[H}ardocp MSI GeForce RTX 2070 GAMING Z review

[NumLock21]

So [H] released their 1070 review early because they did not signed the NDA and some are not happy about it. Who cares, you'll still read or watch the other reviewers anyway, for performance comparisons sake.

[goodtofufriday]

3 minutes ago, VegetableStu said:

but I don't get the "first of the pack" thing o_o I read/watch reviews from all the outlets I follow whenever they publish it anyway (insert Anandtech new motherboard review reference here)

Most people will read the first thing they see. and most news outlets who only report results, not test results, will source hardocp. HOCP gets a head start on google SEO for future clicks for being one of the top results, and additional clicks from news outlets that report today and today only. 

[schwellmo92]

I can get a 1080 Ti for the same price as these 2070’s, and way less if I buy secondhand. Pretty obvious choice for me >.>

[Yoinkerman]

7 hours 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. 

If that were true Nvidia wouldn't send reviewers cards 2 days before launch 

[TVwazhere]

33 minutes ago, schwellmo92 said:

I can get a 1080 Ti for the same price as these 2070’s, and way less if I buy secondhand. Pretty obvious choice for me >.>

That's what I did

[maartendc]

So it performs like 10% faster than a 1080, But you can get a Gigabyte 1080right now for $440 according to PCpartpicker.

 

This 2070 on the other hand is $599, or 36% more expensive, for 10% performance increase.. yeah Nvidia is really milking their performance advantage for all its worth. This is what happens when a manufacturer is competing with its own products instead of real competition.

 

This 2070 Should be priced at $399 or $450 max. A slight increase from the 1070 MSRP of $379. Then it would be OK value. Now, we are just all being ripped off.

 

What, you say? But it is faster than the 1070? Of course, that is what generational gains are supposed to get you. Better performance at the same price.

[schwellmo92]

8 minutes ago, maartendc said:

What, you say? But it is faster than the 1070? Of course, that is what generational gains are supposed to get you. Better performance at the same price.

Intel and Nvidia really killing it. Better performance for unproportionally more cost and only an X year wait.

[Misanthrope]

8 hours ago, sazrocks said:

That's kind of a jerk move to other reviewers

 

8 hours ago, asus killer said:

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

 

 

I have to side with Asus Killer here: We should send a loud and clear message to reviewers: Stop fucking signing NDAs, No I don't care how many bullshit excuses of "It's very tame" and "It's industry standard" you want to throw at us, Don't fucking sign them, push back against Nvidia controlling the message.

[Dylanc1500]

This is quite disheartening to see. There is a lot of misunderstanding in the community.

 

Also, I'll let you assume what I'm referring to.

[pas008]

5 minutes ago, Misanthrope said:

 

 

I have to side with Asus Killer here: We should send a loud and clear message to reviewers: Stop fucking signing NDAs, No I don't care how many bullshit excuses of "It's very tame" and "It's industry standard" you want to throw at us, Don't fucking sign them, push back against Nvidia controlling the message.

lol only nvidia has NDAs

seriously

[maartendc]

6 minutes ago, Misanthrope said:

I have to side with Asus Killer here: We should send a loud and clear message to reviewers: Stop fucking signing NDAs, No I don't care how many bullshit excuses of "It's very tame" and "It's industry standard" you want to throw at us, Don't fucking sign them, push back against Nvidia controlling the message.

Unfortunately, reviewers have to do this to get review samples. Usually they send out review samples at least a couple of days before the product hits the consumer market, which gives the reviewers time to do the benchmarking, and have them ready on launch day. If they do not sign the NDA, they would have to start their testing on day of release, which means they would be DAYS behind other reviewers who do sign the NDA.

 

This all would not be a problem, if it were not for "some people" ahem INTEL ahem. releasing their own misleading benchmarks before the NDA is up, and taking preorders at the same time. If pre-orders were not a thing, NDA's would not be an issue. The problem occurs when you start selling the product BEFORE you allow reviewers to release their findings. Very annoying.

 

The real solution is: don't pre-order anything.

[XenosTech]

15 minutes ago, maartendc said:

Unfortunately, reviewers have to do this to get review samples.

No they don't. Some reviewers like Science studio get their review samples from AIB partners. GN  recently got a review sample from a motherboard vendor.

[pas008]

22 minutes ago, maartendc said:

Unfortunately, reviewers have to do this to get review samples. Usually they send out review samples at least a couple of days before the product hits the consumer market, which gives the reviewers time to do the benchmarking, and have them ready on launch day. If they do not sign the NDA, they would have to start their testing on day of release, which means they would be DAYS behind other reviewers who do sign the NDA.

 

This all would not be a problem, if it were not for "some people" ahem INTEL ahem. releasing their own misleading benchmarks before the NDA is up, and taking preorders at the same time. If pre-orders were not a thing, NDA's would not be an issue. The problem occurs when you start selling the product BEFORE you allow reviewers to release their findings. Very annoying.

 

The real solution is: don't pre-order anything.

dont forget amd did preview too and did preorder too lol

 

intel didnt release any benchmarks a sponsor did

intel cant claim anything on amd side so it was amds bad results arent intels problem its the firm/company/etc that did

and skewering competitions numbers isnt anything new here we always see it done

[schwellmo92]

33 minutes ago, pas008 said:

dont forget amd did preview too and did preorder too lol

 

intel didnt release any benchmarks a sponsor did

intel cant claim anything on amd side so it was amds bad results arent intels problem its the firm/company/etc that did

and skewering competitions numbers isnt anything new here we always see it done

Oh man you’re delusional 

[Misanthrope]

58 minutes ago, maartendc said:

Unfortunately, reviewers have to do this to get review samples. Usually they send out review samples at least a couple of days before the product hits the consumer market, which gives the reviewers time to do the benchmarking, and have them ready on launch day. If they do not sign the NDA, they would have to start their testing on day of release, which means they would be DAYS behind other reviewers who do sign the NDA.

 

This all would not be a problem, if it were not for "some people" ahem INTEL ahem. releasing their own misleading benchmarks before the NDA is up, and taking preorders at the same time. If pre-orders were not a thing, NDA's would not be an issue. The problem occurs when you start selling the product BEFORE you allow reviewers to release their findings. Very annoying.

 

The real solution is: don't pre-order anything.

No they do not have to do it. Yes it might cost them review samples and some "small" youtubers would be limited to very low cost hardware for the most part. I honestly do not care: Nobody fucking owes them an audience and review samples and I could care less if paid shills would lose their jobs because that's what most of them are: paid shills. Online marketing specialists trying to pass out the idea that they are independent reviewers.

 

So no the problem isn't just intel and their NDA ahead of time that just exacerbates the problem but I don't care who tells me otherwise I flat out don't fucking believe that reviewers do not pull their punches and compromise their actual opinions because of the fact they get review samples, and yes that goes even for Steve Burke: You get review samples then you are not 100% objective no matter how many rants you start.

[pas008]

1 minute ago, schwellmo92 said:

Oh man you’re delusional 

please explain

amd didnt have previews out there? didnt have preorder too?

intel is suppose to confirm performance numbers on someone elses product?

and we havent seen skewered numbers since forever? even in cell phones?

[Tristerin]

9 hours ago, sazrocks said:

That's kind of a jerk move to other reviewers

Didn't sign NDA.

Found card for sale

Posted Review

 

 

Not sure how or why or for any reasoning that could be construed as a jerk move.  Jealous perhaps that you (they) have signed an NDA to guarantee them to get a card to review...vs taking the risk (and rewaaaaardddd) of not signing and finding one through various networks to do the review before everyone else...

 

Sounds like excellent marketing skills for HARDOCP.  They took a risk, and are the only ones available with a reward.

[Tristerin]

GOOD JOB HARDOCP.

[maartendc]

1 hour ago, pas008 said:

please explain

amd didnt have previews out there? didnt have preorder too?

intel is suppose to confirm performance numbers on someone elses product?

and we havent seen skewered numbers since forever? even in cell phones?

Nobody said AMD doesnt do the same things. They do. That doesnt make it any better. You should always take manufacturer claims and performance data with a Truckload of Salt.

 

1 hour ago, Misanthrope said:

No they do not have to do it. Yes it might cost them review samples and some "small" youtubers would be limited to very low cost hardware for the most part. I honestly do not care: Nobody fucking owes them an audience and review samples and I could care less if paid shills would lose their jobs because that's what most of them are: paid shills. Online marketing specialists trying to pass out the idea that they are independent reviewers.

 

So no the problem isn't just intel and their NDA ahead of time that just exacerbates the problem but I don't care who tells me otherwise I flat out don't fucking believe that reviewers do not pull their punches and compromise their actual opinions because of the fact they get review samples, and yes that goes even for Steve Burke: You get review samples then you are not 100% objective no matter how many rants you start.

Sure they don't HAVE to. But then they dont get review samples. Which is fine, but it puts them at a major disadvantage.

 

Look, at the end of the day if you don't trust ANYONE who EVER took a review sample from a manufacturer, that is your right. You trust who you trust. Overall, I think the people at Hardware Unboxed, Gamers Nexus, Jayztwocents, etc. do a pretty decent job of doing independent reviews. I have never seen anyone able to refute their reviews as being flawed or biased and been able to prove it. They mostly seem to call out flawed products and praise good products.

 

Most of them also do a decent job of calling out Intel, AMD, Nvidia, or whoever, on their marketing or business-practice BS. (especially Steve at Gamers Nexus more than most, will call out all manufacturers equally).

 

You read and watch the reviews YOU want, nobody is forcing you to watch any of those channels.

 

[pas008]

18 minutes ago, maartendc said:

Nobody said AMD doesnt do the same things. They do. That doesnt make it any better. You should always take manufacturer claims and performance data with a Truckload of Salt.

 

of course you should take multiple reviews and benchmarks to make a conclusion

 

and on that nobody statement did you not say "some people" ahem intel and start in on preorders thing that everyone else does

you are singling them out which all these shit companies do

[Terryv]

5 hours ago, Taf the Ghost said:

It's mostly just a bigger Pascal. We believe the 7nm Ampere will be the shrunken version of both.

So, ampere will be Maxwell 4.0?

[leadeater]

2 hours ago, Tristerin said:

Found card for sale

Wasn't found for sale, wasn't on sale, wasn't purchased as a customer. It was sourced through what ever contacts they have but it certainly wasn't 'found for sale', as in zero consumers could have gotten the card.

[Dylanc1500]

48 minutes ago, Terryv said:

So, ampere will be Maxwell 4.0?

Not quite, there are significant differences between the architectures. However, explaining them is a bit outside the scope of this topic.

 

If you want to learn a bit more about the architectures, id read the white papers on the architectures. They shouldn't be too confusing to understand.
 

Spoiler

 

Maxwell:

https://devblogs.nvidia.com/maxwell-most-advanced-cuda-gpu-ever-made/

 

Pascal:

https://images.nvidia.com/content/pdf/tesla/whitepaper/pascal-architecture-whitepaper.pdf

 

Volta:

http://images.nvidia.com/content/volta-architecture/pdf/volta-architecture-whitepaper.pdf

 

Turing:

https://www.nvidia.com/content/dam/en-zz/Solutions/design-visualization/technologies/turing-architecture/NVIDIA-Turing-Architecture-Whitepaper.pdf

 

 

 

Edit: Thank you!

[leadeater]

1 hour ago, maartendc said:

Sure they don't HAVE to. But then they dont get review samples. Which is fine, but it puts them at a major disadvantage.

 

Look, at the end of the day if you don't trust ANYONE who EVER took a review sample from a manufacturer, that is your right. You trust who you trust. Overall, I think the people at Hardware Unboxed, Gamers Nexus, Jayztwocents, etc. do a pretty decent job of doing independent reviews. I have never seen anyone able to refute their reviews as being flawed or biased and been able to prove it. They mostly seem to call out flawed products and praise good products.

 

Most of them also do a decent job of calling out Intel, AMD, Nvidia, or whoever, on their marketing or business-practice BS. (especially Steve at Gamers Nexus more than most, will call out all manufacturers equally).

 

You read and watch the reviews YOU want, nobody is forcing you to watch any of those channels.

The quality of the reviews, journalism wise, amount of information etc have all gotten better over recent times. If anyone actually listened to a few of the reviewers talk about NDAs when they have that is one of the big things they have pointed to, they remove the race for first and the improves the quality.

 

Quality of reviews will go down without NDAs, either quickly or over time but they will go down. Some might not, those will get less views and will inevitably become reliant on things like Patreon which I am personally opposed to.

[Tristerin]

18 minutes ago, leadeater said:

Wasn't found for sale, wasn't on sale, wasn't purchased as a customer. It was sourced through what ever contacts they have but it certainly wasn't 'found for sale', as in zero consumers could have gotten the card.

 

Money exchanged hands.  Two parties involved in what is normally called a transaction, or can be called a sell, or sale.

 

Again, don't hate the player (HARD OCP) hate the game.

 

I think people get more angry because they elected to follow the rules and someone else said - might makes right and they strong-armed the situation.

 

I can see "Reviewers" and those who make money on "Reviewing" items to be the first ones to be angry.

 

I see those same "Reviewers" who don't change their tactics dying off if the ability to get to market first proves to be the most financially beneficial...

 

WHICH IS WHERE MOST PEOPLES "MORALITY" ENDS LOLOLOL