If it turns out that R.O.G. (Republic of Gamers) Rumors are true and that NVidia is actually hijacking the brand name, I'd love to see a new AMD brand to counter them
I wonder if this is for preventing cards to fall victim of the price increment of the market and to force OEM to offer reasonable prices due to video cards shortage.
Anyway, AMD was absent from the mobile discrete GPU market. I honestly would not mind an RX 580 laptop for 1080p with mobile Ryzen.
Either way, I either get a GPU for my 4770k desktop, or I get a new laptop that can play at 1080p @60 FPS.
Buying a card is right now not an option and I fear that it will not be for the next year. We might be forced to wait for Navi and Volta.
The Purch media shill strikes ..again. How is this a "rebadge"? Is the ti suffix a rebadge? is the 1060 (the 3gb one) a rebadge? this site becomes filthier and filthier.
That all said, I am pretty happy that they didn't try to pass off the OEM parts as a "new" 600 series part. Keeping the rebadge in the same generation model numbers is at least a step in the right direction. Though, I have to wonder if the OEM only 500X SKUs were created simply in an attempt to isolate OEM supply from the supply/demand issues plaguing the retail 500 series SKUs.
What, exactly, is your thesis here, and who are you mad at and why?
The X versions of AMD's 500-series chips don't appear to have any significant differences from the non-X parts. That's pretty textbook for a rebadge/rebrand.
Nvidia's ti suffix reflects additional resources versus non-ti, and is not a rebadge.
1060 3GB loses some RAM and on-die resources, and is not a rebadge.
If AT is shilling here, who are they shilling for? This article definitely isn't praising AMD for their actions, even if it offers explanations. It also calls out Nvidia for doing the same thing.
To be objective, I don't feel this is a rebadge. From my opinion, a rebadge is more like releasing an RX 660 but is actually an RX 560 in the first place. RX 460 to 560 could be considered a rebadge since they eventually quietly changed the 1024 SP to 896SP. Perhaps they are just trying to label it the way they did for their CPU where the X series have higher clockspeed.
It is quite literally a rebadge. The product is the same, the name is different.
"Perhaps they are just trying to label it the way they did for their CPU where the X series have higher clockspeed."
Exactly. Yet these GPUs don't have higher clock speeds. Firstly, an X suffix is probably generally perceived by consumers to be better than a base model. Add to that the fact that AMD already uses the X suffix to mean an enhanced product in their CPU line, as you pointed out, and it's obviously a bit of naming trickery. I guess it's not as dastardly as incrementing the generation digit (5xx to 6xx, in this case), though.
Nope, AMD has just pushed the product pages live, so we've updated the table accordingly. In any case, OEMs have a lot of leeway in how to configure these parts, and presumably the market segment listing is more of a guideline than a specification. But unfortunately, with reference power consumption not being listed on AMD's tables, there's not much to go on.
To clarify, the 'market segment' is listed by AMD on their product pages. But in practice, this wouldn't limit OEM re-configuration if they should so choose.
I'm kinda surprised the OEMs were willing to settle for just an X suffix. The logic's always been that they need something with an obviously newer id to show to the sheeple consumers. I'd've expected a full on increment to the 600 series even if specs were either unchanged or only nudged up a few MHz.
It could be because the 500 series is itself already a minor tweak of the 400 series. AMD perhaps wasn't willing to potentially draw negative attention to themselves by giving news and blog sites and forums posters something extraordinary to gripe about.
Best rebadge ever. I'm serious. When you buy a 560X, you understand that it's close to a 560. When you buy an MX130 you have no idea it's a 940MX. It would be great if GPU makers could just add letters at the end when releasing minor variations instead of confusing everyone with new numbers.
When you buy a 560X you are led to think it's an enhancement of the 560, which it is not. When you buy an MX130 it has little implied relationship to the 940MX or any other GPU other than the MX110 and MX150. MX130 isn't claiming to be something it's not. It doesn't sound particularly new or shiny. There is a rebadge for freshness, but there don't seem to be any underhanded claims going on. It would be like Intel moving an old Core processor to the Pentium or Celeron lines.
Personally I don't think a rebadge is too bad when it moves down the line, e.g., if a 470 goes to 560 in the next generation. But if a 470 goes to a 570 with no change, or a 470 goes to a 470X with no change it's worse.
The MX130 is certainly misleading buyers. People think it's related to the MX150, which is a half decent chip, where in effect it's an old and crippled (where it comes to video processing) chip. Same with AMD on mobile with the 540 and 530, where the 530 is GCN 1.0 and has been renamed countless times.
I think that's much worse because I have to deal with customers who buy these terrible chips and then have problems running software I've worked on. With a 560X, it would be fine. Sure, it might not be different than the 560, but it also has a big advantage that it's not different than a 560. :)
"The MX130 is certainly misleading buyers. People think it's related to the MX150"
It is related. They are both entry level laptop GPUs. The MX130 is not old. I don't see why everything named MX or MX1xx has to have the same video processing abilities. If the MX130 has been crippled in some way then that is an issue in itself and has nothing to do with the naming.
If you want to look at a case where NVIDIA is being tricky with names then look at the two GTX 1030s. In that case a consumer could easily be fooled when seeing two systems with the GT 1030, one being cheaper than the other and thinking the cheaper one is a good deal, not realizing the graphics cards are different even though they are named the same. "GT 1030 with DDR4" and "GT 1030 with GDDR5" is a bit abstruse for the average buyer of those types of machines and there are probably lots of product listings or advertisements where it isn't readily displayed that the GT 1030 in the system has DDR4 DRAM.
@Yojimbo: "Personally I don't think a rebadge is too bad when it moves down the line, e.g., if a 470 goes to 560 in the next generation. But if a 470 goes to a 570 with no change, or a 470 goes to a 470X with no change it's worse."
I fully agree with this sentiment from a performance perspective. However, there are two major issues I consider in a rebadge: Performance and Feature Set. From a performance perspective, I have no issue with a 470 moving to a 560. This even has the benefit of making comparisons between generations simple to understand. A 470 moving to a 570 with no change is downright deceptive as it implies both generational performance gains and generation feature set improvements without delivering either. A 470 moving to a 470X with no change seems like a compromise between OEM demands for something "new" and end user demands to clarify their offerings. Though, it is still deceptive in the sense that there is an implied performance gain that isn't delivered.
When moving to a new major architecture and corresponding feature set, I would like to see a clean break in product numbering as well. For instance, regardless of a Terascale part's performance, the introduction of GCN and its associated capabilities should have warranted its own unique and distinct series of SKUs as there is an implied set of features with the newer series of chips that was not delivered. However, with the lack of major changes between GCN versions (except perhaps the 5th generation), there is no need to have a clean break in series numbers. A rebadge to a newer model number in this situation is acceptable as long as the implied generational performance improvement is maintained and the new model number reflects its performance position in the new stack.
I think this hurts the vendor in the longterm. I don't even consider AMD cards unless they have Vega in their name, the other cards have been rebadged for several generations from 2xx to 5xx, no idea what the comparable mainstream part would be to the 1060/1070/1080s.
At least with Vega56/Vega64 you know they're legit and not rebadged stuff from 5 yrs ago.
It's not too hard to go to a site like Anandtech and look at benchmarks and figure out how the current products stack up against each other. When I want to make a purchase I do the research. I took hours deciding on equipment for grinding and brewing coffee. If someone is already aware of the 200 series through 500 series it would take 30 mins to figure out how the 580 compares with the 1060. If he needs to read about Polaris then just add 30 more minutes.
why oh why could they not do 12nm RX500X and not OEM specifically.....grrrr hard enough to find any RX 500 besides 560 or 550 that are in stock let alone even remotely close to MSRP that they should (~$287 CAD for 8gb RX580 ~ $25 less for RX570..nah they want to price the 4gb models above 8gb pricing and generally charge the same for RX 570 as they do for RX 580....not AMD fault directly, but the partners as well as idiot etrailers..most RX 560 I see are the reduce CU versions priced about $30 more then they should be as well)
either way IMO they really should have done as 12nm refresh of polaris and put more on the shelf for those of us (like me) that have been waiting over a year (basically) to want to buy one and cannot or are faced with paying ~$100+ more than should be (if you are lucky enough to find ANY RX570/580 in stock, even though was claimed pricing stabilized in March..yeh fk right)
AMD has been so half assing their GPU division I seriously expect Intel to take their market share by 2022 when Raj Koduri's Artic Sound products launch.
Ironically, that applies a LOT less to the OEM market where these cards will end up - OEMs are restricted with how much they can mark up machines. A few months ago before the crypto bubble started popping, I bought a complete Ryzen desktop with an RX 580 for about $50 more than the 580 was going for when you could find one in stock.
What I find annoying is that both 550X and 560X have two different configurations under the same name. This is confusing for both customers and those who support them.
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
44 Comments
Back to Article
YukaKun - Wednesday, April 11, 2018 - link
At least they're not GTX675M's, right?Cheers!
ಬುಲ್ವಿಂಕಲ್ ಜೆ ಮೂಸ್ - Wednesday, April 11, 2018 - link
Speaking of GTX.....If it turns out that R.O.G. (Republic of Gamers) Rumors are true and that NVidia is actually hijacking the brand name, I'd love to see a new AMD brand to counter them
Introducing the R.O.G. series (Radeons of Gaming)
Enjoy NVidia!
jimbo2779 - Wednesday, April 11, 2018 - link
I believe Asus are launching AREZ brand for AMD based products.JoeyJoJo123 - Thursday, April 12, 2018 - link
This. And they're not even reusing the ASUS logo as far as I can tell either. So while Nvidia will use ASUS ROG, for AMD it'll simply be AREZ.peevee - Wednesday, April 11, 2018 - link
RX550 X LX DX.More X'es, better product.
Lord of the Bored - Wednesday, April 11, 2018 - link
RX550XXXDanNeely - Wednesday, April 11, 2018 - link
^_^XXX^_^RX{{{550}}}^_^XXX^_^baka_toroi - Wednesday, April 11, 2018 - link
t3h PeNgU1N oF d00m edition?Ryan Smith - Wednesday, April 11, 2018 - link
My RegExes are rusty, but.../(Radeon RX 5)\d0X*/
Yorgos - Wednesday, April 11, 2018 - link
RX550 Ti... oh wait, we are getting paid. This is not a rebadge.
Good news Everynews _NEW_ card from your barelyworks Overlord.
Byte - Wednesday, April 11, 2018 - link
Shoulda released Radeon 550GTHollyDOL - Thursday, April 12, 2018 - link
wasn't xxx domain cathegory for ... adult content? wonder what radeon.xxx site would show, but don't dare to try at work :-)JoeyJoJo123 - Wednesday, April 11, 2018 - link
xXxRX550xXx: This is a pretty sweet MMO we're playing.MrSpadge - Wednesday, April 11, 2018 - link
Yep, I regularly hear customers say "But it's got more X-es!" and then grabbing it with eyes wide opened in excitement.peevee - Wednesday, April 11, 2018 - link
" OEMs want to advertise the latest components when they refresh and update their systems"And it's not even Vega.
eva02langley - Wednesday, April 11, 2018 - link
I wonder if this is for preventing cards to fall victim of the price increment of the market and to force OEM to offer reasonable prices due to video cards shortage.Anyway, AMD was absent from the mobile discrete GPU market. I honestly would not mind an RX 580 laptop for 1080p with mobile Ryzen.
Either way, I either get a GPU for my 4770k desktop, or I get a new laptop that can play at 1080p @60 FPS.
Buying a card is right now not an option and I fear that it will not be for the next year. We might be forced to wait for Navi and Volta.
Yorgos - Wednesday, April 11, 2018 - link
The Purch media shill strikes ..again.How is this a "rebadge"?
Is the ti suffix a rebadge?
is the 1060 (the 3gb one) a rebadge?
this site becomes filthier and filthier.
Ryan Smith - Wednesday, April 11, 2018 - link
Beg your pardon?The specs on the RX 560 are identical to the RX 560X, for example. They aren't new parts in any shape or form.
Whereas the GTX 1060 6GB and 3GB are distinct SKUs; the 3GB has less memory and fewer active SMs, leading to performance differences.
BurntMyBacon - Thursday, April 12, 2018 - link
That all said, I am pretty happy that they didn't try to pass off the OEM parts as a "new" 600 series part. Keeping the rebadge in the same generation model numbers is at least a step in the right direction. Though, I have to wonder if the OEM only 500X SKUs were created simply in an attempt to isolate OEM supply from the supply/demand issues plaguing the retail 500 series SKUs.80-wattHamster - Wednesday, April 11, 2018 - link
What, exactly, is your thesis here, and who are you mad at and why?The X versions of AMD's 500-series chips don't appear to have any significant differences from the non-X parts. That's pretty textbook for a rebadge/rebrand.
Nvidia's ti suffix reflects additional resources versus non-ti, and is not a rebadge.
1060 3GB loses some RAM and on-die resources, and is not a rebadge.
If AT is shilling here, who are they shilling for? This article definitely isn't praising AMD for their actions, even if it offers explanations. It also calls out Nvidia for doing the same thing.
watzupken - Wednesday, April 11, 2018 - link
To be objective, I don't feel this is a rebadge. From my opinion, a rebadge is more like releasing an RX 660 but is actually an RX 560 in the first place. RX 460 to 560 could be considered a rebadge since they eventually quietly changed the 1024 SP to 896SP. Perhaps they are just trying to label it the way they did for their CPU where the X series have higher clockspeed.Yojimbo - Wednesday, April 11, 2018 - link
It is quite literally a rebadge. The product is the same, the name is different."Perhaps they are just trying to label it the way they did for their CPU where the X series have higher clockspeed."
Exactly. Yet these GPUs don't have higher clock speeds. Firstly, an X suffix is probably generally perceived by consumers to be better than a base model. Add to that the fact that AMD already uses the X suffix to mean an enhanced product in their CPU line, as you pointed out, and it's obviously a bit of naming trickery. I guess it's not as dastardly as incrementing the generation digit (5xx to 6xx, in this case), though.
HStewart - Wednesday, April 11, 2018 - link
I am confused, which of these models are Mobile Versions.Ryan Smith - Wednesday, April 11, 2018 - link
Any and all of them, if OEMs would like to use them.HStewart - Wednesday, April 11, 2018 - link
Actually unless I missed it before - the table was updated to include Market segment - for Mobile and DesktopI would think the biggest concern for Mobile will be how much power draw the chips have
Nate Oh - Wednesday, April 11, 2018 - link
Nope, AMD has just pushed the product pages live, so we've updated the table accordingly. In any case, OEMs have a lot of leeway in how to configure these parts, and presumably the market segment listing is more of a guideline than a specification. But unfortunately, with reference power consumption not being listed on AMD's tables, there's not much to go on.Nate Oh - Wednesday, April 11, 2018 - link
To clarify, the 'market segment' is listed by AMD on their product pages. But in practice, this wouldn't limit OEM re-configuration if they should so choose.DanNeely - Wednesday, April 11, 2018 - link
I'm kinda surprised the OEMs were willing to settle for just an X suffix. The logic's always been that they need something with an obviously newer id to show to the sheeple consumers. I'd've expected a full on increment to the 600 series even if specs were either unchanged or only nudged up a few MHz.Yojimbo - Wednesday, April 11, 2018 - link
It could be because the 500 series is itself already a minor tweak of the 400 series. AMD perhaps wasn't willing to potentially draw negative attention to themselves by giving news and blog sites and forums posters something extraordinary to gripe about.ET - Wednesday, April 11, 2018 - link
Best rebadge ever. I'm serious. When you buy a 560X, you understand that it's close to a 560. When you buy an MX130 you have no idea it's a 940MX. It would be great if GPU makers could just add letters at the end when releasing minor variations instead of confusing everyone with new numbers.Yojimbo - Wednesday, April 11, 2018 - link
When you buy a 560X you are led to think it's an enhancement of the 560, which it is not. When you buy an MX130 it has little implied relationship to the 940MX or any other GPU other than the MX110 and MX150. MX130 isn't claiming to be something it's not. It doesn't sound particularly new or shiny. There is a rebadge for freshness, but there don't seem to be any underhanded claims going on. It would be like Intel moving an old Core processor to the Pentium or Celeron lines.Personally I don't think a rebadge is too bad when it moves down the line, e.g., if a 470 goes to 560 in the next generation. But if a 470 goes to a 570 with no change, or a 470 goes to a 470X with no change it's worse.
ET - Thursday, April 12, 2018 - link
The MX130 is certainly misleading buyers. People think it's related to the MX150, which is a half decent chip, where in effect it's an old and crippled (where it comes to video processing) chip. Same with AMD on mobile with the 540 and 530, where the 530 is GCN 1.0 and has been renamed countless times.I think that's much worse because I have to deal with customers who buy these terrible chips and then have problems running software I've worked on. With a 560X, it would be fine. Sure, it might not be different than the 560, but it also has a big advantage that it's not different than a 560. :)
Yojimbo - Thursday, April 12, 2018 - link
"The MX130 is certainly misleading buyers. People think it's related to the MX150"It is related. They are both entry level laptop GPUs. The MX130 is not old. I don't see why everything named MX or MX1xx has to have the same video processing abilities. If the MX130 has been crippled in some way then that is an issue in itself and has nothing to do with the naming.
If you want to look at a case where NVIDIA is being tricky with names then look at the two GTX 1030s. In that case a consumer could easily be fooled when seeing two systems with the GT 1030, one being cheaper than the other and thinking the cheaper one is a good deal, not realizing the graphics cards are different even though they are named the same. "GT 1030 with DDR4" and "GT 1030 with GDDR5" is a bit abstruse for the average buyer of those types of machines and there are probably lots of product listings or advertisements where it isn't readily displayed that the GT 1030 in the system has DDR4 DRAM.
BurntMyBacon - Thursday, April 12, 2018 - link
@Yojimbo: "Personally I don't think a rebadge is too bad when it moves down the line, e.g., if a 470 goes to 560 in the next generation. But if a 470 goes to a 570 with no change, or a 470 goes to a 470X with no change it's worse."I fully agree with this sentiment from a performance perspective. However, there are two major issues I consider in a rebadge: Performance and Feature Set. From a performance perspective, I have no issue with a 470 moving to a 560. This even has the benefit of making comparisons between generations simple to understand. A 470 moving to a 570 with no change is downright deceptive as it implies both generational performance gains and generation feature set improvements without delivering either. A 470 moving to a 470X with no change seems like a compromise between OEM demands for something "new" and end user demands to clarify their offerings. Though, it is still deceptive in the sense that there is an implied performance gain that isn't delivered.
When moving to a new major architecture and corresponding feature set, I would like to see a clean break in product numbering as well. For instance, regardless of a Terascale part's performance, the introduction of GCN and its associated capabilities should have warranted its own unique and distinct series of SKUs as there is an implied set of features with the newer series of chips that was not delivered. However, with the lack of major changes between GCN versions (except perhaps the 5th generation), there is no need to have a clean break in series numbers. A rebadge to a newer model number in this situation is acceptable as long as the implied generational performance improvement is maintained and the new model number reflects its performance position in the new stack.
webdoctors - Wednesday, April 11, 2018 - link
I think this hurts the vendor in the longterm. I don't even consider AMD cards unless they have Vega in their name, the other cards have been rebadged for several generations from 2xx to 5xx, no idea what the comparable mainstream part would be to the 1060/1070/1080s.At least with Vega56/Vega64 you know they're legit and not rebadged stuff from 5 yrs ago.
Yojimbo - Wednesday, April 11, 2018 - link
It's not too hard to go to a site like Anandtech and look at benchmarks and figure out how the current products stack up against each other. When I want to make a purchase I do the research. I took hours deciding on equipment for grinding and brewing coffee. If someone is already aware of the 200 series through 500 series it would take 30 mins to figure out how the 580 compares with the 1060. If he needs to read about Polaris then just add 30 more minutes.Dragonstongue - Wednesday, April 11, 2018 - link
why oh why could they not do 12nm RX500X and not OEM specifically.....grrrr hard enough to find any RX 500 besides 560 or 550 that are in stock let alone even remotely close to MSRP that they should (~$287 CAD for 8gb RX580 ~ $25 less for RX570..nah they want to price the 4gb models above 8gb pricing and generally charge the same for RX 570 as they do for RX 580....not AMD fault directly, but the partners as well as idiot etrailers..most RX 560 I see are the reduce CU versions priced about $30 more then they should be as well)either way IMO they really should have done as 12nm refresh of polaris and put more on the shelf for those of us (like me) that have been waiting over a year (basically) to want to buy one and cannot or are faced with paying ~$100+ more than should be (if you are lucky enough to find ANY RX570/580 in stock, even though was claimed pricing stabilized in March..yeh fk right)
Sttm - Wednesday, April 11, 2018 - link
2016 GPUs with 2018 naming. /Fail.AMD has been so half assing their GPU division I seriously expect Intel to take their market share by 2022 when Raj Koduri's Artic Sound products launch.
kaesden - Wednesday, April 11, 2018 - link
video card releases are pointless until crypto mining somehow dies off. Pricing is ridiculous still.sing_electric - Thursday, April 12, 2018 - link
Ironically, that applies a LOT less to the OEM market where these cards will end up - OEMs are restricted with how much they can mark up machines. A few months ago before the crypto bubble started popping, I bought a complete Ryzen desktop with an RX 580 for about $50 more than the 580 was going for when you could find one in stock.ET - Thursday, April 12, 2018 - link
What I find annoying is that both 550X and 560X have two different configurations under the same name. This is confusing for both customers and those who support them.Tams80 - Thursday, April 12, 2018 - link
What a bloody mess.Native7i - Friday, April 13, 2018 - link
RX400XX to be honest.