- Joined
- Sep 25, 2012
- Messages
- 2,074 (0.46/day)
- Location
- Jacksonhole Florida
System Name | DEVIL'S ABYSS |
---|---|
Processor | i7-4790K@4.6 GHz |
Motherboard | Asus Z97-Deluxe |
Cooling | Corsair H110 (2 x 140mm)(3 x 140mm case fans) |
Memory | 16GB Adata XPG V2 2400MHz |
Video Card(s) | EVGA 780 Ti Classified |
Storage | Intel 750 Series 400GB (AIC), Plextor M6e 256GB (M.2), 13 TB storage |
Display(s) | Crossover 27QW (27"@ 2560x1440) |
Case | Corsair Obsidian 750D Airflow |
Audio Device(s) | Realtek ALC1150 |
Power Supply | Cooler Master V1000 |
Mouse | Ttsports Talon Blu |
Keyboard | Logitech G510 |
Software | Windows 10 Pro x64 version 1803 |
Benchmark Scores | Passmark CPU score = 13080 |
We can't really expect a small company like AMD to do the right thing - that might have cost them serious money, and what would the stockholders say? This is why companies use questionable tactics, and all of them do at times, because they have to answer to those stockholders. Humans all make mistakes, damage control is a make or break proposition at times. That's why I prefer to deal with larger companies, like NVIDIA and Intel, they have more resources to do the right kind of damage control, instead of the shady kind. As for AMD, I can think of a dozen examples of their shady tactics just in the Ryzen and Vega releases this year. I know NVIDIA and Intel have done the same things in the past, but AMD is the champ, in my perception.The reasoning behind doing it doesn't make it better. It doesn't change the fact that they released a card, let it be reviewed, and then limited its performance after. And they didn't just limit the reference cards, they limited all HD4850 cards via the driver.
Instead of just replacing the faulty cards with a fixed version, they decided to just limit performance.