Drunk on GeForce Partner Program Koolaid, MSI Openly Slanders AMD Radeon

[AnarchoPrimitiv]

I love how MSI resorts to the "Nazi defense"

 

[ShurikN]

Right, and now, let's try and buy one at a somewhat comparable price! Oh wait...

That may be a point if MSI was buying its cards (chips) from retailers and not from chip makers themselves.
What he said has a point and AMD has a competing product in every range except for 1080ti.
But that's only on desktop. The original FB drama had a laptop in mind.

 

[Bones]

The kings of cheap talking trash about the competiton - If this wasn't the business world it would be beyond a joke.

And some guys wonder why MSI along with Biostar make some of the cheapest boards on the market..... One huge hint is "Nikos".

 

[LemmingOverlord]

Congratulations on providing a single outlier. Now prove how Vega56 << 1070, RX580 << 1060, RX570 << 1060 3GB, RX560 << 1050, RX550 << 1030 in gaming performance. Good luck!

Regarding MSI, their reply seems further prove GPP is in action (we already saw SKUs dissapearing from MSIs website). Now that AMD is out of the premium gaming brands competition, they will be able to push prices sky high for next gen GPUs ...

It's not a "single outlier", and if you take into account other factors (apart from raw performance) such as price and power consumption, AMD's line-up leaves a lot to be desired. If anything, AMD's GPUs are VASTLY overpriced and the lead in your "comparisons" is questionable. While we can accuse Nvidia of price-gouging all we want, the fact is that AMD's GPUs are priced way over their real value.

• VEGA 56 vs. GTX 1070 (why not the 'ti'?) -> VEGA 56 provides marginal advantages (and generally only in DX12), draws a lot more power, and costs anywhere from $100~300 more
• RX580 vs GTX 1060 -> RX 580 provides advantages in DX12 only. Otherwise it gets overtaken by the GTX 1060. It also draws 185W vs. 120W on the GTX 1060. Did I mention it's costing anywhere from $60~100 more than a GTX 1060?
• RX 570 vs. GTX 1060 3GB -> RX 570 is crushed in almost all games in DX11. It matches or slightly overtakes the GTX 1060 3GB in DX12. The 1060 is $70 cheaper.

Should I continue? I can provide links to reviews with all this. Or are those sites also part of the Grand Conspiracy Against AMD?

 

[Vya Domus]

RX 570 vs. GTX 1060 3GB ... The 1060 is $70 cheaper.

RX580 vs GTX 1060 -> ... $60~100 more than a GTX 1060?

VEGA 56 vs. GTX 1070 (why not the 'ti'?) ... $100~300 more

By official MSRP , none of that is true.

 

[kruk]

It's not a "single outlier", and if you take into account other factors (apart from raw performance) such as price and power consumption, AMD's line-up leaves a lot to be desired. If anything, AMD's GPUs are VASTLY overpriced and the lead in your "comparisons" is questionable. While we can accuse Nvidia of price-gouging all we want, the fact is that AMD's GPUs are priced way over their real value.

• VEGA 56 vs. GTX 1070 (why not the 'ti'?) -> VEGA 56 provides marginal advantages (and generally only in DX12), draws a lot more power, and costs anywhere from $100~300 more
• RX580 vs GTX 1060 -> RX 580 provides advantages in DX12 only. Otherwise it gets overtaken by the GTX 1060. It also draws 185W vs. 120W on the GTX 1060. Did I mention it's costing anywhere from $60~100 more than a GTX 1060?
• RX 570 vs. GTX 1060 3GB -> RX 570 is crushed in almost all games in DX11. It matches or slightly overtakes the GTX 1060 3GB in DX12. The 1060 is $70 cheaper.

Should I continue? I can provide links to reviews with all this. Or are those sites also part of the Grand Conspiracy Against AMD?

No need for links. We have TPU. Crushing you say? Where exactly?

Also, you were the one that wanted to compare benchmark numbers and now when you suddenly realised the performance gap is barely existent you brought market price and power consumption into play ...

 

[LemmingOverlord]

By official MSRP , none of that is true.

Are you trolling? 'Cos it sounds like you're trolling.

Reality vs. bullshit marketing is what we're talking about. Otherwise every card would be only described in superlatives, and all marketing ads would sound like they were written by Trump.

"These are the best GPUs. Great GPUs. You'll see. You won't go to the other GPUs after this GPU. Totally the best. So good."

 

[Vya Domus]

Are you trolling? 'Cos it sounds like you're trolling.

You can say that again , but while reading your own comment. You proudly told us how you can provide us with links to reviews "with all that". Do those reviews contain the prices you listed or the actual MSRPs ? Or are we going to selectively pick up facts and make up the rest ?

 

[LemmingOverlord]

No need for links. We have TPU. Crushing you say? Where exactly?

Also, you were the one that wanted to compare benchmark numbers and now when you suddenly realised the performance gap is barely existent you brought market price and power consumption into play ...

Let's agree to disagree. You want to sum up all games into a single bar graph with no reference to what games are weighed in, what the detail settings were, etc... I'd rather rely on individual game benchmarks from other sites. Also, you like to mix things. I added power and price to emphasize my view on AMD's GPUs. I remain adamant that GTX 1060 3GB is superior to RX 570 in DX11.

Like most people, you think black on white, but to most people things like performance, price and power consumption matter.

 

[medi01]

'Cos it sounds like

It sounds like an nvidia paid shill walked into TP forum.

 

[LemmingOverlord]

You can say that again , but while reading your own comment. You proudly told us how you can provide us with links to reviews "with all that". Do those reviews contain the prices you listed or the actual MSRPs ? Or are we going to selectively pick up facts and ignore the rest ?

While performance on a graphics card doesn't change much (save for corrections on inept driver implementations, or bad game code), the pricing does. As I wrote, I quoted prices from Amazon. As I wrote, I specifically found whatever reviews I could which included the cards quoted. Let me know which one you need. I'll get it.

It sounds like an nvidia paid shill walked into TP forum.

LOL. It's good that you're so clever that you can spot wally. wow.

I'll easily buy an AMD card next time I upgrade, so long as it doesn't kill my wallet, my electricity bill, and I feel I'm getting my money's worth. VEGA and Polaris are definitely not worth it.

 

[I No]

You see it through your perspective like many other Enthusiasts, wrong.
This is to rake money off joe regular. Not you.
And your also downplaying how many Amd cards sell nice bit of undermining there but also wrong.

The reaction to Gpp is spot on imho ,it might be their business but they won't be getting any more of my cash acting like this because I am a wallet voter.

How does this rake money off the regular Joe?
A. You seem to forget that if MSI drops AMD it wouldn't be the first AIB that does it. It happened the other way around as well back with Club3D for example when they committed to ATI.
B. If they decided to do this I bet AMD is well aware of the situation and if they can live with it so can the average Joe.


You people are going to start a full fledged flame-war on naming schemes and cooling solutions -> basically bullshit. Again if MSI or whoever else decides to jump ship they have their own reasons to do so (either AMD's shit isn't supplied by the right amount for them to break even or nVidia's shit generates more profit. I for one fail to grasp how supporting this bullshit will result in something productive. AIB's dropped GPU makers before and this won't be the last time but as long as they didn't fully drop them that means that AMD is ok with taking the back-seat otherwise they would've been sweetening the pot.
At the end of the day everybody wants to make a profit and if that means upsetting a couple of tech-savy people be it. It's a business not a charity but you can flame on other more serious issues this is just plain drool-dripping PR bullshit.

 

[Vya Domus]

While performance on a graphics card doesn't change much (save for corrections on inept driver implementations, or bad game code), the pricing does.

And it will eventually go back to original MSRPs level prices as it once was. But nice way to avoid answering what I asked you. You think we can't spot this obvious fanboy BS you're trying to pull on us ?

 

[I No]

And it will eventually go back to original MSRPs level prices as it once was. But nice way to avoid answering what I asked you. You think we can't spot this obvious fanboy BS you're trying to pull on us ?

By the time that happens the new gen will be out on the market.... Although I do agree with you in certain aspects the pricing is relevant as well. For example right now in my country a Vega 64 is more expensive than an entry level 1080 Ti. Who in their right mind would pay more for less? The pricing will be relevant since the MSRP stands for SUGGESTED pricing throwing the whole topic into an "IF" vs. "IS".

 

[Vya Domus]

By the time that happens the new gen will be out on the market.... Although I do agree with you in certain aspects the pricing is relevant as well. For example right now in my country a Vega 64 is more expensive than an entry level 1080 Ti. Who in their right mind would pay more for less? The pricing will be relevant since the MSRP stands for SUGGESTED pricing throwing the whole topic into an "IF" vs. "IS".

But drawing definitive conclusions such : "Product X is massively overpriced compered to product Y" while the official MSRPs tells a totally different story and when the market is in such a fucked up state where you can find triple digit price variations for the same card is quite meaningless.

 

[I No]

But drawing definitive conclusions such : "Product X is massively overpriced compered to product Y" while the official MSRPs tells a totally different story and when the market is in such a fucked up state where you can find triple digit price variations for the same card is quite meaningless.

The official MSRP means squat nowadays, come to think about it, it always was half-assed. The only time that's been any relevant is when the product was bought directly from nVidia/AMD since those are the only ones that actually give a damn about it. Rest of the market is adding cost to the product so they can make a profit. AIB's do it before shipping it to retailers, retailers do it before selling it to us. But yeah i get your drift pricing isn't always a definitive factor.

 

[bug]

But drawing definitive conclusions such : "Product X is massively overpriced compered to product Y" while the official MSRPs tells a totally different story and when the market is in such a fucked up state where you can find triple digit price variations for the same card is quite meaningless.

Debating prices is a waste of time anyway. If it doesn't rot in a warehouse somewhere, then it's not overpriced. That's all there is to it.

 

[kruk]

Let's agree to disagree. You want to sum up all games into a single bar graph with no reference to what games are weighed in, what the detail settings were, etc... I'd rather rely on individual game benchmarks from other sites. Also, you like to mix things. I added power and price to emphasize my view on AMD's GPUs. I remain adamant that GTX 1060 3GB is superior to RX 570 in DX11.

All individual graphs can be found here on TPU. I trust W1zzard is doing a good job and don't doubt the graphs are correctly compiled, but you can ignore them if you think they are some kind of a Grand Conspiracy Against nVidia. It's your choice ...

Like most fanbois, you think black on white, but to most people things like performance, price and power consumption matter.

It's funny that Maxwell had the same power efficiency as Polaris 1 gen ago and people were buying it as hot cakes. Nobody complained about power consumption back then and everybody was praising Maxwell to be "the best!". Now, suddenly Maxwell efficiency levels are horrible and people should just ignore Polaris ...

 

[ssdpro]

I run a 1700X because of the stability and value but run nvidia for graphics. AMD cards usually seem like an exercise in cobbling something together while nvidia products are polished, usually more expensive, and stable. An MSI employee shouldn't be taking these matters into his/her own hands but come on, it's true. Funny how fast the AMD troll bots found the post and fired torpedoes.

 

[lexluthermiester]

Are you trolling? 'Cos it sounds like you're trolling.

Actually, it kinda looks like you are trolling him...

Everyone has their opinions and MSI has made theirs very clear. Agree with them or not, there is little point in bashing them as there are plenty of other card makers to choose from.

 

[I No]

I run a 1700X because of the stability and value but run nvidia for graphics. AMD cards usually seem like an exercise in cobbling something together while nvidia products are polished, usually more expensive, and stable? An employee shouldn't be taking these matters into his/her own hands but come on, it's true.

Brace yourself I can see the pitchforks and torches near the horizon =)))

 

[cucker tarlson]

Realistically the guy is right. AMD has little to nothing on offer right now, and also nothing tangible to offer in the pipeline except for that unicorn they call Navi, which is some unspecified MCM solution.

Meanwhile we see APUs flying around and again a focus on low-end and midrange.

While this is an absolutely fine thing to say for us, it's very incompetent coming from a msi sales rep. However, this is their probem really and no one should be offended. Unprofessional - yes, our problem as a community or consumers - no.

 

[lexluthermiester]

AMD cards usually seem like an exercise in cobbling something together while nvidia products are polished, usually more expensive, and stable.

Can't agree. Radeon cards are good performers and the drivers are easy to use, work well and are very polished. While I own Nvidia cards, I would have no problems buying Radeon.

 

[GhostRyder]

All individual graphs can be found here on TPU. I trust W1zzard is doing a good job and don't doubt the graphs are correctly compiled, but you can ignore them if you think they are some kind of a Grand Conspiracy Against nVidia. It's your choice ...



It's funny that Maxwell had the same power efficiency as Polaris 1 gen ago and people were buying it as hot cakes. Nobody complained about power consumption back then and everybody was praising Maxwell to be "the best!". Now, suddenly Maxwell efficiency levels are horrible and people should just ignore Polaris ...

I think what he meant was when you compare the two one is enough more efficient that its noticeable in charts. Though I doubt the pocket change difference a month the electricity bill would go up is going to break anyone's bank. If someone was at that point I would say building a gaming PC should be a very low priority.

Different note, MSI should not have said that. Its not a matter which side they said it towards it damages consumer trust and partner trust (Or can I should say). Even though its clear Nvidia has the high end this generation, insulting the competition regardless who set it from MSI is not the best way to do this. Especially when this whole GPP program debacle is going on.

 

[cucker tarlson]

AMD cards usually seem like an exercise in cobbling something together while nvidia products are polished, usually more expensive, and stable.

Disagree. RX580 is a fine competitior for 1060 6GB, and RX570 has the upper hand over over 1060 3GB. Vega 56 strolls past 1070. When I come to think of it the only one that's "cobbled together" is their top tier V64 LC, seems like they went retard with clocks and power limit on this one just to surpass the 1080 by a couple of percent to prove something.. Their drivers are fine, I think they still don't have adaptive vsync (correct me if I'm wrong) which makes radeon a no go for me, but they've actually worked on their drivers much more than nvidia it seems to me.