2900 XT lacks a UVD

[Wreckage]

Originally posted by: Creig
Through an unfortunate misunderstanding

:laugh: LOL!

When AMD does something it's "an unfortunate misunderstanding" and when NVIDIA does something it's "per their usual tactics".

It's pure comedy.

 

[Creig]

Originally posted by: Wreckage

Originally posted by: Creig
Through an unfortunate misunderstanding

:laugh: LOL!

When AMD does something it's "an unfortunate misunderstanding" and when NVIDIA does something it's "per their usual tactics".

It's pure comedy.

Your level of trolling is NEVER funny.

If I recall, when the PVP was found to be non-functional on the NV40, Nvidia didn't mention anything about it for months afterwards. Even requests from Anand himself went completely ignored. With the Vista driver issue, Nvidia again chose to remain silent rather than explain to their customers what was happening and what they were doing to rectify it.

If you find any incorrect statements in my posts, by all means please point them out. But since all you can seem to do is troll, I'll have to assume you have nothing to actually refute me with.

 

[Nelsieus]

Originally posted by: Creig
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.

I generally prefer giving companies the benefit of the doubt, but based on history, it seems ATI isn't all to hesitant in using false advertising practices.

But personally, I don't really care about the whole UVD thing. In fact, I think it's somewhat been a bit blown out of proportion. But you need to stop going after everyone who this does matter to, instead of trying to do damage control in such a desperate manner.

Nelsieus

 

[Nelsieus]

Originally posted by: Creig
With the Vista driver issue, Nvidia again chose to remain silent rather than explain to their customers what was happening and what they were doing to rectify it.

If you find any incorrect statements in my posts, by all means please point them out.

nVidia was vocal in regards to their Vista driver progress, one exert from HardOCP:

"NVIDIA has placed a top priority on supporting our customers. NVIDIA will continue to work diligently on optimizing its Windows Vista drivers to ensure maximum performance on 3D applications through continuous driver updates."
http://enthusiast.hardocp.com/article.html?art=MTI3NCwxLCxoZW50aHVzaWFzdA==

The driver took quite a while to come out, but claiming they were "silent" is rather fictitious.

Nelsieus

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: Creig
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.

do you even read the nonsense you write?
-your "style" may be normal but the substance of your excuse is ridiculous ... amazingly, you have the nerve to accuse Wreckage of doing what you are doing.

according to you, when nvidia advertises something incorrectly, they are evil per their usual tactics but when AMD misleads ,it is an unfortunate misunderstanding

how stupid do you think we are to believe your lame excuses in behalf of your company?
-i think, not very many here are fooled by your silly lopsided spin.

edited

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: Creig

Originally posted by: Wreckage
http://www.techreport.com/onearticle.x/12567

Part II

Which is simply a repost of the DT and Inq articles.

Doesn't really matter what is presented to you. You'll ignore it. Why? We have no freakin idea.

 

[Creig]

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003

Originally posted by: Creig

Originally posted by: Wreckage
http://www.techreport.com/onearticle.x/12567

Part II

Which is simply a repost of the DT and Inq articles.

Doesn't really matter what is presented to you. You'll ignore it. Why? We have no freakin idea.

I called it a repost because he already posted the links that are contained within it.

 

[Wreckage]

Originally posted by: Creig

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003

Originally posted by: Creig

Originally posted by: Wreckage
http://www.techreport.com/onearticle.x/12567

Part II

Which is simply a repost of the DT and Inq articles.

Doesn't really matter what is presented to you. You'll ignore it. Why? We have no freakin idea.

I called it a repost because it makes my point of view look bad

Fixed.

 

[apoppin]

Keys point is - no matter what is posted, if it is negative about AMD, Creig will ignore it

 

[CrystalBay]

So basically both the ATI/Nv high end cards don't need the the extra PVP chip ? The reason being is the power of the shaders of the high end chip....

 

[Creig]

Originally posted by: Nelsieus
I generally prefer giving companies the benefit of the doubt, but based on history, it seems ATI isn't all to hesitant in using false advertising practices.

But personally, I don't really care about the whole UVD thing. In fact, I think it's somewhat been a bit blown out of proportion. But you need to stop going after everyone who this does matter to, instead of trying to do damage control in such a desperate manner.

Nelsieus

You're right, I forgot about the whole HDCP fiasco. While both Nvidia and ATI were involved, ATI was definitely more at fault on that one.

I think my nerves are just getting on edge after listening to certain people whine about AMD over and over and over non-stop for the past 6 months and seeing others troll endlessly. The 2900XT seems to be a decent card for the money, but some people here seem hellbent on proving that it's the cause of everything evil in the world and should be crushed along with the company that made it.

 

[Creig]

Originally posted by: CrystalBay
So basically both the ATI/Nv high end cards don't need the the extra PVP chip ? The reason being is the power of the shaders of the high end chip....

Yes, that's correct. It just hasn't been fully enabled in the drivers yet on the 2900. Both AMD and Nvidia use the GPU for HD acceleration for their highest end cards while the mid-low range need an additional processing chip.

 

[Creig]

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003

Originally posted by: Creig

Originally posted by: Wreckage
http://www.techreport.com/onearticle.x/12567

Part II

Which is simply a repost of the DT and Inq articles.

Doesn't really matter what is presented to you. You'll ignore it. Why? We have no freakin idea.

Because, as I've said repeatedly, not everybody misread the information presented by AMD.

http://www.bjorn3d.com/forum/showthread.php?p=78880

Originally posted by: SwedBear - Site Founder/Partner

Ahh, the guys at Dailytech are at it again.

AMD made it fully clear at the launch that only the HD2400 and HD2600 had the extra UVD chip since the R600 could handle it in the GPU with the shaders. Heck, I even wrote about that in my article. The UVD chip is put in the HD2400 and HD2600 as they do not have the shader performance to handle it.

Apparently they haven't turned on that yet in the beta HD2900XT drivers (got new ones a few days agi but cant put in the HD2900XT now to test). So the HD2900XT is definitely supposed to be capable of accelerating HD.

Incidently this is exactly the same stuff as the 8800GTX has. When playing HD-DVD on my 360 HD-DVD drive i got about the same CPU utilization on both (a bit lower on the HD2900XT). None of the highest end cards have an extra chip to handle the Hd decoding as it is handled by the GPU.

The only issue I can see is that they haven't been able to get it fully working yet in the drivers. I personally don't see the big fuss here. Playing a 20-25 Mbps HD-DVD on a E6400 and getting around 40% CPU usage is to me not a bad result.

Originally posted by: SwedBear - Site Founder/Partner

Well, hardware decoding acceleration is supposed to be available in the next drivers coming in the next few days or so (I really need to install my HD2900XT again to see if the new drivers I got a few days ago have this turned on).

I've read up more on this and I still am quite surprised on this whole debacle. I'm not sure what happened at the US launch event, but at the Tunis launch event there were no uncertaines what-so-ever that UVD was anything else than a feature for the 2400 and 2600 as they needed assists at handle 1080p.

Apparently AMD did not count on people not being able to read all the slides and thus did nt make it clear on every possible slide that UVD was for 2400 and 2600.

This is not the first time that it has taken some time for hardware decoding to start working on new videocards. When the X1000 series first was released it took a while before the various programs supported the hardware encoding in them. And I've had issues with Purevideo.

It definitely is bad though that some AIB's went out and printed boxes where they advertised UVD for the HD2900XT. Apparently AMD hadn't made it clear to them or they jumped the gun and didn't doublecheck this feature.

I think most of this debacle stems from the fact that they did not have the HD2400 and HD2600 ready for the 14 May launch. This made them talk a lot about a feature (UVD) that wasn't available on the card they were selling which confused a lot of people.

But the simple fact is that at least at the Tunis event they clearly told us about the lack of UVD on the HD2900XT as well as the fact that the same features was being handled by the R600 GPU.

 

[Keysplayr]

If AMD made it fully clear, this discussion, and all the articles around the web wouldn't exist. We don't have the privilage of getting something for nothing on this planet. Something happened, a ruckus arose, people are mad and people are denying. And for all the "air-time" this is getting, it really is a little insignificant nothing of an issue.

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003
If AMD made it fully clear, this discussion, and all the articles around the web wouldn't exist. We don't have the privilage of getting something for nothing on this planet. Something happened, a ruckus arose, people are mad and people are denying. And for all the "air-time" this is getting, it really is a little insignificant nothing of an issue.

the *only reason* it it getting "air-time" is because of the ridiculous smokescreen "defenses" hastily thrown up to "protect" AMD's reputation.

even 'the bear' which is quoted twice admits

Apparently AMD hadn't made it clear to them or they jumped the gun and didn't doublecheck this feature.

I think most of this debacle stems from the fact that they did not have the HD2400 and HD2600 ready for the 14 May launch. This made them talk a lot about a feature (UVD) that wasn't available on the card they were selling which confused a lot of people.

you betcha it is AMD's fault for not making it clear to their own Partners ....
... and their reputation is already "mud"

I think my nerves are just getting on edge after listening to certain people effuse enthusiasm about AMD over and over and over non-stop for the past 6 months and seeing others troll endlessly for it. The 2900XT seems to be a decent card for the money, but some people here seem Heavenbent on proving that it's the cause of everything Perfect in the world and should be elevated to "SaintHood" along with the company that made it.

 

[Wreckage]

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003
If AMD made it fully clear, this discussion, and all the articles around the web wouldn't exist. We don't have the privilage of getting something for nothing on this planet. Something happened, a ruckus arose, people are mad and people are denying. And for all the "air-time" this is getting, it really is a little insignificant nothing of an issue.

I think what is clear is that AMD is trying to blame everyone else for it. The board makers, the review websites, their own customers, etc. The Inq posted the AMD slides and they are far from clear on the issue.

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

 

[Creig]

Originally posted by: apoppin

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003
If AMD made it fully clear, this discussion, and all the articles around the web wouldn't exist. We don't have the privilage of getting something for nothing on this planet. Something happened, a ruckus arose, people are mad and people are denying. And for all the "air-time" this is getting, it really is a little insignificant nothing of an issue.

the *only reason* it it getting "air-time" is because of the ridiculous smokescreen "defenses" hastily thrown up to "protect" AMD's reputation.

even 'the bear' which is quoted twice admits

Apparently AMD hadn't made it clear to them or they jumped the gun and didn't doublecheck this feature.

I think most of this debacle stems from the fact that they did not have the HD2400 and HD2600 ready for the 14 May launch. This made them talk a lot about a feature (UVD) that wasn't available on the card they were selling which confused a lot of people.

you betcha it is AMD's fault for not making it clear to their own Partners ....
... and their reputation is already "mud"

I think my nerves are just getting on edge after listening to certain people effuse enthusiasm about AMD over and over and over non-stop for the past 6 months and seeing others troll endlessly for it. The 2900XT seems to be a decent card for the money, but some people here seem Heavenbent on proving that it's the cause of everything Perfect in the world and should be elevated to "SaintHood" along with the company that made it.

See Nelsieus? This is what I was referring to.

 

[Creig]

Originally posted by: Wreckage

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003
If AMD made it fully clear, this discussion, and all the articles around the web wouldn't exist. We don't have the privilage of getting something for nothing on this planet. Something happened, a ruckus arose, people are mad and people are denying. And for all the "air-time" this is getting, it really is a little insignificant nothing of an issue.

I think what is clear is that AMD is trying to blame everyone else for it. The board makers, the review websites, their own customers, etc. The Inq posted the AMD slides and they are far from clear on the issue.

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

Other than the mention on their website that they were aware of the problem and were getting their AIBs to stop putting UVD on the box, I haven't seen them "blaming" anyone. Much less review sites, their customers or "everyone else".

You couldn't be overexaggerating just a LITTLE bit about this, could you?

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: Creig

Originally posted by: apoppin

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003
If AMD made it fully clear, this discussion, and all the articles around the web wouldn't exist. We don't have the privilage of getting something for nothing on this planet. Something happened, a ruckus arose, people are mad and people are denying. And for all the "air-time" this is getting, it really is a little insignificant nothing of an issue.

the *only reason* it it getting "air-time" is because of the ridiculous smokescreen "defenses" hastily thrown up to "protect" AMD's reputation.

even 'the bear' which is quoted twice admits

Apparently AMD hadn't made it clear to them or they jumped the gun and didn't doublecheck this feature.

I think most of this debacle stems from the fact that they did not have the HD2400 and HD2600 ready for the 14 May launch. This made them talk a lot about a feature (UVD) that wasn't available on the card they were selling which confused a lot of people.

you betcha it is AMD's fault for not making it clear to their own Partners ....
... and their reputation is already "mud"

I think my nerves are just getting on edge after listening to certain people effuse enthusiasm about AMD over and over and over non-stop for the past 6 months and seeing others troll endlessly for it. The 2900XT seems to be a decent card for the money, but some people here seem Heavenbent on proving that it's the cause of everything Perfect in the world and should be elevated to "SaintHood" along with the company that made it.

See Nelsieus? This is what I was referring to.

See everyone ... This is what i am referring to


You couldn't be overexaggerating just a LITTLE bit about this, could you in your zeal to jump to AMD's defense EVERY time?

 

[Creig]

Originally posted by: apoppin
You couldn't be overexaggerating just a LITTLE bit about this, could you in your zeal to jump to AMD's defense EVERY time?

Fine then. Since you seem to agree with Wreckage, please point out where AMD is "blaming" review sites, their customers and everyone else. Because I can't find it.

The only mention I see is:

737-27824: Radeon? HD 2900 series - Wrong Information Regarding UVD Support on Retail Box



The information in this article applies to the following configuration(s):
GeCube Radeon? HD 2900XT
HIS Radeon? HD 2900XT
Sapphire Radeon? HD 2900XT
Windows Vista 32-bit Edition
Windows Vista 64-bit Edition
Windows XP Professional
Windows XP Home Edition
Windows XP Media Center Edition
Windows XP Professional x64 Edition

Some AIB Partners indicate UVD (Unified Video Decoding) support on their Radeon? HD 2900 retail box.

Note: UVD is the abbreviation for Unified Video Decoding and not Universal Video Decoding.


Explanation:
Radeon? HD 2900XT does NOT support UVD. Radeon? HD 2600 and 2400 series will be supporting UVD.

ATI has been advised of this issue and is currently communicating with AIB partners. Any updates will be published when they become available.

That hardly looks like they're "blaming" anyone, just acknowledging that misinformation is present on some AIB boxes and they're working with them to correct the situation.

 

[apoppin]

Fine then. Since you seem to agree with Wreckage, please point out where AMD is "blaming" review sites, their customers and everyone else. Because I can't find it.

First ... point out where i said AMD is "blaming" review sites, their customers and everyone else

Because I can't find it.

PLEASE address the *correct* poster - Wreckage - in your accusations.
-- i am NOT guilty by association!

 

[Creig]

Originally posted by: apoppin

Fine then. Since you seem to agree with Wreckage, please point out where AMD is "blaming" review sites, their customers and everyone else. Because I can't find it.

First ... point out where i said AMD is "blaming" review sites, their customers and everyone else

Because I can't find it.

PLEASE address the *correct* poster - Wreckage - in your accusations.
-- i am NOT guilty by association!

So exactly what is it that has gotten you so agitated about this situation? Some people misunderstood the press release slides provided by AMD and a couple of their AIBs printed the wrong information on their boxes. AMD has contacted them to get them to correct it. According to someone who was at the Tunisia launch, AMD was very forthcoming about which products had the UVD processor and which didn't.

It just doesn't seem to be worth the effort you're putting forth to blame AMD for not being totally clear on a couple of presentation slides.

 

[Wreckage]

Originally posted by: Creig

It just doesn't seem to be worth the effort I'm putting forth to defend AMD for being totally misleading on a couple of presentation slides.

Fixed.

Just to quote one of the slides...

ATI Radeon Firsts:

First to 65nm
First with 512-bit memory interface
First with UVD
First for Windows Vista

LOL First for Vista? OK

Currently they don't have a GPU out with either UVD or 65nm that I know of.

I don't see how their "UVD" is any different from "Purevideo HD" which is out already.

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: Creig

So exactly what is it that has gotten you so agitated about this situation? Some people misunderstood the press release slides provided by AMD and a couple of their AIBs printed the wrong information on their boxes. AMD has contacted them to get them to correct it. According to someone who was at the Tunisia launch, AMD was very forthcoming about which products had the UVD processor and which didn't.

It just doesn't seem to be worth the effort you're putting forth to blame AMD for not being totally clear on a couple of presentation slides.

Ohhhh, allow me to address your first question that is highlighted. In the slight chance that you have not noticed, this discussion has become less about whether AMD was right or wrong, but more about exactly why you so blindly defend them. You are agitating us through myopia. And possibly enjoying it. Are you?

Look, we know AMD/ATI has been hammered to hell for the past half a year. With Intel's Core processors/chipsets and Nvidia's graphics cores/chipsets, it's like AMD/ATI has a foot firmly planted on it's neck. And being sympathetic to that particular company, you feel the pressure from that foot on your neck as well. You need to lash out and defend even at the cost of forum embarrassment. You refuse to acknowledge any wrong doing from that company and will find the thinnest hard to find thread of text to support your "cause". But act like an all thumbs novice keyboardist when it comes to finding things against them and ALWAYS ask others to find it for you. And they do. And you ignore. So why ask?

UVD is no big deal for most. A HUMONGOUS deal to a mere few percent. Hell, we aren't even questioning who's fault this whole fiasco stems from. Majority has decided it would seem. That is a finished issue. So our attentions have turned solely in "your" direction and we have strange looks on our faces I bet, whenever we read your posts. You are the issue now. All we can ask is, "Why is this so?".

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: Creig

Originally posted by: apoppin

Fine then. Since you seem to agree with Wreckage, please point out where AMD is "blaming" review sites, their customers and everyone else. Because I can't find it.

First ... point out where i said AMD is "blaming" review sites, their customers and everyone else

Because I can't find it.

PLEASE address the *correct* poster - Wreckage - in your accusations.
-- i am NOT guilty by association!

So exactly what is it that has gotten you so agitated about this situation? Some people misunderstood the press release slides provided by AMD and a couple of their AIBs printed the wrong information on their boxes. AMD has contacted them to get them to correct it. According to someone who was at the Tunisia launch, AMD was very forthcoming about which products had the UVD processor and which didn't.

It just doesn't seem to be worth the effort you're putting forth to blame AMD for not being totally clear on a couple of presentation slides.

let me try again and address your questions to who they properly belong: YOU

So exactly what is it that has gotten you so agitated about this situation?

and

It just doesn't seem to be worth the effort you're putting forth to defend AMD

i am not the slightest bit "agitated" ... otoh, you appear to be

i feel i am responding to your "agitation" by escalating more forceful posts to debunk your silly excuses for AMD's misleading everyone on UVD. The more you do your silly distraction dance, the louder i get in drawing attention to your attempts at a smokesreen.

There is no need for one ... AMD already admitted they are at fault for allowing their partners to post misinfo - it is on their website for all to see - it is called a "disclaimer" ... and their misleading slides are there for all to see.
For me it IS 'no biggie' ... but i am directing my posts at you because you go way beyond the usual AMD fanboy.

Sorry you don't like me pointing it out ... it is no "effort" on my part, believe me ...
--it is my pleasure.