nguyenLOL launch data showed 7900XTX a measly 35% faster than RDNA2 6950XT



Definitely "not a liar" :roll:

Tbf, "up to" and "average" are very different way of presenting data. In that average, there might have been a game that was 70% faster than the RX 6950. iirc, there were even a few games at launch that were faster on RDNA 2 vs RDNA 3. Performance delta across several games not being consistent is not new

NoyandTbf, "up to" and "average" are very different way of presenting data. In that average, there might have been a game that was 70% faster than the RX 6950. iirc, there were even a few games at launch that were faster on RDNA 2 vs RDNA 3. Performance delta across several games not being consistent is not new

If you choose to present to everyone only a small part of data that the majority of people will not experience, it's lying by omission

Definitetion of lying by omission:
"Lying by omission is the deliberate act of leaving out important details so the truth is skewed or misrepresented. It's the counterpart of lying by commission, or using false direct statements."

nguyenIf you choose to present to everyone only a small part of data that the majority of people will not experience, it's lying by omission

There are at least 10,000 games on the market right now. By your reasoning, everyone is lying. But I’ll play along. Please state your entire list of games that must be included by Intel, AMD and Nvidia in their performance marketing material in order not to be lying. That way I can go back to the slides from each company to know who’s lying.

Recuswww.pcworld.com/article/1499957/amd-is-undershipping-chips-to-keep-cpu-gpu-prices-elevated.html
www.techpowerup.com/319371/amd-tightly-regulating-prices-of-successful-radeon-rx-6750-gre-in-china

Ever heard of "Whataboutism"?

KipicogPlease stop the cherrypicking. We are not stupid.

No one said you were. Someone earlier in the thread called an AMD exec a pathological liar. Someone else defended that pathetically nitwitted statement. The above benchmark results are showing definitive information that the AMD exec was in fact being very truthful, and they're doing it with one of the arguers own citation sources.

This is called definitive evidence, not cherry-picking.

nguyenDefinitetion of lying by omission:
"Lying by omission is the deliberate act of leaving out important details so the truth is skewed or misrepresented. It's the counterpart of lying by commission, or using false direct statements."

dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/pedantic

giving too much attention to formal rules or small details

DavenThere are at least 10,000 games on the market right now. By your reasoning, everyone is lying. But I’ll play along. Please state your entire list of games that must be included by Intel, AMD and Nvidia in their performance marketing material in order not to be lying. That way I can go back to the slides from each company to know who’s lying.

Just pick any game you like out of TPU testing?

Nvidia - we never lie to you

Also Nvidia:
www.sec.gov/news/press-release/2022-79

nguyenJust pick any game you like out of TPU testing?

That’s not what you said. You said if you pick a small amount of data to represent your product you are lying by omission. Please state the necessary amount of data by listing games that should be included in a company’s marketing material so that we know who’s lying. Because I know you wouldn’t lie to me, I’ll assume the list you provide is an industry wide standard for GPU performance reporting.

DavenThat’s not what you said. You said if you pick a small amount of data to represent your product you are lying by omission. Please state the necessary amount of data by listing games that should be included in a company’s marketing material so that we know who’s lying. Because I know you wouldn’t lie to me, I’ll assume the list you provide is an industry wide standard for GPU performance reporting.

TPU and HUB with different set of games show that on avg 7900XTX was 35% faster than 6950XT at launch.
If Scott weren't lying then it's TPU or HUB were lying :rolleyes:

nguyenIf you choose to present to everyone only a small part of data that the majority of people will not experience, it's lying by omission

Definitetion of lying by omission:
"Lying by omission is the deliberate act of leaving out important details so the truth is skewed or misrepresented. It's the counterpart of lying by commission, or using false direct statements."

That's why we have independent reviewers to show what's real. AMD main goal is to present their products in the best possible light. Although, they are selectively willing to show their product losing against the "competition" (the competition being a higher end product that doesn't target the same customers). I have yet to heard of a tech company being fully transparent about what to expect. Even if it's a painfully average product, they will still hype it up (or just not talk about it all). If the makers don't believe in their own product, customers sure as hell won't take them seriously.
www.techpowerup.com/img/YW49HDjvjgPkas5B.jpg

That was always the mentality of Nvidia. Even when it wasn't the huge corporation it is today. Let's not forget the lock Nvidia implemented in drivers where a customer who has payed and bought an Nvidia card was seeing CUDA and PhysX getting disabled if the primary graphics card was a competitor's model. I mean, Nvidia was demanding absolute loyalty from consumers 15 years ago, why be different today, especially today?

I'd love to buy an AMD GPU again, when they can match Nvidia in terms of watt usage, performance, drivers and features. However, coming from a Radeon 6800, I know they are not even close.

2080 Ti to Radeon 6800 was the worst upgrade I made in this century. So I pulled the trigger on a 4070 Ti for 650 dollars one year ago. Everything has been smooth sailing since. Cool, quiet, zero issues and great features across the board.

Wake me up when AMD can deliver.

It seems we have strayed from the topic a bit. How about we return to the subject of NVidia acting like a cartel.

@Mods Sorry for my part in this. I saw a redonkulas statement and it set me off.

NoyandThat's why we have independent reviewers to show what's real. AMD main goal is to present their products in the best possible light. Although, they are selectively willing to show their product losing against the "competition" (the competition being a higher end product that doesn't target the same customers). I have yet to heard of a tech company being fully transparent about what to expect. Even if it's a painfully average product, they will still hype it up (or just not talk about it all). If the makers don't believe in their own product, customers sure as hell won't take them seriously.
www.techpowerup.com/img/YW49HDjvjgPkas5B.jpg

Scott was pitching 7900XTX against their own 6950XT, they knew fully well the 7900XTX was only 35-40% faster than 6950XT when Scott walked on stage and gave everyone that PR slide

nguyenTPU and HUB with different set of games show that on avg 7900XTX was 35% faster than 6950XT at launch.
If Scott weren't lying then it's TPU or HUB were lying :rolleyes:

So there isn’t a standard list of games and therefore AMD wasn’t lying by ommission.

DavenSo there isn’t a standard list of games and therefore AMD wasn’t lying by ommission.

Steve from HUB said the 7900XTX internal reviewer guide said AMD's own internal testing show around 40% uplift, so why did Scott walked on stage and never mentioned it? he kinda omitted that part huh

On topic:
www.businessinsider.com/nvidia-earnings-ai-chips-demand-jensen-huang-allocate-fairly-stock-2024-2?IR=T

Whatever "fairly" means.

Lucky I need to go out, otherwise I'd be getting stuck into this farcical derailing of the OP.

Please take this post as a warning to stay on topic.

watzupkenTo be honest, whenever a company grows too big, it is unavoidable for them to operate in an anti-competitive way to fend off competitors. That is the unfortunate fact. Take Intel for example, it is clear they are likely still at it with the anti-competitive practice. If you just look across laptops for example, notice that most premium laptops are exclusive to Intel chips only? AMD processors rarely get the "red carpet" treatment and even if the same model exists, the specs may also be inferior to the Intel version. One can argue that AMD may not be able to supply that many chips as compared to Intel, but I do wonder if high end laptops really sell like hot cakes.

Yes, this is exactly it! It seems inherent to capitalism that when a corporate entity reaches a certain size, they rely less and less on innovation and fair competition and instead increasingly focus on manipulating the system, anti-competitive practices, and using accumulated size and resources to compete rather than innovation. For example, consider Intel's or Nvidia's behavior whenever they've even perceived the slightest threat from AMD. We can recall from the early 2000s that Intel resorted to bribing OEMs with their "rebate" plan or Nvidia's GPP program in the mid to late 2010s, both of which undoubtedly have implications in the present and, imo, act more as temporary windows into the everyday running of these relationship to this day, than as aberrations of their corporate behavior. For example, I think we can all agree that AMD's mobile offerings are just as good, if not better (especially in efficiency) than Intel's and yet there are far fewer laptop models based on AMD, the ones that are are usually cheaper options (in quality), and sometimes they seemingly don't even apply the products in the best possible way, i.e. how I'm constantly seeing laptops with AMD APUs paired with nvidia dGPUs, which is fine as an option, but there seems to be very few laptop models where the stronger AMD APUs are used ALONE which I would think would be their BEST use, i.e. a thin and light, premium ultrabook with a 7840H(S)/7940H(S)/8840H(S)/8940H(S) and that's it!

I think the lack of AMD laptops testifies to the nature of the relationship between Intel/AMD and the OEMs and how Intel's bribery of OEMs like Dell previously still deeply affects everything. For example, I believe that Dell doesn't have a single AMD XPS laptop option and this is 100% a reflection of Intel's influence on OEMs and while Intel might no be giving obvious bribes or payments, they go to these OEMs form a "development partnership" where Intel basically throws a lot of cash at them...does anybody here think that Dell, Asus, MSI, etc do not have the resources to develop a top of the line laptop model based on an AMD sku? While some may argue that this is merely "just doing business", the fact still remains that in the instance of laptops (arguably the most lucrative x86 market behind enterprise) the superiority of the product (CPU) is seemingly the LAST factor in determining what laptops get produced, and I'm sure the same can be said for pre-built Desktop PCs from OEMs as well.

True story: My coworkers are aware at my interest in computers, that I build them, and I've basically become the "computer guy" if anybody has a question or needs advice....well, just a few days ago, I was talking to a coworker about laptops because his wife is in the market for one, and I mentioned AMD. His perception of AMD was as though it was still 2013, that they were a cheaper, lesser option that somebody would only buy because they have to. This guy isn't dumb, and while he isn't an enthusiast, he also isn't completely ignorant, but I tried to parse out the basis for his perception and it was largely due to his observation that for example, when you're at Best Buy, the top of the line laptop models never have an AMD option, and when there are AMD options, they're usually budget tier. It really makes you wonder how much of Intel's business in the post-ryzen era has been based upon their cartelistic relationships with OEMs and the ability it has created to curate an image and perception in the minds of consumers that is divorced from reality.

nguyenYou mean Scott walked on stage and told everyone that RDNA3 would be 50-70% faster than RDNA2 didn't make him a liar?

Still way more close to reality than Mr. Leather Jacket walking on stage with charts in the background claiming the 4090 would be up to 4x faster than the 3090. :laugh: Hiding in the little fine print that it's only the case with DLSS fake frame generation. It was clearly Nvidia who started this deceptive marketing BS, not AMD. Just wondering, do you get cool aid coupons for spreading Nvidia & Intel nonsense, lol?

KipicogNot a single person that plays the game competitively and does well, uses 4K

Gamers who play competitive titles don’t care for nvidia’s eye candy be it 4K or not . Then you have budget gamers who simply cannot afford a double digit price premium just to enable RT/DLSS and rather focus on what still is the most important metric which is raster performance .

Nvidia somehow convinced people that RT is some next level shit that we all need like cyberpunk is the game that we all need a 4090 for .

HxxGamers who play competitive titles don’t care for nvidia’s eye candy be it 4K or not . Then you have budget gamers who simply cannot afford a double digit price premium just to enable RT/DLSS and rather focus on what still is the most important metric which is raster performance .

Nvidia somehow convinced people that RT is some next level shit that we all need like cyberpunk is the game that we all need a 4090 for .

No they care about best performance, low power usage and features that actually work, like RTX Reflex. Not AMD Anti Lag thats you VAC Banned in seconds.

Once again;

Clearly shows AMD has huge issues in esport titles. 7900XTX uses way more power than 4080. More heat, more noise, more coilwhine. Everything you don't want.

And this is why 99% of competitive gamers use Nvidia.

KipicogNo they care about best performance, low power usage and features that actually work, like RTX Reflex.

And this is why 99% of competitive gamers use Nvidia.

You pulled that 99% metric out of your ass but that’s cool. Now add pricing next to each of the top 5 cards to prove my point and don’t cherry pick that either … use msrp

MarsM4NStill way more close to reality than Mr. Leather Jacket walking on stage with charts in the background claiming the 4090 would be up to 4x faster than the 3090. :laugh: Hiding in the little fine print that it's only the case with DLSS fake frame generation. It was clearly Nvidia who started this deceptive marketing BS, not AMD. Just wondering, do you get cool aid coupons for spreading Nvidia & Intel nonsense, lol?

www.pcgamer.com/nvidias-rtx-4090-4x-performance-claims-arent-holding-up-on-current-games/

Spoiler: Intel's Snake Oil & Completely Insane Anti-AMD Marketing

OP is talking about Scott Herkelman accusing Nvidia:

World's most important fuel of the AI frenzy, NVIDIA, is facing accusations of acting as a "GPU cartel" and controlling supply in the data center market, according to statements made by executives at rival chipmaker Groq and former AMD executive Scott Herkelman

Scott here really did a number on Radeon brand reputation with the constant lying, now he's just the boy who cried wolf.

HxxYou pulled that 99% metric out of your ass but that’s cool. Now add pricing next to each of the top 5 cards to prove my point and don’t cherry pick that either … use msrp

You obviously knows nothing about eSport. Most if not all top 100 players use Nvidia and Reflex, 2000, 3000 or 4000 series. And Nvidia don't sponsor players or teams. Hell every top player uses Nvidia, not just the top 100.

prosettings.net/lists/cs2/

And watch that video. Shows 7900XTX draws 100-150 watts more than 4080 while delivering worse performance.

Gogogo ->
"AMD really need to fix this." Yep... AMD has tons of stuff to fix but they prioritize making CPUs and APUs, which is why they have succes right now.

Funny how people expect AMD to compete 1:1 with Nvidia which does solely GPUs and is a top 3 company worldwide in terms of market cap, while focussing on CPUs mostly... Not going to happen. Sad to break it to you.

AMD have exactly zero chance of beating Nvidia in the GPU space. All those AI money Nvidia grabs right now, will drip down into gaming space over the next many years. AMD is done for in the high-end market. Which is why Radeon 8000 series won't get any high-end SKU.

I have an AMD CPU, why? Because its great. Their GPUs tho, not so much.

AMD and Intel can battle for the low to mid-end market going forward.