Because Nvidia is selling off years old tech under a new name.
Yeah...not so much.
The 8800GT had been out for about 9 months when the 9800GT came out, a tad bit shy of the 2 years that that would validate your claim of "years old tech".
The 8800GS was out for a whole 3 months before the 9600GSO came out, also a tad shy of validating your claim.
The 9800GTX+ was out for 6 months before the GTS250 came out, again a tad shy of validating your claim.
Now, you can try to make the argument that really the GTS250 was the same as the 9800GTX, and many do, but they use different GPUs. One 65nm and one 55nm. The GPUs did progress, a die shrink is a progression.
In terms of actual tech, in forms of new features, nVidia didn't really do anything in that front. They just tweaked to make what they already had slightly better. There wasn't much need to add any new features. ATi did the same, with pretty much every GPU from HD3800 and HD4800 being based on R600. RV670 was R600 tweaked and shrank, and RV770 was R670 with a GDDR5 memory controller(because GDDR4 was dead), and more shaders.
And really GF200 was just G92 with more shaders, so there really wasn't a reason to redesign a mid-range GPU. If nVidia had, they would have just released a GPU that was weaker then G92 already was. ATi on the other hand did re-design their mid-range GPU, and sure enough it was weaker then R670, I actually would have preferred they just use RV670 to fill the mid-range, we would have seen better cards.
Ati never do it to dedicated hardware, alltho IGP get a rename ever now n then with minor changes.
Sure they do, I've given two examples already.
Like, hey i got a 8800 GT, ohh yeah, i got a 9800 GT, ahh yeah? i got a GT240, while all are the same, i've come across people wanting to upgrade from 8800 GT to 9800 GT, thats the problem!
I guess. Then again, I've seen people wanting to upgrade from an HD3850/70 to an HD4670. I'm guessing the people wanting to upgrade from a 8800GT to a 9800GT are the same ones that would upgrade from an HD3850 to an HD4670. Guess which upgrade is better...yep, the 9800GT, because at least they would get the same performance and not less.
If you dont understand that, You got a problem.
I understand it, it just isn't a problem created by renaming as much as it is a problem created by consumer stupidity. And the problem wouldn't have been any different if nVidia had released an entirely different cored card with the same performance and price points and called it the 9800GT.
This cannot be complained "much" about, alltho, 5690 would be a welcome name.
Actually, HD5690 is just as bad of a name. I've already covered why.
Mobile 5870 and so on, can be complained about, atleast its new tech instead of nvidia and their "GTX260M" thats a 8800 GT
Man, nVidia's mobile market and naming schemes have been completely jacked the fuck up...don't even get me started.
At least performance wise, they were close though. As a GTX260M does compete pretty well with the mobility HD4850, just like the desktop counter parts. Largly thanks to ATi horribly underclocking the mobile HD4850.
The fuzz is all about that nvidia renamed one DIE more than ati have done in their lifetime...
Not really, the 8800GT and 9800GT used the same G92 die, but the GTS240 doesn't.(And by the way, the GT240 uses a totally different die from the three.)
Thats the reason of all this hate.
What is the reason, you haven't made a valid point.
The G92 G80 and so on is a technological Marvel, but i hate it for the sole reason that it ripped off people, upgrading from 8800 GT to 9800 GT.
And I hate that people upgrading from an HD3850 to an HD4670 got "ripped off"...though I wouldn't call it ripped off actually. If they are too stupid to do the research and find out how something performs before they buy it, then they aren't getting ripped off when they get the same performance, they are getting lucky.
