Jump to content

Are Linus and Luke nVidia fanboys?

Influencija

First of all, I do not mean this post to be an accusation, but a fair question.
Luke did a review of R9 390x. He tried not ranting and being objective, but the message of the video is: noone ever in any circumstances should buy this card. Overall opinion is that the whole 300 series is just a rebrand with nothing new to offer.

 

 

Here is a video of Linus' review of GTX 770. Somehow that card is not a rebrand of GTX 680, but an "enhanched edition" of it, and you can tell its superior because its memory is clocked at 7GHz (because memory speed is the most important GPU geature), and because of that its much better for higher than 1080p resolutions?

And although it didnt show any improvement compared to GTX 680, that's surely because on their particular card GPU boost was not working as it should.

 

What do you guys think, are they somewhat fanboyish?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't really get that feeling from the 390x review, he was basically just confirming what is facts about the 390x.

However they absolutely are biased at least somewhat towards Nvidia considering they are one of their sponsors.

 

vsKgAJp.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, i agree that the 390x is not worth the price tag, but the 390 is more than worth it.

The problem is that it's hard to stay objective when you're also compassionate about the stuff you review.

When in doubt: C4

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think everyone is entitled to have a preference and for the most part Linus and Luke give a fair and balanced opinion of products, except when it comes to Apple lol 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think in general they favor Nvidia, but maybe not that "intensive".

Spoiler

Main PC: CPU Xeon E3-1231 V3 - MB Asrock B85M Pro3 - RAM 16GB Kingston - GPU GTX 1070 Gainward Phoenix - PSU Corsair AX760i - Monitor  LG 22EA63 - Keyboard Corsair Strafe - Mouse Logitech G402 - Storage 2x3TB WD Green - 240GB OCZ SSD

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

You do raise a good point, but was the 770 not cheaper than the 680?

 

From what I can see a 390x is no cheaper than an 8gb version of the 290x (not a massive reason, but may be the reason for their unenthusiastic view on the card)

Cpu: Ryzen 2700 @ 4.0Ghz | Motherboard: Hero VI x370 | Gpu: EVGA RTX 2080 | Cooler: Custom Water loop | Ram: 16GB Trident Z 3000MHz

PSU: RM650x + Braided cables | Case:  painted Corsair c70 | Monitor: MSI 1440p 144hz VA | Drives: 500GB 850 Evo (OS)

Laptop: 2014 Razer blade 14" Desktop: http://imgur.com/AQZh2sj , http://imgur.com/ukAXerd

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

Wouldn't say complete Nvidia fanboys, more like realist. Excluding actual fanboys who do chime in within this community, I'm confident the overwhelming majority of techies would LOVE for AMD to be more competitive. The reality is while not entirely a complete rebrand of the 200 series, the 300 series didn't do much to wow anyone - while not a 100% lazy rebadging, it's still essentially a more energy efficient 200 series card for all intended purposes. On the other hand, I'd say the AMD Fury (non X) would be more worth saving up for vs the R9 300* stuff. 

 

AMD does make some nice stuff, but with the competition from both sides of their market being more efficient with their tech, it takes a lot to down play that. In the end, performance, price and efficiency is what sells product. If your opponents are doing it better, you either scale up or cut prices. From observing this for years, it feels more AMD takes the latter approach more often to stay in the game. Of course, AMD's R&D budget isn't as impressive which hinders advancements in tech.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

First of all, I do not mean this post to be an accusation, but a fair question.

Luke did a review of R9 390x. He tried not ranting and being objective, but the message of the video is: noone ever in any circumstances should buy this card. Overall opinion is that the whole 300 series is just a rebrand with nothing new to offer.

From what I've heard, the 390x is just a rebrand with nothing new to offer than double the VRAM. So why should Luke try to obscure that.

 

 

Here is a video of Linus' review of GTX 770. Somehow that card is not a rebrand of GTX 680, but an "enhanched edition" of it, and you can tell its superior because its memory is clocked at 7GHz (because memory speed is the most important GPU geature), and because of that its much better for higher than 1080p resolutions?

And although it didnt show any improvement compared to GTX 680, that's surely because on their particular card GPU boost was not working as it should.

 

What do you guys think, are they somewhat fanboyish?

Well, atleast it's not the same tier of cards, as with the 390x and the 290x.

 

But it is true that they tend to take more of a Nvidia side of things, but who doesn't?! (excuse the bad joke).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the 390x doesn't get the recommendation is because it's about $100 more then the 290x and doesn't really offer a good enough performance boost that the price is justified. I still think it's a good card since it's cheaper then the 980 and trade blow with it, not to mention that it has double the ram of the 980. The reason the 770 doesn't get rag on about being a rebrand as much is because it is slightly better then the 680 while being at the same price point.

Mainboard:ROG-STRIX-B360-G-GAMING/Cpu:I5 8400 /Gpu: Galax RTX 2070 /Ram: Corsair Vengeance 16 GB DDR4/ Storage:1TB HDD 2 Corsair SSD PSU : Corsair 550W/Cooling: Silverstone Air Cooler/ / Case : Corsair/Keyboard:Razer Chroma TKL/Mouse:Mionix Castor+Steelseries Qck Mass/Headphone:V Moda M100 

Quote me if you when me to reply to something. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

Its not about being a fanboy, they give the true facts and in this case the facts were its not worth getting...

My Rigs:

Gaming/CAD/Rendering Rig
Case:
 Corsair Air 240 , CPU: i7-4790K, Mobo: ASUS Gryphon Z97 mATX,  GPU: Gigabyte G1 Gaming GTX 970, RAM: G.Skill Sniper 16GB, SSD: SAMSUNG 1TB 840 EVO, Cooling: Corsair H80i PCPP: https://au.pcpartpicker.com/b/f2TH99SFF HTPC
Case:
Silverstone ML06B, CPU: Pentium G3258, Mobo: Gigabyte GA-H97N-WiFi, RAM: G.Skill 4GB, SSD: Kingston SSDNow 120GB PCPP: https://au.pcpartpicker.com/b/JmZ8TW
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe that the term fanboy should be reserved for people who blindly devote themselves to a particular product and flatly refuse to acknowledge that any other products have anything whatsoever to offer. I've seen Linus on many occasions recommend AMD cards to people because is best suited their budget or workload. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think "fanboy" might be a bit of an extreme term, they definitely show a preference for Nvidia cards, but it's not like they're saying, to steer clear of all AMD cards.

Aftermarket 980Ti >= Fury X >= Reference 980Ti > Fury > 980 > 390X > 390 >= 970 380X > 380 >= 960 > 950 >= 370 > 750Ti = 360

"The Orange Box" || CPU: i5 4690k || RAM: Kingston Hyper X Fury 16GB || Case: Aerocool DS200 (Orange) || Cooler: Cryorig R1 Ultimate || Storage: Kingston SSDNow V300 240GB + WD Black 1TB || PSU: Corsair RM750 || Mobo: ASUS Z97-A || GPU: EVGA GTX 970 FTW+

"Unnamed Form Factor Switch" || CPU: i7 6700K || RAM: Kingston HyperX Fury 16GB || Case: Phanteks Enthoo Evolv Mini ITX (White) || Cooler: Cryorig R1 Ultimate (Green Cover) || Storage: Samsung 850 Evo 1TB || PSU: XFX XTR 550W || Mobo: ASUS Z170I Pro Gaming || GPU: EVGA GTX 970 FTW+

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

From what I've heard, the 390x is just a rebrand with nothing new to offer than double the VRAM. So why should Luke try to obscure that.

 

 

What? The performance of the R9 390x is higher in any situation.

Spoiler

Main PC: CPU Xeon E3-1231 V3 - MB Asrock B85M Pro3 - RAM 16GB Kingston - GPU GTX 1070 Gainward Phoenix - PSU Corsair AX760i - Monitor  LG 22EA63 - Keyboard Corsair Strafe - Mouse Logitech G402 - Storage 2x3TB WD Green - 240GB OCZ SSD

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmm.... This does seem somewhat bias... I'll have to ponder over this one  :huh:

i5 2400 | ASUS RTX 4090 TUF OC | Seasonic 1200W Prime Gold | WD Green 120gb | WD Blue 1tb | some ram | a random case

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

Pretty sure they said 390x and 390 are good cards for what they are. They seem to compete fairly with the 900 series in raw performance but fall short of driver support and features. This is just how it is atm, until AMD do better what else can you say.

i7 6700K - ASUS Maximus VIII Ranger - Corsair H110i GT CPU Cooler - EVGA GTX 980 Ti ACX2.0+ SC+ - 16GB Corsair Vengeance LPX 3000MHz - Samsung 850 EVO 500GB - AX760i - Corsair 450D - XB270HU G-Sync Monitor

i7 3770K - H110 Corsair CPU Cooler - ASUS P8Z77 V-PRO - GTX 980 Reference - 16GB HyperX Beast 1600MHz - Intel 240GB SSD - HX750i - Corsair 750D - XB270HU G-Sync Monitor
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't really get that feeling from the 390x review, he was basically just confirming what is facts about the 390x.

However they absolutely are biased at least somewhat towards Nvidia considering they are one of their sponsors.

 

vsKgAJp.jpg

They used to be sponsored by nividia, not anymore. I think I share Linus'/Luke's opinions on that matter, I just use whatever is best for me, I might like Nividia cards a bit better but I have a 280x, simply because it was better than the nividia offering at the time, and still is. 

 

Besides, being sponsored by Nividia doesn't necessarily influence their own opinions, and I have no doubt in my mind that if Linus/Luke wasn't allowed to speak/critique on Nividia products, they would have never been sponsored by them. 

CPU: i5-4690k GPU: 280x Toxic PSU: Coolermaster V750 Motherboard: Z97X-SOC RAM: Ripjaws 1x8 1600mhz Case: Corsair 750D HDD: WD Blue 1TB

How to Build A PC|Windows 10 Review Follow the CoC and don't be a scrub~soaringchicken

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

First, this ain't tech news.  Second, I don't think they are nvidia fanboys but AMD isn't doing themselves any favours.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

Pretty sure they said 390x and 390 are good cards for what they are. They seem to compete fairly with the 900 series in raw performance but fall short of driver support and features. This is just how it is atm, until AMD do better what else can you say.

Driver support? AMD had bad drivers for some time in the past, but this is old history... really old.

Spoiler

Main PC: CPU Xeon E3-1231 V3 - MB Asrock B85M Pro3 - RAM 16GB Kingston - GPU GTX 1070 Gainward Phoenix - PSU Corsair AX760i - Monitor  LG 22EA63 - Keyboard Corsair Strafe - Mouse Logitech G402 - Storage 2x3TB WD Green - 240GB OCZ SSD

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not entirely a rebrand...more of a refresh...

Yeah, or rebadge?

 

My point is exactly what nhatduy1611 said.

 

I think the 390x doesn't get the recommendation is because it's about $100 more then the 290x and doesn't really offer a good enough performance boost that the price is justified. I still think it's a good card since it's cheaper then the 980 and trade blow with it, not to mention that it has double the ram of the 980. The reason the 770 doesn't get rag on about being a rebrand as much is because it is slightly better then the 680 while being at the same price point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think "fanboy" might be a bit of an extreme term, they definitely show a preference for Nvidia cards, but it's not like they're saying, to steer clear of all AMD cards.

I think the term "preference" is mistaken for, wanting the better card (efficiency, mostly better performance, lesser heat output) at least at the higher end. 

 

EDIT: and if for a second someone accused me of being a fanboy, I have never bought a nividia card, so there ya go

CPU: i5-4690k GPU: 280x Toxic PSU: Coolermaster V750 Motherboard: Z97X-SOC RAM: Ripjaws 1x8 1600mhz Case: Corsair 750D HDD: WD Blue 1TB

How to Build A PC|Windows 10 Review Follow the CoC and don't be a scrub~soaringchicken

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

1. No

2. There is not any reason to post this in "News"

I run my browser through NSA ports to make their illegal jobs easier. :P
If it's not broken, take it apart and fix it.
http://pcpartpicker.com/b/fGM8TW

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

Driver support? AMD had bad drivers for some time in the past, but this is old history... really old.

No other explanation for the bad performance due to lack of decent drivers. Drivers for games are often late or released as a beta driver for new games where Nvidia seem to get all the latest titles supported on release. Hmhmhmh. 

i7 6700K - ASUS Maximus VIII Ranger - Corsair H110i GT CPU Cooler - EVGA GTX 980 Ti ACX2.0+ SC+ - 16GB Corsair Vengeance LPX 3000MHz - Samsung 850 EVO 500GB - AX760i - Corsair 450D - XB270HU G-Sync Monitor

i7 3770K - H110 Corsair CPU Cooler - ASUS P8Z77 V-PRO - GTX 980 Reference - 16GB HyperX Beast 1600MHz - Intel 240GB SSD - HX750i - Corsair 750D - XB270HU G-Sync Monitor
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

They used to be sponsored by nividia, not anymore. I think I share Linus'/Luke's opinions on that matter, I just use whatever is best for me, I might like Nividia cards a bit better but I have a 280x, simply because it was better than the nividia offering at the time, and still is. 

 

Besides, being sponsored by Nividia doesn't necessarily influence their own opinions, and I have no doubt in my mind that if Linus/Luke wasn't allowed to speak/critique on Nividia products, they would have never been sponsored by them. 

The Nvidia logo is still on the site and I hadn't heard about them dropping them as a partner.

And as much as I respect and like Linus, he isn't somehow invulnerable from influences from his company's partners. Nvidia doesn't just partner with people in the vested interest of giving people reviews on tech, they had something they wanted to get out of the agreement as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

No other explanation for the bad performance due to lack of decent drivers. Drivers for games are often late or released as a beta driver for new games where Nvidia seem to get all the latest titles supported on release. Hmhmhmh. 

Many times nvidia just have access first to the games, because some studios use their software to produce the game, Anyway the overall performance of AMD and Nvidia because of drivers even on the release date of the games is not very diferent. But maybe you have a source that can prove that you are saying.

Spoiler

Main PC: CPU Xeon E3-1231 V3 - MB Asrock B85M Pro3 - RAM 16GB Kingston - GPU GTX 1070 Gainward Phoenix - PSU Corsair AX760i - Monitor  LG 22EA63 - Keyboard Corsair Strafe - Mouse Logitech G402 - Storage 2x3TB WD Green - 240GB OCZ SSD

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×