[H}ardocp MSI GeForce RTX 2070 GAMING Z review

[bitsandpieces]

Read full review here: https://www.hardocp.com/article/2018/10/14/msi_geforce_rtx_2070_gaming_z_performance_review/

 

 

H have signed no NDA with NVIDIA:

"HardOCP has an exclusive for you today. Since we have not signed NVIDIA's recent NDA, we are not being sourced RTX review cards by NVIDIA or its AIBs. We were however able to source a retail sample from overseas. The official embargo for the RTX 2070 expires Tuesday at 8am CDT. Since we are not held to NVIDIA's embargo we have a full RTX 2070 performance review for you today. We’ve got a custom retail-packed factory overclocked video card based on the new GeForce RTX 2070. We will be comparing the GeForce RTX 2070 with the GeForce GTX 1080 and Radeon RX Vega 64 video cards in eight games at 1440p and 4K. This is real-world game testing, using highest playable settings and apples-to-apples comparisons."

 

The RTX2070 seems to be a very good alternative to GTX1080Ti and outright kills the reason for RTX2080 to exist

There is however the matter for no existing RTX benchmarks

[sazrocks]

That's kind of a jerk move to other reviewers

[asus killer]

4 minutes ago, sazrocks said:

That's kind of a jerk move to other reviewers

Nda's are stupid and only serve for people to preorder blindly. No one should agree to them.

 

[sazrocks]

Just now, asus killer said:

Nda's are stupid and only serve for people to preorder blindly. No one should agree to them.

 

NDAs also allow for every reviewer to have time to make a full and thorough review of the product. The correct way to publish early is for all reviewers to do it together, not screw each other over for clicks. 

[Sakkura]

6 minutes ago, sazrocks said:

That's kind of a jerk move to other reviewers

More a jerk move of Nvidia, they should have ensured no cards were out in the wild before the NDA expiration date.

[Morgan MLGman]

Keep in mind this part of the review:

Quote

This is a highly factory overclocked custom cooled and built GeForce RTX 2070 video card. This video card represents the pinnacle of GeForce RTX 2070 performance.

 

[Cereal5]

Isn't the 2070 closer in price to a 1080 Ti? wouldn't that be a more valid comparison? cause the 1080 Ti is around 25-30% faster than a 1080, and it looks like 2070 is too. So the only difference is what.... ray tracing?

[sazrocks]

Just now, Sakkura said:

More a jerk move of Nvidia, they should have ensured no cards were out in the wild before the NDA expiration date.

Sounds like H paid off some overseas retailer to send them a "sample", not that there was a card floating around. There probably was an NDA that the retailer signed (and ignored) too.

 

H could (and should) have just published along with everyone else.

[Bananasplit_00]

14 minutes ago, bitsandpieces said:

The RTX2070 seems to be a very good alternative to GTX1080Ti and outright kills the reason for RTX2080 to exist

but its still slower than the 1080TI and 2080?

[asus killer]

3 minutes ago, sazrocks said:

NDAs also allow for every reviewer to have time to make a full and thorough review of the product. The correct way to publish early is for all reviewers to do it together, not screw each other over for clicks. 

Then make it end before starting pre orders.

This guy already has a non review card and did the review, so no reason for it

[Delicieuxz]

12 minutes ago, sazrocks said:

That's kind of a jerk move to other reviewers

I don't think so.

 

Reviewers have a choice of whether to sign an NDA that restricts their review release date in exchange for getting a free sample from Nvidia. Those who chose to sign the NDA got what they chose: A free review sample and the restriction that comes with it.

 

Reviewers that chose to not sign the NDA had to source a GPU from other means, probably paying for it out of their own pocket, but aren't subject to Nvidia's review release restriction.

 

Is it a jerk move that those who chose to not sign the NDA don't get a free review sample? That's part of the package. And a person chooses to not sign an NDA specifically to not be bound by Nvidia's terms - which include Nvidia's review release restrictions.

[sazrocks]

Just now, asus killer said:

Then make it end before starting pre orders.

This guy already has a non review card and did the review, so no reason for it

I don't disagree that what Nvidia did was wrong, but for H to break rank like this just screws everyone over.

[Delicieuxz]

4 minutes ago, sazrocks said:

I don't disagree that what Nvidia did was wrong, but for H to break rank like this just screws everyone over.

Hard OCP didn't sign the NDA, so they aren't a part of Nvidia's review regime ranks to be breaking them. H also didn't get the benefits of signing an NDA, so why should they forgo the benefits of not signing an NDA? Those who sign have their benefits and downsides, while those who don't have theirs. It's a choice.

 

Hard OCP also made a forum poll on whether they should sign Nvidia's NDA or not. In choosing to not sign it and not be a part of what the site owner views as a totalitarian review regime, H OCP is also taking a stand against that review regime.

[sazrocks]

7 minutes ago, Delicieuxz said:

I don't think so.

 

Reviewers have a choice of whether to sign an NDA that restricts their review release date in exchange for getting a free sample from Nvidia. Those who chose to sign the NDA got what they chose: A free review sample and the restriction that comes with it.

 

Reviewers that chose to not sign the NDA had to source a GPU from other means, probably paying for it out of their own pocket, but aren't subject to Nvidia's review release restriction.

 

Is it a jerk move that those who chose to not sign the NDA don't get a free review sample? That's part of the package. And a person chooses to not sign an NDA specifically to not be bound by Nvidia's terms - which include Nvidia's review release restrictions.

You're assuming that H obtained this card through completely legit means. I'd argue that (while I do dislike Nvidia) Nvidia isn't stupid enough to just throw cards out in the wild without making retailers sign NDAs and other agreements that prevent them from doing things, like, selling the cards before they go on sale... Therefore, someone somewhere most likely broke an agreement with Nvidia. Personally I wouldn't be surprised if H paid off the retailer to get them to break the agreement and send them a card.

 

Don't get me wrong, what Nvidia has done this launch is wrong, and H has probably done nothing legally wrong. My point was that their publishing of this story shows a lack of respect for other reviewers, especially since the embargo lift is so close.

[Morgan MLGman]

9 minutes ago, Cereal5 said:

Isn't the 2070 closer in price to a 1080 Ti? wouldn't that be a more valid comparison? cause the 1080 Ti is around 25-30% faster than a 1080, and it looks like 2070 is too. So the only difference is what.... ray tracing?

The 2070 is 599$ for the FE model so it's as much as the 1080 when it launched.

The 1080Ti is comparable in terms of performance to the 2080 so it's faster than the 2070. The price increase compared to the 1070 is huge...

 

[Stefan Payne]

24 minutes ago, sazrocks said:

That's kind of a jerk move to other reviewers

Vengeance is sweet, isn't it?

 

Since nVidia didn't sample them and banned them from all official sources, they looked elsewhere and pissed off everyone involved. GOOD!!

 

So they being banned by nVidia for Testsamples was actually an advantage for them - and disadvantage for everyone 

[sazrocks]

2 minutes ago, Stefan Payne said:

Vengeance is sweet, isn't it?

 

Since nVidia didn't sample them and banned them from all official sources, they looked elsewhere and pissed off everyone involved. GOOD!!

 

So they being banned by nVidia for Testsamples was actually an advantage for them - and disadvantage for everyone 

I dislike Nvidia as much as the next guy, but why does this justify hurting other reviewers? What have they done wrong? 

 

Vengeance may be sweet but the collateral damage that comes with it is bitter.

[Stefan Payne]

1 minute ago, sazrocks said:

I dislike Nvidia as much as the next guy, but why does this justify hurting other reviewers? What have they done wrong? 

Not having the balls to talk about the GPP for example or even defending it.

Have you already forgotten the Geforce Partner Programme? And how soft many other outlets were to nVidia?

 

1 minute ago, sazrocks said:

Vengeance may be sweet but the collateral damage that comes with it is bitter.

Its a business.

If you have a disadvantage, you see that you make it to an advantage.

 

The solution would have been easy:
Give them a Card and let them sign the NDA. But because they were banned from beeing sampled, they could do whatever they wanted. And they knew a guy who know a guy, that knew a guy who could give them a card prior to the NDA  date.

 

And they used the oppurtunity.

 

Also what you forgot is the price of the card. How much did they pay? 2000€?? 5000€??

[Sfekke]

30 minutes ago, asus killer said:

Nda's are stupid and only serve for people to preorder blindly. No one should agree to them.

 

But if you don't agree you don't get the product and the relationship you have with that brand/company will probably decrease.

[sazrocks]

11 minutes ago, Stefan Payne said:

Not having the balls to talk about the GPP for example or even defending it.

Have you already forgotten the Geforce Partner Programme? And how soft many other outlets were to nVidia?

Lots of other reviews were pissed too... I still don't see how H is justified in harming them.

11 minutes ago, Stefan Payne said:

Its a business.

If you have a disadvantage, you see that you make it to an advantage.

 

The solution would have been easy:
Give them a Card and let them sign the NDA. But because they were banned from beeing sampled, they could do whatever they wanted. And they knew a guy who know a guy, that knew a guy who could give them a card prior to the NDA  date.

 

And they used the oppurtunity.

I never have said that they could not do this or that it would not have been the best business decision for them (at least short term). I am instead saying that they should not have done this out of respect for other outlets. In business there are plenty of legally right but ethically wrong things you can do to get an advantage.

11 minutes ago, Stefan Payne said:

Also what you forgot is the price of the card. How much did they pay? 2000€?? 5000€??

And this makes it right how? The price of an object does not justify it ethically.

[Sakkura]

23 minutes ago, sazrocks said:

You're assuming that H obtained this card through completely legit means. I'd argue that (while I do dislike Nvidia) Nvidia isn't stupid enough to just throw cards out in the wild without making retailers sign NDAs and other agreements that prevent them from doing things, like, selling the cards before they go on sale... Therefore, someone somewhere most likely broke an agreement with Nvidia. Personally I wouldn't be surprised if H paid off the retailer to get them to break the agreement and send them a card.

 

Don't get me wrong, what Nvidia has done this launch is wrong, and H has probably done nothing legally wrong. My point was that their publishing of this story shows a lack of respect for other reviewers, especially since the embargo lift is so close.

Unless they stole the card, H did everything completely legit. It's not their fault Nvidia tries to have an NDA while letting people preorder (trying to get people to buy blind, based only on marketing hype). If other reviewers are hurt, that's Nvidia's fault.

17 minutes ago, sazrocks said:

I dislike Nvidia as much as the next guy, but why does this justify hurting other reviewers? What have they done wrong? 

 

Vengeance may be sweet but the collateral damage that comes with it is bitter.

H did not hurt other reviewers, Nvidia did.

[sazrocks]

I see you edited your post to include more:

45 minutes ago, Delicieuxz said:

Hard OCP didn't sign the NDA, so they aren't a part of Nvidia's review regime ranks to be breaking them. H also didn't get the benefits of signing an NDA, so why should they forgo the benefits of not signing an NDA? Those who sign have their benefits and downsides, while those who don't have theirs. It's a choice.

 

Hard OCP also made a forum poll on whether they should sign Nvidia's NDA or not. In choosing to not sign it and not be a part of what the site owner views as a totalitarian review regime, H OCP is also taking a stand against that review regime.

I'll focus on the second part because I already mainly responded to the first part:

 

I support taking a stand against this crap, but together, not individually, as individually you are stealing clicks from your peers. See my previous post:

56 minutes ago, sazrocks said:

The correct way to publish early is for all reviewers to do it together, not screw each other over for clicks. 

The NDA system needs to be reformed, not abolished, otherwise we will lose the quality of reviews that we have now.

[sazrocks]

15 minutes ago, Sakkura said:

Unless they stole the card, H did everything completely legit.

Legally yes, as I said:

39 minutes ago, sazrocks said:

and H has probably done nothing legally wrong.

 

15 minutes ago, Sakkura said:

It's not their fault Nvidia tries to have an NDA while letting people preorder (trying to get people to buy blind, based only on marketing hype).

No, and I disagree with how Nvidia handled this launch. This is an ugly trend from multiple manufacturers that needs to be stopped. 

39 minutes ago, sazrocks said:

Don't get me wrong, what Nvidia has done this launch is wrong

 

15 minutes ago, Sakkura said:

If other reviewers are hurt, that's Nvidia's fault.

H did not hurt other reviewers, Nvidia did.

I completely disagree. Nvidia did not publish this review. Nvidia did not just hand H a card without an NDA. I really don't see how not giving someone a product necessarily hurts other reviewers. That part required action from H. It was H's decision to publish early, even with stated knowledge of the embargo lift date. Once again, legally H did nothing wrong. Ethically, on the other hand, I would argue that they did. They could have just of easily waited until the same time as other reviewers to publish (something that is not unprecedented by the way; GN has done this in the past) out of respect for the honest work that others have put in to their reviews. Instead, whatever their intentions to nobly stand up to Nvidia or whatever, the reality is that others have now lost clicks (and therefore revenue) because of H. 

[LAwLz]

I have a feeling some people in this thread would have acted very differently if it was an AMD card that had been obtained and reviewed before the official publishing date. 

 

 

At the end of the day, this could and probably will hurt other reviewers, which is a shame. 

NDAs disclosure agreements exist so that reviewers get a fair chance to test the card without having to rush something out the door to not be "late" with their review. This is just very bad manners. 

[leadeater]

Was going to read review, went looking for other ones I prefer to read... none to be found, checked back here to find it's early release of review so not going to read it. I'll wait, no line cutting thanks.