[UPDATED 2] - Nvidia GPP shows its first victim

[Snapperx]

1 hour ago, MadyTehWolfie said:

aren't going to care about a flashy box if they know the components and cooling are up to par.

!!BUT AMD IS SUB-PAR!!

[Tieox]

Regardless of who makes the superior GPU, the issue I have with this is the future of GPU advancement, we saw how Intel sat on their laurels when AMD stalled after the FX series.  I really hope we do not see the same with Nvidia if AMD take a decade to catch up.

[mr moose]

3 hours ago, Kierax said:

 we saw how Intel sat on their laurels when

No they didn't, that's just an internet trope,  A narrative that isn't founded on any real insight.  No company rests on it's laurels, they keep developing and building the next and best.   Please don't confuse sandbagging (to any degree of the term) for slacking off.

[MadyTehWolfie]

4 hours ago, Kierax said:

Regardless of who makes the superior GPU, the issue I have with this is the future of GPU advancement, we saw how Intel sat on their laurels when AMD stalled after the FX series.  I really hope we do not see the same with Nvidia if AMD take a decade to catch up.

Maybe AMD needs to get good then. I don't want to wait a decade for a even better Nvidia gpu. 

 

Side note: most consumers are like magpies so I guess having a less shiney box hurts competition in that regard though general consumers probably don't even know the difference between the 1070 and 1080. They just hear buzz words and get a warm feeling.

[Tieox]

58 minutes ago, mr moose said:

No they didn't, that's just an internet trope,  A narrative that isn't founded on any real insight.  No company rests on it's laurels, they keep developing and building the next and best.   Please don't confuse sandbagging (to any degree of the term) for slacking off.

The whole debacle after Ryzen was gaining internet popularity while it may not factually be the case, made it seriously look like Intel scrambled to get something that was in RnD and make it a marketable solution to a crisis they got comfortable waiting for.

 

Competition is a necessity for innovation within tech companies, otherwise while they do develop new technologies in the background, as with any situation you often keep your best punches/solutions till you really need them.

[laminutederire]

1 hour ago, mr moose said:

No they didn't, that's just an internet trope,  A narrative that isn't founded on any real insight.  No company rests on it's laurels, they keep developing and building the next and best.   Please don't confuse sandbagging (to any degree of the term) for slacking off.

I think you're both right in a way. They continued working on making better products, but they purposely let the market stagnate to quad-core which were more profitable I guess. That's no coincidence they happen to bump up core count the second AMD competes. They could bump up their products easily because they haven't sat on their was doing nothing. But they most probably have held off on products and refused to give their best to consumers.

[Drak3]

2 minutes ago, laminutederire said:

I think you're both right in a way. They continued working on making better products, but they purposely let the market stagnate to quad-core which were more profitable I guess. That's no coincidence they happen to bump up core count the second AMD competes. They could bump up their products easily because they haven't sat on their was doing nothing. But they most probably have held off on products and refused to give their best to consumers.

Seeing the road map, seems like it is a coincidence.

[laminutederire]

9 hours ago, leadeater said:

MSI have fixed their website and AMD Gaming X cards show up in the GPU filter list again, for those interested.

That was probably the point of AMD. To cover their asses just in case, there's nothing better to let the info out, forcing AIB to be very cautious in their marketing because people are watching. The MSI screwed up royally and their best move is to held off their horses on GPP if they signed it, simply because the backlash if discovered would be too rash.

Something along those lines.

[Razor01]

13 minutes ago, Kierax said:

The whole debacle after Ryzen was gaining internet popularity while it may not factually be the case, made it seriously look like Intel scrambled to get something that was in RnD and make it a marketable solution to a crisis they got comfortable waiting for.

 

Competition is a necessity for innovation within tech companies, otherwise while they do develop new technologies in the background, as with any situation you often keep your best punches/solutions till you really need them.

 

 

Well in general terms, its always better to have companies leap forging one another when it comes to tech advancements.  But eventually one company will end up with the lead longer than the other because of the nature of the business with higher costs to develop.  nV did the same thing with Tesla too, they held on to that architecture for too long and let AMD catch up.  But they milked the market for all Tesla was worth.

 

Of course with the node transitions slowing down that hurt them too.  With Intel, we really don't know what they have in plan for future architectures its been 3 going on 4 generations of 14nm processors.  So what they had planned for 10nm Coffee Lake, what we see in the lower power SKU's technology wise might not be what we see in the full fledged 10nm chips, there could be things cut out of them. 

 

Generally back up plans aren't going to have all the features that are planned for because well die size is going to increase considerably.  So Intel can't just take a 10nm chip and put it on a 14nm process with all the features they had planned for, unless that 10nm has no extras, I find that highly unlikely there are no extras for the 10nm transition. at least not anymore because of how AMD caught up.  Tick Tock works great when they have the luxury of no competition, doesn't work so well when someone is hot on their heels. We have to wait and see what happens though.

 

Just like with Volta, nV might slow down a little bit, hope not, but why not milk something and use that money for one big improvement if its possible.

[laminutederire]

1 minute ago, Drak3 said:

Seeing the road map, seems like it is a coincidence.

 It might be, but had Ryzen be out sooner, I still think they would have bumped up the core count, because they had to in some ways. That would have just meant for them less margins

[Razor01]

1 hour ago, laminutederire said:

 It might be, but had Ryzen be out sooner, I still think they would have bumped up the core count, because they had to in some ways. That would have just meant for them less margins

 

 

Doesn't happen that way with silicon designs, Intel would have needed to plan for that to happen years in advance.  Just like the 14nm Coffee lake release, that wasn't because Ryzen came out, Intel planned for it to come out and started designing the chip years ago for this release, of course Ryzen could have pushed the time table forward for the release, but at most 1 to 2 quarters.  There isn't much flexibility in time here.

 

This is why we don't see leap frogging of tech that much in graphics and cpus anymore, its very hard to do with the restrictions of time to develop, costs to develop, and nodes.

[Drak3]

1 minute ago, laminutederire said:

 It might be, but had Ryzen be out sooner, I still think they would have bumped up the core count, because they had to in some ways. That would have just meant for them less margins

I doubt it. Looking at Sky, Kaby, and Coffee, Kaby only looks like it was pushed as it was because it couldn't maintain the good clocks of Sky with the core count of Coffee, but there were bills to pay and potential product to sell.

[laminutederire]

3 minutes ago, Razor01 said:

 

For the higher end one I'd agree, but for their mainstream chips, it's not like they couldn't have done i5 4C HT and i7 6 cores or something like this since they already had chips like those anyway.

5 minutes ago, Drak3 said:

 

Could be it as well. Then you could still argue that they held off clocks by not allowing OC on all mainstream chips. Remains that competition catalyzed change for Intel. That's nice for us

[Razor01]

Just now, laminutederire said:

For the higher end one I'd agree, but for their mainstream chips, it's not like they couldn't have done i5 4C HT and i7 6 cores or something like this since they already had chips like those anyway.

Could be it as well. Then you could still argue that they held off clocks by not allowing OC on all mainstream chips. Remains that competition catalyzed change for Intel. That's nice for us

 

 

Even for the smaller ones, validation alone takes 2 quarters to a year for each chip.

 

I might be reading what you stated wrong so please correct me if I did.

 

Lets give this example, if an 8 Ryzen core came out and blew the paints of a 8 core Xeon in everything.

 

Then Intel would be in a position to get out a 6 core part that would go up against a 6 core Ryzen right?  That would be the situation you are stating.  If they weren't planning for anything higher than that 6 core part, they can't do anything.

 

What would the benefit be for Intel right now to release a 6 core part that goes up against a 6 core Ryzen right now, when a 6 core Intel does just as good as an 8 core Ryzen, in day to day tasks?  They are going to milk it for all its worth.  When that 8 core Intel comes out then they can drop the prices of 6 core part to fall in line.  Make more money as a result. 

 

Intel and even AMD or any company for that matter they don't give us things for free or less costs because they want to, they do it when they have to lol.

[Drak3]

9 minutes ago, laminutederire said:

Could be it as well. Then you could still argue that they held off clocks by not allowing OC on all mainstream chips. Remains that competition catalyzed change for Intel. That's nice for us

That's assuming all chips are stable or even remotely efficient much past their clocks. They're all binned prior to becoming what they are.

[laminutederire]

4 minutes ago, Razor01 said:

 

Intel and even AMD or any company for that matter they don't give us things for free or less costs because they want to, they do it when they have to lol.

That was my point, Ryzen forced them to release CPU with probably less margins than before (since bigger dies). Before they didn't have to so they could have had designs for better CPU idling to wait until and competes.

 

3 minutes ago, Drak3 said:

That's assuming all chips are stable or even remotely efficient much past their clocks. They're all binned prior to becoming what they are.

Sure but they are all capable to hold their base clocks. Why not unlock them for people who want to. They're binned but that doesn't mean you couldn't squeeze 100 or 200MHz (or more) for free on certain chips.

[Drak3]

Just now, laminutederire said:

Sure but they are all capable to hold their base clocks. Why not unlock them for people who want to. They're binned but that doesn't mean you couldn't squeeze 100 or 200MHz (or more) for free on certain chips.

Because overclocking beyond MCE is a niche. There isn't a good reason to unlock them, outside of marketting.

[Razor01]

Just now, laminutederire said:

That was my point, Ryzen forced them to release CPU with probably less margins than before (since bigger dies). Before they didn't have to so they could have had designs for better CPU idling to wait until and competes.

 

Sure but they are all capable to hold their base clocks. Why not unlock them for people who want to. They're binned but that doesn't mean you couldn't squeeze 100 or 200MHz (or more) for free on certain chips.

 

Ryzen didn't do that though, Intel's 6 core part is still priced where the last top end 4 core parts were.  300-400 bucks.  They might have pushed Intel's clocks up, not sure because that was heavily influenced by node changes and design too.  Clocks are a product of both those mostly design.

[laminutederire]

4 minutes ago, Drak3 said:

Because overclocking beyond MCE is a niche. There isn't a good reason to unlock them, outside of marketting.

There's also no reason why not.

[Drak3]

Just now, laminutederire said:

There's also no reason why not.

More people buy the bottom SKUs because they can overclock them.

 

Basically what happened to the 1800X

[mr moose]

1 hour ago, Kierax said:

The whole debacle after Ryzen was gaining internet popularity while it may not factually be the case, made it seriously look like Intel scrambled to get something that was in RnD and make it a marketable solution to a crisis they got comfortable waiting for.

 

Competition is a necessity for innovation within tech companies, otherwise while they do develop new technologies in the background, as with any situation you often keep your best punches/solutions till you really need them.

They did scramble to get both x299 and CL out.  But it wasn't because they were dragging their feet, it genuinely wasn't ready for release.  I dare say Intel were secretly hoping it would take AMD longer to get ryzen out.

 

1 hour ago, laminutederire said:

I think you're both right in a way. They continued working on making better products, but they purposely let the market stagnate to quad-core which were more profitable I guess. That's no coincidence they happen to bump up core count the second AMD competes. They could bump up their products easily because they haven't sat on their was doing nothing. But they most probably have held off on products and refused to give their best to consumers.

 

I think looking at long term trends from Intel and their roadmap it was probably more coincidence,  However there will be a certain degree of sandbagging to squeeze just a little bit more out of the last run, this is normal corporate practice I am sure Nvidia do it just as much and I would say AMD does it but probably not so much by choice though.

 

 

 

To the rest of the thread:

Honestly the amount of assumptions, conspiracies and made up reasoning on this forum is getting worse,  MSI put AMD gaming X back on their website. For right now all this means is GPP is not a thing in the way people assume it is.  we don't need people making up reasons for them doing this, just wait until there is actually some evidence before jumping on the bandwagon.   Also retailers run out of stock all the time, they are not pulling stock because of GPP,  stop claiming Nvidia are pulling current GPUs from the market,  no retailer in the history of successful retailers has ever stockpiled products that are in High demand only for the purpose of selling the next product. 

And finally only a very small proton of buyers buy  a brand because of its brand.  this rhetoric about people buying Nvivia because it's nvidia is not real, there would easily be just as many who buy AMD because it's AMD,  you know we have countless threads asking for advice on cards because people actually want to make an informed purchase and not a brand purchase.   People recommend the best, just because that happens to be Nvidia slightly more often than not doesn't mean people are blindly recommending them.   

 

At some point people are going to have to accept that some products are popular because they are better, sometimes better marketed but mostly just better products, especially in a niche market were 90% of the buyers are not easily fooled by glossy boxes and blurbs on ads.

 

 

[Notional]

Oh how nice of you Nvidia. You "moved on". Well guess what? The consumers fracking didn't! Scummy @$£$@

[YamiYukiSenpai]

On 3/20/2018 at 11:08 AM, kladzen said:

Looks like MSI have removed all their "gaming" from AMD graphics cards aswell.. only NVIDIA cards have the gaming brand now.

 

You can check out msi website if needed.

Not yet, at least on the Canadian website.

[Razor01]

21 minutes ago, YamiYukiSenpai said:

Not yet, at least on the Canadian website.

Same here in the US.

[leadeater]

3 hours ago, YamiYukiSenpai said:

Not yet, at least on the Canadian website.

 

3 hours ago, Razor01 said:

Same here in the US.

 

Go back a page or so, I posted when it got fixed. Definitely was broken and were not showing up.