nVidia designations and ethics

[Vee]

I certainly don't want to make this into some kind of nVidia bashing or ATI vs nVidia thing. I'm using several nVidia cards myself. But there is this thing about nVidias designations and marketing, that is starting to bother me.

Originally we had TNT, TNT2, GF, GF2 and GF3. Each designating a specific chip set, and could be expected to live up to certain abilities. Sure there were different memory and clockrate editions, like GTS and GF3 Ti200 and Ti500. But basically you got what the designation implied. nVidia built first TNT then GeForce into a strong trademark with 1, 2 and 3.

Then with GF4 something happens. Yes, we get the new generation GF4 graphic chip from nVidia as GF4 Ti.
- But, hey what is this: Vendors and ads proclaim various cheap PCs as having "Powerful GeForce4 3D graphics from nVidia", when specification is listing some "GF4 MX". MX now actually being some revamped GF2, that only supports DX7, it looks to me as if it is an attempt to take advantage of a strong trademark, in order to intentionally mislead people about capabilities?

But never mind that for now. Let's leave that and go on. nVidia diversifies their phenomenal GF4Ti with different clocks. Ti4200, Ti4400, Ti4600 and Ti4800. People quickly realize the brilliant value of the Ti4200. nVidia have now built reputation and expectations into their four digit numbers. 4200, 4600 and 4800 becoming the most popular.

What happens next? Next generation from nVidia is not one single chip set, running at different clocks with different memory. Rather it is a whole family of chips. From the rather anemic to the one with power ambitions. No longer is nVidia fooling around with any "GeForce5" designation. Instead they are launching the FX5200, FX5600 and FX5800 designations. I have a very hard time seeing this as anything but an attempt to take advantage of the associations with earlier Ti4200, Ti4600 and Ti4800.
But since the puny FX5200 and the mediocre FX5600 certainly in no way can be considered corresponding to Ti4200 or Ti4600, it again looks to me as an intentional effort to use a reputation to mislead the market about true capabilities?

But let's move on again. The more knowledgable part of the market soon sees through all that. The correct *GF5* cards are soon identified: FX5900XT corresponds to Ti4200, FX5900/FX5950 to Ti4600 and FX5900ultra/FX5950ultra to Ti4800. So basically, nVidia has now taught the market that the good stuff is all in the single high four digit number. With different suffixes.

So what happens as next stage in this (fraud?).?
nVidias next generation of chip sets ALL get the same four digit number! FX6800, irrespective of number of pipes or rendering power. We get our basic *GeForce6*, 'Ti4200-4600-4800' as FX6800GT, FX6800ultra and FX6800 ultra extreme. But no down market "FX6600" or "FX6200" this time. Oh no, no. Instead they are designated FX6800 (no suffix) and FX6800LE!

See what I'm getting at?
This is the third time in a row, nVidia are changing their designation practice. - And it is the the third time in a row, it looks to me as if it is done as an intentional effort to mislead the market about the true capabilities beneath the designation!
What will come next from nVidia? lowend="FX7ultra", "ultra" will become important, right? Then "FX7ultraextreme, FX7ultraXX, FX7ultraXXX, FX7thermonuclear"?

(It's not exactly helpful when you're trying to explain to people what videocard will be right for them -> "Hey, I bought that card you recommended, but I found it $70 cheaper than you said. Lucky I got such a good deal, because it's really not much faster than my old.". ATI's manipulations with obscure buswidth and anemic "SE" cards are troubling too.).

The reason I wrote this piece, is that all this actually angers me somewhat.
What are your thoughts?

 

[The Green Bean]

Umm lack of sleep?

 

[CrackRabbit]

I agree with you on the misleading by Nvidia with the Geforce 4MX series of cards, but seriously if you arent doing any research you shouldn't be upgrading your computer.

 

[VirtualLarry]

Someone slept through the lecture on "product line differentiation" in business class, I guess.

Also conveniently forgot the TNT2 M64 and original GF2 MX product introductions, and the TNT Vanta. (Riva 128, Riva 128 ZX, etc.)

None of this is in any way new, although the fact that the names are so similar-sounding is unfortunate, and probably intentional, intended to confuse the consumer and get them to purchase a cheaper card because they think it is a more advanced one.

ATI is guilty of the same thing, introduction the Radeon, and then the 7000, which is slower, and then re-releasing the original Radeon as the 7200, and then the 8500 LE re-named to 9100, the AGP 8x version of the 9000 renamed as the 9200, but slower than the 9100, etc. Even worse, when is a 9800 Pro not an 9800 Pro, etc.

It's all a mess. Caveat Emptor, has never been truer, than in the PC video-card business. I don't think that any of it is fraud though. (With the possible exception of the Sapphire Radeon 9800 Pro 128-bit business.)

 

[ponyo]

zzz...

 

[NokiaDude]

That is soooo true. ATI does the same thing to an extent, but not as bad as nVidia. nVidia should team up with ATI, ATI could design the most powerful GPU, while nVidia could design a motherboard chipset that would cater to ATI's GPU needs.

 

[Tostada]

I was about to say the exact same thing CrackRabbit said. If you're too stupid to know the difference between graphics cards, you probably won't notice you got a POS 64-bit card, either, so you get to save a few bucks.

And similarly, the majority of ATI's cards are worthless. You don't see anybody on here recommending anything but the 9200, 9600, 9800, X800, but they make plenty crappy models in between.

 

[silent tone]

Originally posted by: Tostada
I was about to say the exact same thing CrackRabbit said. If you're too stupid to know the difference between graphics cards, you probably won't notice you got a POS 64-bit card, either, so you get to save a few bucks.
.

Intelligence has nothing to do with this. Some people don't care to spend hours learning about the technology that makes a product to see past the deceptive names. This may come as a shock but I'd rather not be forced to spend the time finding informative resources on the net, then read a dozen or two pages about the tech for every $100+ purchase I make. I'm an enthusiast and know a decent amount about fillrates, pipelines, buses, and ALU architecture, but it's a beating picking through new product lines every 6 months when ATI & Nvidia release 5 new models each.

I fail to understand why anybody here would defend the chicanery of marketing goons.

That is all.

 

[Antoneo]

Originally posted by: istallion

Originally posted by: Tostada
I was about to say the exact same thing CrackRabbit said. If you're too stupid to know the difference between graphics cards, you probably won't notice you got a POS 64-bit card, either, so you get to save a few bucks.
.

Intelligence has nothing to do with this. Some people don't care to spend hours learning about the technology that makes a product to see past the deceptive names. This may come as a shock but I'd rather not be forced to spend the time finding informative resources on the net, then read a dozen or two pages about the tech for every $100+ purchase I make. I'm an enthusiast and know a decent amount about fillrates, pipelines, buses, and ALU architecture, but it's a beating picking through new product lines every 6 months when ATI & Nvidia release 5 new models each.

I fail to understand why anybody here would defend the chicanery of marketing goons.

That is all.

I completely agree with you. I'm not a heavy gamer at any means, and I would imagine that the majority of the gamer market would be either in my category or those who upgrade their computer every 6 months to a year. I don't have any numbers but I am assuming (possibly incorrectly) that estimate. Technology in nearly every part of the computer market is improving at a healthy clip (save hard drives, monitors, sound cards, network cards) and to have to do several hours of research to pull apart marketing tactics from actual performance and then match it up to my budget is annoying. I'd sure appreciate if they used appropriate naming, but that won't happen.

 

[CrackRabbit]

Originally posted by: istallion

Originally posted by: Tostada
I was about to say the exact same thing CrackRabbit said. If you're too stupid to know the difference between graphics cards, you probably won't notice you got a POS 64-bit card, either, so you get to save a few bucks.
.

Intelligence has nothing to do with this. Some people don't care to spend hours learning about the technology that makes a product to see past the deceptive names. This may come as a shock but I'd rather not be forced to spend the time finding informative resources on the net, then read a dozen or two pages about the tech for every $100+ purchase I make. I'm an enthusiast and know a decent amount about fillrates, pipelines, buses, and ALU architecture, but it's a beating picking through new product lines every 6 months when ATI & Nvidia release 5 new models each.

I fail to understand why anybody here would defend the chicanery of marketing goons.

That is all.

I wasnt Defending the marketing goons at all, all I am saying is that if your an un-informed consumer you are going to get screwed on just about anything you buy, whether it be video cards, tvs, vaccuum cleaners, car stereos,you name it. If people would put 30 minutes to an hour of research into thier purchases you would have fewer sales of the watered down versions or things with misleading names.

Another thing is sometimes people dont need the most high powered thing available, they need it to do its specified function and nothing extra. I recently bought an old Matrox G450+ i didnt need DX9 level graphics for the machine it was going in. Why spend extra on it?

CrackRabbit

 

[Krk3561]

Companies arent in the market to please you, they couldn't give 2 $hits what your opinion of them is. Its all about marketing and making profits.

The same could be said about any company.

 

[nick1985]

radeon 8500 or the radeon 9000/9200/9600SE ?????

radeon 9550 or the 9500???

radeon 9800SE?!?!


gimme a break, both companies do it.

 

[DAPUNISHER]

Business ethics is an oxymoron.

 

[MangoTBG]

Originally posted by: Vee
I certainly don't want to make this into some kind of nVidia bashing or ATI vs nVidia thing. I'm using several nVidia cards myself. But there is this thing about nVidias designations and marketing, that is starting to bother me.

Originally we had TNT, TNT2, GF, GF2 and GF3. Each designating a specific chip set, and could be expected to live up to certain abilities. Sure there were different memory and clockrate editions, like GTS and GF3 Ti200 and Ti500. But basically you got what the designation implied. nVidia built first TNT then GeForce into a strong trademark with 1, 2 and 3.

Then with GF4 something happens. Yes, we get the new generation GF4 graphic chip from nVidia as GF4 Ti.
- But, hey what is this: Vendors and ads proclaim various cheap PCs as having "Powerful GeForce4 3D graphics from nVidia", when specification is listing some "GF4 MX". MX now actually being some revamped GF2, that only supports DX7, it looks to me as if it is an attempt to take advantage of a strong trademark, in order to intentionally mislead people about capabilities?

But never mind that for now. Let's leave that and go on. nVidia diversifies their phenomenal GF4Ti with different clocks. Ti4200, Ti4400, Ti4600 and Ti4800. People quickly realize the brilliant value of the Ti4200. nVidia have now built reputation and expectations into their four digit numbers. 4200, 4600 and 4800 becoming the most popular.

What happens next? Next generation from nVidia is not one single chip set, running at different clocks with different memory. Rather it is a whole family of chips. From the rather anemic to the one with power ambitions. No longer is nVidia fooling around with any "GeForce5" designation. Instead they are launching the FX5200, FX5600 and FX5800 designations. I have a very hard time seeing this as anything but an attempt to take advantage of the associations with earlier Ti4200, Ti4600 and Ti4800.
But since the puny FX5200 and the mediocre FX5600 certainly in no way can be considered corresponding to Ti4200 or Ti4600, it again looks to me as an intentional effort to use a reputation to mislead the market about true capabilities?

But let's move on again. The more knowledgable part of the market soon sees through all that. The correct *GF5* cards are soon identified: FX5900XT corresponds to Ti4200, FX5900/FX5950 to Ti4600 and FX5900ultra/FX5950ultra to Ti4800. So basically, nVidia has now taught the market that the good stuff is all in the single high four digit number. With different suffixes.

So what happens as next stage in this (fraud?).?
nVidias next generation of chip sets ALL get the same four digit number! FX6800, irrespective of number of pipes or rendering power. We get our basic *GeForce6*, 'Ti4200-4600-4800' as FX6800GT, FX6800ultra and FX6800 ultra extreme. But no down market "FX6600" or "FX6200" this time. Oh no, no. Instead they are designated FX6800 (no suffix) and FX6800LE!

See what I'm getting at?
This is the third time in a row, nVidia are changing their designation practice. - And it is the the third time in a row, it looks to me as if it is done as an intentional effort to mislead the market about the true capabilities beneath the designation!
What will come next from nVidia? lowend="FX7ultra", "ultra" will become important, right? Then "FX7ultraextreme, FX7ultraXX, FX7ultraXXX, FX7thermonuclear"?

(It's not exactly helpful when you're trying to explain to people what videocard will be right for them -> "Hey, I bought that card you recommended, but I found it $70 cheaper than you said. Lucky I got such a good deal, because it's really not much faster than my old.". ATI's manipulations with obscure buswidth and anemic "SE" cards are troubling too.).

The reason I wrote this piece, is that all this actually angers me somewhat.
What are your thoughts?

I think the one and only thing that nVidia REALLY did something wrong was with the GF4 Ti series. Ok so they have the 4200 4400 and 4600. With each increase of number there's an increase of power. Then we are introduced to the 4800. It does not have any more power than the 4600. I can't remember whether it was a 4200 or 4400 with 8x AGP. Big freakin' deal. 8x AGP does nothing. So 4200<4400<4600 and the 4600>4800?

That was just wrong.

 

[PsharkJF]

It parallels CPU marketing.
Intel markets the pure clockspeed of their chips, as well as the L2 cache for the Prescott. What they don't tell you is that the 512 K Northwood is much more effecient than any Prescott given the same clock speed, and the fact that Intel desktop processors [excluding the Xeon EE's] get trounced in terms of everything except encoding and 3d modelling.
AMD used to/still does market their processors off of Intel's. This is some thinking I put in when I was bored playing morrowind. ;P The Prescott core is less effecient than the Northwood cored Intels.. which means the same processor for AMD can be marketed as two seperate values depending on which core is used for evaluations. Then it becomes obvious, to get a bigger "XP/64 +" value, why not use the more inneficient Prescott core for the numbering? That would produce a higher number, drawing people in with "higher" performance issues that just ends up being more marketing.

Point is, Intel realizes that GHz sells. CPU cache translates into sales.
AMD realizes that marketing their processors off of Intel speeds helps.

Sound familiar? =P

 

[Vee]

Originally posted by: VirtualLarry
Also conveniently forgot the TNT2 M64 and original GF2 MX product introductions, and the TNT Vanta. (Riva 128, Riva 128 ZX, etc.)

If you have point here, it proves my point. I haven't "conveniently forgotten" anything. I'm clueless. So I thought all TNT2 were basically the same thing. Am I screwed?

None of this is in any way new, although the fact that the names are so similar-sounding is unfortunate, and probably intentional, intended to confuse the consumer and get them to purchase a cheaper card because they think it is a more advanced one.

I don't think so. I don't think the intention is to fool the consumer to pick a cheaper card. I think the intention is to get consumers looking for a cheaper card to choose your brand. And maybe fool some consumers to think that they can afford a 'great upgrade'. Like change that old Ti4200 for the new FX5200.

Edit: Actually, I think maybe the idea is that it should look good PC builders machine specs too.
Like Dell is so happy they can always refer to the slowest available graphics solution as "Intel Extreme Graphics".

ATI is guilty of the same thing, introduction the Radeon, and then the 7000, which is slower, and then re-releasing the original Radeon as the 7200, and then the 8500 LE re-named to 9100, the AGP 8x version of the 9000 renamed as the 9200, but slower than the 9100, etc. Even worse, when is a 9800 Pro not an 9800 Pro, etc.

Of course they are.

It's all a mess. Caveat Emptor, has never been truer, than in the PC video-card business. I don't think that any of it is fraud though. (With the possible exception of the Sapphire Radeon 9800 Pro 128-bit business.)

How hard will this get to be, while we are still smugly talking about "too stupid to know the difference between graphics cards...so you get to save a few bucks" (Tostada's contribution) or resigned nod "Caveat Emptor"?

Research? What research, who does the research for us? Everyone here perfectly happy about all production descriptions they've read through the years, in PC magazines and on the web? Remember all the positive reviews about the 5% faster and $800 more expensive P4EE? Who pays their ads? Why isn't this next step.

I'm not trying to be impossible here. It's just that I think the 'system' needs some kind of feedback now and then. I have only vague ideas about what "product line differentiation" is. But who is to blame for there being marketing people who think this is a good idea? Silent complying customers who really know better. That's who.

Debate, media, please. Consumers who realize a brand attempts to confuse them about what they're buying, makes these kind of marketing tricks a poor idea. And business classes are going to teach this as examples of classic mistakes in poor marketing.
So all this is just my attempt at some feedback, for some balance, to stop the slip 'n slide. I'm not prepared to passively accept that tricking and fooling the customer are the basics of marketing. I feel one should react with hostility towards that.

 

[Gamingphreek]

Well actually the 4800 is faster than the 4600. The 4800 has an increase in clockspeed and has AGP 8x support. That is about the only difference. (sorry i didnt want to quote that whole post again)

-Kevin

 

[0roo0roo]

nothing new as has been said. ati's naming schemes with all the pro's le's, lower numbered cards that are faster then certain higher numbered cards etc and whatever versions are enough to confuse even people who follow such things.

 

[XNice]

i happen to like reading reviews/previews/etc every 6months or so when new cards come out. jus my 2 cents. Companies are out to make money, thats why they created the company. Pleasing consumers is an afterthought to stay in business. Man up and deal with it.

This isn't directed towards anyone, it's just how i deal with it.

 

[magomago]

Originally posted by: Gamingphreek
Well actually the 4800 is faster than the 4600. The 4800 has an increase in clockspeed and has AGP 8x support. That is about the only difference. (sorry i didnt want to quote that whole post again)

-Kevin

are you sure? I also thought it was a ti4200 with AGP 8x

do you any proof?

 

[Tab]

I truly agree with you. I honestly wish that the manfactures would use more naming ethics. This is also the same situation with the 9700 Pro Mobility.

 

[JBT]

I belive the 4800 was the same exact thing as the 4600 but with 8x AGP support. They also had 4800SE's which were the same as 4400's but with 8X agp support too.

 

[Regs]

All I know is the FX lined sucked up until the FX5900 came along.

The 4600 was over priced considering the value of the 4200.

And anything that had MX in it's name was crippled.

ATI plays their cards as well. I would be pissed if I got a ATI 9800 Pro from sapphire with 128-bit ram.

But yes, any marketing associate of a major hardware company who would recommend naming a card "DontBuyMe" would not expect to be employed very much longer. This is likely why Anandtech and other review sites got so popular.

You're right in your simplicity. Adding to your point, and im going to step out on a ledge on this one, RAM vendors have been the major culprit in name differentiation. LL, XMS Cas 2.0, level 1, level 2, EB, HB, Golden, platinum, and not to mention the pricing. Some vendors charge over 40 dollars extra just for Cas 2.0 other than Cas 2.5.

 

[ViRGE]

The sad part is that it's a vicious, endless cycle. The first company to stop it will be screwed in the marketplace.

 

[dfloyd]

Yep I agree 100%.

Me and a friend saw the great deal on the Gaiward 6800 Ultra. Wow $300 we thought. What a deal. Spent a ton of hours trying to find reviews or info.

Finally checked gainwards main site and saw that the 6800 Ultra is actually the 2100 Ultra. Just a standard 6800, not a ultra.

Come on Nvidia, name chips, 6000, 7000, and 8000. Not gt, not ultra, not crap.