Don't be a blind fanboy. I think it's a really lousy move on AMD's part but just FYI: Nvidia was notorious for this sort of thing. They're not quite as bad these days but they still do it. In fact, look at the 1060 lineup. See anything interesting?
The GTX 1060 isn't the same, since the difference between GTX 1060 models was made clear from the beginning whereas the RX 560's specs were silently altered post release. Also, there's a clean separation between the 3GB and 6GB versions of the GTX 1060.
There are other examples of older or cheaper graphics cards with multiple configurations that are more comparable, especially in the low-end mobile graphics market, but it's a bit surprising that AMD would do this to the RX 560 (which is, while not a high-end GPU, certainly capable of serious gaming and competes with the GTX 1050).
I do not defend AMD's action. It's a garbage move by some marketing pricks. But where is it made clear in the name that the 1060 3GB has less shaders than the 6GB model? How common is THAT? You'd have to either have prior knowledge or look at the specs to know there was more than a RAM difference. There are better past examples, as I said Nvidia is better than they used to be. I chose the 1060 to illustrate a model name/spec issue with a current Nvidia model.
The 1060 naming was poor, there's no doubt about that, but this move from AMD is far worse. The 1060 3GB was released soon after the 1060 6GB and VRAM amount tends be clearly listed in the product description and prominently displayed on the product page and physical box. Even users with limited understanding would know they were purchasing a product with inferior specs. Nvidia's product pages list the 1060 6GB and 1060 3GB as separate products. Most reviews and benchmarks clearly label the 1060 6GB and 1060 3GB separately so consumers can make an informed decision. Let me say again that the 1060 naming and specs were disingenuous, but AMD's current move is on another level entirely.
The RX 560 was released a long time ago. Many people considering the RX560 will be looking at benchmarks which are readily available but don't mention or list cut-down cards (because they didn't use to exist!). The fact that you can type RX 560 into a Newegg search and buy something that is a different product (the RX 460) and objectively inferior to the RX 560s that AMD sent out to reviews months and months ago is disgraceful.
Alexrvb's point is that there's nothing in the VRAM-related labelling which makes it clear that the 3GB model is a slower product. Without this distinction, someone would justly assume that a game which only uses say 2GB VRAM would run at the same speed on both cards, which isn't the case at all. I don't buy that NVIDIA didn't know this would be an issue before launch; either that or the engineers and marketing people never, ever talk to each other.
This has happened so many times before, the debacle with the GTX 460 v2, the meddling in the 500 series, silly name amid the Titans, etc. People had a completel meltdown over the 970, even though no ordinary gaming test showed any relevant difference (that mess was much more about perception).
This will damage AMD, but they can limit it by offering free replacements of the lesser model for anyone affected.
Didn't they start with the MX, and then introduce replacements: MX 100 (lesser), MX 200 (slightly less) and MX 400 (greater)? If so, at least these were labelled, if somewhat confusingly.
There was nothing wrong with the Geforce 2 MX branding. Maybe you were thinking of the Geforce 4 MX, which was using hardware similar to the Geforce 2 rather than the Geforce 4 (or even 3).
There really is no point, the cut down shaders can't be overcome. An nvidia might be able to overcome the deficit since it can clock very high with minimal power increase - AMD parts don't have that ability.
There's no justification for it. The RX 560 was pretty universally faster than the RX 460 it replaced on account of the improved CU count. Moving back down to 14 CUs is just going to hurt performance.
Some people claim this is "pulling an Nvidia," but this is probably the dumbest thing any of the tech companies has done in recent years, even if the impact is small.
It seems even worse: the Sapphire Pulse Radeon RX 560 4GD5 contains both versions and the one with fewer CUs actually clocks lower (1226 MHz max vs. 1300 MHz) and has a lower power limit (75 W vs. 90 W). It's also got a lower memory clock (1500 MHz vs. 1750 MHz).
This should really be a RX555 or RX550. Such desperate profit maximization seems not sustainable due to the reputation damage this might cause. Is that what we get now without Raja?
They already have a 550. It should have been a 555 or (like some regions already have) a 560D. This is just the marketing department trying to figure out how to move chips with a defective CU or two. Honestly it was stupid of them to only sell a fully enabled chip for so long in most regions. Should have had a cheaper 14 CU (and lower power - no additional connector) model from the start.
This was probably done under Raja- article states weaker SKUs appeared at the beginning of October, and it takes time to make a decision, produce cards and distribute. Not to say that current AMD's response ('AIB partners would be responsible for communicating') is what consumers are looking for. Proper move would be to apologize and refund, before a lawsuit pops up.
I mean, NVidia had the 860M that was available in both Maxwell and Kepler versions, with dramatically different performance & power envelopes. Because reasons.
The Kepler version of the 860M wasn't silently introduced post-release with no announcement, though. And there were significant changes made to compensate for the older Kepler architecture, though the Maxwell version was still better, whereas the new RX 560 is a throwback to the old RX 460. More importantly, the RX 560 is a mid-range desktop graphics card sold at retail with aftermarket coolers etc. while the 860M was an OEM mobile chip.
As for the differences between the Maxwell and Kepler versions:
https://www.notebookcheck.net/NVIDIA-GeForce-GTX-8... "Despite its considerably higher shader count, the Kepler version is about 10 percent slower, mainly due to the worse bandwidth efficiency... The low-clocked Kepler version draws just slightly more power."
https://www.notebookcheck.net/Review-Nvidia-GeForc... "It is easy to understand why Nvidia produces two versions of the GeForce GTX 860M. Smaller notebooks use the soldered GPUs with the Maxwell chip GM107, whereas bulkier gaming cases with MXM slots use the significantly bigger Kepler sibling (GK104 chip), which is also manufactured in a 28 nm process."
Nice to see you guys reading heise.de! They love you, too ;-)
I don't usually propose violence, but somebody should be force marched out of a door very publically so AMD stands a chance to survive this kneecapping of their reputation.
It sounds like a reverse binning exercise; release the good chips first and the lesser binned ones later. It should've been launched as the RX 555. It does sound like a repeat of the GT 730.
I'm hoping the purpose (or at least a side-benefit) is to enable low-profile RX 560's. The RX 460 was available in that form factor, and AMD definitely needs something better than the RX 550.
Desperate AMD now plays its lame nefarious marketing game to fool consumers into buying old RX460 as RX560 which will lead to AMD being sued for false advertising. All this proves Debt dumb and R&D poor AMD's Cred is as dead as a Dino, Dodo and Disco.
"AMD has silently lowered the specifications of the Radeon RX 560 to encompass parts with 14 CUs (896 Stream Processors), allowing them to be sold alongside standard 16 CU (1024 SP) parts"=fraud.
Damn it AMD. What is wrong with you? It is in the interest of AMD to protect their reputation by ensuring that the AIBs provide accurate information on their boxes. This situation makes AMD seem unreliable and untrustworthy, even if it is in AIB's hands. It's not as if people will stop buying nVidia cards by Asus because the Asus RX 560 was wrongly/insufficiently labeled. They are going to stop buying AMD cards in general though.
Not the brightest move by AMD if they want to gain the trust of gamers. They should be happy that gamers are considering their lower end cards at all, but it will definitely backfire when their customers find out they didn't get what they thought they were getting. That is something to make someone not want to buy AMD ever again.
Then again, gamers have been treating AMD like garbage for years. The market has had a bias for a long time. Think of it this way. We all know how the Xbox is doing in Japan. It has gone so far that MS practically gave up on it. They tried releasing JRPGs on their consoles for example to sell them in the past, and it didn't work. Nothing they did, helped them gain market share over there, and there really is no good reason for it other than the mindshare of the population.
It's the same in the GPU space. The gaming market is like Japan for AMD. They have really tried for a long time (much longer than MS in Japan), but they are not valued. And well, if they can make a quick buck in the meantime, which they desperately need, by being able to ship and potentially sell chips that couldn't be sold at that price otherwise, they are going to do it. It's not as if their targeted consumer base had their backs anyway.
Is it wrong? Yes. But it's not as if their reputation can get much worse either. Their reputation of being a hotter, slower, more power hungry budget alternative with crappy drivers, bad coolers, inferior technology and second tier features & support, which ultimately is not budgetary anyway because you need a bigger power supply and better cooling and bigger case and more case fans while missing out on the awesome competitor logos and brand name and GameWorks and premium features like G-sync, precedes them.
At the same time, nobody goes to the length of not buying nVidia ever again when they do similar nonsense (except for me apparently). GTX 970 3.5GB, GTX 1060 3GB, Fermi clock speeds, 860M, Geforce 2 MX, the list goes on and on. Sure, they are called out on it, but what then? Calling out is useless by itself, if what they get in their pockets is not consistent with the situation. And that's where the responsibility of the consumer comes in. But we're not mature enough for that (yet). Because one felt it in their pockets whether they did good or bad, and the other was getting their pockets filled whether they did good or bad. So... Yeah.
And suddenly over there, there's a much better market, which are the miners. In the light of the recent 'mining driver', AMD seems to be adopting a 'screw gamers, welcome miners' attitude, and I don't blame them. At least miners buy their products when they are a good deal, rather than constantly whining about AMD and bashing them.
Is this anti-consumer? Yes. Is it worse than nVidia's past examples? No. Is it better? No.
I'm not defending this action, but honestly, I don't care anymore. Gamers are generally too busy having nerdgasms at every other nVidia product to know what's really important for the future. They only care about bragging rights and the here and now.
Keep getting screwed over. Maybe someday we'll be mature enough to know what matters.
"This situation makes AMD seem unreliable and untrustworthy, even if it is in AIB's hands."
Unfortunately, this was 100% in AMD's hands. If they had release it as a 555 or 560LE or somesuch and an AIB called it a 560 then that was out of AMD's hands. Intentionally choosing to call it a 560 as well and keeping it on the DL is just as much garbage as the stunts nvidia pulls and it falls on AMD, not that AIB partners.
I keep saying "I'd buy an AMD CPU if they do this", or "I'd buy a GPU for a Linux box when they do that." And then I don't.
And I'm lying to myself, because it's not that I think that AMD can beat Intel and Nvidia, I just want them to be good enough to keep Intel and Nvidia in check pricewise and moving forward, letting someone else buy them so that I can get an affordable six or eight core Intel i7 with the GTX 2080 or whatever high end card they put out next.
So I rah-rah them on the Internet while a little voice in the back of my head reminds me that they'll never really be good enough to seriously consider using in a high end build. Not because I personally care about bragging rights, but because the better of a system you build today, with the least chance of having major driver issues and the like, the longer you can go before building your next one.
(Though, having purchased and returned a Mixed Reality headset, the urge to put together a God Box for VR has ebbed significantly so I guess it doesn't matter that much in my case anyway.)
Sounds like a simple case of AMD releasing lower grade product to satisfy AIB partners due to stock shortages. These companies were promised stock and already had packaging supplied with wording and graphics for said higher spec GPU’s.
The problem for AMD is that they didnt cover themselves by stipulating these companies would be doing this by press realease.
Now they have undermined all the trust they had recently in the consumer market, which doesn’t bode well for their other product promotions now.
With this in mind it doesn't suprise me they released that statement under pressure. I bet there are some short-term discounts being offered yo AIB’s now to cover their costs.
I have been praising Lisa Su's integrity, but her integrity is now in question!
Call it RX 560 TOT (Trick-Or-Treat), RX 560 GFD (GPU For Dummies), RX 560 LSI (Lisa Su's Integrity), ... : )
AMD paycheck collectors' names are still the same whether 2 balls or 1 ball, aren't they? Yes, indeed.
Blame on AIB OEMs to damage the relationships, what a coward and wow!
Repeat to each of AMD paycheck collectors until they are eliminated or properly retrained: Your name is still the same whether 2 balls or 1 ball, isn't it? Yes, indeed.
"We apologize for the confusion this may have caused."
Stop copying politician's sentence and go by the fact: We apologize for the confusion this has been causing.
Actually, no need to apologize but an explanation as below:
Can you tell a car is an in-line-4 or V6? Not until you drive it, or some dummies can't even tell when they drive it. It's buyers' responsibility to know buying an in-line-4 or V6, isn't it?
Buyers: But car manufacturers let us know about the two choices upfront.
AMD: But you aren't buying cars, are you?
Paycheck collectors are just having fun with buyers, aren't they? : )
Next, AMD could be even more creative and gave people more options and offerred 4 ways to spell its CEO's name: Lisa Su, Liza Su, Lisa Zu, or Liza Zu, the same person anyway : )
I am not sure what is the reason for this dodgy move, but AMD should consider renaming this lower specced product. The name is misleading plus the fact that they silently changed the spec on both the hardware and their website.
We’ve updated our terms. By continuing to use the site and/or by logging into your account, you agree to the Site’s updated Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
38 Comments
Back to Article
Wreckage - Tuesday, December 5, 2017 - link
Typical shady move by AMD.Alexvrb - Tuesday, December 5, 2017 - link
Don't be a blind fanboy. I think it's a really lousy move on AMD's part but just FYI: Nvidia was notorious for this sort of thing. They're not quite as bad these days but they still do it. In fact, look at the 1060 lineup. See anything interesting?naretla - Tuesday, December 5, 2017 - link
The GTX 1060 isn't the same, since the difference between GTX 1060 models was made clear from the beginning whereas the RX 560's specs were silently altered post release. Also, there's a clean separation between the 3GB and 6GB versions of the GTX 1060.There are other examples of older or cheaper graphics cards with multiple configurations that are more comparable, especially in the low-end mobile graphics market, but it's a bit surprising that AMD would do this to the RX 560 (which is, while not a high-end GPU, certainly capable of serious gaming and competes with the GTX 1050).
Alexvrb - Tuesday, December 5, 2017 - link
I do not defend AMD's action. It's a garbage move by some marketing pricks. But where is it made clear in the name that the 1060 3GB has less shaders than the 6GB model? How common is THAT? You'd have to either have prior knowledge or look at the specs to know there was more than a RAM difference. There are better past examples, as I said Nvidia is better than they used to be. I chose the 1060 to illustrate a model name/spec issue with a current Nvidia model.rhysiam - Wednesday, December 6, 2017 - link
The 1060 naming was poor, there's no doubt about that, but this move from AMD is far worse. The 1060 3GB was released soon after the 1060 6GB and VRAM amount tends be clearly listed in the product description and prominently displayed on the product page and physical box. Even users with limited understanding would know they were purchasing a product with inferior specs. Nvidia's product pages list the 1060 6GB and 1060 3GB as separate products. Most reviews and benchmarks clearly label the 1060 6GB and 1060 3GB separately so consumers can make an informed decision. Let me say again that the 1060 naming and specs were disingenuous, but AMD's current move is on another level entirely.The RX 560 was released a long time ago. Many people considering the RX560 will be looking at benchmarks which are readily available but don't mention or list cut-down cards (because they didn't use to exist!). The fact that you can type RX 560 into a Newegg search and buy something that is a different product (the RX 460) and objectively inferior to the RX 560s that AMD sent out to reviews months and months ago is disgraceful.
mapesdhs - Thursday, December 7, 2017 - link
Alexrvb's point is that there's nothing in the VRAM-related labelling which makes it clear that the 3GB model is a slower product. Without this distinction, someone would justly assume that a game which only uses say 2GB VRAM would run at the same speed on both cards, which isn't the case at all. I don't buy that NVIDIA didn't know this would be an issue before launch; either that or the engineers and marketing people never, ever talk to each other.This has happened so many times before, the debacle with the GTX 460 v2, the meddling in the 500 series, silly name amid the Titans, etc. People had a completel meltdown over the 970, even though no ordinary gaming test showed any relevant difference (that mess was much more about perception).
This will damage AMD, but they can limit it by offering free replacements of the lesser model for anyone affected.
nathanddrews - Thursday, December 7, 2017 - link
The real kick in the groin is that this card was already overpriced by $20. To keep it at $99 is like a second kick to the groin.Lord of the Bored - Wednesday, December 6, 2017 - link
This still isn't as bad as the GeForce 2 MX was.silverblue - Thursday, December 7, 2017 - link
Didn't they start with the MX, and then introduce replacements: MX 100 (lesser), MX 200 (slightly less) and MX 400 (greater)? If so, at least these were labelled, if somewhat confusingly.Dizoja86 - Saturday, December 9, 2017 - link
There was nothing wrong with the Geforce 2 MX branding. Maybe you were thinking of the Geforce 4 MX, which was using hardware similar to the Geforce 2 rather than the Geforce 4 (or even 3).MonkeyPaw - Tuesday, December 5, 2017 - link
Will AT do a comparison of the two models? I’m curious if the 14 CU will maybe boost higher or more often and make up some of the difference.Cellar Door - Tuesday, December 5, 2017 - link
There really is no point, the cut down shaders can't be overcome. An nvidia might be able to overcome the deficit since it can clock very high with minimal power increase - AMD parts don't have that ability.Drumsticks - Tuesday, December 5, 2017 - link
There's no justification for it. The RX 560 was pretty universally faster than the RX 460 it replaced on account of the improved CU count. Moving back down to 14 CUs is just going to hurt performance.Some people claim this is "pulling an Nvidia," but this is probably the dumbest thing any of the tech companies has done in recent years, even if the impact is small.
StevoLincolnite - Tuesday, December 5, 2017 - link
Don't forget the texture mapping units and Ram also got culled.It should have been named the Radeon RX 555.
MrSpadge - Tuesday, December 5, 2017 - link
It seems even worse: the Sapphire Pulse Radeon RX 560 4GD5 contains both versions and the one with fewer CUs actually clocks lower (1226 MHz max vs. 1300 MHz) and has a lower power limit (75 W vs. 90 W). It's also got a lower memory clock (1500 MHz vs. 1750 MHz).This should really be a RX555 or RX550. Such desperate profit maximization seems not sustainable due to the reputation damage this might cause. Is that what we get now without Raja?
Alexvrb - Tuesday, December 5, 2017 - link
They already have a 550. It should have been a 555 or (like some regions already have) a 560D. This is just the marketing department trying to figure out how to move chips with a defective CU or two. Honestly it was stupid of them to only sell a fully enabled chip for so long in most regions. Should have had a cheaper 14 CU (and lower power - no additional connector) model from the start.neblogai - Wednesday, December 6, 2017 - link
This was probably done under Raja- article states weaker SKUs appeared at the beginning of October, and it takes time to make a decision, produce cards and distribute. Not to say that current AMD's response ('AIB partners would be responsible for communicating') is what consumers are looking for. Proper move would be to apologize and refund, before a lawsuit pops up.69369369 - Tuesday, December 5, 2017 - link
AMD FineGimp™geekman1024 - Tuesday, December 5, 2017 - link
Ok, thanks for the info. 560 is officially out of my shopping list.benzosaurus - Tuesday, December 5, 2017 - link
I mean, NVidia had the 860M that was available in both Maxwell and Kepler versions, with dramatically different performance & power envelopes. Because reasons.naretla - Tuesday, December 5, 2017 - link
The Kepler version of the 860M wasn't silently introduced post-release with no announcement, though. And there were significant changes made to compensate for the older Kepler architecture, though the Maxwell version was still better, whereas the new RX 560 is a throwback to the old RX 460. More importantly, the RX 560 is a mid-range desktop graphics card sold at retail with aftermarket coolers etc. while the 860M was an OEM mobile chip.As for the differences between the Maxwell and Kepler versions:
https://www.notebookcheck.net/NVIDIA-GeForce-GTX-8...
"Despite its considerably higher shader count, the Kepler version is about 10 percent slower, mainly due to the worse bandwidth efficiency... The low-clocked Kepler version draws just slightly more power."
https://www.notebookcheck.net/Review-Nvidia-GeForc...
"It is easy to understand why Nvidia produces two versions of the GeForce GTX 860M. Smaller notebooks use the soldered GPUs with the Maxwell chip GM107, whereas bulkier gaming cases with MXM slots use the significantly bigger Kepler sibling (GK104 chip), which is also manufactured in a 28 nm process."
abufrejoval - Tuesday, December 5, 2017 - link
Nice to see you guys reading heise.de! They love you, too ;-)I don't usually propose violence, but somebody should be force marched out of a door very publically so AMD stands a chance to survive this kneecapping of their reputation.
Until then, just say NO!
silverblue - Wednesday, December 6, 2017 - link
It sounds like a reverse binning exercise; release the good chips first and the lesser binned ones later. It should've been launched as the RX 555. It does sound like a repeat of the GT 730.mode_13h - Wednesday, December 6, 2017 - link
I'm hoping the purpose (or at least a side-benefit) is to enable low-profile RX 560's. The RX 460 was available in that form factor, and AMD definitely needs something better than the RX 550.Ro_Ja - Wednesday, December 6, 2017 - link
Didn't NVIDIA do this too way back Fermi years? Clock speed was very different for those GTX 460 and GTX 560sCPUGPUGURU - Wednesday, December 6, 2017 - link
Desperate AMD now plays its lame nefarious marketing game to fool consumers into buying old RX460 as RX560 which will lead to AMD being sued for false advertising. All this proves Debt dumb and R&D poor AMD's Cred is as dead as a Dino, Dodo and Disco.peevee - Wednesday, December 6, 2017 - link
"AMD has silently lowered the specifications of the Radeon RX 560 to encompass parts with 14 CUs (896 Stream Processors), allowing them to be sold alongside standard 16 CU (1024 SP) parts"=fraud.peevee - Wednesday, December 6, 2017 - link
Can we please start putting marketoids in prisons where they naturally belong?NightAntilli - Wednesday, December 6, 2017 - link
Damn it AMD. What is wrong with you?It is in the interest of AMD to protect their reputation by ensuring that the AIBs provide accurate information on their boxes. This situation makes AMD seem unreliable and untrustworthy, even if it is in AIB's hands. It's not as if people will stop buying nVidia cards by Asus because the Asus RX 560 was wrongly/insufficiently labeled. They are going to stop buying AMD cards in general though.
Not the brightest move by AMD if they want to gain the trust of gamers. They should be happy that gamers are considering their lower end cards at all, but it will definitely backfire when their customers find out they didn't get what they thought they were getting. That is something to make someone not want to buy AMD ever again.
Then again, gamers have been treating AMD like garbage for years. The market has had a bias for a long time. Think of it this way. We all know how the Xbox is doing in Japan. It has gone so far that MS practically gave up on it. They tried releasing JRPGs on their consoles for example to sell them in the past, and it didn't work. Nothing they did, helped them gain market share over there, and there really is no good reason for it other than the mindshare of the population.
It's the same in the GPU space. The gaming market is like Japan for AMD. They have really tried for a long time (much longer than MS in Japan), but they are not valued. And well, if they can make a quick buck in the meantime, which they desperately need, by being able to ship and potentially sell chips that couldn't be sold at that price otherwise, they are going to do it. It's not as if their targeted consumer base had their backs anyway.
Is it wrong? Yes. But it's not as if their reputation can get much worse either. Their reputation of being a hotter, slower, more power hungry budget alternative with crappy drivers, bad coolers, inferior technology and second tier features & support, which ultimately is not budgetary anyway because you need a bigger power supply and better cooling and bigger case and more case fans while missing out on the awesome competitor logos and brand name and GameWorks and premium features like G-sync, precedes them.
At the same time, nobody goes to the length of not buying nVidia ever again when they do similar nonsense (except for me apparently). GTX 970 3.5GB, GTX 1060 3GB, Fermi clock speeds, 860M, Geforce 2 MX, the list goes on and on. Sure, they are called out on it, but what then? Calling out is useless by itself, if what they get in their pockets is not consistent with the situation. And that's where the responsibility of the consumer comes in. But we're not mature enough for that (yet). Because one felt it in their pockets whether they did good or bad, and the other was getting their pockets filled whether they did good or bad. So... Yeah.
And suddenly over there, there's a much better market, which are the miners. In the light of the recent 'mining driver', AMD seems to be adopting a 'screw gamers, welcome miners' attitude, and I don't blame them. At least miners buy their products when they are a good deal, rather than constantly whining about AMD and bashing them.
Is this anti-consumer? Yes.
Is it worse than nVidia's past examples? No.
Is it better? No.
I'm not defending this action, but honestly, I don't care anymore. Gamers are generally too busy having nerdgasms at every other nVidia product to know what's really important for the future. They only care about bragging rights and the here and now.
Keep getting screwed over. Maybe someday we'll be mature enough to know what matters.
masouth - Thursday, December 7, 2017 - link
"This situation makes AMD seem unreliable and untrustworthy, even if it is in AIB's hands."Unfortunately, this was 100% in AMD's hands. If they had release it as a 555 or 560LE or somesuch and an AIB called it a 560 then that was out of AMD's hands. Intentionally choosing to call it a 560 as well and keeping it on the DL is just as much garbage as the stunts nvidia pulls and it falls on AMD, not that AIB partners.
Old_Fogie_Late_Bloomer - Thursday, December 7, 2017 - link
Ouch.I keep saying "I'd buy an AMD CPU if they do this", or "I'd buy a GPU for a Linux box when they do that." And then I don't.
And I'm lying to myself, because it's not that I think that AMD can beat Intel and Nvidia, I just want them to be good enough to keep Intel and Nvidia in check pricewise and moving forward, letting someone else buy them so that I can get an affordable six or eight core Intel i7 with the GTX 2080 or whatever high end card they put out next.
So I rah-rah them on the Internet while a little voice in the back of my head reminds me that they'll never really be good enough to seriously consider using in a high end build. Not because I personally care about bragging rights, but because the better of a system you build today, with the least chance of having major driver issues and the like, the longer you can go before building your next one.
(Though, having purchased and returned a Mixed Reality headset, the urge to put together a God Box for VR has ebbed significantly so I guess it doesn't matter that much in my case anyway.)
Agent Smith - Wednesday, December 6, 2017 - link
Sounds like a simple case of AMD releasing lower grade product to satisfy AIB partners due to stock shortages. These companies were promised stock and already had packaging supplied with wording and graphics for said higher spec GPU’s.The problem for AMD is that they didnt cover themselves by stipulating these companies would be doing this by press realease.
Now they have undermined all the trust they had recently in the consumer market, which doesn’t bode well for their other product promotions now.
With this in mind it doesn't suprise me they released that statement under pressure. I bet there are some short-term discounts being offered yo AIB’s now to cover their costs.
Agent Smith - Wednesday, December 6, 2017 - link
IMOThis problem will disappear soon provided AMD takes control with press releases and behind the scenes compensations quickly.
wow&wow - Wednesday, December 6, 2017 - link
I have been praising Lisa Su's integrity, but her integrity is now in question!Call it RX 560 TOT (Trick-Or-Treat), RX 560 GFD (GPU For Dummies), RX 560 LSI (Lisa Su's Integrity), ... : )
AMD paycheck collectors' names are still the same whether 2 balls or 1 ball, aren't they? Yes, indeed.
Blame on AIB OEMs to damage the relationships, what a coward and wow!
Repeat to each of AMD paycheck collectors until they are eliminated or properly retrained:
Your name is still the same whether 2 balls or 1 ball, isn't it? Yes, indeed.
"We apologize for the confusion this may have caused."
Stop copying politician's sentence and go by the fact: We apologize for the confusion this has been causing.
Actually, no need to apologize but an explanation as below:
Can you tell a car is an in-line-4 or V6? Not until you drive it, or some dummies can't even tell when they drive it. It's buyers' responsibility to know buying an in-line-4 or V6, isn't it?
Buyers: But car manufacturers let us know about the two choices upfront.
AMD: But you aren't buying cars, are you?
Paycheck collectors are just having fun with buyers, aren't they? : )
wow&wow - Wednesday, December 6, 2017 - link
Next, AMD could be even more creative and gave people more options and offerred 4 ways to spell its CEO's name: Lisa Su, Liza Su, Lisa Zu, or Liza Zu, the same person anyway : )GreenReaper - Tuesday, December 12, 2017 - link
Just make it LiSau, one less character but essentially the same thing . . . right? ^_^;SlyNine - Sunday, December 10, 2017 - link
That's pretty fked.watzupken - Monday, December 11, 2017 - link
I am not sure what is the reason for this dodgy move, but AMD should consider renaming this lower specced product. The name is misleading plus the fact that they silently changed the spec on both the hardware and their website.