Anand's x1950p review: CrossFire Done Right

[Gstanfor]

Originally posted by: Roguestar
So are you just going to change the topic's title any time someone you insult calls you on it, or are you going to make up your mind what your opinion is?

Sadly, this is simply standard fanatic tactics. anyone who dares criticize ati or their products in any way is in for a pasting, regardless of what the truth of the situation might be.

The old PR sewer pipe is still busy polluting like mad I see. At least they aren't (directly) aiming the slimy mess nvidia's way this time.

 

[Dom1105]

Well at any rate does any one happen to have the inside scoop on what internet shops are going to be selling this on the near future, im talking like by the end of the month future not like 3 months.

THX ~Andrew~

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: Gstanfor

Originally posted by: Roguestar
So are you just going to change the topic's title any time someone you insult calls you on it, or are you going to make up your mind what your opinion is?

Sadly, this is simply standard fanatic tactics. anyone who dares criticize ati or their products in any way is in for a pasting, regardless of what the truth of the situation might be.

The old PR sewer pipe is still busy polluting like mad I see. At least they aren't (directly) aiming the slimy mess nvidia's way this time.

so what is the 'truth' of the situation to a nvidiot?

i thought i'd try something new . . . criticizing ATi . . . and it seemed a valid criticism when i first posted it

but it turned out to be nothing deserving of major criticism . . . if it was, i would not have changed the topic's title - at all

Finally . . . the Topic's title has NOT changed: "Anand's x1950p review: CrossFire Done Right " and the 'original criticism' - the CORE of the topic in the SUMMARY has ALSO not changed still there in case you missed it:

Topic Summary: DISHONESTY in ATi's x1900GT

ONLY the "Update" has changed: 1) 'DW is full of it'
and 2) 'DW replies'

next time i will aim my criticism at an truly dishonest company where it will stick . . . at EA or nvidia.

 

[BFG10K]

Trash them, try to not screw up next time.

That's a little bit naïve wouldn't you say?

 

[coldpower27]

I say they should have just created an X1900 GS and discontinued the X1900 GT if supplies of 575MHZ R580 Cores were getting low, clock it at something conservative like 500MHZ.

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: Nelsieus
Derek reported on ATI changing the specs of a GPU. I'm not sure why you wouldn't expect him to do so?

And no matter how small that change in spec was, it's the principle, imo, that counts. I have no problem with either ATI or nVidia changing the specs of any of their cards as long as it's reported upon (as Derek did). But if I can't find out because some of you seem to be against poiting such occurences out (as you are with Derek in this case), then how would the consumer know? Those are the kinds of things I expect Anandtech and other hardware sites to mention.

When it's done secretly, I don't like it, and respect Derek for beinging it up.

it wasn't done secretly. Derek Wilson conveniently hid the truth from you for his article's little tirade.

he may have reported negatively on the change in spec but he NEGLECTED to inform us that ATi already informed everyone else.
:thumbsdown:

and the products specs are on the box and also on the site when you buy the product.... there also are some reasons to choose the 'slower' card that he failed to report on.

he seems to be rather biased and incredibly inconsistent in saying what they should do for the SAME situation. i.e [earlier] he critized ATi for changing the product's designation for a +10 mhz core adjustment and berated them, saying changing such a small spec didn't justify a 'name change'.

well, make up your mind. what is it?
:Q

DW was just sloppy in that review.

 

[redbox]

Originally posted by: Slammy1
You know, there's a big difference between a 10MHz/10MHz jump and a 63MHz/120MHz change, especially when 1 is a "new" product the other is a shipping product. Hardly damning evidence of bias.

You have a good point. There is a bigger change at least in specs between the old 1900gt and new 1900gt however, the idea is still the same. Last time the introduced a new card that had about the same specs and performance. Derek didn't like that. This time ATI didn't introduce a new card just changed a little about the old one. The card still gives the same performance of the old one. Derek didn't like that either. I was just wondering which way Derek would like them to do it. Since he has pretty strong opinions either way they do it.

 

[Slammy1]

I think your overall point is valid, and that there is some bias in the matter after reading the article you posted fully. I don't think ATI was being dishonest, it's not like they're manipulating PQ to make the benches look better. I can also see his point that it's hard for a review site to maintain integrity when products change significantly, even if the net is apparantly miniscule.

I think from my stand point I'm more than a bit concerned over the effect of the AMD merger. I thought at first it'd be all positive, but with reported layoffs and some personal observations it seems that, at least for the transitions, I'm liking them less as a company. Understand, I've had nothing but ATI as long as I've had AGP, and though I don't upgrade at the rate of many here I am above the curve for the gen'l population. Two months ago I was a card carrying member of the ATI fanboy club. I just hope when the dust settles they'll go back to making solid cards and fully functioning software.

I'm sure I'll feel better about ATI once I get AVIVO working properly .

 

[redbox]

Originally posted by: Slammy1
I think your overall point is valid, and that there is some bias in the matter after reading the article you posted fully. I don't think ATI was being dishonest, it's not like they're manipulating PQ to make the benches look better. I can also see his point that it's hard for a review site to maintain integrity when products change significantly, even if the net is apparantly miniscule.

I think from my stand point I'm more than a bit concerned over the effect of the AMD merger. I thought at first it'd be all positive, but with reported layoffs and some personal observations it seems that, at least for the transitions, I'm liking them less as a company. Understand, I've had nothing but ATI as long as I've had AGP, and though I don't upgrade at the rate of many here I am above the curve for the gen'l population. Two months ago I was a card carrying member of the ATI fanboy club. I just hope when the dust settles they'll go back to making solid cards and fully functioning software.

I'm sure I'll feel better about ATI once I get AVIVO working properly .

It would be hard for AT to maintain integrity if they didn't report on the change yes. I can see where a site like AT would need to at least report on the changes. But, it is another thing to call those changes "dishonest". In my eyes there are many things in the tech world that I would call dishonest (EA's new spyware comes to mind), but ATI changing the specs on a card with a very small performance differnce (one that in a real world test I doubt anyone could tell which card was which just by the performance they offered in games), isn't one of those dishonest deeds that sometimes creeps up.

As far as their merger I wouldn't really focus too much on the fact that there where lay offs. Every major company does it Intel did it awhile back and look at where their standing. The hospital I work at did them about a year ago and though there where some changes at that time with how we handled patients (mostly do to staffing problems) we are taking care of them much the same way we where before the layoffs. I have had nothing but good experiences from both companies I can't see this merger being a bad thing. I think you are right once the dust settles this new company will be in much better shape to utilize all of the talent that they now possess.

 

[ronnn]

totally off topic, but who is dug777 that is being unbanned?

 

[Pantalaimon]

What did people expect when the merger was announced anyway? It's practically a given that there will be lay-offs when two companies merge. Did people expect otherwise?

 

[Roguestar]

Originally posted by: apoppin
so what is the 'truth' of the situation to a nvidiot?

next time i will aim my criticism at an truly dishonest company where it will stick . . . at EA or nvidia.

Oh cool, it's "nVidia and EA are bad companies", "Anyone who disagrees with me is an idiot", and "include smiles incase anyone takes me to heart and flames back".

Pretty much the triumvirate of crap arguments there, mate.

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: Roguestar

Originally posted by: apoppin
so what is the 'truth' of the situation to a nvidiot?

next time i will aim my criticism at an truly dishonest company where it will stick . . . at EA or nvidia.

Oh cool, it's "nVidia and EA are bad companies", "Anyone who disagrees with me is an idiot", and "include smiles incase anyone takes me to heart and flames back".

Pretty much the triumvirate of crap arguments there, mate.

as usual, you have no clue

you take what i say completely out of context and twist it completely
:thumbsdown:

and still make no point

 

[redbox]

Originally posted by: apoppin


Finally . . . the Topic's title has NOT changed: "Anand's x1950p review: CrossFire Done Right " and the 'original criticism' - the CORE of the topic in the SUMMARY has ALSO not changed still there in case you missed it:

Topic Summary: DISHONESTY in ATi's x1900GT

ONLY the "Update" has changed: 1) 'DW is full of it'
and 2) 'DW replies'

What I find strange is that there is very little x1950p descussion in the x1950p crossfire thread. Anyone else find that as weird.

 

[Drayvn]

Originally posted by: redbox

Originally posted by: apoppin


Finally . . . the Topic's title has NOT changed: "Anand's x1950p review: CrossFire Done Right " and the 'original criticism' - the CORE of the topic in the SUMMARY has ALSO not changed still there in case you missed it:

Topic Summary: DISHONESTY in ATi's x1900GT

ONLY the "Update" has changed: 1) 'DW is full of it'
and 2) 'DW replies'

What I find strange is that there is very little x1950p descussion in the x1950p crossfire thread. Anyone else find that as weird.

Not on these forums

 

[ronnn]

Originally posted by: redbox


What I find strange is that there is very little x1950p descussion in the x1950p crossfire thread. Anyone else find that as weird.

Sort of highlights why that angry conclusion was weird.

 

[acegazda]

Originally posted by: ronnn
totally off topic, but who is dug777 that is being unbanned?

YGPM... try to stay on topic

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: redbox

Originally posted by: apoppin


Finally . . . the Topic's title has NOT changed: "Anand's x1950p review: CrossFire Done Right " and the 'original criticism' - the CORE of the topic in the SUMMARY has ALSO not changed still there in case you missed it:

Topic Summary: DISHONESTY in ATi's x1900GT

ONLY the "Update" has changed: 1) 'DW is full of it'
and 2) 'DW replies'

What I find strange is that there is very little x1950p descussion in the x1950p crossfire thread. Anyone else find that as weird.

weird . . . here? . . . in video
:Q

not a bit

and it stayed pretty much on topic . . . look at the 'summary' [which never changed] . . . it was a discussion of ati's alleged DISHONESTY in the 1950p review.

yeah, the 1950p looks nice . . . now where the hell are they ad why are they so expensive?

i thought it was a 'hard launch' . . . not a 'hard-to-find launch'
:disgust:

 

[sandorski]

1% difference, I go back to my first post then and settle on : meh

Should there be 2 Models with 1% difference in performance and maybe a couple $ in price? Don't be ridiculous.

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: sandorski
1% difference, I go back to my first post then and settle on : meh

Should there be 2 Models with 1% difference in performance and maybe a couple $ in price? Don't be ridiculous.

let Derek Wilson answer in his OWN words:
ATI has this nasty habit of introducing way too many GPUs into its lineup, and today is no letdown to tradition as ATI is introducing a total of five new video cards.

can't he make up his own mind? First Blame ATI when they change the name and Then blame ATi when they don't.
:thumbsdown:

don't forget the 'slower one' that DerekWilson disses has a quieter fan, better cooling [and maybe o/cing?] and is HDCP compliant.

imo he should apologize to ATi.

his bias against ATi is growing and it clouds his articles . . . how can he even claim to be 'objective'?
:thumbsdown: :thumbsdown:

maybe, i really should change the title back to :

Derek Wilson is Full of it

edit . . . on 2nd thought . . . nope . . .
[i have tempted fate too much, recently]

he knows

 

[coldpower27]

Originally posted by: redbox

Originally posted by: Slammy1
You know, there's a big difference between a 10MHz/10MHz jump and a 63MHz/120MHz change, especially when 1 is a "new" product the other is a shipping product. Hardly damning evidence of bias.

You have a good point. There is a bigger change at least in specs between the old 1900gt and new 1900gt however, the idea is still the same. Last time the introduced a new card that had about the same specs and performance. Derek didn't like that. This time ATI didn't introduce a new card just changed a little about the old one. The card still gives the same performance of the old one. Derek didn't like that either. I was just wondering which way Derek would like them to do it. Since he has pretty strong opinions either way they do it.

No that is the thing the card gives very close to the same level of performance as the old one, differences of 1-2 FPS on the whole, consistently. It is not the same.

I agree though with the second part of how Derek should make up his mind if he did indeed complain about the X1600 -> X1650 transition.

I think the brand is a good idea though.
This is like for example taking the 7900 GS SKU and then calling it the 7600 GTX, albeit with a lower price tag.

What they should have done is discontinue the X1900 GT and made a X1900 GS. So they could sell those extra R580 cores that don't make 575MHZ grade. The problem with some people is that when looking at SKU's they look at the entire X1K line to date including SKU's that have been terminated sometime ago.

If you look at what ATI is officially selling ythe lineup is not too bad, it's just bad when you include discontinued units. It's the problem that stock of discontinued units take awhile to clear from the channel hence giving consumer far more choice then there should be.

ATI Low End
X1300 -> X1300 Pro -> X1300 XT

ATI Mainstream
X1650 Pro -> X1650 XT

ATI Performance Mainstream
X1900 GT -> X1900 XT 256

ATI High End
X1900 XT 512? -> X1900 XTX? -> X1950 XTX

Nvidia Low End
7300 LE -> 7300 GS -> 7300 GT

Nvidia Mainstream
7600 GS -> 7600 GT

Nvidia Performance Mainstream
7900 GS -> 7950 GT

Nvidia High End
7900 GTX > 7950GX2

 

[blckgrffn]

Originally posted by: coldpower27
I say they should have just created an X1900 GS and discontinued the X1900 GT if supplies of 575MHZ R580 Cores were getting low, clock it at something conservative like 500MHZ.

I agree. ATI hasn't been shy about creating a plethora of models in the past, why stop now?

Both parties (ATI & nVidia) are guilty, but there were so many x800 varieties...

 

[redbox]

Originally posted by: coldpower27

Originally posted by: redbox

Originally posted by: Slammy1
You know, there's a big difference between a 10MHz/10MHz jump and a 63MHz/120MHz change, especially when 1 is a "new" product the other is a shipping product. Hardly damning evidence of bias.

You have a good point. There is a bigger change at least in specs between the old 1900gt and new 1900gt however, the idea is still the same. Last time the introduced a new card that had about the same specs and performance. Derek didn't like that. This time ATI didn't introduce a new card just changed a little about the old one. The card still gives the same performance of the old one. Derek didn't like that either. I was just wondering which way Derek would like them to do it. Since he has pretty strong opinions either way they do it.

No that is the thing the card gives very close to the same level of performance as the old one, differences of 1-2 FPS on the whole, consistently. It is not the same.

I will agree a 1-2 fps difference isn't exactly the same, however the gaming experience will be the same. I suspect that no one would be able to tell the differnce between them going just off of gaming performance.

I think the brand is a good idea though.
This is like for example taking the 7900 GS SKU and then calling it the 7600 GTX, albeit with a lower price tag.

What they should have done is discontinue the X1900 GT and made a X1900 GS. So they could sell those extra R580 cores that don't make 575MHZ grade. The problem with some people is that when looking at SKU's they look at the entire X1K line to date including SKU's that have been terminated sometime ago.

I agree. Getting ride of some of the cores that don't make speed is a good way of clearing your stocks. Both sides do it and we as consumers benifit with the new (and better bang for buck) cards. In the past ATI has done this alot with their GTO line. It's the same concept except that we don't get a new branding. Or cheaper prices. That maybe a bad thing though as it can confuse buyers.

If you look at what ATI is officially selling ythe lineup is not too bad, it's just bad when you include discontinued units. It's the problem that stock of discontinued units take awhile to clear from the channel hence giving consumer far more choice then there should be.

Ya your right, but what are you going to do. It's not like those cards are going to disapper because ATI no longer officially sells them. There is alot of overlap for the buyer, and to me it doesn't matter too much what ATI is officially selling. If you can buy it at retail then it is a viable option to the buyer and something that needs to be considered when giving buying advice or writing up a review.

 

[DerekWilson]

Originally posted by: apoppin

Originally posted by: Nelsieus
Derek reported on ATI changing the specs of a GPU. I'm not sure why you wouldn't expect him to do so?

And no matter how small that change in spec was, it's the principle, imo, that counts. I have no problem with either ATI or nVidia changing the specs of any of their cards as long as it's reported upon (as Derek did). But if I can't find out because some of you seem to be against poiting such occurences out (as you are with Derek in this case), then how would the consumer know? Those are the kinds of things I expect Anandtech and other hardware sites to mention.

When it's done secretly, I don't like it, and respect Derek for beinging it up.

it wasn't done secretly. Derek Wilson conveniently hid the truth from you for his article's little tirade.

he may have reported negatively on the change in spec but he NEGLECTED to inform us that ATi already informed everyone else.
:thumbsdown:

and the products specs are on the box and also on the site when you buy the product.... there also are some reasons to choose the 'slower' card that he failed to report on.

he seems to be rather biased and incredibly inconsistent in saying what they should do for the SAME situation. i.e [earlier] he critized ATi for changing the product's designation for a +10 mhz core adjustment and berated them, saying changing such a small spec didn't justify a 'name change'.

well, make up your mind. what is it?
:Q

DW was just sloppy in that review.

First, sorry for the really late reply to all this. Things have been busy around here.

I didn't hide the truth any more than ATI did ... seriously though, like I said before, it doesn't matter that they acknowledged the change. The change itself is the problem.

A bunch of people brought up what I said about the diff btwn the X1600 XT and X1650 Pro ... This is entirly different for two reasons: the 10MHz core and mem oc is much small than the diff between the 2 versions of the 1900 GT in both magnitude and percentage, and the clock speeds were *increased* to create a new part.

That second point is very key (and something people haven't really addressed). I'll bring it all together in a second.

I have not changed my position on IHVs creating too many different parts for the same market segment. NVIDIA does it right: set a relatively modest clock speed for parts and allow OEMs to adjust clock speed and price of a part as they can/desire. The effect is that NVIDIA sets a minimum clock speed for a product. This minimum clock speed should not *decrease* during the products life cycle.

I wouldn't care if ATI or NV *raised* the specs of something by a small ammount that didn't change performance without changing the name. But when they lower specs, they are taking something away from the customer that can't actually be determined: performance of games released in the future.

As I said before, we can't test future games -- all we know is that the way game developers do things now is not highly affected by the clock speed changes of the X1900 GT. With the trade off being a drop in core clock and increase in memeory clock, we loose compute performance and gain memory performance. For quite a long time games have been shifting their burden toward compute power and if the trend continues the new X1900 GT ver. 2 will get progressively worse than the original over time -- with a potential performance loss of over 10%.

To be very clear, here's would be ideal:

1) no more dropping clock speeds of parts that are already shipping without a name change

2) no more changing the name of parts for an increase in clock speed that has a maximum theoretical performance increase of less than 3% (like the X1600 XT -> X1650 Pro -- there is no way the performance difference could possibly reach over 3%).

3) allow upward flexibility in a parts clock speed both to give OEMs some ability to differentiate themselves and to help avoid yeild issues created by setting too high a target when a product is launched.

If you take all of these points into account, you'll note that nothing I have ever said about the subject of clock speed adjustment and product naming has ever contradicted the position I take on the subject.

Also, I'm not biased agains ATI -- I just don't like stupid behavior. There is no reason I can't dislike something that ATI did and still love their X1950 XTX CrossFire (because I do).

Sorry if I'm too late for anyone to see this reply (and care), but here it is anyway

 

[ElFenix]

i dislike all those AIB variant products... too damn confusing.