Tuesday, December 5th 2017
AMD Officially but Silently Downgrades Radeon RX 560 with an 896 SP Variant
The phenomenon of Radeon RX 560 graphics cards with 896 stream processors is more widespread than earlier thought. It looks like RX 560 cards with 896 stream processors will be more widely available than the previously thought Greater China region; with AMD silently editing the specifications of the SKU to have either 896 or 1,024 stream processors, as opposed to the 1,024 it originally launched with. There are no clear labeling guidelines or SKU names to distinguish cards with 896 stream processors from those with 1,024.
The Radeon RX 560 and the previous-generation RX 460 are based on the 14 nm "Polaris 11" silicon, which physically features 16 GCN compute units (CUs), each packed with 64 stream processors. The RX 560 originally maxed this silicon out, with all 16 CUs being enabled, while the RX 460 has two CUs locked. The decision to change specs of the RX 560 effectively makes it a re-brand of the RX 460, which is slower, and provides fertile grounds for bait-and-switch lawsuits.
Source:
Heise.de
The Radeon RX 560 and the previous-generation RX 460 are based on the 14 nm "Polaris 11" silicon, which physically features 16 GCN compute units (CUs), each packed with 64 stream processors. The RX 560 originally maxed this silicon out, with all 16 CUs being enabled, while the RX 460 has two CUs locked. The decision to change specs of the RX 560 effectively makes it a re-brand of the RX 460, which is slower, and provides fertile grounds for bait-and-switch lawsuits.
129 Comments on AMD Officially but Silently Downgrades Radeon RX 560 with an 896 SP Variant
But....for whatever reason, that never happenend. This feels like a more misleading move than the gtx 970 memory issue.. :(
www.techpowerup.com/forums/threads/unlock-shaders-asus-rx-560-rog-strix-evo-gaming-4gb.239154/
At least for oem's it was supposed to be called 560d.
Though truth be told, whoever buys this low end isn't very likely to care about specs at all.
And while many users who buy these cards wont know specs (do many anyway, really?), they will surely believe 560 is better than 460 as, generally, this is how it works.
This is not good. We can blame the board partners, but it seems there is a lack of 'institutional control' in that 560D name not making it out. If amd doesnt discern between the cards in their website, i can understand why partners didnt change it either.
Its like a damn loot crate!!! Never know what you'll get!
AIBs obviously knew this happens and they still didn't make a clear distinction between them.
The source of this problem is AMD. Because their partners went along with it doesnt absolve AMD of creating the problem in the first place.
Again.. 560s are now loot crates. Scary.
Hell, looking back at AMD's history, I thik they may actually have more rebrands than new releases altogether.
www.biostar.com.tw/app/en/vga/introduction.php?S_ID=236
How could Biostar specify this a 470D but others can't do the same for the 560 ? It's AMD at fault ?
You know , it's funny I just remembered how there are 2 1060s on the market with the exact same name as well but somehow anything associated with Nvidia gets a pass while similar happenings turn AMD into a shady ass company . :)
I never heard of the 470D in the past, because, well, it wasn't released in the states. It IS a different card with a different name. In the case of the, 570D AMD didn't seem to specify (see the first post, see post 16), and consequently, neither did the AIBs. So we have a problem. These seem to be in more places than that now(?)...
As far as the 1060's, no idea on that outside of a 3GB and 6GB version. But let's stop using straw man tactics and stick to the point....NVIDIA and their shady practices are not the issue here.
The point:
AMD did not discern between these distinctly different models. Because of this, both AMD in their reference/oem cards and the AIBs with their cards, we have what I am coining as "loot crate" GPUs. EVERYONE could have been better in this situation, I certainly agree. However its more than clear where this started and it isn't with the AIBs.
Even TPU's database makes a clear distinction , not only between the name but also the actual core variant : Polaris 21 XL and Polaris 21 XT.
You just don't want to accept the fact that this has been done before in the exact same fashion with the only exception being that, now, AIBs didn't do their job properly (intentionally or not).It never is , I know. ;)Right , let's not focus on the same thing Nvidia and it's board partners did and focus instead on AMD , because somehow that's more important and relevant. Gotcha , I'm not gonna mention it again. :)
Understand, I am not the one who brought up the 470D which DOES IN FACT HAVE A CLEAR ENTRY ON AMD's website. So, the 470D isn't the issue here. They did that right. Here, they do NOT have an entry for the 560D. Its just a 560 with two different sets of specs. Because of this, the reference 560 and the AIBs apparent willingness to run with it, they are loot crate GPUs. Again, I am not absolving the AIBs part in this for propagating the issue, however, it is clear the source of the ambiguity is from AMD.
As far as I am concerned AIBs have engaged in false advertising tactics without doubt.