2900 XT lacks a UVD

Page 5 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Creig

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 1999
5,170
13
81
Originally posted by: apoppin
Originally posted by: Wreckage
Originally posted by: Creig

Admission? Huh? Apparently AMD/ATI never advertised it as having a UVD in the first place

http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=39884

this is the guy that started the avalanche

http://techreport.com/onearticle.x/12552
I've just learned something that compels me to publish a major correction to our review of the Radeon HD 2900 XT GPU. I got the clear, distinct impression from AMD's presentations, statements, and conversations with me at its Radeon HD press event that its new UVD video decode acceleration logic was present in its entire lineup of Radeon HD graphics chips, and I relayed that information to you in our review of the product, promising to follow up with tests of this feature at a later date.

True to my word, I set out yesterday to test HD video decode acceleration on a Radeon HD 2900 XT using an HD DVD drive and a version of PowerDVD supplied by AMD for such purposes. To my surprise, CPU utilization during playback on our Core 2 Extreme X6800 test system ran between 40 and 50%, well above what one would expect from a solution with full HD video decode acceleration.

Naturally, I contacted AMD to inquire about the problem. I received a reply from AMD's David Baumann discussing the issue that ended with this revelation:

Be aware, though, that HD 2900 XT itself does not feature UVD, this is specific to 2600 and 2400, so the levels of CPU utilization you see should be somewhat similar to the previous generation.

The UVD logic handles the CPU-intensive bitstream processing and entropy decode acceleration portions of the HD video playback pipeline. These are the most notable video decode acceleration capabilities that would separate the Radeon HD 2900 series from its direct competition, the GeForce 8800 series, if the HD 2900 XT actually had them. Turns out it does not. As the email states, the video playback capabilities of the Radeon HD 2900 XT are essentially similar to those of the previous-gen Radeon X1950.

So the essence of our correction is that the Radeon HD 2900 XT doesn't offer robust acceleration of HD video playback and will not likely reduce CPU utilization or power consumption substantially during high-definition video playback versus a GeForce 8800. We still intend to follow up with testing, but the lack of UVD logic on the GPU resets our expectations dramatically.

With that out of the way, I believe I ought to take a moment to explain how we came to believe the Radeon HD 2900 XT had full HD video playback acceleration, an impression formed by many layers of talk from AMD, starting with the Radeon HD name. Let me share a slide with you from a presentation titled "ATI Radeon HD 2000 Series and the Ultimate HD Experience," given by AMD's David Cummings, Director of Mobile GPU Marketing. The slide looks like so:

see slide - exhibit A

You can, of course, read for yourself that it says "Avivo HD technology makes full spec HD DVD / Blu-Ray (HD Disc) playback accessible at all price points," but I just like repeating it. That gives one a certain idea, does it not? Now, let's have a look at another slide showing what Avivo HD brings to video decode acceleration:


see slide - exhibit B

The bit labeled "Avivo HD" shows GPU acceleration of bitstream processing and entropy decode, and makes clear it's distinct from the Radeon X1000's Avivo video processing, which lacks acceleration of those stages.

Now, look at any specs list for the Radeon HD 2900 XT?say, this one from AMD's website, and you will find listed among its specs "ATI Avivo? HD Video and Display Platform" and a bullet point under that saying "HD decode acceleration for H.264/AVC, VC-1, DivX and MPEG-2 video formats." At the end of the day, one gets the impression that this GPU has Avivo HD, with all that entails.

Of course, AMD has left itself some wiggle room in its technical statements. The specs list above isn't technically untrue?just imprecise. The dodge built into the Cummings presentation, with its talk of making HD video playback "accessible at all price points" seems to be that high-end CPUs can handle HD video playback without as much assistance from the GPU. But that's a paper thin excuse, in my view.

To make sure this wasn't simply a matter of me missing the boat?it has been known to happen, and I've got a few gray hairs promising more of the same in the future?I checked with a couple of other journalists who attended a separate Radeon HD press event the week after the one I attended. Both Marco Chiappetta from HotHardware and Ryan Shrout of PC Perspective came away from their meetings with AMD convinced the Radeon HD 2900 XT had full HD playback acceleration via UVD logic, as well. I was not alone in gathering this impression from AMD. To their credit, some reviewers did sort through the fog and identify the Radeon HD 2900 XT's lack of UVD, but they were swimming against the tide of statements from AMD itself.

Nor could any of us have uncovered this fact prior to the publication of our reviews via testing, because AMD hasn't yet delivered a driver that includes the support for the Radeon HD's "full" multimedia capabilities.
judge for yourself if it was AMD or their AiBs that mislead

i believe the AiBs themselves were mislead by AMD ... hence the *disclaimer* on AMD's site

So what you've posted is that some reviewers at a press event misunderstood the facts that were presented. Because, and I quote your quote "some reviewers did sort through the fog and identify the Radeon HD 2900 XT's lack of UVD". So OBVIOUSLY the facts were there, although possibly presented in a way that was confusing to some. So AMD didn't make any false claims.

And what is posted on AMD's website is NOT a disclaimer. It's simply a statement saying that they are aware of the situation and are attempting to get it cleared up. I'm sure it's there to keep them from being bombarded with emails saying, "Did you know that HIS is advertising the 2900 as having a UVD?"
 

Creig

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 1999
5,170
13
81
Originally posted by: Wreckage
Originally posted by: Creig

Admission? Huh? Apparently AMD/ATI never advertised it as having a UVD in the first place

http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=39884

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003
From those two links, it would appear that AMD led AIB's to believe, with documentation and the like, that the entire 2xxx line was equipped with the UVD feature.
So AIB's were only advertising what they were led to believe they "could".

Creig, you need to rethink your stance on this. I mean, it doesn't really make a difference to me whether the 2900XT has UVD or not. Nor does it matter to me whose fault it was that it was advertised on the boxes. But apparently, it matters much more to you where the blame falls. I think we can all see for ourselves where that blame belongs.
So why do you care so much? What is the big deal? You're treading uphill here with some effort that is kind of futile. All you really have to do, is keep an open mind and look at the data from a "neutral" position and you will see what the rest of us see. And you won't look that foolish pissing into the wind. Not trying to aggravate you, just wishing you would keep things real for a change.

So nice to know that you're "neutral" and that when you have an opinion it's because you're keeping an open mind. But when someone else has a differing opinion, they're pissing into the wind.

I simply showed that AMD did not advertise the 2900 as having a UVD because some people were under the impression that they had. Now they know.

So now that you know as well, try to keep an open mind about it (and me). Okay?
 

apoppin

Lifer
Mar 9, 2000
34,890
1
0
alienbabeltech.com
Originally posted by: Creig
Originally posted by: Wreckage
Originally posted by: Creig

Admission? Huh? Apparently AMD/ATI never advertised it as having a UVD in the first place

http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=39884

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003
From those two links, it would appear that AMD led AIB's to believe, with documentation and the like, that the entire 2xxx line was equipped with the UVD feature.
So AIB's were only advertising what they were led to believe they "could".

Creig, you need to rethink your stance on this. I mean, it doesn't really make a difference to me whether the 2900XT has UVD or not. Nor does it matter to me whose fault it was that it was advertised on the boxes. But apparently, it matters much more to you where the blame falls. I think we can all see for ourselves where that blame belongs.
So why do you care so much? What is the big deal? You're treading uphill here with some effort that is kind of futile. All you really have to do, is keep an open mind and look at the data from a "neutral" position and you will see what the rest of us see. And you won't look that foolish pissing into the wind. Not trying to aggravate you, just wishing you would keep things real for a change.

So nice to know that you're "neutral" and that when you have an opinion it's because you're keeping an open mind. But when someone else has a differing opinion, they're pissing into the wind.

I simply showed that AMD did not advertise the 2900 as having a UVD because some people were under the impression that they had. Now they know.

So now that you know as well, try to keep an open mind about it (and me). Okay?

Keys isn't neutral, i am not neutral and your are not neutral ... you mind is completely shut ... and and according to you, we should call it "Saint AMD", i guess

some reviewers did sort through the fog and identify the Radeon HD 2900 XT's lack of UVD, but they were swimming against the tide of statements from AMD itself.

It is clear to 99+% of the posters here that AMD mislead everyone
-- including it's partners

--but yes, you are 100% entitled to your minority view of 1

you didn't "show" anything ... we already know your position that AMD can do no wrong
 

Keysplayr

Elite Member
Jan 16, 2003
21,219
55
91
Originally posted by: Aikouka
Originally posted by: tuteja1986
In fact, the Radeon HD series is the first line of GPUs to integrate the HDCP encryption keys directly into the ASIC, no external CryptoROM chip is needed.

8800GTS and 8800GTX has this as well. I believe the 8600GTS also has it on-die, but the rest are via chip as they're not required.

EDIT:

Also, nVidia may not have mentioned that they had PureVideo 2 decoding, but the vendors did and vendors pull information from the manufacturer's page and where do they get their information from.... drum roll please... nVidia!

In fact, you can even see it on their website for the 8800:

http://www.nvidia.com/page/8800_features.html
NVIDIA® PureVideo? HD Technology2:
The combination of high-definition video decode acceleration and post-processing that delivers unprecedented picture clarity, smooth video, accurate color, and precise image scaling for movies and video.

I don't see anything special when using my 8800 compared to any other card that I've owned... and that's after using a 6800GT where the PureVideo didn't even work on :Q.

http://www.nvidia.com/page/8800_features.html
Discrete, Programmable Video Processor:
NVIDIA PureVideo is a discrete programmable processing core in NVIDIA GPUs that provides superb picture quality and ultra-smooth movies with low CPU utilization and power.

Comparing the 8600 and the 8800... we see this really isn't true.

I don't see them mentioning particular GPU's bud. Can you point that out?
 

Aikouka

Lifer
Nov 27, 2001
30,383
912
126
Originally posted by: keysplayr2003
I don't see them mentioning particular GPU's bud. Can you point that out?

If you'd actually navigate to the page yourself or look... you kind of have to click on "8800" to get there ;). There are separate sections for the 8800, 8600 and 8500.

EDIT: Also how the URL has 8800_features in it :p.
 

Creig

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 1999
5,170
13
81
Originally posted by: apoppin
It is clear to 99+% of the posters here that AMD mislead everyone
-- including it's partners

--but yes, you are 100% entitled to your minority view of 1

you didn't "show" anything ... we already know your position that AMD can do no wrong

Jesus apoppin, get real. AMD released information that some people misunderstood. They acted on this situation by telling their AIBs to stop putting UVD on the 2900XT boxes. Do you honestly think that this has never happened before?

If somebody bought one of the cards with UVD on the box and they feel that this feature was the deciding factor in choosing the card over a different one, then I think they should be allowed to return the card for a refund. It would seem to me to be a short-sighted decision since the same capabilities are supposed to come to the 2900 in an upcoming driver release. But if they feel that strongly about it, then return the card.

Why are you making such a production out of it?
 

Creig

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 1999
5,170
13
81
Originally posted by: Aikouka
Originally posted by: keysplayr2003
I don't see them mentioning particular GPU's bud. Can you point that out?

If you'd actually navigate to the page yourself or look... you kind of have to click on "8800" to get there ;). There are separate sections for the 8800, 8600 and 8500.

EDIT: Also how the URL has 8800_features in it :p.

Actually, Aikouka, I don't see any mention of PureVideo 2. I do see "NVIDIA® PureVideo? HD Technology2:" but that's simply to point to a footnote at the bottom of the page.

2 - Feature requires supported video software. Features may vary by product.
 

Keysplayr

Elite Member
Jan 16, 2003
21,219
55
91
Originally posted by: Creig
Originally posted by: apoppin
It is clear to 99+% of the posters here that AMD mislead everyone
-- including it's partners

--but yes, you are 100% entitled to your minority view of 1

you didn't "show" anything ... we already know your position that AMD can do no wrong

Jesus apoppin, get real. AMD released information that some people misunderstood. They acted on this situation by telling their AIBs to stop putting UVD on the 2900XT boxes. Do you honestly think that this has never happened before?

If somebody bought one of the cards with UVD on the box and they feel that this feature was the deciding factor in choosing the card over a different one, then I think they should be allowed to return the card for a refund. It would seem to me to be a short-sighted decision since the same capabilities are supposed to come to the 2900 in an upcoming driver release. But if they feel that strongly about it, then return the card.

Why are you making such a production out of it?

Just pretend you're someone else, then go back and read your posts. I'm talkin "Wow".

@Aikouka: Thanks, I was running out the door and didn't have time to check myself. Grazi!

 

Creig

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 1999
5,170
13
81
Originally posted by: keysplayr2003
Just pretend you're someone else, then go back and read your posts. I'm talkin "Wow".

You first.

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003
You're treading uphill here with some effort that is kind of futile.
Originally posted by: keysplayr2003
And you won't look that foolish pissing into the wind.
Originally posted by: keysplayr2003
just wishing you would keep things real for a change.

Since you now can't refute what I've posted, you've taken to insulting me instead.


Lame.
 

apoppin

Lifer
Mar 9, 2000
34,890
1
0
alienbabeltech.com
Originally posted by: keysplayr2003
Originally posted by: Creig
Originally posted by: apoppin
It is clear to 99+% of the posters here that AMD mislead everyone
-- including it's partners

--but yes, you are 100% entitled to your minority view of 1

you didn't "show" anything ... we already know your position that AMD can do no wrong

Jesus apoppin, get real. AMD released information that some people misunderstood. They acted on this situation by telling their AIBs to stop putting UVD on the 2900XT boxes. Do you honestly think that this has never happened before?

If somebody bought one of the cards with UVD on the box and they feel that this feature was the deciding factor in choosing the card over a different one, then I think they should be allowed to return the card for a refund. It would seem to me to be a short-sighted decision since the same capabilities are supposed to come to the 2900 in an upcoming driver release. But if they feel that strongly about it, then return the card.

Why are you making such a production out of it?

Just pretend you're someone else, then go back and read your posts. I'm talkin "Wow".

@Aikouka: Thanks, I was running out the door and didn't have time to check myself. Grazi!
oh, 'wow', now you're talkin'!

OK, i'll pretend i am Creig ... RE: AMD "hear no evil, seen no evil, speak no evil, post no evil" ... nvidia is an evil company ....

:Q

OK, that was fun .. i did the same thing once, pretending i was Wreckage .. identical experience ... but my brain is back 'on' now.

i AM "real" ... no one is paying me for my opinion ... i am not making a "production" about it ... you are the one with the song and the "excuse" dance for AMD

Just another total failure for AMD's PR ... ATi's PR got fired
--mildly entertaining ... but totally out of step


EDIT: Guys, look at the Slides that AMD released ... then see who is making the smokescreen ... and why

http://techreport.com/onearticle.x/12552

hard to misunderstand ... damn near impossible ... unless you were looking critically
 

Creig

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 1999
5,170
13
81
Originally posted by: apoppin
[OK, i'll pretend i am Creig ... RE: AMD "hear no evil, seen no evil, speak no evil, post no evil" ... nvidia is an evil company ....

:Q

OK, that was fun .. i did the same thing once, pretending i was Wreckage .. identical experience ... but my brain is back 'on' now.

i AM "real" ... no one is paying me for my opinion ... i am not making a "production" about it ... you are the one with the song and the "excuse" dance for AMD

Just another total failure for AMD's PR ... ATi's PR got fired
--mildly entertaining ... but totally out of step

You were the one screaming for AMDs blood saying that they advertised the 2900 as having a UVD and should be sued for it. I simply pointed out that this was not true. I'm sorry if the facts threw a damper on your AMD-burning party. I'm sure you'll find some other reason to continue with your tirade.
 

apoppin

Lifer
Mar 9, 2000
34,890
1
0
alienbabeltech.com
Originally posted by: Creig
Originally posted by: apoppin
[OK, i'll pretend i am Creig ... RE: AMD "hear no evil, seen no evil, speak no evil, post no evil" ... nvidia is an evil company ....

:Q

OK, that was fun .. i did the same thing once, pretending i was Wreckage .. identical experience ... but my brain is back 'on' now.

i AM "real" ... no one is paying me for my opinion ... i am not making a "production" about it ... you are the one with the song and the "excuse" dance for AMD

Just another total failure for AMD's PR ... ATi's PR got fired
--mildly entertaining ... but totally out of step

You were the one screaming for AMDs blood saying that they advertised the 2900 as having a UVD and should be sued for it. I simply pointed out that this was not true. I'm sorry if the facts threw a damper on your AMD-burning party. I'm sure you'll find some other reason to continue with your tirade.

@Aikouka: Thanks, I was running out the door and didn't have time to check myself. Grazi!
i thought you were running out the door ... here for more "AMD damage control"?

i did NOT say i am screaming for AMD's blood ... otoh i DID say the lawyers will get it .. i am just watching the show and laughing at the fanboys weak excuses for 'their' company

i did NOT say AMD advertised the 2900 as having a UVD ... otoh i DID say they mislead even their own partners

You cannot even quote me properly. i simply pointed out that what you are saying is not true. I'm sorry if the facts threw a damper on your AMD-for-sainthood party. I'm sure you need no reason to continue with your undying support for them - but will continue as you are somehow compelled to defend AMD's screwup.
--another AMD screwup
 

Aikouka

Lifer
Nov 27, 2001
30,383
912
126
Originally posted by: Creig
Actually, Aikouka, I don't see any mention of PureVideo 2. I do see "NVIDIA® PureVideo? HD Technology2:" but that's simply to point to a footnote at the bottom of the page.

2 - Feature requires supported video software. Features may vary by product.

The 8600 doesn't mention... well of fricken course it doesn't mention it... nVidia linked the 8600's features and benefits to the 8800's page. To me if their excuse is they link all of them to the 8800's page and then say it "varies via model" as an excuse for not giving the 8800 the same video processing power, I'm going to be pissed. Why the hell did I pay $650 for a card where someone who buys the cheaper version gets better performance out of their system?
 

Creig

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 1999
5,170
13
81
Originally posted by: apoppin
Originally posted by: Creig
Originally posted by: apoppin
[OK, i'll pretend i am Creig ... RE: AMD "hear no evil, seen no evil, speak no evil, post no evil" ... nvidia is an evil company ....

:Q

OK, that was fun .. i did the same thing once, pretending i was Wreckage .. identical experience ... but my brain is back 'on' now.

i AM "real" ... no one is paying me for my opinion ... i am not making a "production" about it ... you are the one with the song and the "excuse" dance for AMD

Just another total failure for AMD's PR ... ATi's PR got fired
--mildly entertaining ... but totally out of step

You were the one screaming for AMDs blood saying that they advertised the 2900 as having a UVD and should be sued for it. I simply pointed out that this was not true. I'm sorry if the facts threw a damper on your AMD-burning party. I'm sure you'll find some other reason to continue with your tirade.

@Aikouka: Thanks, I was running out the door and didn't have time to check myself. Grazi!
i thought you were running out the door ... here for more "AMD damage control"?

i did NOT say i am screaming for AMD's blood ... otoh i DID say the lawyers will get it .. i am just watching the show and laughing at the fanboys weak excuses for 'their' company

i did NOT say AMD advertised the 2900 as having a UVD ... otoh i DID say they mislead even their own partners

You cannot even quote me properly. i simply pointed out that what you are saying is not true. I'm sorry if the facts threw a damper on your AMD-for-sainthood party. I'm sure you need no reason to continue with your undying support for them - but will continue as you are somehow compelled to defend AMD's screwup.
--another AMD screwup

Speaking of not being able to quote properly, the "running out the door" comment was made by keysplayr, not me.

I've never made any claims that AMD is some perfect company. But ever since the 2900 was released and didn't manage to outperform the 8800GTX, you've been on some sort of crusade versus AMD. Even now you're still blaming the UVD advertising on AMD and not the individual AIBs.

defend AMD's screwup

Obviously some people were able to figure out the correct information from what was presented. So it was, in fact, correct. Maybe it could have been presented a little clearer. Hopefully they'll do a little better next time.

It hardly seems worth all the effort you're putting into crucifying AMD.
 

nullpointerus

Golden Member
Apr 17, 2003
1,326
0
0
Originally posted by: Aikouka
Originally posted by: Creig
Actually, Aikouka, I don't see any mention of PureVideo 2. I do see "NVIDIA® PureVideo? HD Technology2:" but that's simply to point to a footnote at the bottom of the page.

2 - Feature requires supported video software. Features may vary by product.

The 8600 doesn't mention... well of fricken course it doesn't mention it... nVidia linked the 8600's features and benefits to the 8800's page. To me if their excuse is they link all of them to the 8800's page and then say it "varies via model" as an excuse for not giving the 8800 the same video processing power, I'm going to be pissed. Why the hell did I pay $650 for a card where someone who buys the cheaper version gets better performance out of their system?

Um...because "the cheaper version" was introduced many months later? ;)

You make it sound as if these cards all came out at the same time, and nVidia just screwed the 8800-series users by not giving them full HD hardware acceleration.
 

Aikouka

Lifer
Nov 27, 2001
30,383
912
126
Originally posted by: nullpointerus
Um...because "the cheaper version" was introduced many months later? ;)

You make it sound as if these cards all came out at the same time, and nVidia just screwed the 8800-series users by not giving them full HD hardware acceleration.

You mean like they did 2 years ago? ;)

To me though, it sounds like they're trying to cover it a bit by using their "model dependent" by referencing the 8800 and the 8600 on the same page since the 8800 doesn't have it and the 8600 does.
 

guezz

Member
May 10, 2006
45
0
0
Originally posted by: Wreckage
http://www.techreport.com/onearticle.x/12567

Part II
It's retarded to link this situation to the HDCP fiasco since they then actually wrongly mentioned non-HDCP cards as supporting it - while it's now a misconception by some AIBs and quite a few media outlets since they never actually said that the HD2900 XT has UVD (e.g. listed the ones supporting it (read the HD Video specs) or this one).

Was ATI clear enough about which cards supports UVD - obviously not! We wouldn't have this misconception mess if they were precise enough in their presentation.
 

apoppin

Lifer
Mar 9, 2000
34,890
1
0
alienbabeltech.com
Originally posted by: Creig
Originally posted by: apoppin
Originally posted by: Creig
Originally posted by: apoppin
[OK, i'll pretend i am Creig ... RE: AMD "hear no evil, seen no evil, speak no evil, post no evil" ... nvidia is an evil company ....

:Q

OK, that was fun .. i did the same thing once, pretending i was Wreckage .. identical experience ... but my brain is back 'on' now.

i AM "real" ... no one is paying me for my opinion ... i am not making a "production" about it ... you are the one with the song and the "excuse" dance for AMD

Just another total failure for AMD's PR ... ATi's PR got fired
--mildly entertaining ... but totally out of step

You were the one screaming for AMDs blood saying that they advertised the 2900 as having a UVD and should be sued for it. I simply pointed out that this was not true. I'm sorry if the facts threw a damper on your AMD-burning party. I'm sure you'll find some other reason to continue with your tirade.

@Aikouka: Thanks, I was running out the door and didn't have time to check myself. Grazi!
i thought you were running out the door ... here for more "AMD damage control"?

i did NOT say i am screaming for AMD's blood ... otoh i DID say the lawyers will get it .. i am just watching the show and laughing at the fanboys weak excuses for 'their' company

i did NOT say AMD advertised the 2900 as having a UVD ... otoh i DID say they mislead even their own partners

You cannot even quote me properly. i simply pointed out that what you are saying is not true. I'm sorry if the facts threw a damper on your AMD-for-sainthood party. I'm sure you need no reason to continue with your undying support for them - but will continue as you are somehow compelled to defend AMD's screwup.
--another AMD screwup

Speaking of not being able to quote properly, the "running out the door" comment was made by keysplayr, not me.

I've never made any claims that AMD is some perfect company. But ever since the 2900 was released and didn't manage to outperform the 8800GTX, you've been on some sort of crusade versus AMD. Even now you're still blaming the UVD advertising on AMD and not the individual AIBs.

defend AMD's screwup

Obviously some people were able to figure out the correct information from what was presented. So it was, in fact, correct. Maybe it could have been presented a little clearer. Hopefully they'll do a little better next time.

It hardly seems worth all the effort you're putting into crucifying AMD.

oh no ... LONG before HD2900xt was released ... i was ragging on them in January for the delay and the LIES about the delay ... the BS about AMD "needing to hold back r600 for the family launch"

"family launch"?!? ... where is it? i find it "strange" they didn't keep holding r600 back considering the complete disaster of shape it is in right now .. i made fun of AMD's FUD then and i will continue to do so

AMD is the only one with the nails and somehow they are managing to stage their own crucifixion with their inability to deliver anything but excuses, misleading information and multiple product delays.

i also find it interesting that you use religious symbolism to convey you devotion to Them
... well your god is proving to be a Weak One and its followers and getting more and more desperate as everyone points out AMD's Weaknesses, Feet of Clay and Forked Tongue.
 

Creig

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 1999
5,170
13
81
Yeah. Right. Maybe when you're done with your "The Passion of the Christ" analogy you can come back down to Earth and discuss the topic normally like the rest of us mere mortals.
 

apoppin

Lifer
Mar 9, 2000
34,890
1
0
alienbabeltech.com
Originally posted by: Creig
Yeah. Right. Maybe when you're done with your "The Passion of the Christ" analogy you can come back down to Earth and discuss the topic normally like the rest of us mere mortals.

You were the one that dragged it off topic to make it "personal" ... plus you accused me falsely of "crucifying AMD"
It hardly seems worth all the effort you're putting into crucifying AMD.
it's your analogy ... i expanded on it.

And i say unto ye, 'no effort' ... AMD is supplying the jokes at their own expense. Excuse me for laughing.
 

Nelsieus

Senior member
Mar 11, 2006
330
0
0
Originally posted by: Creig
Yeah. Right. Maybe when you're done with your "The Passion of the Christ" analogy you can come back down to Earth and discuss the topic normally like the rest of us mere mortals.

I find it funny how you start calling apopin out for what you call "crucifying AMD", yet whenever he did the exact same thing to nVidia regarding the Vista driver issues, you didn't seem to mind.

It seems your feelings change quite drastically when the "crucifying" is done on the team you tend to be partial to.

But that's just my observation, atleast.

Nelsieus

Nelsieus

 

Creig

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 1999
5,170
13
81
I made one reference. I didn't realize that required all further responses to be biblical in nature.

In the Vista issue, it was Nvidia themselves who advertised their products as 'Vista Ready'. It was on their website and on the box of every 8800 sold. And yet when Vista became available there was not only no driver, but no reponse from Nvidia. As per their usual tactics, they deleted any reference to Vista Ready from their website and refused to comment on the situation. And in their forums, they deleted posts pertaining to the Vista issue and handed out bans left and right to those upset at the lack of drivers and lack of communication.

The biggest difference between that situation and this one is AMD did not advertise the HD2900XT as having a UVD. Through an unfortunate misunderstanding, some AIBs and reviewers misread the information provided by AMD to mean that it did. When AMD learned that some of their partners were selling the HD2900XT with "UVD" on the boxes, they not only informed them to remove it but also posted the details of this problem on their website so people would know that they were aware of the situation and were taking steps to correct it.

There are a LOT of differences between the Nvidia Vista driver issue and this one. You can't simply compare the two as if they were completely identical except for name of the company involved.