AMD Issues Official Statement Regarding RX 560 Silent Downgrade

[Fluffmeister]

GTX 1060. Nuff said.

Stay on topic! We all know Nv are amazingly evil and far more successful, but lets focus on AMD:

http://products.amd.com/en-us/search/desktop-graphics/radeon™-rx-series/radeon™-rx-500-series

 

[bogmali]

I am going to quote myself from the other thread since it seems fitting as I see the same off-topic argument

Looks at thread title and want to ask:

How did it transition to Nvidia

Let's not make this into another AMD v Nvidia drama otherwise I will issue thread bans or vacations to those who continue to troll/derail this thread.

 

[lexluthermiester]

100% fail and zero points gained. Nicely done AMD.

While nvidias naming scheme could most certainly be made more clear, it is a different situation as nvidia makes it clear there is a difference starting from their website on down to the card partners.

Oh please.. NVidia has done this same thing several times. 9800GT, GTX260M or GTX560 anyone? Or we could talk about the GTX970. Don't get me wrong, I'm a Geforce/Quadro owner/user, but mistakes are mistakes and AMD generally owns their problems better than NVidia. And that's all this is, a mistake by AMD and the card builders to make a clear differentiation between the two specs. They've addressed the problem and are implementing a solution. Let's move on..

 

[evernessince]

Let's all ignore the fact that in many, possibly most cases, Nvidia's cards actually get stronger with updated architectures.

WTF does this have to do with his point or this article?

 

[evernessince]

This issue was around a SINGLE DAY before AMD addressed it and you already have people here calling AMD the devil. Let's be honest, the people commenting hyperbolicly here aren't doing so for fair discourse, they are going so because they are either invested in Nvidia (through product or otherwise) or because they are miserable people. AMD gave their partners a little too much leeway with the two different SKUs but they at least fixed the issue extremely quickly.

 

[XiGMAKiD]

bamboozle me once, shame on you. bamboozle me twice, heck you fren! y u bamboozle so much?*"

*quoted from random internet post
"goes to every entity

 

[B-Real]

I haven't seen any AIB partners inform customers on their cards boxes that the GTX 1060 with 3GB are about 10% slower than the ones having 6GB because of the more CUDA cores the 6GB version has. Have any of you?

 

[Vya Domus]

I haven't seen any AIB partners inform customers on their cards boxes that the GTX 1060 with 3GB are about 10% slower than the ones having 6GB because of the more CUDA cores the 6GB version has. Have any of you?

Apparently simply quoting that it is a 3GB version somehow automatically infers that it's slower , making it easy for the customer to understand what is going on. And we are talking about the same customers who are said to be incapable of reading the spec sheet.

What people refuse to accept is that all of these ambiguous naming schemes need to be called out upon equally. If we just find excuses for some of them and separate them from others , this sort of crap will never end.

 

[B-Real]

Apparently simply quoting that it is a 3GB version somehow automatically infers that it's slower , making it easy for the customer to understand what is going on. And we are talking about the same customers who are said to be incapable of reading the spec sheet.

What people refuse to accept is that all of these ambiguous naming schemes need to be called out upon equally. If we just find excuses for some of them and separate them from others , this sort of crap will never end.

Yes, for those who don't check reviews or specs, it might be so. But actually it is NOT true! Just check the GTX 960 2/4GB, 290X 4GB/8GB, 270X 2/4GB reviews. There is no difference at all between those models.

 

[EarthDog]

This issue was around a SINGLE DAY before AMD addressed it and you already have people here calling AMD the devil. Let's be honest, the people commenting hyperbolicly here aren't doing so for fair discourse, they are going so because they are either invested in Nvidia (through product or otherwise) or because they are miserable people. AMD gave their partners a little too much leeway with the two different SKUs but they at least fixed the issue extremely quickly.

its fixed? Their specs page doesnt list the card yet...

I haven't seen any AIB partners inform customers on their cards boxes that the GTX 1060 with 3GB are about 10% slower than the ones having 6GB because of the more CUDA cores the 6GB version has. Have any of you?

I dont see any boxes with performamce numbers on them (unless its a previous gen to new ), do you?

 

[Vayra86]

Apparently simply quoting that it is a 3GB version somehow automatically infers that it's slower , making it easy for the customer to understand what is going on. And we are talking about the same customers who are said to be incapable of reading the spec sheet.

What people refuse to accept is that all of these ambiguous naming schemes need to be called out upon equally. If we just find excuses for some of them and separate them from others , this sort of crap will never end.

No it is called allowing customers to perform due diligence, and marketing exists primarily to confuse us in doing that, it happens everywhere, and when it becomes downright misleading or simply incorrect, that's when the ban hammer comes down from all directions. As it should be, because everything beyond 'simply incorrect' becomes so abstract you can fill whole forum pages on it (case in point).

This was the case with GTX 970, it is the case here, and it is not the case when it comes to a 1060 3GB vs 6GB for very obvious reasons... No difference in my book, and no free passes for either company at any time. Its a fine line, but to me its a very clear one.

 

[Vya Domus]

and it is not the case when it comes to a 1060 3GB vs 6GB for very obvious reasons...

Well if that's the result of the diligence of the consumer , then I am deeply disgruntled and disappointed.

Its a fine line, but to me its a very clear one.

You'll realize that is not the case years from now when you'll see this thing will occur again and again. By the look of things nothing good will come out of this. But that is just my prediction.

 

[Vayra86]

Well if that's the result of the diligence of the consumer , then I am deeply disgruntled and disappointed.

You'll realize that is not the case years from now when you'll see this thing will occur again and again by all of these companies .

You should be, but not at Nvidia or AMD, but at customers for being dumb idiots who don't read more than headlines and are unwilling to mobilize over these 'mistakes'. Those are real drivers for change, not us yapping about irrelevant details on a silly forum.

There are quite a few markets where big steps have been made towards transparency in product descriptions, ingredients in food, etc etc. and even there you see this keeps returning in a new form. Its the confusing marketing that creates a profit window for companies, in most marketplaces these days and ever since... forever.

Blame capitalism.

 

[lexluthermiester]

I haven't seen any AIB partners inform customers on their cards boxes that the GTX 1060 with 3GB are about 10% slower than the ones having 6GB because of the more CUDA cores the 6GB version has. Have any of you?

To be fair, NVidia has published the differences between those two cards. What they needed to do is call the 1060 6GB a 1060ti. And that's all AMD had to do, call one an RX560 and the higher performing version an RX560X or something.

 

[EarthDog]

Exactly my point. Sure the name isnt clear there is a performance difference, but outside of that, its clearly specd out anywhere you look that has specs.

Ill say it again... loot crate gpu here...

Until they fix the website, they continue to propogate the issue with ambiguous specs.

 

[newtekie1]

GTX 1060. Nuff said.

Not really, since nVidia made it completely clear from the beginning what the differences between the two versions of the GTX1060. They also made it easy to determine what version you were getting, if you buy the 3GB version you knew what you were getting. You didn't have to guess if you were getting the version with less cuda cores.

Oh please.. NVidia has done this same thing several times. 9800GT, GTX260M or GTX560 anyone?

None of those is the same thing. Rebrands are not the same thing as lowering a cards specs halfway through the products life without making it easy to tell between the different versions

This issue was around a SINGLE DAY before AMD addressed it and you already have people here calling AMD the devil.

One day?!? They released the weaker version this summer. It has been several months.

Apparently simply quoting that it is a 3GB version somehow automatically infers that it's slower

We all know that customers that don't bother to read reviews are also the same customers that automatically assume cards with more memory are better. That's literally the oldest marketing trick in graphics card's book. It just happens to actually work in this case.

 

[Vya Domus]

Not really, since nVidia made it completely clear from the beginning what the differences between the two versions of the GTX1060.

How could have they made it clear from the beginning if the 3GB version wasn't even launched at the same time.

This is so hilarious , you people try so hard to defend Nvidia while completely ignoring the fact that what they are doing is identical to supposed "bait and switch stunts" you accuse AMD for.

You didn't have to guess if you were getting the version with less cuda cores.

Yes , you only had to take a look at the spec sheet to find that out. You could also do that when buying a 560. Is there a difference ? Is the consumer more prone to not read those specs if they buy a 560 ? Because the name does not convey that information in either cases.

 

[EarthDog]

Beginning of the 3gb launch? Come on, dont act like an idiot... you clearly arent one.

It is similar, not identical though. The distinction has been made enough times across these threads.

Ignore those dramatizing and focus on the issue...a non-existent entry on the amd website for the 560d.

You could also do that when buying a 560.

LOL, NO.

You can't and is the ENTIRE POINT HERE. How many times does one need to show the AMD website DOES NOT DISTINGUISH BETWEEN THE TWO. Unless the box (LOL) or AIB (LOL) has it on their site, there isn't any way to tell.

How do we keep missing the fundamental issue here? This reminds me of the NFL and the Colin Kapernick thing... shit got so convoluted with other BS, the crux of the issue was lost.

 

[lexluthermiester]

None of those is the same thing. Rebrands are not the same thing as lowering a cards specs halfway through the products life without making it easy to tell between the different versions

Nice selective response. Are you done being a fanboy? And it is the exact same thing. Two differently spec'd products getting the same name.

 

[Vayra86]

Inb4 lock...

 

[newtekie1]

How could have they made it clear from the beginning if the 3GB version wasn't even launched at the same time.

This is so hilarious , you people try so hard to defend Nvidia while completely ignoring the fact that what they are doing is identical to supposed "bait and switch stunts" you accuse AMD for.

The day the GTX1060 3GB was launched, AKA "from the beginning", it was clear that it was a weaker card, and easy for the customer buying in the store to determine which version they were getting.

Yes , you only had to take a look at the spec sheet to find that out. You could also do that when buying a 560. Is there a difference ? Is the consumer more prone to not read those specs if they buy a 560 ? Because the name does not convey that information.

Um, no you can't just look at the spec sheet to determine which version you are getting. I'll give you a scenario:

You are standing in a store, you have 4 cards in front of you. A GTX1060 6GB, a GTX1060 3GB, a RX 560 4GB, and an RX 560 4GB. Can you tell me which GTX1060 has 1280 Cuda cores and which one has 1152? Yes, it is easy. Can you tell me which RX 560 has 1024 stream processors and which one has 896 stream processors? No, there's no way to tell until you get the card home and run GPU-Z.

Do you see the difference here? Or do you still want to go on about how the GTX1060 is the same situation?

Or how about another situation:

You already have a GTX1060 6GB, you like it so much you are going to buy another one for you brother for Christmas. You go to the store and buy a GTX1060 6GB. Did you're brother get a card with the same number of cuda cores as the card you had? Yep.

Or

You already own a RX 560 4GB, you like it so much you are going to buy another one for your brother for Christmas. You go to the store and buy a RX 560 4GB. Did you're brother get a card with the same number of stream processor as the card you had? You have no idea.

See why what AMD did wasn't the same?

Nice selective response. Are you done being a fanboy? And it is the exact same thing. Two differently spec'd products getting the same name.

Um, try again. The nVidia cards you listed are two identical cards with the same specs getting different names. That isn't exactly the same thing to what AMD is doing. Do you even have a grasp on what AMD did? Or you are just blindly defending them..and you're calling me a fanboy?

Even the GTX970 issue you brought up wasn't as bad as what AMD did. NVidia didn't go back and physically lower the specs of the GTX970, and hence reduce its performance, without telling anyone. The performance of the GTX970 was the same at all times, the card that reviewers got was the same card that the customer was buying. This is not the case with the AMD RX 560 issue. AMD has gone back and psychically lowered the specs and performance of the card without really making it clear to the customer.

 

[Vya Domus]

The day the GTX1060 3GB was launched, AKA "from the beginning"

They were not launched concurrently. They weren't even announced at the same date. The 6GB version predates the 3GB one in every way.

https://www.anandtech.com/show/10580/nvidia-releases-geforce-gtx-1060-3gb

If the consumer had read reviews and announcements from the original launch they could have easily walked into a store a month or two down the line and unknowingly buy a weaker 1060 under the assumption that it simply had less VRAM since it a very common occurrence for cards to be sold like this. This could have played out in exactly the same way if we are talking about a 560.

If however we assume the buyer does have access to all information that is available, in either cases he could have easily looked at the specs and figure out something is amiss. Now if they didn't then there is nothing else that could have prevented this from happening , both of those products should have had proper names.

This is why at the end of the day it is the same issue whether you are buying a 1060 or a 560.

Can you tell me which GTX1060 has 1280 Cuda cores and which one has 1152? Yes, it is easy.

If I , for some reason , can't look up the specs ? No , I can't. And you conveniently provided zero explanations on why I should. Even more so , you said it's easy.

The reason why your example is fundamentally flawed is because it would have to rely on the assumption that one would already know that one of them has fewer shaders. Because if they didn't , there is absolutely no way they could tell that just by looking at the name and quite frankly I can't see how you could possibly prove the opposite.

If however you have some other explanation on why it is easier to tell which is which please say it.

 

[Frick]

With the GT730, that was literally a bottom of the barrel card. AND they released all the versions of the card at the same exact time. So everyone knew they existed from day one, and you knew what to look for. If reviewers reviewed the card, they knew to look at the version and let people know which one they were reviewing. (Did any major site ever even review the GT730?) Plus, the target demographic wasn't gaming, if you tried to game on a GT730, I feel bad for you, every version of that card was shit.

Well I got through Warlords of Draenor on a c2d e8400 and a GT530 (same card)... The GDDR5 version of the GT730 wasn't all that bad tbh, and that was reviewed on some smaller sites.

As for this, it's an issue if there's no way of telling pre purchase what you're getting, and if the price is the same. But you can usually get some detailed data on the card you're looking, unless you buy from unreputable retailers or random dudes on ebay.

 

[EarthDog]

They were not launched concurrently. They weren't even announced at the same date. The 6GB version predates the 3GB one in every way.

https://www.anandtech.com/show/10580/nvidia-releases-geforce-gtx-1060-3gb

So, we are upset that the card which came after and has more vRAM performs better?

And you conveniently provided zero explanations on why I should. Even more so , you said it's easy.

Just click on "sign here" if you aren't going to read about what you want to buy.

FFS, we get that it isn't as easy as it should be with the 1060... the point is there is ZERO recourse for the customer to determine the difference between the AMD cards as the AMD website does not distinguish between the two.

.. and frankly, again, NVIDIA, this is an AMD thread, nobody gives a shit about what they did. We all know it. If you want to reply and bantor with those dramatizing the issue adding fuel to the fire, do so, but this NVIDIA talk has gone on long enough across multiple threads. Sad.

 

[Vya Domus]

So, we are upset that the card which came after and has more vRAM performs better?

It didn't came after , it's the other way around. For crying out loud , it's the millionth time you don't read my comments properly.

The 6GB version predates the 3GB one in every way.

predate1
priːˈdeɪt/
verb
3rd person present: predates

1. exist or occur at a date earlier than (something).
   "here parish boundaries seem clearly to predate Roman roads

EDIT : Don't want to be mean but you're doing it so often.

Anyway , you are right I went off topic for far too long .