AMD's official "eff you GPP" response: A Gamer's Choice

[Kamjam21xx]

Its probably also all subject to change, behind closed doors. It would astound me if it wasnt.

[Razor01]

1 minute ago, Kamjam21xx said:

Its probably also all subject to change, behind closed doors. It would astound me if it wasnt.

If you have ever seen nV change after they make a decision please let me know, cause I have never seen that happen

 

This is the same shit AMD went after nV with  Gameworks, with TWIMTBP.  Come on, nV owns the code they wrote they can do as they deem with what they own.  But Kyle doesn't want to link this to that, because he put his foot in hot oil already, no take backs.

[Kamjam21xx]

2 minutes ago, Razor01 said:

If you have ever seen nV change after they make a decision please let me know, cause I have never seen that happen

 

This is the same shit AMD went after nV with  Gameworks, with TWIMTBP.  Come on, nV owns the code they wrote they can do as they deem with what they own.  But Kyle doesn't want to link this to that, because he put his foot in hot oil already, no take backs.

It would still astound me if they ever had people sign anything that wasnt subject to change. 

[Razor01]

1 minute ago, Kamjam21xx said:

It would still astound me if they ever had people sign anything that wasnt subject to change. 

There are always contingencies in contracts but usually those changes are due to specific reasons, most of them will be due to money reasons, another one is due to force majeure, things out of each parties control.

[pas008]

1 hour ago, Notional said:

Actually it's more straight from AMD.

 

Because it's not NVidia's branding. 

 nvidias end product they are just a manufacturing company lol

 

1 hour ago, Notional said:

What do you mean instead of competing? Where is AMD not competing?

 

AMD sells their chips to GPU vendors. They have no say who or what those vendors sell their cards to. In the end, it's the distributors and retailers selling the cards to miners.

Price increase has nothing to do with AMD. They are not reeling in the added revenue.

 

No vendor demands NVidia market their stuff. That is not what this entire thing is about. This is about NVidia strong arming the vendors and usurping the vendors IP (branding). It is entirely up to NVidia how they want to market things. They can just market specific models. After all, if they market ROG, they are also marketing Intel. That is their choice.

 

How do we know? Because NVidia refuses to talk about it. Refuses to debunk it. And because every single vendor doing both branding are making those changes while being completely hermetically sealed about ANY and ALL info about the program. Extrapolating a conclusion from all the info is not difficult. No vendor would willingly choose to do this at own accord. Remember that GPP does exist, NVidia had an official announcement about it.

so manufactureres should have rights to a product that they manufacture for others?

oh wait its nvidias end product they just make the shit for them

[Kamjam21xx]

1 minute ago, pas008 said:

 nvidias end product they are just a manufacturing company lol

 

so manufactureres should have rights to a product that they manufacture for others?

oh wait its nvidias end product they just make the shit for them

I feel like that doesnt make nvidia own their cards, the same way AMD doesnt own my cpu because i bought it.

[Razor01]

2 minutes ago, Kamjam21xx said:

I feel like that doesnt make nvidia own their cards, the same way AMD doesnt own my cpu because i bought it.

So you don't feel nV's IP is not their right to own?

[pas008]

2 minutes ago, Kamjam21xx said:

I feel like that doesnt make nvidia own their cards, the same way AMD doesnt own my cpu because i bought it.

they are licensed manufacturers and distributors hence gtx geforce rx radeon name on all cards

they are not consumers either

 

 

[Razor01]

going to point to this

 

https://hbr.org/2005/12/marketing-malpractice-the-cause-and-the-cure

 

Quote

To build brands that mean something to customers, you need to attach them to products that mean something to customers.

 

Quote

The great Harvard marketing professor Theodore Levitt used to tell his students, “People don’t want to buy a quarter-inch drill. They want a quarter-inch hole!” Every marketer we know agrees with Levitt’s insight. Yet these same people segment their markets by type of drill and by price point; they measure market share of drills, not holes; and they benchmark the features and functions of their drill, not their hole, against those of rivals. They then set to work offering more features and functions in the belief that these will translate into better pricing and market share. When marketers do this, they often solve the wrong problems, improving their products in ways that are irrelevant to their customers’ needs.

 

 

Now take nV in this instance what are they trying to do?  "people don't want to by a graphics card that plays games, they want graphics cards that play games above and beyond what was done before"  Their cards can provide that, AMD's current cards cannot. 

 

Why wouldn't they want to separate their cards from AMD's cards in this instance.

 

Now if ASUS's ROG brand houses both AMD and nV products, ASUS's brand is pretty much saying either of these cards can do the same things.  But reality is they can't do the same things.  And its not even close.

 

People really need to read the rest of this article.  It goes into the nuances of what branding achieves vs what companies and most people "think" they achieve.

 

[pas008]

i like this one and bolded

http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/branding.html

The process involved in creating a unique name and image for a product in the consumers' mind, mainly through advertising campaigns with a consistent theme. Branding aims to establish a significant and differentiated presence in the market that attracts and retains loyal customers

[laminutederire]

50 minutes ago, Razor01 said:

 

PS AMD is not competitive in the GPU side of things at all!

Ps: we've been over this a million times. Yes they are. Not being competitive on the highest end does not mean not being competitive at all.

[Notional]

29 minutes ago, Razor01 said:

*snip giant wall of text, even Trump would be proud of*

Incorrect; in the original article, it stated that their primary gaming brand should be exclusively aligned with Nvidia. But since most vendors only has one gaming brand, that was the de facto outcome (see Gigabyte for instance).

 

You have no idea what lawsuits are under way. Neither from AMD, FTC, EU Commission, civil class action or anything else. You can speculate or guess. But that is all.

 

Consumers are limited in choice of gaming branded apparel. And considering that most GPU's sold are gamer branded, it will have an impact on choice. Specifically because the average consumer isn't as educated on the matter as we are in here. There's a reason EVERYTHING has RBG bs on it today. It's not because people don't want it. Gaming brands are very strong for the market it targets. And branding means a LOT (otherwise companies wouldn't bother with it). 

For instance, the highest grossing movie of all time, Avatar, costs around 300 million to make. And Fox spent around 150 million on promotions. That's one third of the entire budget spent on that movie.

 

Yeah, it IS kinda goofy when people don't understand basic ownership of branding/IP and products.

 

What else would you like AMD to do? They are the underdog. They have limited funds. They have to fight with whatever they got. And they are being quite good at it. When that barking dog is a watchdog alerting to something scummy, then everyone loves that dog.

 

That is your subjective opinion. Focusing on freedom, open standards, etc. is something a lot of people care about and supports. Consumers supporting closed vendor locked in, proprietary standards, are for the most cases, blatant idiots working against their own interests for the benefits of a company. Why would any consumer do that? 

 

Because Kyle doesn't like that kind of scummy shit. And Nvidia has done nothing about it. In fact, NVidia chose to be completely silent on the matter, and put a massive gag order, the tech world hardly ever sees (sans Apple). What do you want him to criticize AMD for? Approaching this scummy business in a way, you subjectively dislike? You're overstating your own importance here.

 

AMD is completely competitive on everything but a tiny tiny niche of the extreme upper end of cards. 

3 minutes ago, pas008 said:

 nvidias end product they are just a manufacturing company lol

 

so manufactureres should have rights to a product that they manufacture for others?

oh wait its nvidias end product they just make the shit for them

Nonsense. NVidia makes a processor and supplies drivers/eco system for that chip. Everything else is made by the vendor, including branding, sales channels, pricing, etc. 

 

They don't manufacturer it for others. It's their product and their branding. You're spouting nonsense.

[Notional]

4 minutes ago, pas008 said:

i like this one and bolded

http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/branding.html

The process involved in creating a unique name and image for a product in the consumers' mind, mainly through advertising campaigns with a consistent theme. Branding aims to establish a significant and differentiated presence in the market that attracts and retains loyal customers

Everyone here understands what branding is. A lot, on the other hand, doesn't seem to understand why branding exists, or who owns the IP of said brands.

[Kamjam21xx]

No i know, i just care less and less for nvidia with every contribution they make. I use to like them as a company, but that changed over time.

[Razor01]

21 minutes ago, Notional said:

Incorrect; in the original article, it stated that their primary gaming brand should be exclusively aligned with Nvidia. But since most vendors only has one gaming brand, that was the de facto outcome (see Gigabyte for instance).

Which was taken out of context as we figured out from Kyle's interview with PCgamer, where he reads out "agreed gaming brand"

 

21 minutes ago, Notional said:

You have no idea what lawsuits are under way. Neither from AMD, FTC, EU Commission, civil class action or anything else. You can speculate or guess. But that is all.

Yes we do go search for things happening with AMD and nV in the jurisdictions that the FTC, EU will be filling papers on this.  Still nothing is coming up. Another words nothing is being done yet.  This is all public record stuff man.  If a formal investigation is set, things will be there.  There will be injunctions and what not, because they won't be able to do an investigation with out that, and to get to the lawsuit they need that first.

 

21 minutes ago, Notional said:

Consumers are limited in choice of gaming branded apparel. And considering that most GPU's sold are gamer branded, it will have an impact on choice. Specifically because the average consumer isn't as educated on the matter as we are in here. There's a reason EVERYTHING has RBG bs on it today. It's not because people don't want it. Gaming brands are very strong for the market it targets. And branding means a LOT (otherwise companies wouldn't bother with it). 

For instance, the highest grossing movie of all time, Avatar, costs around 300 million to make. And Fox spent around 150 million on promotions. That's one third of the entire budget spent on that movie.

 

What else would you like AMD to do? They are the underdog. They have limited funds. They have to fight with whatever they got. And they are being quite good at it. When that barking dog is a watchdog alerting to something scummy, then everyone loves that dog.

Yeah but nV's brand means more to a gamer right now then any other brand on the market when it concerns graphics cards.

 

AMD know this, they can't do shit about it, and that is why they don't want this to happen because their products don't stake up. It has everything to do with them not anyone else.

 

What else can they do, stop barking get on the horse and make a good product lol.  Or at least get products out on a timely basis, it doesn't need to compete at the top but if Vega came out at the same time as the 1080, it wouldn't be as a bad as it was.

 

21 minutes ago, Notional said:

That is your subjective opinion. Focusing on freedom, open standards, etc. is something a lot of people care about and supports. Consumers supporting closed vendor locked in, proprietary standards, are for the most cases, blatant idiots working against their own interests for the benefits of a company. Why would any consumer do that? 

 

Advertising with Freedom and Rebellion (loaded words) is not subjective at all man lol, you really need to think about this a bit more.

 

http://score.rims.k12.ca.us/activity/second_war_independence/pages/aganda.html

 

I can show you many links to this type of work with advertising.

21 minutes ago, Notional said:

AMD is completely competitive on everything but a tiny tiny niche of the extreme upper end of cards.

 

No its not, we can go back all the way to prior to the Polaris launch and talk about how they tried to sway public opinion on what to look for in gaming cards, how they should be looked at when benchmarking, How about the VR drivel they tried?  Even Maxwell as better at VR then Polaris was lol with comparable performance cards.

 

Kyle doesn't like it, but he already made mistakes in his first article.  I don't care if he likes it or not, I don't think anyone likes it, I don't either.  But there is a point when he needs to sit down and use his the correct head, the one on top of his body and analyze what is going on in front of him instead of making comments, because at that point he is no longer a journalist, he is a commentator. 

 

[Razor01]

26 minutes ago, laminutederire said:

Ps: we've been over this a million times. Yes they are. Not being competitive on the highest end does not mean not being competitive at all.

PS they are not, they can't even be competitive in what they showed prior to launch.  They said the were going to be competitive in perf/watt, they are not, they said they were going to be on top with VR, they are not.  They said they were going..... Poor Volta, they are not. 

 

Polaris is a card that is competitive for people that only look at AMD products as their primary choice.  People that weigh in on all factors of their purchase, they are not competitive at all.

 

If price is the only thing people look at, yeah go ahead and get a Polaris or Vega, but Price is not everything.  We are talking about a products capabilities, not an arbitrary attachment to where they end up being in the marketplace.

 

The problem is you think they are competitive, look at the market share, low end and mid range is 35% of the market, do they have 50% of that 35% of the market, in gaming?  No they don't.  17% was there prior to Polaris was launched, that means that 17% was due to their entire market space, so AMD has anywhere from 10- 34% of the total gaming market for everything.  If it wasn't for mining, AMD will be way down we all know that.  10% sales were due to mining is what AMD stated.

[D13H4RD]

And NVIDIA will still probably command a majority of the gaming-oriented GPU market share

 

Unless AMD pulls a Ryzen for Radeon. Idk when that will ever happen though.

[Kamjam21xx]

29 minutes ago, laminutederire said:

Ps: we've been over this a million times. Yes they are. Not being competitive on the highest end does not mean not being competitive at all.

They are competative on the high end. AMD is better than nvidia for time and money on normal workstations for a lot of workflows. Your specific workflow changes if thats true though.

 

AMD is all around giving intel and nvidia a run for their money in high end workstation and server solutions at the moment. Its not always that way, but still. 

 

Atleast thats what i think, maybe im wrong. I dont get updated on a weekly basis not even monthly sometimes.

[Razor01]

12 minutes ago, Kamjam21xx said:

They are competative on the high end. AMD is better than nvidia for time and money on normal workstations for a lot of workflows. Your specific workflow changes if thats true though.

 

AMD is all around giving intel and nvidia a run for their money in high end workstation and server solutions at the moment. Its not always that way, but still. 

 

Atleast thats what i think, maybe im wrong. I dont get updated on a weekly basis not even monthly sometimes.

Workstations no they are not current AMD products in workstations compete with Maxwell based Quadro parts for the most part, there are some outliers that they compete with pascal parts but few and far between .

 

AMD is competitive with Maxwell based products when we consider all metrics.  At lower price points. but Price is something that is placed based on its market position when it arrives in the market.

 

Polaris matches up well with all metrics with a GTX 970 (vram excluded)

 

Vega matches up very well with all metrics with the GTX 980ti,   Yeah Vega 64 does get more performance but at a higher power draw, if we equal that out, overclocking the GTX 980ti its performance and power consumption is similar to that of Vega 64.  All of this with more than one node differential.   nV's tech is better currently.

[Kamjam21xx]

You could build an entire workstation for the price of a professional card from nvidia, i dont see how your making more money if you give your employees a bunch of cards that cost thousands, that physically cant do some of the things you can do on a 1,600$ amd card just because it has more vram.

 

Run a gpu accelerated simulation that needs 16gb of vram and its impossible on an nvidia card without jumping up to insane prices.

[Razor01]

Just now, Kamjam21xx said:

You could build an entire workstation for the price of a professional card from nvidia, i dont see how your making more money if you give your employees a bunch of cards that cost thousands, that physically cant do some of the things you can do on a 1,600$ amd card just because it has more vram.

As I stated this isn't about price.  nV has better products, so if they want to they can price them higher lol. 

 

I even stated when they released the 1080ti and dropped the price of the 1080 they didn't need to do that, but the underlying reason of for them doing that was to hurt AMD's bottom line.

[Kamjam21xx]

3 minutes ago, Razor01 said:

As I stated this isn't about price.  nV has better products, so if they want to they can price them higher lol. 

 

I even stated when they released the 1080ti and dropped the price of the 1080 they didn't need to do that, but the underlying reason of for them doing that was to hurt AMD's bottom line.

Well yeah their actual cards are great, no doubt. But the economic choice is AMD, and thats not a budget thing. If i had more money to spend id run 4x crossfire.

 

When it comes to games i know thats a different story. But i get pumped on simulations and rendering a picture one tiny box at a time now.

 

[Razor01]

2 minutes ago, Kamjam21xx said:

Well yeah their actual cards are great, no doubt. But the economic choice is AMD, and thats not a budget thing. If i had more money to spend id run 4x crossfire.

 

 

Are we talking about best bang for the buck here or who has the better tech?

 

A Yugo and Mercedes do the same thing but one is clearly better than the other, one is a budget friendly option though.

 

Differences.

[laminutederire]

15 minutes ago, Razor01 said:

PS they are not, they can't even be competitive in what they showed prior to launch.  They said the were going to be competitive in perf/watt, they are not, they said they were going to be on top with VR, they are not.  They said they were going..... Poor Volta, they are not. 

 

Polaris is a card that is competitive for people that only look at AMD products as their primary choice.  People that weigh in on all factors of their purchase, they are not competitive at all.

 

If price is the only thing people look at, yeah go ahead and get a Polaris or Vega, but Price is not everything.  We are talking about a products capabilities, not an arbitrary attachment to where they end up being in the marketplace.

 

The problem is you think they are competitive, look at the market share, low end and mid range is 35% of the market, do they have 50% of that 35% of the market, in gaming?  No they don't.  17% was there prior to Polaris was launched, that means that 17% was due to their entire market space, so AMD has anywhere from 10- 34% of the total gaming market for everything.  If it wasn't for mining, AMD will be way down we all know that.  10% sales were due to mining is what AMD stated.

You're just pissing me off. You re parroting time and again a false narrative.

There a lot of cards worth being picked off in Amd's line up. Why do you think Nvidia released the 1060 so fast? Why they released a 1070ti?

Talk about capabilities? They can game just fine, freesync monitors are as good and way cheaper. Relive is arguably on par on better than shadowplay. Drivers are correct. They developed new techs like the possibility to use ssd directly which is useful for some.

The only place amd is lacking is where Nvidia is just acting like a douche, namely Deep learning. They insist on keeping this closed source and to me that's very dangerous considering the area of science it touches.

[Kamjam21xx]

Kindof both. I think nvidia professional cards are frivolous like brand new work trucks instead ones that have been used 4-6 years.

 

Idk of anyone that would need say 4 gv100 cards and 4x cpus except someone for industrial lights and magic Or something.

 

Even then the specs of a gv100 arent actually 8,400 more than the closest AMD card. Youd beat out the gv100 with 2x wx9100 in the terraflops department. 

 

Wx not w

 

Edited April 20, 2018 by Kamjam21xx