Discussion in 'Article Discussion' started by bit-tech, 7 Dec 2017 at 10:40.
The mind boggles.
This is pretty disgraceful really. Really not acceptable (and it doesn't matter which company is doing it). Way to damage your brand.
Meh. NVIDIA did the exact same thing with the 1060 3GB and 6GB models. At least AMD had the balls to say sorry...
Bit different, actually... They were/are 2 distinctly different SKU's to meet different price points, it was in every model name and on every box what configuration each card was equipped with - from what I have seen, you'd have to load up GPU-Z or something to see how many CU's your GPU had here.
This is more like the GTX 970 memory scandal.
Worse than the GTX970 4GB memory scandal imho, because the 970 that you bought performed the same as the one that was reviewed, whereas a gimped 560 won't be as performant as the "standard" 560 that was originally available before it was downspecced.
Isn't this more like Gigabyte's 'rev 2.0' habit... Release a decent board, then a few months later release a 'rev 2.0' version with a shitload of corners cut, which people then buy on the strength of reviews of the rev 1 version...
I didn't know they were distinctly marketed as different cards... my bad!
It is more like what Apple does with their naming schemes that enables shops to scam people by not explicitly marking older products as being old.
Wikipedia lists it as the RX 560D (D= defective die?), which references one article saying it was intended for the Chinese market only. Perhaps the card shortages due to miners buying everything led to some of the board partners selling this card into western markets without making it clear that it was a cut down version.
Whilst I agree an apology on AMD's part is very welcome, there is no excuse for a lack of clarification as to exactly what your purchasing in the first instance; perceived stealth changes of an existing product being a strict no no - a distinct own goal on AMD's part methinks.
I never found the 10603GB/6GB business particularly shady, 3GB cards are cheaper than 6GB cards and just the difference in RAM on the box implies lower performance to go with the price.
The 970 balls up was more shady, but again it was more optimistic marketing since the 970's specs and performance were never changed by the discovery of the last 500MB being largely unusable (plus it was technically there and usable, just very slowly).
This is just plain duplicitous, multiple grades of parts being sold under the same SKU. It's a good way for AMD to burn up the goodwill it's gained from Ryzen this year.
This isn't AMD, it's the board partners (and possibly some e-tailors) who fu*&ed up. This isn't the first time letter(s) has been added to the end of a GPU name with a large amount of ambiguity as to what they meant:
XL, Pro, SE, GT, GTO, GTX, XT, XTX, XT PE, LE, GS, GX2, GTS, Ultra, GE, GSO, Ti, TITAN, TITAN BLACK, TITAN Z, TITAN X, TITAN XP.
Also, where does it say that they sold the cards under the same SKU? I find that almost impossible to believe.
Don't forget the Titan Xp, which was in no way to be confused with what Nvidia called the Titan X Pascal but which every other bugger called the Titan XP...
China got a 560D. In the rest of the world, AMD brands both chips as simply 560.
No, AMD themselves silently updated their page on the 560.
I don't think AMD originally intended the chips to be sold outside of China, so why would their English product page bother mentioning them?
Separate names with a comma.