will get the best service here? And who do you think comes across as credible?

Its those personal qualities that set one review apart from the others and give credibility to all the data provided. Not the five lines of conclusion and the rating of 1-10. And also not the benchmarks on their own. Everyone can run some tests. The strength lies in drawing the right conclusions and the reality is that most correct conclusions are nuanced and drown in a sea of screaming 'tubers. And that harms the review more than anything else across the whole community - it harms faith in reviewers in a broad sense. Case in point: this thread, where we are pointing fingers at presumably sponsored reviewers. Thát is why I have a great aversion to the showbiz approach of a Youtuber.

If you have a consumer centric approach, this is probably the one to use - the right tone of voice at the right time, to the right audience. Not the one where all reviews approach things with no regard for their target audience, making everything stale and most likely misplaced for its readers or viewers. The Taichi review that was talked about earlier - its clearly written not for Joe Average, but for Joe Enthusiast. Mr Average has no use for this board whatsoever and pays twice as much as he could or should. Its not in 'Joe Average's' interest at all to buy that board; does that make it an anti-consumer review?



DeathtoGnomes said:


> The do more in video than written. The written part is usually a summary of whats in the video.



If I recall correctly, back in the day GamerNexus' written reviews always struck me as shallow, incomplete, and lazy. Perhaps that set the tone for me... maybe I'll give GN another 'unbiased' look. He's at the very least one of the least annoying tubers to listen to.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Jun 19, 2018)

GlacierNine said:


> So in other words, you have no intention of making a cogent point or an argument worth anyone's time


No. Not in this thread anyway. While others are, it seems clear that the dead horse is well and truly beaten..


----------



## moproblems99 (Jun 19, 2018)

I have to admit, I am amazed by all the experts here at TPU.  How could someone go anywhere else?


----------



## Space Lynx (Jun 19, 2018)

Vayra86 said:


> It was always marketable to critically review products, don't act like GN figured out some magical way of doing that. Written reviews have done this for quite some time now, including TPU. The reality is, most of the time, products are quite fine and generally, reviews are insanely boring. Motherboards for example. You can do a roundup and conclude 95% will provide precisely the same performance, in a price range from lower midrange all the way up to enthusiast level. Look at the Z370 roundup on Anandtech, its a good example of that, and it represents the real world where most parts are OEM based.
> 
> The kicker is, its marketable to critically review products EVEN without making companies hate your guts. The reason 'tubers get removed from the free stuff lists is because of tone of voice and feeding the hype or hate trains. That is also what @cadaveca was referring to with his example of ASUS and working with them on improving stuff. The real progress doesn't happen in the open playground but in constructive dialogue, well outside the range of sweaty keyboard heroes spamming comments under a video.




Disagree with this... tweaktown review of motherboards shows thermals of VRM cooling and that is how I base my purchase it, and oddly enough the Z370 motherboards across all brands varies greatly, but tweaktown found that MSI used new vrm's and temps were decent even on the budget $120 MSI Z370 boards, so that is what I went with based on those reviews. Gigabyte boards outside of Ultra 7 (or w.e its called) all had like 20 + celsius warmer temps on VRM's across all price ranges compared to the budget MSI Tomahawk which was $120 at the time.



moproblems99 said:


> I have to admit, I am amazed by all the experts here at TPU.  How could someone go anywhere else?



for motherboard reviews, nothing beats Tweaktown.

for power supply reviews, check out johnny guru, and read the hot testing section, TPU doesn't offer this level of detail, its very interesting to me to read about it just for fun, so those two parts I go elsewhere, everything else TPU is fine for me


----------



## Nuckles56 (Jun 19, 2018)

lynx29 said:


> Disagree with this... tweaktown review of motherboards shows thermals of VRM cooling and that is how I base my purchase it, and oddly enough the Z370 motherboards across all brands varies greatly, but tweaktown found that MSI used new vrm's and temps were decent even on the budget $120 MSI Z370 boards, so that is what I went with based on those reviews. Gigabyte boards outside of Ultra 7 (or w.e its called) all had like 20 + celsius warmer temps on VRM's across all price ranges compared to the budget MSI Tomahawk which was $120 at the time.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I really have to disagree with you on PSU testing, Aris does way more thorough testing here for TPU/ Tom's than OW does for JonnyGuru, Aris does way more testing, and covers 100% of the possible loading options for a PSU


----------



## Space Lynx (Jun 19, 2018)

Nuckles56 said:


> I really have to disagree with you on PSU testing, Aris does way more thorough testing here for TPU/ Tom's than OW does for JonnyGuru, Aris does way more testing, and covers 100% of the possible loading options for a PSU



Yeah but I like the disassembly and hot testing sections, I don't think they do that on TPU, I admit disassembly is kind of unnecessary, I just think it is neat to look inside.


----------



## Nuckles56 (Jun 19, 2018)

lynx29 said:


> Yeah but I like the disassembly and hot testing sections, I don't think they do that on TPU, I admit disassembly is kind of unnecessary, I just think it is neat to look inside.


Just looking at the most recent PSU review on TPU (Cougar GX-F 750W) there's definitely disassembly and the Load regulation and Efficiency Measurements section is hot testing


----------



## Space Lynx (Jun 19, 2018)

Nuckles56 said:


> Just looking at the most recent PSU review on TPU (Cougar GX-F 750W) there's definitely disassembly and the Load regulation and Efficiency Measurements section is hot testing




Thanks for the info, it has been awhile since I have checked any reviews. Seasonic 750w Titanium was my last buy, so pretty much am retired from PSU business for years to come. It really doesn't get any better than that. It is nice to know I can read TPU though, only improvement I would like to see is actual thermal imaging of VRM's on motherboard reviews, and TPU would definitely be the only website I need, lol


----------



## DeathtoGnomes (Jun 19, 2018)

moproblems99 said:


> I have to admit, I am amazed by all the experts here at TPU.  How could someone go anywhere else?


my sarcasm detector blipped.


----------



## R-T-B (Jun 19, 2018)

I'm an expert...  Just ask all the dead hardware in my closet.


----------



## DeathtoGnomes (Jun 19, 2018)

R-T-B said:


> I'm an expert...  Just ask all the dead hardware in my closet.


I've heard the skeletons still play Pong in there, I bet their hardware reviews are deadly.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Jun 20, 2018)

R-T-B said:


> I'm an expert...  Just ask all the dead hardware in my closet.





DeathtoGnomes said:


> I've heard the skeletons still play Pong in there, I bet their hardware reviews are deadly.


Thank you both, that laugh was needed!


----------



## blued (Jun 21, 2018)

At the end of the day, Nvidia still has the superior cards and thats what I base my buying decisions on. Its almost become farcical seeing many stating ethical reasons for not buying Nvidia. Same occurred with Intel in the first few years after Conroes release, until they could no longer ignore the performance advantage. Then most went Intel and ditched their ethics argument in the bin. I have a feeing same will occur with Nvidia sooner or later.


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Jun 21, 2018)

blued said:


> At the end of the day, Nvidia still has the superior cards and thats what I base my buying decisions on. Its almost become farcical seeing many stating ethical reasons for not buying Nvidia. Same occurred with Intel in the first few years after Conroes release, until they could no longer ignore the performance advantage. Then most went Intel and ditched their ethics argument in the bin. I have a feeing same will occur with Nvidia sooner or later.


So most didn't already choose performance over ethics, Nvidias market share says not many are guided by ethics.
I call farcical someone commenting on stuff they have not watched yet somehow disagree with personally but hey ho.

Some held on and still voted via the medium of cash .


----------



## lexluthermiester (Jun 22, 2018)

blued said:


> At the end of the day, Nvidia still has the superior cards and thats what I base my buying decisions on. Its almost become farcical seeing many stating ethical reasons for not buying Nvidia. Same occurred with Intel in the first few years after Conroes release, until they could no longer ignore the performance advantage. Then most went Intel and ditched their ethics argument in the bin. I have a feeing same will occur with Nvidia sooner or later.


I've seen this myself. Of course, there are the diehards that stick to their principles but those people are in the minority.


theoneandonlymrk said:


> So most didn't already choose performance over ethics, Nvidias market share says not many are guided by ethics.
> I call farcical someone commenting on stuff they have not watched yet somehow disagree with personally but hey ho.


They made valid points based on observations. You can disagree all you want, doesn't make them wrong.


----------



## las (Jun 22, 2018)

He does it for views. His numbers are always far from everyone elses.

Nah, it's not a conspiracy.


----------



## blued (Jun 23, 2018)

theoneandonlymrk said:


> I call farcical someone commenting on stuff they have not watched yet somehow disagree with personally but hey ho.


Ah... by implied admission, you've watched the entire 1hr+ vid? You mean theres more to it than what its title states (Nvidia - Anti-Competitive, Anti-Consumer, Anti-Technology)? By a Youtuber who has an established track record with similar vids and very clear position where he stands? OK...  just not sure ANY topic about ANY company could compel me to spend *an hour of my time on*, regardless of who its from or any pros or cons that may be part of it. Would have to be a topic very dear and important to me with a clear vested interest in it for me (and certainly far more important in my life than any HW company can be). But hey, if you felt it worth your while, guess thats what counts. Now you are brimming with all the important facts and info that you can validly base your next ethical HW purchase on (if you werent already).


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Jun 23, 2018)

blued said:


> Ah... by implied admission, you've watched the entire 1hr+ vid? You mean theres more to it than what its title states (Nvidia - Anti-Competitive, Anti-Consumer, Anti-Technology)? By a Youtuber who has an established track record with similar vids and very clear position where he stands? OK...  just not sure ANY topic about ANY company could compel me to spend *an hour of my time on*, regardless of who its from or any pros or cons that may be part of it. Would have to be a topic very dear and important to me with a clear vested interest in it for me (and certainly far more important in my life than any HW company can be). But hey, if you felt it worth your while, guess thats what counts. Now you are brimming with all the important facts and info that you can validly base your next ethical HW purchase on (if you werent already).


Yet you have time to pass judgement on here, based on what then a title, this converasation is over buddy dont quote me im not talking to someone about something they cant be arsed finding out about, as i said in other posts i lived through and remember all the facts already.

I did'nt need to watch the video because i'm That Old, But i did.  goodbye.


----------



## HTC (Jun 23, 2018)

I knew about a few of those things (the more "public" ones) but most i didn't know of.

I already disliked nVidia due to their pricing scheme (they keep insisting to price "mid-range" cards @ high prices): this video just made me dislike them more, that's all.


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Jun 23, 2018)

HTC said:


> I knew about a few of those things (the more "public" ones) but most i didn't know of.
> 
> I already disliked nVidia due to their pricing scheme (they keep insisting to price "mid-range" cards @ high prices): this video just made me dislike them more, that's all.


Price manipulation is my biggest dislike dude, and presently because Nvidia mapped its market Wrong were all expected to buy two year old tech at still 20% inflated prices now ,only for a few more months so they can bring out Next gen in August at Higher prices, im not buying their f up i tell thee.

Sheeple are blinded by stats ,fps and bs so often.


----------



## DeathtoGnomes (Jun 23, 2018)

theoneandonlymrk said:


> Price manipulation is my biggest dislike dude, and presently because Nvidia mapped its market Wrong were all expected to buy two year old tech at still 20% inflated prices now ,only for a few more months so they can bring out Next gen in August at Higher prices, im not buying their f up i tell thee.
> 
> *Sheeple are blinded by stats ,fps and bs so often*.



RGB is not BS! Its a major selling point now for those Sheeple!


----------

