[Hardocp]GeForce GTX 1080: Most Bizarre Secret Paper Launch Ever

[DaveSimmons]

Might as well throw my shoe into this:

It's definitely a paper launch.

Not sure why anyone would get peeved by this.

Because apparently OP thinks it's the bad kind of paper launch, or that all cases where reviews are allowed before release date are bad:

So to see them call out this paper launch is a refreshing change.

Why would anyone need to "call out" allowing reviews before the announced ship date?

The call outs I can recall were for the bad kind of paper launches like the GTX 580 where it was supposedly "available now" but not in real quantities. A fake launch to stifle competition.

So, OK, I accept there are 2 definitions for paper launch, but so far this is the kind that does not matter, and is not a sane reason to bash nvidia.

Edit: or is someone really going to claim that nvidia should have embargoed all reviews until May 27th? That it would have been better somehow, more ethical?

 

[Genx87]

Paper launch has pretty much always meant that a company releases paper specs on a product (either through a PR event, reviews, or both), but with the actual product not being available until later.

Whether or not the company in question announces a date for when you can buy it is irrelevant, the question is whether or not there is a gap between when the product is available in paper form (i.e. reviews and the like) and when it is available to purchase. If there is, then it is a paper launch.

No it hasnt. This is a new definition people are using. Paper launch is when a product is actually launched for sale but non-existent. Hence it is launched only available on paper.

 

[DaveSimmons]

No it hasnt. This is a new definition people are using. Paper launch is when a product is actually launched for sale but non-existent. Hence it is launched only available on paper.

That is my recollection of the term as well, going back to the 90s, but apparently the young whippersnappers have evolved a second definition where allowing any reviews before the official, announced release date is also a "paper launch."

 

[exar333]

The card has not yet been released, so by default it is impossible to be either a paper launch or hard launch. Only 05/27 will tell us what type it will be.

 

[Bacon1]

The card has not yet been released, so by default it is impossible to be either a paper launch or hard launch. Only 05/27 will tell us what type it will be.

https://blogs.nvidia.com/blog/2016/05/06/geforce-gtx-1080/

That’s why we orchestrated an elaborate online scavenger hunt to bring gamers to a surprise launch event that featured the first look at the GeForce GTX 1080 and a live performance by Deadmau5.

Nvidia calls it a launch event. :\

The real issue is... Paper launch shouldn't be a major negative like people try to portray it. Its better to have reviews prior to purchasing so you can see if you get a good deal.

 

[DaveSimmons]

The real issue is... Paper launch shouldn't be a major negative like people try to portray it. Its better to have reviews prior to purchasing so you can see if you get a good deal.

It's partisans trying to conflate the old definition of falsely claimed availability with this new definition of not embargoing reviews.

Applying this new definition, nvidia deserves praise for their "paper launch" by letting buyers know a couple of weeks early whether or not they should buy a 1080. Good work nvidia! Hopefully AMD will have a similar "paper launch" too! Every card should get a "paper launch"!

 

[tential]

What value does any of this discussion have other than to cry about either vendor paper launching and then cite times they did it in the past to further cry about it.

 

[kaesden]

this is NOT a paper launch(at least not yet). I don't get why people get so upset about this. They announced a product, announced a release date, and provided reviews prior to the release date.

A paper launch would be may 27th rolling around and then no cards are actually available and there's a massive back order on day 1 because they "released" like 100 total cards worldwide so they could say its out and available but no one can actually buy one.

NO OTHER PRODUCT IS SUBJECT TO THIS NONSENSE.

If a cell phone, or video game is announced, and then released months later, no one cries foul about a paper launch. This is how it always works for every other product i can think of.

Regarding reviews, seriously?? people are complaining that review samples were given out to be reviewed before the release date? That's the BEST way to do it. I want to know what to expect for my purchase of any product, especially one that will cost north of $700.(not saying i'm buying a 1080, definitely won't be at launch) If reviews weren't available until after launch date, people would cry foul that nvidia was scared of what the numbers would reveal. Same thing if they announced the card and availability on the same date. Would you have bought a 1080 for $700 the morning after the announcement video, not knowing anything about the real world performance?? I sure as hell wouldn't. Quit calling a PROPERLY MANAGED LAUNCH a paper launch. This is the RIGHT way to do it. If May 27th rolls around and availability is so limited that no one can actually get a card for the first month or three, then we can complain about a paper launch. But so far, everything has been done the best possible way.

 

[railven]

this is NOT a paper launch(at least not yet). I don't get why people get so upset about this. They announced a product, announced a release date, and provided reviews prior to the release date.

A paper launch would be may 27th rolling around and then no cards are actually available and there's a massive back order on day 1 because they "released" like 100 total cards worldwide so they could say its out and available but no one can actually buy one.

NO OTHER PRODUCT IS SUBJECT TO THIS NONSENSE.

If a cell phone, or video game is announced, and then released months later, no one cries foul about a paper launch. This is how it always works for every other product i can think of.

Regarding reviews, seriously?? people are complaining that review samples were given out to be reviewed before the release date? That's the BEST way to do it. I want to know what to expect for my purchase of any product, especially one that will cost north of $700.(not saying i'm buying a 1080, definitely won't be at launch) If reviews weren't available until after launch date, people would cry foul that nvidia was scared of what the numbers would reveal. Same thing if they announced the card and availability on the same date. Would you have bought a 1080 for $700 the morning after the announcement video, not knowing anything about the real world performance?? I sure as hell wouldn't. Quit calling a PROPERLY MANAGED LAUNCH a paper launch. This is the RIGHT way to do it. If May 27th rolls around and availability is so limited that no one can actually get a card for the first month or three, then we can complain about a paper launch. But so far, everything has been done the best possible way.

I guess I'm familiar with the other definition.

Once reviews hit the product is essentially "released" as you are now just waiting to buy it. I've always associated that as a paper launch.

But I believe this might be more tied to the old methods of information, ie when we'd get a PCGamer magazine or some non-sense rag magazine with the review almost a month before since the article had to go through the whole printing/distribute thing. Now with the internet they can literally post reviews day of release if they so choose to but have had the hardware in their hands for maybe even a month.

Annnnyyywwaaaays, end of it I guess it doesn't matter outside internet forum points. /shrug

 

[kaesden]

I guess I'm familiar with the other definition.

Once reviews hit the product is essentially "released" as you are now just waiting to buy it. I've always associated that as a paper launch.

...

Annnnyyywwaaaays, end of it I guess it doesn't matter outside internet forum points. /shrug

that's where I would think you're wrong. Reviews have nothing to do with a product being considered "released". Release date is when retailers are told by the manufacturer that they can begin selling the item. Reviews could happen before, at the same time, or after(or even not at all).

I do agree with that last point you made. It doesn't matter one bit outside of internet forums

*edit*
Actually it does matter somewhat when a "respected?" publication like HardOCP decides to flame a company for a paper launch when the product has not even launched yet. It shows they lack any professionalism by using their ability to get lots of eyes on an article to flame a company for an imaginary problem.

 

[sandorski]

this is NOT a paper launch(at least not yet). I don't get why people get so upset about this. They announced a product, announced a release date, and provided reviews prior to the release date.

A paper launch would be may 27th rolling around and then no cards are actually available and there's a massive back order on day 1 because they "released" like 100 total cards worldwide so they could say its out and available but no one can actually buy one.

NO OTHER PRODUCT IS SUBJECT TO THIS NONSENSE.

If a cell phone, or video game is announced, and then released months later, no one cries foul about a paper launch. This is how it always works for every other product i can think of.

Regarding reviews, seriously?? people are complaining that review samples were given out to be reviewed before the release date? That's the BEST way to do it. I want to know what to expect for my purchase of any product, especially one that will cost north of $700.(not saying i'm buying a 1080, definitely won't be at launch) If reviews weren't available until after launch date, people would cry foul that nvidia was scared of what the numbers would reveal. Same thing if they announced the card and availability on the same date. Would you have bought a 1080 for $700 the morning after the announcement video, not knowing anything about the real world performance?? I sure as hell wouldn't. Quit calling a PROPERLY MANAGED LAUNCH a paper launch. This is the RIGHT way to do it. If May 27th rolls around and availability is so limited that no one can actually get a card for the first month or three, then we can complain about a paper launch. But so far, everything has been done the best possible way.

This.

People like Drama though, so I'm sure some will argue about long after the Official Availability date. A year from now this affront to all Gamers will make the Nvidia is the Devil bullet lists. Not that they are not( ), but this lame "issue" will live on.

 

[wingman04]

this is NOT a paper launch(at least not yet). I don't get why people get so upset about this. They announced a product, announced a release date, and provided reviews prior to the release date.

A paper launch would be may 27th rolling around and then no cards are actually available and there's a massive back order on day 1 because they "released" like 100 total cards worldwide so they could say its out and available but no one can actually buy one.

NO OTHER PRODUCT IS SUBJECT TO THIS NONSENSE.

If a cell phone, or video game is announced, and then released months later, no one cries foul about a paper launch. This is how it always works for every other product i can think of.

Regarding reviews, seriously?? people are complaining that review samples were given out to be reviewed before the release date? That's the BEST way to do it. I want to know what to expect for my purchase of any product, especially one that will cost north of $700.(not saying i'm buying a 1080, definitely won't be at launch) If reviews weren't available until after launch date, people would cry foul that nvidia was scared of what the numbers would reveal. Same thing if they announced the card and availability on the same date. Would you have bought a 1080 for $700 the morning after the announcement video, not knowing anything about the real world performance?? I sure as hell wouldn't. Quit calling a PROPERLY MANAGED LAUNCH a paper launch. This is the RIGHT way to do it. If May 27th rolls around and availability is so limited that no one can actually get a card for the first month or three, then we can complain about a paper launch. But so far, everything has been done the best possible way.

This^^^. When they launch a new product and there is not enough in stores it is only on paper there was a paper launch. Example, People say hay the new GTX1080s are out of stock. Then we say that was a paper launch.

 

[sirmo]

Product was unveiled. NDA was lifted, benchmarks were posted. If at that point you still can't buy the product, then it is a paper launch. No ifs or buts about it.

A lot of companies do paper launches. I don't think it's such a big deal either way.

 

[Vesku]

It's a paper launch, i.e. a bit of a tease showing specs and promised performance before product is actually available.

Not much to be angry about unless there is low available inventory on the promised retail release date. OK a bit of anger might be justified for that 2.1GHz overclock not having enough caveats in JHH's presentation. Funny that HOCP cuts Nvidia some slack on that in their article.

 

[railven]

*edit*
Actually it does matter somewhat when a "respected?" publication like HardOCP decides to flame a company for a paper launch when the product has not even launched yet. It shows they lack any professionalism by using their ability to get lots of eyes on an article to flame a company for an imaginary problem.

I fell through the Gamegate rabbit hole and basically saw the media that I devoted a lot of time and clicks to turn on the audience. (Not implying that is what is happening here, but more I lost trust/faith in "journalist")

HardOCP can close shop, I wouldn't care. Even AT has lost some of that luster. With them trying to 1up each other to first to post, it seems much info falls through the grates.

Flame wars from consoles to CPUs back to GPUs, people take some of this too serious.

 

[sandorski]

Product was unveiled. NDA was lifted, benchmarks were posted. If at that point you still can't buy the product, then it is a paper launch. No ifs or buts about it.

A lot of companies do paper launches. I don't think it's such a big deal either way.

The problem is one of equivocation. Meaning, there might be the formal "Paper Launch" wherein Product is Announced/Shown before Available as you describe, but there is also the fallacious "Product Unavailable" launch when it should be available.

Without this equivocation there is no Article or Controversy. The Article is little more than Clickbait, the Controversy is a waste of everyones time.

 

[positivedoppler]

It does feel like Nvidia rushed this. When the 970 and 980 launched, the reviews were out the same day they declared the Maxwell cards were immediately available for purchase and older cards discontinued.

 

[sirmo]

The problem is one of equivocation. Meaning, there might be the formal "Paper Launch" wherein Product is Announced/Shown before Available as you describe, but there is also the fallacious "Product Unavailable" launch when it should be available.

Without this equivocation there is no Article or Controversy. The Article is little more than Clickbait, the Controversy is a waste of everyones time.

But that's beyond the scope of the definition of a paper launch. You do not have to miss the availability deadline for something to be called a paper launch. Paper launch is simply a practice of unveiling a product weeks before it's available for purchase.

As I've said, I don't think it's a huge issue either way. Obviously we would all like to see more hard launches. Where you wake up in the morning you see benchmarks of a new product and you place an order for your sample that same day.

Nvidia obviously felt a desire to push up the unveiling of 1080 weeks before it was available for sale for some reason, and that makes it a paper launch.

 

[DaveSimmons]

By the new definition yes, but not the classic, better definition of not really available after the official release date.

Now get off my lawn!

 

[sandorski]

But that's beyond the scope of the definition of a paper launch. You do not have to miss the availability deadline for something to be called a paper launch. Paper launch is simply a practice of unveiling a product weeks before it's available for purchase.

As I've said, I don't think it's a huge issue either way. Obviously we would all like to see more hard launches. Where you wake up in the morning you see benchmarks of a new product and you place an order for your sample that same day.

Nvidia obviously felt a desire to push up the unveiling of 1080 weeks before it was available for sale for some reason, and that makes it a paper launch.

Why is it that these criteria only apply to Video Cards? We have Games that are Shown/Announced 6 Months in advance of availability and no one gets into a tizzy about "Paper Launches".

 

[wahdangun]

It does feel like Nvidia rushed this. When the 970 and 980 launched, the reviews were out the same day they declared the Maxwell cards were immediately available for purchase and older cards discontinued.

it is rushed, didn't u see how crap that FE edition blower ?? it can't even sustain boost clock without throttling, its look like nvdia know how Polaris perform and increasing the clock to the max, without considering cooler capacity and since average buyer rarely go to forum or majority reviewer didn't test it throughly, nvdia can get away with it.

and the most hilarious thing is they want to charge it $100 more, and called it craftsmanship ?? hahaha

 

[Bacon1]

it is rushed, didn't u see how crap that FE edition blower ?? it can't even sustain boost clock without throttling, its look like nvdia know how Polaris perform and increasing the clock to the max, without considering cooler capacity and since average buyer rarely go to forum or majority reviewer didn't test it throughly, nvdia can get away with it.

and the most hilarious thing is they want to charge it $100 more, and called it craftsmanship ?? hahaha

Its the "oh shit we need to sell our first test batch" tax. They are having to sell them ahead of schedule before they can work on reducing the costs and more mass production. There is a great video detailing just how rushed and low end the board is.


using bad language is not allowed in the technical forums,
Markfw900


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p_2_iCCesxI

 

[exar333]

It does feel like Nvidia rushed this. When the 970 and 980 launched, the reviews were out the same day they declared the Maxwell cards were immediately available for purchase and older cards discontinued.

Being rushed or not is immaterial. The 980ti launch was rushed too. NV rushed that out the door ahead of Fury and it was a huge success for them. It is the product that matters and availability.

 

[raghu78]

Being rushed or not is immaterial. The 980ti launch was rushed too. NV rushed that out the door ahead of Fury and it was a huge success for them. It is the product that matters and availability.

exactly. the key here was 980 Ti was widely available at launch. Partner custom cards with huge overclocks, much better power circuitry and cooling came in within a month.

https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/MSI/GTX_980_Ti_Gaming/35.html

The custom GTX 980 Ti OC cards pretty much rocked with 15-20% higher performance. The difference is 980 Ti was built on a mature 28nm process which had been in production for almost 4 years. The 16FF+ process has been in production for a year (primarily with Apple A9) and a few other mobile chips. TSMC doubled the 16FF+ wafers shipped per month(wpm) in Mar 2016 to 80k wpm. But wafer allocation is still in high demand with demand outstripping supply and Apple is rumoured to produce 100% of A10 chips at TSMC 16FF+. Nvidia's supply situation will be revealed within the first few weeks. So we will see how they do. But on a new process node with yield issues for large chips ( > 300 sq mm) supply is going to be tough.

 

[Arachnotronic]

Nvidia's supply situation will be revealed within the first few weeks. So we will see how they do. But on a new process node with yield issues for large chips ( > 300 sq mm) supply is going to be tough.

From NVIDIA's most recent conference call:

Deepon Nag - Macquarie Capital (USA), Inc.

Yeah, thanks, guys, and congratulations on the great quarter. For Q2, could you kind of talk about how much the contribution you expect from Pascal and also maybe give us an update on where you think yield is progressing right now?

Jen-Hsun Huang - Co-Founder, President, CEO & Director

Yeah. Thanks a lot, Deepon. We're expecting a lot of Pascal. Pascal was just announced for 1080 and 1070, and both of those products are in full production. We're in production with Tesla P100, and so all of our Pascal products that we've announced are in full production, so we're expecting a lot.

Yields are good. And building these semiconductor devices are always hard, but we're very good at it. And this is now a year behind when the first 16-nanometer FinFET products went into production in TSMC. They have yields under great control. TSMC is the world's best manufacturer of semiconductors, and we work very closely with them to make sure that we're ready for production, and we surely wouldn't have announced it if we didn't have manufacturing under control. So we're in great shape.