Nvidia cuts out reviewers for the GTS250 - Such dirty rats...

Status
Not open for further replies.
iirc, the gts240 kicks the 4670's ass, so what's sadder, being a rebrand or losing to rebrand?
gts250 has no chance against a 4850 though, so idk what the point of the 250 is.
i mean, i understand keeping a chip that was competitive alive, but whats the deal there?
 
BababooeyHTJ said:
Don't they all do this with previews? Look at the previews for the 55nm GTX260 where reviewers were only allowed to test 5 games that their drivers are made for like Crysis and Dead Space.
Click to expand...

this is a little different than restricting people to certain games on a review imo... I mean ok, sure use the games which make the card shine.. that's cool. I even looked the other way when those drivers cheated extra points out of 3dmark a long while ago.. but this time they are obviously so embarrassed by their product they need to stop good honest people from reviewing it.. man. I dunno...

I still like my GTX260s and I'll buy whatever graphics card I think is going to get me the best bang for my bucks.. but this for sure tarnishes my image of Nvidia a bit..
 
LOCO LAPTOP said:
I don't know, but I know it's not a smart move at all. It only makes people pissed and switch over to ATi or not buy any upcoming rebrands.
Click to expand...

by people you mean the people that actually read and follow tech news like us, then thats probably a very very small segment of their target customers.
I'm sure the number of Joes buying the rebranded 250s will surpass that in number so no worries there!
 
flak-spammer said:
One has to remember this marketing strategy has been used all over the place. The best example is AMDs Tri-Core CPUs are really quad core CPUs that had one damaged or failed core. AMD and NVidia have been rebranding stuff for a while now it's an incredibly smart idea because they make larger profit margins on products they don't have to spend R&D on.
Click to expand...

that is not the same, AMD sold quad cores as tri cores, they are tri cores as the 4th is not properly up to spec

NVIDIA is taking the same cards and putting a new name on it to fool people...

Also, someone else said ATI is renaming some cards into the 4 series... so ATI could be just as guilty?



ATI catalyst 9.1 renames HD 3000 to 4000
http://www.fudzilla.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=11867&Itemid=34

Eleven "new" cards

And now it's official, ATI did some selective rebranding of their Radeon HD 3000 generation to HD 4000 but this time they did it in their official Catalyst 9.1 driver.

The file called CH_75108.inf says it all. It shows 11 new cards branded as Radeon HD 4230, HD 4250, HD 4570, HD 4580, HD 4730 and finally HD 4750.

Take a quick look at this part of inf file

"ATI Radeon HD 4230" = ati2mtag_RV610, PCI\VEN_1002& DEV_95C5
"ATI Radeon HD 4230 " = ati2mtag_RV610, PCI\VEN_1002& DEV_95C5
"ATI Radeon HD 4250" = ati2mtag_RV610, PCI\VEN_1002& DEV_95C5
"ATI Radeon HD 4250 " = ati2mtag_RV610, PCI\VEN_1002& DEV_95C5
"ATI Radeon HD 4250 " = ati2mtag_RV610, PCI\VEN_1002& DEV_95C0
"ATI Radeon HD 4570 " = ati2mtag_RV630, PCI\VEN_1002& DEV_9598
"ATI Radeon HD 4580" = ati2mtag_RV630, PCI\VEN_1002& DEV_9598
"ATI Radeon HD 4730 " = ati2mtag_RV630, PCI\VEN_1002& DEV_9505
"ATI Radeon HD 4730 " = ati2mtag_RV630, PCI\VEN_1002& DEV_9505
"ATI Radeon HD 4750" = ati2mtag_RV630, PCI\VEN_1002& DEV_9505
"ATI Radeon HD 4750 " = ati2mtag_RV630, PCI\VEN_1002& DEV_9505

This clearly proves that the HD 42x0 generation is based on RV61x core that is behind HD 3400 brand, the new HD45x0 is based on RV63x core or HD 3600 generation and the new 47x0 brand is as well based on RV63x brand. These are not RV610 and RV630 cores, they are 55nm RV615 and RV635 brands and we got that by comparing the DEV IDs of 2400 series branded RV610 and the new one. At RV615 the DEV_95C5 is part of the name, while the 2400 series has DEV_94 in the name.

You can help yourself unpack the 9.1 driver and check it for yourself and it is rather interesting to see how tables have turned.
Click to expand...
 
grimreeferx09 said:
iirc, the gts240 kicks the 4670's ass, so what's sadder, being a rebrand or losing to rebrand?
gts250 has no chance against a 4850 though, so idk what the point of the 250 is.
i mean, i understand keeping a chip that was competitive alive, but whats the deal there?
Click to expand...

Durrrr

the hd 4670 has no competitor from nvidia

the hd 4830 goes against the gts240 (9800gt/8800gt w/e) and is faster and cheaper
 
MrGuvernment said:
that is not the same, AMD sold quad cores as tri cores, they are tri cores as the 4th is not properly up to spec

NVIDIA is taking the same cards and putting a new name on it to fool people...

Also, someone else said ATI is renaming some cards into the 4 series... so ATI could be just as guilty?



ATI catalyst 9.1 renames HD 3000 to 4000
http://www.fudzilla.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=11867&Itemid=34
Click to expand...

This information from fudzilla was already debunked and its pretty obvious that this was just a driver renaming or internal naming in the INF, either intentional or not. The RV6xx aren't even in production anymore....Where FIDO got this completely wrong was mistaking a driver renaming scheme into 'rebranding' ala Nvidia's 9800gtx + -> GTS250. Just look up latest inf from cat 9.2 and you will see the same line RV670 along with driver device id 9505 listed for both 3 and 4 series as just a simple reference. Grasping at straws at best.


This thread is about Nvidia preventing unbiased reviews, lol love how people turn this into a "but AMD or company X did this and that" to detract from the issue being discussed.
 
Dictionary.com defines Ethics as:
that branch of philosophy dealing with values relating to human conduct, with respect to the rightness and wrongness of certain actions and to the goodness and badness of the motives and ends of such actions
1) I don't know if it's "right" what Nvidia did to deny access to review sites who wouldn't swing the media their way.
2) I believe that it will help more people then hurt them by preventing unbaised reviews. If Nvidia in denying access to these review sites will inturn allow Nvidia to sell more product this will allow more people to possibly keep their jobs do to increased sales and benefit the economy.
3) It doesn't hurt us the informed buyers because we are research nuts anyway and read up on topics like this, so we know the truth anyway.
4) If the product does perform comparable to the segment and price it's placed in is it not a decent buy? (can be debated)
These are my major points.
 
I really do not see a problem here, Nvidia themselfs said the gts 250 would be cheaper than the 9800gtx, This just seems like a foolish trick aimed at the novice computer building crowd.

Im gonna keep my eyes pealed on 9800gtx prices, if i see them at or under where i bought mine (145 Shipped) i might go sli and call it a day til dx11 :cool:
 
Sherloc said:
Dictionary.com defines Ethics as:
that branch of philosophy dealing with values relating to human conduct, with respect to the rightness and wrongness of certain actions and to the goodness and badness of the motives and ends of such actions
1) I don't know if it's "right" what Nvidia did to deny access to review sites who wouldn't swing the media their way.
2) I believe that it will help more people then hurt them by preventing unbaised reviews. If Nvidia in denying access to these review sites will inturn allow Nvidia to sell more product this will allow more people to possibly keep their jobs do to increased sales and benefit the economy.
3) It doesn't hurt us the informed buyers because we are research nuts anyway and read up on topics like this, so we know the truth anyway.
4) If the product does perform comparable to the segment and price it's placed in is it not a decent buy? (can be debated)
These are my major points.
Click to expand...

You have some twisted logic/ethics.

I completely disagree with point #2. Do you not believe in freedom of information?
 
I've a question: if NV wanted to rebrand all their existing product line to use a consistant naming scheme, how should they have handled it?
 
alex_law said:
I've a question: if NV wanted to rebrand all their existing product line to use a consistant naming scheme, how should they have handled it?
Click to expand...

By not re-branding cards that already exist.
If there is an improvement/change to a card, a version number or equivalent should be used.
 
I dont have a problem with re-naming per say. Its when NV cuts out sights from the reviews like HardOCP for not giving into the NV whims that bothers me. Way to stick to your guns Kyle!
 
Jbirney said:
I dont have a problem with re-naming per say. Its when NV cuts out sights from the reviews like HardOCP for not giving into the NV whims that bothers me. Way to stick to your guns Kyle!
Click to expand...

Even if Nv gave them a gts250, [H] would not have bothered reviewing it. Because they already have, http://www.hardocp.com/article.html?art=MTU1NCwsLGhlbnRodXNpYXN0. And so have most of the other sites. Nv seems to be trying to get review sites to bench CUDA and hardware accelerated PhysX demos instead of actual games.

I'm fine with the rebrand, but the attempt at hiding that it is a rebrand is irksome.
 
Roland00 said:
It is now known as the 9600 gso, but there is more than one version of the gso with a different amount of stream processors.
Click to expand...
No, that turned out to be a hoax. 9600GS is always 96 stream processors, 192-bit wide memory bus, but can be 384MB or 768MB. You are still right about the 8800GS=9600GSO, though.
 
To answer your question OhMyGod, no where in the constitution is it explicitly stated we have a "right to information." That being said i don't like that they didn't allow Kyle and others to test the cards, I personally think it was a faulty move on their part, but to say what they did was unethical... In my Business Law class we are taught that the basic guide to ethical behavior is to follow the law. Can you tell me a law that they broke? If not, then the ethics of the matter really becomes subjective to the individual, and truthfully I think most posters on the Hardforum are going to be biased themselves in their opinion, because it segregates us and Kyle from the reviewing process. So to acheive a correct judgement on this issue we would have to solicite a response from the indirectly effected portion of the community.
 
Nenu said:
By not re-branding cards that already exist.
If there is an improvement/change to a card, a version number or equivalent should be used.
Click to expand...

But if the current product is viable and they want a consistant naming scheme, then what?

You have the card specs, you have the price. Anything else is just ePenis fodder, anyway.
 
Any computer person worth their pocket protector knows to NEVER touch an nvidia X5XX series or below. The X6XX series is the budget line, the X5XX series is the "I don't play games" series.
 
Some of you may remember a post that I made in this very forum a few days ago asking for information about a 512MB eVGA 9600gso that I was thinking about buying. There are absolutely no reviews on that card anywhere, as it's a gimped product released under the same name. I decided that I didn't want team green in my PC because nVidia was being very dishonest with this product. Now I read this and I know why there were never any 256/512MB gso reviews, which I feel is even more dishonest. I do however need a new video card so I'll be getting a 4830 this afternoon. nVidia has lost one customer (me) over all this, how many more potential customers will they lose?
 
mavalpha said:
No, that turned out to be a hoax. 9600GS is always 96 stream processors, 192-bit wide memory bus, but can be 384MB or 768MB. You are still right about the 8800GS=9600GSO, though.
Click to expand...

No, the 384/768MB GSOs have 96 stream processors, the 256/512MB GSOs have 48. See my post above.
 
kadozer said:
This information from fudzilla was already debunked and its pretty obvious that this was just a driver renaming or internal naming in the INF, either intentional or not. The RV6xx aren't even in production anymore....Where FIDO got this completely wrong was mistaking a driver renaming scheme into 'rebranding' ala Nvidia's 9800gtx + -> GTS250. Just look up latest inf from cat 9.2 and you will see the same line RV670 along with driver device id 9505 listed for both 3 and 4 series as just a simple reference. Grasping at straws at best.


This thread is about Nvidia preventing unbiased reviews, lol love how people turn this into a "but AMD or company X did this and that" to detract from the issue being discussed.
Click to expand...



good to know, i just quoted that from OCForums which someone had posted, i posted it as many people were saying screw NVIDIA i am going to ATI, so i posted that thinking ATI was doing the same so no point in jumping to either side.
 
Its amazing how the nvidia fanbois are still hanging on to the saddle. You are all missing the point of the article, its already known what Nvidia is doing, Kyle has already informed us about their doings. The fact in Inquirer article is they are shipping cards that you wouldnt buy in a store or online and have the same specs. Its not just dishonest and completely absurd but its false advertisement so to speak, which can lead them in court if there is enough interest.

Again do not try to pull the "but ATI did the same thins with rebranding" stories, they have NEVER went this far, they have never went for as long as Nvidia did which is almost 3.5 years now. ATI has never pushed reviewers out like Nvidia did. Your comparisons are pointless.

Whats more surprising is the fact it seems Nvidia is all based on lies. They only care about their share prices and their precious shareholders. They will squeeze every single dime out of you and wont even have any remorse when they sell you old tech. They put up a fake image that they are the greatest thing there is but its all based on lies and false advertisement. Does it work? seems like it, but looks what it has done to them...

Suit yourself if you wish to spend the money with them and in the future. This is one of the reasons i have yet to upgrade my 8800gts 640, because nothing nvidia put out have yet to make a difference. I wanted to go ATI even after i got my 8800 and no doubt in my mind i am not going back to nvidia.
 
Nvidia ION thing is going on too between Nvidia and Intel LOL All these companies are Money thirsty, rather than get togeher and combine their resrouces tehy douche it out in court.
Intel Nvidia AMD Ati They have all had their share in court and dark rumors.
 
If you want to do completely unbiased reviews with no expectations or pressure from a vendor, buy the hardware yourself. If you accept hardware kits with the expectation that you will include vendor specific features in your review you better do it if you want the gravy train to continue. If you decide not to, don't cry about it when the gravy train stops.

Welcome to marketing. Been this way since modern consumerism begain.
 
Yes what Nvidia is doing isn't honest, but if it helps more people than it hurts wouldn't the outcome be positive? If they sell more tech and it helps retain more jobs for them (helping the economy), and allows them more saved R&D dollars for the next tech that we really want to see (not some mid/low-range card) then aren't we benefited by this decision?
 
I dont see the big deal. Since when rebadging such a crime? And I have no interest in switching to ATI just to stick it to nvidia, given the number of driver and performance issues I have had with ATI in the past.
 
Monkey God said:
I dont see the big deal. Since when rebadging such a crime? And I have no interest in switching to ATI just to stick it to nvidia, given the number of driver and performance issues I have had with ATI in the past.
Click to expand...

Read again, it's about them not allowing websites to review their card because it's not going to be favorable or they're not going to praise CUDA and PhysX on these new cards. And also not only that it's re-badged, but they're trying to cover it up. At least before they didn't try and cover it up.
 
What exactly did they try to hide?
I read the VR article and all I saw was lame innuendo and accusations without proof.

Its a rebadged 9800. OK. What else did nvidia do that was so evil besides pick and choose who would get the cards to review?
 
Monkey God said:
What exactly did they try to hide?
I read the VR article and all I saw was lame innuendo and accusations without proof.

Its a rebadged 9800. OK. What else did nvidia do that was so evil besides pick and choose who would get the cards to review?
Click to expand...

Sounds a bit like a bunch of whiny lefties in here. "All these companies are Money thirsty, rather than get togeher and combine their resrouces tehy douche it out in court.", my goodness, pass the talking stick. Rebadging and cherry-picking reviewers? Welcome to 2009!
 
Citizen86 said:
Read again, it's about them not allowing websites to review their card because it's not going to be favorable or they're not going to praise CUDA and PhysX on these new cards. And also not only that it's re-badged, but they're trying to cover it up. At least before they didn't try and cover it up.
Click to expand...

yeah, exactly. everybody KNEW the 9800GTX was going to be on par with the 8800GTX, and most people knew the 9800GT was going to be close to the 8800GT...

but making a whole new generation of cards, by simply using a chip that is already three years old is low.
 
alex_law said:
But you all know about this too, amirite?
Click to expand...

yeah, but we can't actually DO anything about the cherry picked card reviews and the "slect" group of reviewers that nvidia picks. thats total bull crap.

and to whoever said it will help build the economy... thats the dumbest thing i've ever heard.

you're saying that people wasting their money on what they think are "upgrades" is a good way to boost the economy? more like a way for nvidia bastards to pocket some more cash on their way home every night.

what nvidia is ALSO DOING is eliminating any competition by not coming up with new tech. way to really put those R and D Dollars to work boys!

and for goodness sake, who gives a crap about physX? theres TWO GAMES that have actually used physx, in the past, i don't know, 5 YEARS?!
 
Monkey God said:
What else did nvidia do that was so evil besides pick and choose who would get the cards to review?
Click to expand...
I think that's the real issue here. When review sites like [H] get thrown out of the ring because they aren't focusing enough attention on features that their readers don't necessarily have any interest in, that's an issue.

Realistically, NVIDIA should supply hardware to reputable sites without making half-a-dozen stipulations as to what reviewers can and cannot cover. If NVIDIA truly stands behind its products, there should be no issue. Unfortunately, NVIDIA seems desperate enough to enforce that its products be propped up with gimmicky and half-useless technologies because the core performance is just too underwhelming to be competitive.

The question I have to ask is this: if NVIDIA can't stand by its products, how the hell could anyone expect us to have faith enough in those products to buy them?
 
phide said:
I think that's the real issue here. When review sites like [H] get thrown out of the ring because they aren't focusing enough attention on features that their readers don't necessarily have any interest in, that's an issue.

Realistically, NVIDIA should supply hardware to reputable sites without making half-a-dozen stipulations as to what reviewers can and cannot cover. If NVIDIA truly stands behind its products, there should be no issue. Unfortunately, NVIDIA seems desperate enough to enforce that its products be propped up with gimmicky and half-useless technologies because the core performance is just too underwhelming to be competitive.

The question I have to ask is this: if NVIDIA can't stand by its products, how the hell could anyone expect us to have faith enough in those products to buy them?
Click to expand...

They are not thrown out of the ring, they are just removed from "desirable reviewer" status. If I was a marketing department VP, and review sites weren't interested in talking about stuff I needed talked about to sell my product, id move on too. Thats not lack of faith in the product, that's just common sense.

You guys seem to be equating common business "I need to sell my stuff" practices with somehow they are evil big bad corporations.
 
Read between the lines. So the 250 is just a renamed part that's been reviewed by everyone already. Where's the issue?
 
Does this really tarnish Nvidia's image more than their chipsets already have or when them and ATI were caught price fixing which alot of people seem to forget about or the fact that they are charging board manufaturers to put a stamp of approval on ther bios to run sli or their shady marketing practices? This is not about reviews it's about previews which are allways full of requirements. Have you guys seen the AMD charts about Phenom II performance before they were releaced while no one was allowed to do a preview? Why would you trust any of these companies? If AMD could do the same they would, but they have only releaced 3 cards better than this and two of them are dual gpu solutions. I have never even seen a review site mention any driver bug unless it's so bad that a game won't even run in a review. And you trust these review sites? I don't buy a video card untill it's in the hands of end users at the forums.
 
Oh yeah.. don't get me started on their chipsets. ;) I guess this is just one more thing in a series of lots of other events which are kind of iffy... but I guess that's how businesses operate.. they start off trying to offer the best experience in something while trying to turn a profit at the same time.. but in the end it's all about the money. I agree also, usually I wait to hear end user reviews before making a video card purchase.. the 8800GTX was my exception tho. I got one on launch. what a great card that turned out to be. :)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top