AMD Silently Cuts Down Core Count on Radeon RX 560 Graphics Card – Now Shipping With 896 Cores Inste

[happy medium]

https://wccftech.com/amd-radeon-rx-560-14-cu-model-silent-launch/


I think that this sucks for uniformed GPU buyers.

 

[VirtualLarry]

WHAT??? If this isn't an isolated incident, then I think AMD is really screwing the pooch, as far as their credibility goes.

If they allowed ISVs to do this, then they should force them to call them "SE" or something.

Guess yields at GF are down? What other reason would they have for doing this?

 

[EXCellR8]

The issue here is that in order to be absolutely sure which variant are you buying, you will have to compare product codes, as the official name of the card is the same. AMD could’ve easily adopted Asian-only SKU, the RX 560D, which would ultimately define worse specs. Sadly, that did not happen.

sometimes I feel like companies totally ignore the fact that some consumers are actually pretty savvy when it comes to buying new gear.

 

[crisium]

I do not support this anti-consumer behavior. I also do not understand the rational behind the utter refusal to create a new SKU name.

GTX 560 Ti (Core 448) = GTX 565
Radeon 7870 (XT/LE) = 7930 (even more appropriate as it can xfire with 7900 series and not 7800)
GTX 1060 (Core 1152 3gb) = GTX 1055
Radeon 560 (Core 896) = Radeon 555 (or call it the Radeon 460/560D which it is). There were also 1024 core 460s for some reason because creating a 455 was heresy for reasons.

You don't even need to be clever, it's just common sense.

 

[VirtualLarry]

I do not support this anti-consumer behavior.

Likewise. I might buy NV next time. (Of course, I recently had problems with a GTX1060 3GB card, properly supporting my 4K UHD TV at 4K60 over HDMI. A Window 10 Upgrade seemed to fix the issue.)

 

[Campy]

Reminds me a lot of the GTX 1060 3gb/6gb sillyness. Sure, they are easy to tell apart when you know about the difference, but for uninformed buyers there's no easy way to know that the gpu chip in the 3gb version is gimped.

 

[Stuka87]

Likewise. I might buy NV next time. (Of course, I recently had problems with a GTX1060 3GB card, properly supporting my 4K UHD TV at 4K60 over HDMI. A Window 10 Upgrade seemed to fix the issue.)

NV is way more anti-consumer than AMD is. Not that AMD is perfect, but they almost go out of their way to help consumers as a whole (Just look at how long they provide driver updates for).

 

[Yotsugi]

That's almost lawsuit material.
Do want.

 

[DaveSimmons]

It's on the front page of Anandtech now: https://www.anandtech.com/show/12122/amd-silently-lowers-radeon-rx-560-specifications

Both 14- and 16-CU GPUs are now being sold as "560" with AMDs blessing.

The honest way to rebrand the 460 would've been as a 550, or maybe even a 560LE. Not as a 560.

 

[Yotsugi]

It's on the front page of Anandtech now: https://www.anandtech.com/show/12122/amd-silently-lowers-radeon-rx-560-specifications

Both 14- and 16-CU GPUs are now being sold as "560" with AMDs blessing.

The honest way to rebrand the 460 would've bern as a 550, or maybe even a 560LE. Not as a 560.

Or 555.
Sounds more than sane!

 

[ElFenix]

NV is way more anti-consumer than AMD is. Not that AMD is perfect, but they almost go out of their way to help consumers as a whole (Just look at how long they provide driver updates for).

Lets not get started down the whataboutism rabbit hole.

AT Moderator ElFenix

 

[IEC]

Garbage move. I wonder who at RTG thought this was a good idea.

 

[Krteq]

Isn't this only for Chinese market? There was a lot of similar products for china only, like RX 470D, R9 390 4GB, R9 370X etc...

 

[Yotsugi]

Isn't this only for Chinese market? There was a lot of similar products for china only, like RX 470D, R9 370X etc...

No, it's now for everyone and without the "D" letter.

 

[Krteq]

OK, so what about R9 390 (4GB)? Where have you seen it's for all markets?

 

[DaveSimmons]

Isn't this only for Chinese market? There was a lot of similar products for china only, like RX 470D, R9 390 4GB, R9 370X etc...

From the front-page AnandTech article:

"Which brings us to the next point of how this does translate in terms of consumer-facing e-tailers. Amazon [ USA ] is directly selling both ASUS cards without SP counts and only referring to the GPU as RX 560 EVO, while Amazon UK is selling the Sapphire card without any indication of 14 CUs. Additionally, Newegg is directly selling three 896 SP RX 560s, with the SP count in the description: the PowerColor Red Dragon 4GBD5-DHA (and the 4GBD5-DHAM brown box variant), along with the ASUS ROG Strix EVO Gaming OC. Based on listing release dates, this 896 SP RX 560 situation has existed since at least the beginning of October."

 

[happy medium]

Update (12/5/17, 6 p.m. ET): An AMD statement given to our sister site confirms the two RX 560 variants, and AMD also noted that AIB partners would be responsible for communicating a given RX 560 model's specifications.

Source: AMD

From Toms site.

"AMD also indicated that AIB partners would be responsible for disclosing the specifications of their specific RX 560 product, and the situation brings a new meaning to the phrase "buyer beware"

 

[Yotsugi]

Why didn't they simply name it RX555 to avoid confusion?

 

[DaveSimmons]

Why didn't they simply name it RX555 to avoid confusion?

The same reason why both AMD and Nvidia allow selling cards with either fast or slow VRAM while using the same product name. To fool unwary buyers.

 

[VirtualLarry]

Wow, talk about a BS response from AMD on this issue.

 

[Guru]

This is class action lawsuit waiting to happen and if AMD think they can get away from this they are sorely mistaken. Dumb move that will hurt their wallet and reputation!

 

[EXCellR8]

except they've already kind of gotten away with it...

 

[Elixer]

Wow, talk about a BS response from AMD on this issue.

Yeah, pretty dumb move.

Seems they have more defective chips they want to get rid of, and instead of doing a 555 or whatever, they left it at 560. Pure BS.

 

[VirtualLarry]

This is class action lawsuit waiting to happen and if AMD think they can get away from this they are sorely mistaken. Dumb move that will hurt their wallet and reputation!

At first, I liked this post. Then, I took it back, after thinking a bit about the Sony PS3 class-action over the removal of the ability to run Linux on it.

In that particular case, the product was sold, and advertised, with certain capabilities. Some of those capabilities were taken away after purchase.

In this case, with AMD, those extra shaders that someone bought, if they purchased a card with 1024, are NOT being cut down to 896 or whatever shader count the gimped ones have. They still have all of their shaders.

Likewise, for a properly-described 896-shader RX 560 card, it's up to the buyer to ascertain what particular model of card that they are purchasing is. Is it potentially misleading? Yes, if the retailer doesn't disclose the proper shader count in the fine print somewhere, in the pre-sales information. But I really think that AMD's behind is covered, with the specification update on their site.

If anything, a purchaser's beef would be with the retailer, if they bought a card, and it wasn't properly described, knowing that AMD's site shows that it could be made to either specification.

Is this poor form by AMD? Yes. Is it actually illegal in any way? Not likely. (Though, I am not a lawyer, and this is not legal advice.)

Edit: This actually happens A LOT in the tech industry. Mfg methods and capabilities change. Buyers are attracted to certain model numbers.

How many different LinkSys WRT54G models were there? At least 8-9, to my recollection. Some with less RAM or flash memory, some with more. Yet, they didn't change the model number.

Same with some other router vendors, like Netgear, that released a "V2" of a certain router (there's a thread about it in Networking somewhere), where the original version was using a Broadcom chipset (good), and the newer version is using a MediaTek chipset (not as good). And yet, there's no differentiation by most retailers or fulfillment houses, like Amazon, as to which one you're getting. It becomes luck of the draw.

At least in this case, wtih AMD, the particular card SHOULD BE properly described, by the retailer (in the fine print), and on the ISV's web site (among their various sub-model-codes).

Likewise, with Samsung, with their popular 850 EVO SATA SSDs. They've gone through several revisions, using different layered V-NAND, with different performance characteristics, and they haven't changed the main model code either.

So you see, there's plenty of precident for this sort of thing, and none of it is illegal, to my knowledge.

Sure, in the market of video cards, there comes to be an expectation of exacting specifications, behind every particular model code, but even so, many ISVs overclock or clock to different specifications, necessitating looking at the detailed specs anyways.

Edit: And then there's the video RAM issue - some of the cheaper editions of certain GPUs, have DDR3 RAM, instead of GDDR5, which the reference model had. My XFX R7 250X 2GB cards are like that. And two of my XFX R9 260X 2GB GDDR5 cards, bought at the same time, have different heatsinks, and slightly different clock speeds. Weird, eh?

 

[Kenmitch]

Jeez....Don't buy a 560 without knowing the specs of the card your purchasing seems like the logical thing too do. No need to drag AMD thru the coals if it's the AIB's that are the ones not being honest in the end.