Nvidia is at it again: 3060 8GB released, up to 35% slower than its 12GB counterpart

[WereCat]

8 hours ago, LAwLz said:

Just because the box has a particular layout does not mean that's the official name of the product.

NVIDIA has full control over the branding of their cards even on OEM boxes. What's on the box is the official name. If they did not wanted to be misleading they would put the VRAM amount directly next to the card name. The box and branding on the box is made so that your eyes are immediately drawn to the name of the card and it's branding. There is no VRAM amount in that area on the box. They do this because it works. If they can put (Super / Ti) next to the name they can as well put in the VRAM amount at the very least.

 

8 hours ago, LAwLz said:

When I go to for example Newegg to order a GPU, the product name includes the VRAM amount.

Yes, and what do you see when you go directly to Microcenter and walk between shelves of RTX 3060 cards?

 

Even if the VRAM amount is there on the box next to the name of the card and the difference between them in performance is this big, it's still wrong! At the very least it's a bit less elusive but it's still wrong! I can somewhat understand choosing less VRAM that's clocked higher or lower and keeping the branding but cutting down memory bus that affects performance this much is just ridiculous.

[Poinkachu]

18 minutes ago, WereCat said:

NVIDIA has full control over the branding of their cards even on OEM boxes. What's on the box is the official name. If they did not wanted to be misleading they would put the VRAM amount directly next to the card name. The box and branding on the box is made so that your eyes are immediately drawn to the name of the card and it's branding. There is no VRAM amount in that area on the box. They do this because it works. If they can put (Super / Ti) next to the name they can as well put in the VRAM amount at the very least.

 

Yes, and what do you see when you go directly to Microcenter and walk between shelves of RTX 3060 cards?

Based on the pics I've seen, I just wanna add that it looks kinda like the small prints on a contract.
I'm a bit into designs, so I agree that they designed it so that sight will be "pulled" towards the Brand & Series name, then to model number.

[suicidalfranco]

Is this a storm in a cup type of thread

[leadeater]

2 hours ago, suicidalfranco said:

Is this a storm in a cup type of thread

Yes 

[LAwLz]

11 hours ago, leadeater said:

Well I'm so glad to know that ZOTAC GeForce RTX 3080 AMP Holo 12GB LHR and ZOTAC GeForce RTX 3080 Trinity OC 12GB LHR are entirely different models of Nvidia GPUs and that  AMP, Holo, Trinity and OC all each means something and all signify performance difference.

 

Now throw in every other AIB bollocks in to this. Somehow I think the most important part comes at the start and is what a lot of people mainly look at, just a suspicion I have.

 

If you want to go down the path you keep trying then you cannot ignore all the other crap slapped on graphics cards names.

Now you're being silly.

In your example you didn't change any of the numbers, while the real life products in this case do.

 

But you do bring up a good point. If we go by the logic that "it's not the GPU die that matters, it's performance", then should we also start changing the numbering on OC models of cards?

I think it becomes very messy very quickly if we start arguing that "3080" and "3080 OC" is misleading because they perform differently, and we can't expect customers to understand what OC means in terms of performance (just like we apparently can't expect consumers to understand that a model with 12GB after it performs better than one with 8GB after it".

 

 

Yes, GPU SKU names can be long and confusing, but if the argument is that "consumers shouldn't have to read more than exactly 4 numbers" then we run into issues where it is apparently deceptive and evil for Nvidia to call their GPUs things like "Ti" as well, or AMD calling their GPUs "XT".

 

I don't get why "RX 6800" vs "RX 6800 XT" and "RTX 3080" vs "RTX 3080 Ti" are apparently super easy to understand and not at all misleading. But "RTX 3060 8GB" vs "RTX 3060 12GB" is somehow too much for consumers to take in and we can't expect people to read the full name, just the first 4 numbers.

 

 

If the argument is that consumers only read the the first 4 numbers, why are you not mad at AMD for doing the whole "XT" thing? Or Nvidia for doing the whole "Ti" thing?

[leadeater]

27 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

Now you're being silly.

In your example you didn't change any of the numbers, while the real life products in this case do.

I didn't change any of the numbers? Those are both real life 100% legitimate products taken directly from the retail website selling them. Why would I change them? I'm giving you something that actually exists....

 

So you tell me exactly how changing 12GB to another number would make any difference at all if you didn't really know any of the mess other than RTX 3080?

 

 

Edit:

27 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

If the argument is that consumers only read the the first 4 numbers, why are you not mad at AMD for doing the whole "XT" thing? Or Nvidia for doing the whole "Ti" thing?

Fortunately I've already said such a thing is dumb in this very topic.

 

But as I already said also, at least those are established model designations that have a proper meaning and significance that goes across multiple generations. Random VRAM numbers at the end do not. They also get added after the fact after all the information and understanding about the original product has been imparted in to the market and consumers. Slapping 8GB on the end and fundamentally changing the product is equivalent to re-writing history, very hard to do and shouldn't even be done.

 

Edit 2:

Oh and if you really do want to argue VRAM capacity signifies both performance and model difference and sufficient to inform buyers then put these 3 GPUs in order of performance: GTX 1060 3GB, GTX 1060 5GB & GTX 1060 6GB. Hint they are not in performance order currently.

[leadeater]

21 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

If the argument is that consumers only read the the first 4 numbers, why are you not mad at AMD for doing the whole "XT" thing? Or Nvidia for doing the whole "Ti" thing?

If you think that is the argument and the point then you've walked off the cliff Wile  E Coyote  style and have yet looked down to start falling yet. The argument is known established naming conventions not peoples ability to read nor look at numbers. When things have a known and established basis of understanding then people can use that, when you do not use this then understanding starts to go by the wayside.

 

This is not a difficult point to understand. There is literally a reason Nvidia goes GTX 1080, RTX 2080, RTX 3080 & RTX 4080 and not GTX 1080, RTX 2078, RTX 3084 & RTX 4088

[WereCat]

49 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

 

 

But you do bring up a good point. If we go by the logic that "it's not the GPU die that matters, it's performance", then should we also start changing the numbering on OC models of cards?

I think it becomes very messy very quickly if we start arguing that "3080" and "3080 OC" is misleading because they perform differently, and we can't expect customers to understand what OC means in terms of performance (just like we apparently can't expect consumers to understand that a model with 12GB after it performs better than one with 8GB after it".

Those are completely different things.

 

A GPU with "OC" in it means it's factory overclocked and you typically pay more for it while not really getting any benefit because any amount of OC on the card done by OEM is overshadowed by the boosting tech on the card. Only thing you're getting there are slightly higher guaranteed boost clocks which are typically several 100 of MHz lower than the actual clocks you will get.

 

Not only that but by getting the non-OC card you can still OC it yourself and pay less and get more. You're still getting the same card with just barely different clocks over which you have an actual control as a consumer because you can tune the clocks yourself.

 

Is this a trap for non-savy people? Kind of yes, sometimes people get to spend more because of this. This has always been the case and sometimes these OC models approach higher tier cards with their price. But getting the lowest priced card in the same tier vs the highest priced card in the same tier never amounted to much of a difference. You typically get better build quality and cooling but not a whooping 20% to 30% performance difference. You're still buying the same card with just slight difference in clocks. But this is also something set by OEMs and not NVIDIA. NVIDIA provides the base specs and you should expect the base specs at the very least. And they still haven't even updated their website...

 

You can't increase memory bus yourself on the RTX 3080 8GB and claw back the 20% to 30% performance vs the 12GB. The issue here is not 8GB vs 12GB the issue here is that the 8GB one has cut down memory bus which makes the card a LOT slower. These cards should be the same performance tier despite having different memory amounts but they don't because they are not the same tier of cards!

 

An i5 12400f with 16GB RAM does not fare worse than the same CPU with 64GB of RAM as long as you are not using more than 16GB. Well, as long as you run them both with the same amount of channels. Reviewers keep bashing OEMs for putting single RAM stick in the PC for a reason. But in this case you still have option to fix it by adding another stick of RAM, you can't do anything about it on a GPU.

 

That is the only context that should matter in this. You get 8GB to save money because you don't have use for 12GB VRAM in which case you should have the same experience because you're supposedly buying the same card with just less VRAM. Except in this case you barely pay less, at least now these cards cost the same like the 12GB versions from what I've looked up.

1 hour ago, LAwLz said:

 

 

I don't get why "RX 6800" vs "RX 6800 XT" and "RTX 3080" vs "RTX 3080 Ti" are apparently super easy to understand and not at all misleading. But "RTX 3060 8GB" vs "RTX 3060 12GB" is somehow too much for consumers to take in and we can't expect people to read the full name, just the first 4 numbers.

 

 

If the argument is that consumers only read the the first 4 numbers, why are you not mad at AMD for doing the whole "XT" thing? Or Nvidia for doing the whole "Ti" thing?

Excuse me, what?

 

RX 6800 vs RX 6800 XT implies they are different tiers of cards

RTX 3060 8GB vs RTX 3060 12GB implies they are the same tier of card with different amount of VRAM.

 

When you got GTX 780 3GB vs GTX 780 6GB you still got the same performance with both cards unless you did something that actually needed more than 3GB of VRAM in which case the 6GB pulled ahead ... and you got it for that purpose and that performance difference in this case is acceptable.

However, if you got 780 3GB and 780 6GB and you did something that only used up to 3GB and yet the 3GB version performed 20% to 30% less then you know there is something amiss.

 

Not the same thing.

[mr moose]

22 hours ago, WereCat said:

There is not a clear difference in the name. 

 

As was pointed out in the video and my previous comment... the card is named RTX 3060 on the box. 

 

There's no RTX 3060 12GB or RTX 3060 8GB.

The VRAM amount is located on the box but it's not part of the name of the card and can be easily overlooked. 

I don't know what the stores are like in your area, but here in Australia it doesn't matter which shop you go to the cards are ALWAYS listed by GPU type and Ram size along side the brand and that brands variants.    I have not been able to find a single listing for a GPU that does not have the memory in the name.

 

21 hours ago, Blademaster91 said:

As others have already pointed out not everyone is going to look at benchmarks and reviews or will know the difference.

Then there is no point in have a unique name for each product then.  If a consumer is not even going to look them up or ask when there is a unique identifier then not having one won't improve that.

21 hours ago, Blademaster91 said:

So because the uninformed consumer might not know the difference, its ok for them to be misled by product naming or ripped off buying a worse graphics card?

It's not misleading, the card is sold as an 8G or 12G,  no one knows how well a card performs without looking at benchmarks or buying the thing and testing it themselves, so the product having a unique identifier is the only important part of the name.

 

21 hours ago, Blademaster91 said:

If the naming were clear that the 3060 8GB was a different card then a consumer wouldn't need to google or ask a forum if the 3060 8GB is worth buying compared to a 3060 12GB.

The naming is clear, one has more ram, if a consumer doesn't know that more ram equals better then they should be doing research. 

21 hours ago, Blademaster91 said:

You're missing the point, the 1060 3GB and 1060 6GB perform differently, but both of those are in the same xx60 performance tier.

It does though, thats how the naming is supposed to work with graphics cards and cpu's, except when a company wants it to be intentionally confusing.

But just looking at the box there isn't anything that would obviously point out the difference in either version, the VRAM capacity alone shouldn't be used to differentiate a graphics card, because there is the 1060 3GB and 1060 6GB example with how different a card can be, and the 3080 10GB and 3080 12GB which isn't enough of a difference to call the 3080 12GB a 3080 Ti or a 3080 Super.

That is the problem though, if someone is only looking at the product naming then they won't know the difference. I really don't see why people are defending Nvidia for purposely confusing the consumer into buying a worse graphics card, the consumer won't know they're getting ripped off until they wonder why a 3060 with 12GB or VRAM is faster.

At this point it seems you and some others are arguing that the name should indicate a performance metric.  No GPU has ever done that, in fact I am having trouble thinking of a pc component that does that.  You are getting a 3060 with X ram, if you want to know how good that is you have to look it up just like every other component in your pc.  Hell the only reason we know there is a difference is because someone tested them and we read the review.  if you or anyone else goes and buys a GPU based solely on what they think the name should mean then more fool them.  You don;t buy a car just because it has GT in the name do you? what about the numbers they tack on the end?  no you test drive, you compare and read reviews and ask on forums what owners think.  This is no different, we have a unique way to differentiate these cards and that is all you need so you can work out which one is best for you.

 

The other thing people are forgetting in this discussion is that the ram size never tells you anything about performance,  it never has and likely never will.  Suddenly expecting or demanding they make it mean something in comparison to other products on the market is not going to change that.

[mr moose]

15 minutes ago, WereCat said:

 

 

RX 6800 vs RX 6800 XT implies they are different tiers of cards

No, to the untrained it implies nothing more than a difference.  What that difference is needs to be worked out.  For all we know as pleb moron consumers is that XT might mean it has racing stripes.

 

15 minutes ago, WereCat said:

RTX 3060 8GB vs RTX 3060 12GB implies they are the same tier of card with different amount of VRAM.

 

 

But it does imply a difference and if you as a consumer don't know to check out what that difference is then the issue is with you. 

As I said in my last post, ram has never been an indicator of performance, if they put in more ram but it was some dodgy cheap ddr4 or even kept the ram amount the same but used dodgy cheap shit and didn't tell you then there would be a case for misrepresenting the product, but this is going the other way, it is less ram so the marketing angle would suggest a lower tier card.  How much lower is what the consumer has to research,  because no naming scheme will tell you how well a product performs and never can.

 

 

 

[Fasterthannothing]

remove

[LAwLz]

2 hours ago, WereCat said:

Excuse me, what?

 

RX 6800 vs RX 6800 XT implies they are different tiers of cards

RTX 3060 8GB vs RTX 3060 12GB implies they are the same tier of card with different amount of VRAM.

How about we ask my mom which card is faster, the "RX 6800" vs "RX 6800 XT".

My guess is that she will have no idea and guess at random. 

 

If I ask her which card is faster, the "RTX 3060 8GB" or "RTX 3060 12GB" my guess is that she would pick the 12GB model, and she would be right.

 

 

This example only makes sense to you because you are used to it and understand the naming schemes.

I feel like you are talking out of both sides of your mouth. Whenever the spotlight gets aimed at some other weird naming convention you go "well I understand that so it's not an issue" but as soon as we bring up this instance you go "but we have to think of this from the POV of someone who doesn't know anything". You can't have it both ways. 

If 3060 8GB and 3060 12GB are too similar and might fool people then I would argue 6800 and 6800 XT are too similar and might fool people. It's not like AMD couldn't have named them 6800 and 6850, right? 

[Avocado Diaboli]

Nvidia (and every other manufacturer) should stop using numbers altogether. 3060 is a higher number than 2080. Bigger number implies better performance, because people are stupid and only look at one data point to make purchase decisions. /s

[starsmine]

Lets be completely honest. 
Anyone buying a 3060 12GB does not care about price performance value anyways. 

The 6700xt is more powerful then the 3060ti, costs the same as a 3060, and comes with two free games that are 60 dollars each

[leadeater]

You all know this issue isn't that big right? You all know the name is bad and a better one could have easily been chosen...

 

The bigger issue is coming here voicing the opinion that it's not a problem which is a opinion you can have, just also be self aware enough to know this and that you are actively supporting bad product naming in a style that won't always be correct, hasn't always been correct and leads to poor purchasing decisions and creates the prevalence of misinformation..

 

If you are fine with all of the above then that is your choice, just know you are more of the problem than Nvidia is in this situation.

[LAwLz]

1 hour ago, leadeater said:

You all know this issue isn't that big right? You all know the name is bad and a better one could have easily been chosen...

 

The bigger issue is coming here voicing the opinion that it's not a problem which is a opinion you can have, just also be self aware enough to know this and that you are actively supporting bad product naming in a style that won't always be correct, hasn't always been correct and leads to poor purchasing decisions and creates the prevalence of misinformation..

 

If you are fine with all of the above then that is your choice, just know you are more of the problem than Nvidia is in this situation.

I think the naming is bad, but I also don't think this is an issue because it will affect next to nobody.

I just don't like the inconsistency where this very minor issue gets multiple news articles written about it, this thread with almost 150 posts (30 of which are from you) and a bunch of people calling for Nvidia to be sued, how they will never buy from Nvidia, etc.

 

The reactions are so over the top. But when other products have bad names nobody cares. Hell, even names I think are bad from Nvidia didn't get this much attention. 

GTX 1660 vs GTX 1660 Ti vs GTX 1660 Super? Nahh, not at all confusing and doesn't need to be pointed out. I am sure nobody will be confused by that.

RX 6800 vs RX 6800 TX? Totally not confusing at all. No way we should point out that they could have named it the RX 6850 instead to make things easier to understand. Nope, no way we should point that out. That product gets a free pass.

 

The 3060 8GB is slower than the 3060 12GB? This is the worst thing ever! This is proof that Nvidia are the most evil company in the entire world!

Nobody will ever understand this product name! We can't expect people to read more than 4 numbers or look up benchmarks!

 

 

If I had to come up with a naming scheme for graphics cards, I would base the number on the GPU die. All cards that have the same die gets the same name. If there are differences such as different clocks or different memory, that gets added as a suffix. This is how GPUs in general have been named, both from AMD and Nvidia. In pretty much every generation we have had the same GPU paired with different memory, and it has always been a suffix. It hasn't been an issue because people need to look up benchmarks to understand what performance they will get to begin with, so they will see the difference in performance. If you are only googling half the product name then you're on your own. If we start ruling that product names can't contain suffixes because people might not read them then all of a sudden pretty much all product names are misleading. Suddenly we should have an issue with companies putting "OC" on cards as well because someone might look up the performance of an OC card and then buy a non-OC card and thus get fooled into buying a certain brand, because they ignore the "OC" suffix. 

 

If the argument is that the name should reflect a certain performance then we also get into issues with things like OC cards. Should the 4080 OC suddenly be called the 4085 because it performs better than the 4080? If not, why should the 3060 8GB be called the 3050 Ti just because it happens to perform worse than the 3060 12GB? 

[Dabombinable]

It'd really have made a great 3050ti. Considering with Kepler the GTX 650ti was a cut down GTX 660. Though in more than memory bus.

@LAwLz

Nvidia use to distinguish between models with cut down memory bus/ Eg. Riva TNT2 VantaLT/Vanta/M64 and then the TNT2/TNT2 Pro/TNT2 Ultra. And shock horror - the performance difference between a same clocked M64 and standard TNT2 was substantial. The new 3060's name is shit as it is a far slower product than the first 3060.

 

Fuck just look at the Geforce 2 MX200 and MX400. 64bit vs 128bit. Same die. Not given the same model name.

[MageTank]

6 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

The reactions are so over the top. But when other products have bad names nobody cares. Hell, even names I think are bad from Nvidia didn't get this much attention. 

GTX 1660 vs GTX 1660 Ti vs GTX 1660 Super? Nahh, not at all confusing and doesn't need to be pointed out. I am sure nobody will be confused by that.

RX 6800 vs RX 6800 TX? Totally not confusing at all. No way we should point out that they could have named it the RX 6850 instead to make things easier to understand. Nope, no way we should point that out. That product gets a free pass.

I do not disagree with you, but I do want to say that in @leadeater's defense, I have seen him complain about these very things. I've also seen my fair share of new builders on this very forum be confused by the GTX 1660 series so that alone proves it impacts those that may not know where to source proper reviews of these products. It doesn't help that most people typically google "GTX 1660 Fortnite FPS" and end up with some kid on Youtube that has no controls in their testing methodology using a 5 year old processor reviewing budget GPU's and bottlenecking them to near consistent performance.

 

Based on what I am reading, both you and Leadeater appear to be arguing for the same thing (though with differing levels of passion). Seems like we all agree that the current naming conventions suck across the board and not just for Nvidia. Anyone that remembers me during the Zen chipset launches knows I was not a fan of AMD's chipset naming convention being intentionally similar to Intel's but only being off by a single digit, resulting in mass confusion and people purchasing incompatible boards with the wrong vendors processor. This issue does not plague only the GPU segment and needs to be addressed across the industry.

 

My two cents on this 3060 8GB situation (not that anyone asked for it) is that Nvidia is well within their right to name the products as they deem appropriate. Personally I think it is shooting themselves in the foot, but who am I to get in the way of that bullet? If customers suffer the consequences, that is on Nvidia. Now the unfortunate collateral damage is those that work in computer retail and tech support segments that have to support these customers and are often at the forefront of the anger that stems from this issue. If those very retail chains and downstream partners get enough complaints, the burden to address this will surely fall on Nvidia and all other companies that participate in this nonsensical naming scheme. I have my doubts that these tech companies are reading these forums and achieving sudden states of enlightenment as if they didn't know this was a problem before.

 

Those of you on a crusade to save the ill-informed from making a mistake during purchase, put that energy towards something that will actually matter. Yelling at Nvidia and the other companies from a tech forum they don't frequent likely won't reach their ears, but you can certainly reach the ears of their customers if you create guides, write reviews or get the word out to reviewers that can reach those customers.

 

17 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

The 3060 8GB is slower than the 3060 12GB? This is the worst thing ever! This is proof that Nvidia are the most evil company in the entire world!

Nobody will ever understand this product name! We can't expect people to read more than 4 numbers or look up benchmarks!

I don't think people would have a problem with this if retail stores publicly advertised ROP/TMU/SM counts on their specification pages, but almost no retailer has a fleshed out specification tab for GPU's. If I am Joe Everyman and I google "8GB vs 12GB VRAM" I'll likely find an explanation about frame buffer sizes and impact of running out of VRAM, but nothing about similarly classed cards having completely different SM configurations or bus widths which would have a far more significant impact on performance than simply having less VRAM at a given resolution.

 

Now personally I don't put this blame entirely on Nvidia. Could Nvidia give us a better name? Say, an RTX 3055? Sure, nothing would logistically stop them from doing so. However, if retailers would flesh out the product pages for the products they are selling, the "compare this item" buttons on their websites might actually matter. I'd certainly like Nvidia to advertise these in-depth specs too. Sad that I have to go to TPU just to see that breakdown when nothing prevents them from making that advertisement themselves. Motherboard manufacturers get down to the nitty gritty and will tell you what each PCIe slot/M.2 slot is wired to, whether lane bifurcation is supported, etc. It's time GPU's catch up, lol.

 

25 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

If the argument is that the name should reflect a certain performance then we also get into issues with things like OC cards. Should the 4080 OC suddenly be called the 4085 because it performs better than the 4080? If not, why should the 3060 8GB be called the 3050 Ti just because it happens to perform worse than the 3060 12GB? 

I get your point here, however I think there is a point of clarification here that must be addressed. When a card is called "OC", it is because the product has been modified (in this example, overclocked beyond boost specifications). If a card is called "Mini", it is because the PCB is custom and designed to be smaller. If a card is called "8GB" vs "12GB", my assumption (based on this pattern) is that the VRAM capacity between the two cards are different. Now changing things in addition to this is where things get confusing and I think this is where people have a point of contention. They are not wrong for feeling this way, just like you are not wrong for expecting prospective buyers to research products they intend to spend their hard earned money on.

 

Now I do disagree with anyone that believes these suffixes shouldn't exist in general, you have to give these companies something to market with and they exist to describe the physical condition of the product. If every card was called "RTX 3080" on a website but looked differently, it would be just as problematic for customers as you'd have no means of finding the specific card aesthetic you are looking for, or end up overspending on a subpar 3080 when an overclocked version is similarly priced or cheaper.

 

People must also understand that there is always inherent risk with product nomenclature that is bound to confuse the lesser-informed. When my company launched a system containing the RTX 2070 Super Mini from ZOTAC, we had so many customer complaints about us using a "RTX 2070 Super Mini" instead of an RTX 2070 Super, despite it being the exact same card, lol. At some point, we must all agree that no matter how hard we try as a people to make something idiot proof, they will always build a better idiot.

[leadeater]

47 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

I think the naming is bad, but I also don't think this is an issue because it will affect next to nobody.

I just don't like the inconsistency where this very minor issue gets multiple news articles written about it, this thread with almost 150 posts (30 of which are from you) and a bunch of people calling for Nvidia to be sued, how they will never buy from Nvidia, etc.

There are so many replies literally because of you and others like you knowingly arguing against what IS a bad product name that you know could be better because you want to defend against "pile on Nvidia bad" for goodness knows what reason. 

 

The name is bad, the reasoning you want to try and defend it is bad and is also historically not even correct.

 

So if we all know it's bad and could have been better then why are we here... Right? So lets just move on. Like I said you're being more of a problem than Nvidia has been in this situation. They have a right as pointed out to name their products like crap and we have a right to say it's a bad name. You don't have to jump off the deep end to be contrarian and the defender of all who are "unjustly" being slandered. What is so problematic is you know the name could have been better chosen, so what on earth are you even doing? 

 

My strong reaction is specifically at YOU, not Nvidia. 

[leadeater]

1 hour ago, LAwLz said:

The reactions are so over the top. But when other products have bad names nobody cares. Hell, even names I think are bad from Nvidia didn't get this much attention. 

GTX 1660 vs GTX 1660 Ti vs GTX 1660 Super? Nahh, not at all confusing and doesn't need to be pointed out. I am sure nobody will be confused by that.

RX 6800 vs RX 6800 TX? Totally not confusing at all. No way we should point out that they could have named it the RX 6850 instead to make things easier to understand. Nope, no way we should point that out. That product gets a free pass.

 

On 12/4/2022 at 1:36 AM, leadeater said:

Similarly I also find Ti and Super unnecessary and stupid but at least there is historic understanding that these denote performance.

 

Have you finished being incorrect?

 

Have you finished not reading the actual arguments and reasons put forward because it's very obvious you are not reading them.

 

Once I see you at all address established standardized naming then and only then will you be in a position to have this discussion. Harping on about not being able to read more than 4 numbers makes you look as if you're incapable of common debate etiquette. If you aren't going to acknowledge points raised then you have no purpose being in the debate at all. '

 

Similarly you are going on about performance being what should be used for different modeling naming when I very clearly talked about GPU die core configuration and memory bus which effect performance, and it's those origin factors for the performance difference that are what is behind model naming not specifically and only performance.

 

So that's my offer, come to the debate table prepared or don't come.

[sof006]

On 12/5/2022 at 3:37 PM, Stahlmann said:

I'm in a similar situation. But my main problem is that i play a lot of ray traced games nowadays. I don't want to "upgrade" to a 7900 XT or 8900 XT for example while they can't get their ray tracing performance to the same level as several year old Nvidia cards. And ray tracing will only get more support going forward, being baked into popular next-gen game engines and all that.

While that is true, the uptake on anything Ray Traced is still super slow and i've looked at the performance differences and in reality AMD isn't that far behind. I bet the new AMD cards will be a massive improvement.

 

 

[LAwLz]

44 minutes ago, leadeater said:

-snip-

You sound pretty emotional and upset about this. Maybe you should take a while off, cool down and come back to this topic when you have calmed down a little?

 

 

I don't think your argument of "this is okay to do because of history" is a valid argument. For example AMD only started using XT on their 5000 series of GPUs, and yet nobody had any issues with that. I tried looking on this forum and after 15 minutes of searching I could not find anyone who raised even a single objection to that poor naming scheme, and I think that is worse than 8GB vs 12GB, because at least the average Joe will most likely reach the correct conclusion (for the wrong reason) in that regard.

 

 

So do I understand you correctly. You think that GPU numbers should be based on the GPU die in combination with the memory bus. Correct? If either of those things change, then it should have a new name. If neither of those are changed by something else is changed, then it's fine to retain the same product number and just add a suffix. Correct?

[starsmine]

And if you are to argue SE is better, it should be known that people correctly assume that means "Special Edition"
It does not mean slow edition, thats just a nick name people who already know about the card know about.

most would assume special means faster

That misleads consumers more then 8GB would, as less ram makes you assume lesser. 

[bramturismo]

20 minutes ago, starsmine said:

And if you are to argue SE is better, it should be known that people correctly assume that means "Special Edition"
It does not mean slow edition, thats just a nick name people who already know about the card know about.

most would assume special means faster

That misleads consumers more then 8GB would, as less ram makes you assume lesser. 

I'd like to chime in here and say that I know absolutely squat about what an iPhone SE is, other than it being a cheaper version.

[HenrySalayne]

8 hours ago, LAwLz said:

The reactions are so over the top. But when other products have bad names nobody cares. Hell, even names I think are bad from Nvidia didn't get this much attention. 

GTX 1660 vs GTX 1660 Ti vs GTX 1660 Super? Nahh, not at all confusing and doesn't need to be pointed out. I am sure nobody will be confused by that.

RX 6800 vs RX 6800 TX? Totally not confusing at all. No way we should point out that they could have named it the RX 6850 instead to make things easier to understand. Nope, no way we should point that out. That product gets a free pass.

Textbook example of the fallacy of relative privation...