AMD GPU might get their own gaming brand under GPP

[DocSwag]

1 hour ago, AresKrieger said:

Seems like the latter currently, hard to say for sure until ASUS makes new cards but regardless the whole thing was made out to be far worse than it actually was unsurprisingly.

If it's just that and they can have branches off of existing lines I honestly don't care.

1 hour ago, NumLock21 said:

My guess is only limited to video cards? That means Asus can still plaster ROG on other AMD products just not their video card.

I was thinking more along the lines of whether or not something like having a lineup called ROG Fire or something for amd and something like ROG Grass for nvidia would be allowed.

[NumLock21]

17 minutes ago, mr moose said:

I already find all the different branding confusing, from Asus alone we have:  

 

ROG Strix,

ROG Poisendon,

Strix,

Turbo,

Dual,

PH and XH,

Plus all the vanilla stuff.

 

 

 

Strix was the original name when it was only on their video cards. When they start adding other products into the Strix brand, then they changed it to ROG Strix. ROG Strix is the less expensive product line up, when compared to ROG.

6 minutes ago, DocSwag said:

If it's just that and they can have branches off of existing lines I honestly don't care.

I was thinking more along the lines of whether or not something like having a lineup called ROG Fire or something for amd and something like ROG Grass for nvidia would be allowed.

I doubt that will be allowed.

[mr moose]

3 minutes ago, NumLock21 said:

Strix was the original name when it was only on their video cards. When they start adding other products into the Strix brand, then they changed it to ROG Strix. ROG Strix is the less expensive product line up, when compared to ROG.

I doubt that will be allowed.

But do we really need 8 different versions of the one GPU?  Why not just 3,  reference, performance and top shelf?

[XenosTech]

3 minutes ago, mr moose said:

But do we really need 8 different versions of the one GPU?  Why not just 3,  reference, performance and top shelf?

Much like how intel has 4 differnt versions of a cpu for market segments/budgets. It's not different for GPU's but at least they carried the same branding across both, so you just had to look at the name and be done with it.

[NumLock21]

22 minutes ago, mr moose said:

But do we really need 8 different versions of the one GPU?  Why not just 3,  reference, performance and top shelf?

Because not everyone wants just those 3, they want something in between. For me, what I do is focus on the one I want to buy, and ignore the rest.

[Jito463]

1 hour ago, mr moose said:

It's interesting how people assume something is illegal because they feel it is unethical.    No one can get any information and yet people are still convinced they know full well what is happening. 

Who's saying it's illegal?  It's potentially anti-competitive (which could cross over into legal territory) - and some have argued that it's anti-consumer, which I tend to agree with - but I haven't seen anyone arguing it's outright illegal.

[divito]

Not sure how people are getting trapped in their logical reasoning here. Just because something isn't expressly illegal doesn't mean it's not anti-competitive in nature.

And for all we "know" about the GPP, it seems to blur the lines between the types of anti-competitive behavior that exists; they skirt very close to several documented issues that they could be taken to task over. It's definitely not an accident into how it was crafted as to deter legal recourse.

[mr moose]

29 minutes ago, XenosTech said:

Much like how intel has 4 differnt versions of a cpu for market segments/budgets. It's not different for GPU's but at least they carried the same branding across both, so you just had to look at the name and be done with it.

I definitely blame Intel for the CPU naming thing.  That's even more of a mess.   But whats the difference between the top end Asus and MSI and Gigabyte etc?  3-4 FPS?  Maybe there are more notable differences in temp and noise because raw performance is more a marketing exercise than a value add.

 

9 minutes ago, NumLock21 said:

Because not everyone wants just those 3, they want something in between. For me, what I do is focus on the one I want to buy, and ignore the rest.

I know, they make what sells.  But the discussion turned to confusing brands like CPU nomenclature,  which I think is easily already just as confusing even within single companies.   I personally only work out which GPU I can aford and then get the cheapest I can find, because fuck spending another $100 for 3 FPS.

 

7 minutes ago, Jito463 said:

Who's saying it's illegal?  It's potentially anti-competitive (which could cross over into legal territory) - and some have argued that it's anti-consumer, which I tend to agree with - but I haven't seen anyone arguing it's outright illegal.

People are claiming it actually is anti competitive (including yourself) which is illegal in most countries. Along with anti consumer practices. 

 

Also in this whole debate about GPP there have been numerous accusations of legality not only on this forum in the 3 threads I have read but also in the lead article and across the web.   

[Razor01]

16 minutes ago, Jito463 said:

Who's saying it's illegal?  It's potentially anti-competitive (which could cross over into legal territory) - and some have argued that it's anti-consumer, which I tend to agree with - but I haven't seen anyone arguing it's outright illegal.

 

8 minutes ago, divito said:

Not sure how people are getting trapped in their logical reasoning here. Just because something isn't expressly illegal doesn't mean it's not anti-competitive in nature.

And for all we "know" about the GPP, it seems to blur the lines between the types of anti-competitive behavior that exists; they skirt very close to several documented issues that they could be taken to task over. It's definitely not an accident into how it was crafted as to deter legal recourse.

 

Anti competitive, is a legal term, its automatically illegal if its anti competitive.

 

https://www.ftc.gov/enforcement/anticompetitive-practices

 

if something is anti competitive its anti trust, for an action to be labeled as such it must fall into these categories.  It can't be it might fall into it if this and that.  It has to do it by itself.

[XenosTech]

8 minutes ago, mr moose said:

I definitely blame Intel for the CPU naming thing.  That's even more of a mess.   But whats the difference between the top end Asus and MSI and Gigabyte etc?  3-4 FPS?  Maybe there are more notable differences in temp and noise because raw performance is more a marketing exercise than a value add.

Aesthetics play a part too... I primarily buy asus because they have all black cards and they're really quiet. MSI is a close second because Red and Black are my fave colours, gigabyte holds third because orange and black lol and I like sapphire because their's are simplistic and black so can't ever go wrong chucking one of those in my builds either.

[Lathlaer]

2 hours ago, Razor01 said:

You never put those three together and try to say crap like that in court, it doesn't hold water.

Really? ;-)

 

 

Now, if we assume that the decision was within the judges power to make, never say that morals do not enter courtrooms because they are very often the basis of the execution of the law. If the law states that in extenuating circumstances the judge can dismiss a case in the name of fairness, it has very much to do with morals. It's literally codified morals.

[Razor01]

19 minutes ago, Lathlaer said:

Really? ;-)

 

 

Now, if we assume that the decision was within the judges power to make, never say that morals do not enter courtrooms because they are very often the basis of the execution of the law. If the law states that in extenuating circumstances the judge can dismiss a case in the name of fairness, it has very much to do with morals. It's literally codified morals.

That isn't even what we are talking about man

 

What we are talking about here is nV's ethics in implementing such a program.  Will it be considered illegal in court because of the ethics nV used for GPP.  Hell no, ethics doesn't come into court, if its illegal its goes to court simple as that not because of the ethical reason behind doing a program.  If a judge deems to exercise his ethical reasoning for a judgement or dismal like what you linked to, that is not what we are talking about.

 

Is what nV doing unethical to their partners?  Ya it is, but are those bad ethics enough to take them to court?  No, they need to do something illegal for them to be taken to court, not unethical treatment of their partners and their partner's brand lol.

 

Ethics are not morals, morals are not laws.  Morals can shape laws, ethics can't shape laws.  Laws can shape morals too.

[Lathlaer]

1 minute ago, Razor01 said:

That isn't even what we are talking about man

Sorry, around the time the law Uni papers started getting listed and definition of ethics and morals I got the impression that the discussion went a bit offtopic and general about the role of ethics in law. Which is of course more complex than "if it's codified law, ethics have no part in it" or otherwise guys like Austin or Hart wouldn't have argued about it in the nineteenth century. The World War II and Nuremberg Trials also bared the so called radical legal positivism and showed all it's flaws. But that's neither here nor there.

 

Again, I apologize for the confusion.

[Razor01]

Just now, Lathlaer said:

Sorry, around the time the law Uni papers started getting listed and definition of ethics and morals I got the impression that the discussion went a bit offtopic and general about the role of ethics in law. Which is of course more complex than "if it's codified law, ethics have no part in it" or otherwise guys like Austin or Hart wouldn't have argued about it in the nineteenth century. The World War II and Nuremberg Trials also bared the so called radical legal positivism and showed all it's flaws. But that's neither here nor there.

 

Again, I apologize for the confusion.

Np, man, all judges use their moral and ethical judgement to preside over a case, and they should because well otherwise might as well put a robot up there right

[mr moose]

1 hour ago, Razor01 said:

 might as well put a robot up there right

Sometimes I think that would be a good idea. 

[handymanshandle]

23 hours ago, DocSwag said:

So how limiting exactly is GPP? Do brands like ROG become nvidia exclusive? Or can companies do something like how asus has ROG crosshair/zenith for amd and ROG maximus/rampage for intel?

23 hours ago, AresKrieger said:

Seems like the latter currently, hard to say for sure until ASUS makes new cards but regardless the whole thing was made out to be far worse than it actually was unsurprisingly.

The latter seems very likely.

So for like Gigabyte they could say like Aorus Windforce for say AMD and for Nvidia like Aorus Powerforce or something like that.

Or it could simply be Windforce for AMD and Aorus for Nvidia or vice versa.

 

Asus, should be able to keep its ROG line separate from Nvidia and allow it to be ROG Strix for say Nvidia and maybe use one of their AMD mobo names... I kinda like the idea of them calling the AMD cards ROG Zenith...

"Asus ROG Zenith RX 680" or something like that, not sure if they'll call Navi cards Navi ## or if they'll go back to RX ###

"Asus ROG Strix GTX 1175" or whatever Nvidia calls its Turing or Ampere consumer cards. Doubt Volta will be go mainstream

 

Asus does make Strix AMD motherboards although I think motherboards are a bit different.

[kokakolia]

2 hours ago, XenosTech said:

Aesthetics play a part too... I primarily buy asus because they have all black cards and they're really quiet. MSI is a close second because Red and Black are my fave colours, gigabyte holds third because orange and black lol and I like sapphire because their's are simplistic and black so can't ever go wrong chucking one of those in my builds either.

I honestly think that Asus/Sapphire sell more graphics cards than anyone else because they're slightly more expensive, so people think that they should be better than the rest. It also makes me smile when I see a low-power GPU like a GTX 1050 being cooled by an over-engineered dual-fan shroud with a massive heatsink. 

 

Honestly, shopping for a graphics card is confusing as hell. So I'm assuming that most people avoid the cheapest option and go for the slightly more expensive option with all of the "gamer" jiberjabber and more fans. And coincidentally, tech reviewers won't ever touch the most basic version of a GPU with a 10-foot pole (unless it's a reference card) and go straight for the most expensive and over-engineered card...typically from Asus. The "ROG Stryx RGB OC Edition" as I like to call it. 

[Notional]

I think Asus should give NVidia a new high end line, fitting of NVidia's stature. Professional High Achieving Gamers.

[Arika]

2 minutes ago, Notional said:

Professional High Achieving Gamers.

oh boy that was a stretch

[asus killer]

i would name it "4gb is 4gb" 

[Uzume]

I thought the entire point of GPP was to lock away all "gaming" branding from AMD and make it Nvidia exclusive. Ie, doesn't matter if they call it "ROG Strix Aurous Gaming+" or create a new "My Little Radeon Gaming" brand. If they put the word "gaming" on an RTG product then they get sent to Nvidia's gulag in Siberia.

[pas008]

20 minutes ago, zzrhardy said:

I thought the entire point of GPP was to lock away all "gaming" branding from AMD and make it Nvidia exclusive. Ie, doesn't matter if they call it "ROG Strix Aurous Gaming+" or create a new "My Little Radeon Gaming" brand. If they put the word "gaming" on an RTG product then they get sent to Nvidia's gulag in Siberia.

please reread

https://www.hardocp.com/article/2018/03/08/geforce_partner_program_impacts_consumer_choice

nvidia is just freely offering services that are easy come for more profits

the comparison to intel is stretching like said they can still sell competing products

mind you these are just manufacturers which can be pulled any day like random drunken sex with a bar maiden lol

xfx nvidia cards?

anyways all I read is nvidia is offering a service to buy out manufacturers gaming brands if they want to sign up but how can they not go along with it?

well for starters no one is talking about it is because of disclosure, and the fact these companies arent all equal in their negotiations

their ip contract is already in disclosure so why should this be a open text book test on each manufacturers contract

 

[Uzume]

4 minutes ago, pas008 said:

please reread

https://www.hardocp.com/article/2018/03/08/geforce_partner_program_impacts_consumer_choice

Reading that was what gave me that impression in the first place. Specifically the stipulation of: "Gaming Brand Aligned Exclusively With GeForce." 

[pas008]

5 minutes ago, zzrhardy said:

Reading that was what gave me that impression in the first place. Specifically the stipulation of: "Gaming Brand Aligned Exclusively With GeForce." 

does that mean ONLY? gaming brand aligned only for geforce

[Uzume]

Just now, pas008 said:

does that mean ONLY?

That is my understanding of the word "exclusively" but I am not a smart man.