[Misleading] Data from large French retailer show AMD GPUs less reliable than Nvidia

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
S

SiliconWars

Platinum Member
Dec 29, 2012
2,346
0
0
AMD needs to have some strong words with Sapphire but instead of that they made them the exclusive FirePro partner...
 
3

3DVagabond

Lifer
Aug 10, 2009
11,951
204
106
Cloudfire777 said:
It was actually the one with the biggest sample of reviewers I could find.

Here is
HIS 290X
29% giving it 1/5 eggs

Asus 290X
0% giving it 1/5 eggs

Combine all of them together, the dissatisfaction about 290X is pretty high compared to the GTX 780 and 780 Ti`s.
So it doesn`t look like Sapphire cards are the only one with high failure rate.

I`m not cherry picking here. I took the GPUs with the most reviews.
Click to expand...

I find it confusing that there is any difference between 290X cards. They are all the same cards with different stickers on them.
 
S

Silverforce11

Lifer
Feb 19, 2009
10,457
10
76
3DVagabond said:
I find it confusing that there is any difference between 290X cards. They are all the same cards with different stickers on them.
Click to expand...

Its because Newegg reviews are really reliable...

and can be used to form official datasets to judge brand performance.

/sarc
 
B

blackened23

Diamond Member
Jul 26, 2011
8,548
2
0
SiliconWars said:
Yeah and SKYMTL bought them all so he could spread FUD about quiet mode. :biggrin:
Click to expand...

First of all, this performance variance debacle will surely skew the RMA/failure numbers you're seeing, and not in a good way. I'm under the impression that any RMA for any reason is considered a "failure", the AIB has to inspect the card to see what happened i'm assuming. So it's counted as a failure. When people get these cards that are underperforming, i'm sure quite a few customers will RMA them and that will skew the "failure" numbers further.

SKYMTL has always had kind words for AMD cards in his reviews, and if you don't believe this you should read his 290 and 290X reviews which earned high praise from him. OBVIOUSLY, at that time, he was not aware of the performance variance issues which the 290 presented. Heck, I wasn't aware of them either and I thought that the 290X looked fairly promising.

That said, 15% performance variance between 4 retail cards is utter nonsense, and I can't believe it when some say it's okay. It isn't okay - people are buying cards that are underperforming based on reviews they've seen, and those reviews don't properly represent what they're buying at retail. SKYMTL has always been objective in his reviews, which is what a reviewer is SUPPOSED to do. A reviewer is also supposed to deliver news that is important to prospective purchasers as well - if cards at retail are underperforming and have up to a 15% performance delta, customers do not win. Only AMD stockholders would win in that case, with the consumer losing. If customers are buying defective/underperforming cards -this news needs to get out so AMD can fix their crap. You're a consumer, right? Why would you possibly want this situation to perpetuate? Why would you want a customer to buy a card, run it in quiet mode, and NOT KNOW what performance they're getting? The reviews would tell them it's pretty fast, but then they would go home to a card that barely performs on par with a 7970. That is BS. That is a huge disservice to a consumer. You are...a consumer, right? And no, not everyone wants to run uber mode fans.

I still think that any RMA returned constitutes a failure by most statistics, I spoke to newegg CS once and they more or less told me that most RMAs are returned to the manufacturer for inspection. So any RMA, which I imagine the 290 is going to be RMA'ed a LOT because of performance variance, will constitute a failure. It also constitutes AMD failing the consumer with unpredictable performance for the factory default quiet setting (on the 290X). so it's easy to assume that the 290 will have high RMA rates as well to skew these numbers even further. If SKYMTL can verify his findings, it is a good thing. It will result in customers getting the proper product they paid for regardless of which BIOS setting they choose, it will result in lower "failure" rates.

Again, this news being brought to the public is nothing but a good thing from a consumer perspective. And from AMD's perspective, once they fix the issue they will have lower 290 failure/RMA rates.
 
Last edited:
B

blackened23

Diamond Member
Jul 26, 2011
8,548
2
0
SiliconWars said:
It was a joke blackened, lighten up.
Click to expand...

Well, it's a recurring theme for folks here to question the integrity of reviewers and I don't really think it's fair to do that 100% of the time. Certainly, if a reviewer has completely outlandish behavior clearly indicating bias, than you should not take them seriously.

Yet, we have nvidia fans that call HardOCP "biased" and AMD fans calling SKYMTL "biased". I do not consider either source biased - they're both good sources of information. Know what i'm saying? I hate it when people are so quick to throw out the "biased" or "FUD" card when neither of these websites have ever done anything to indicate a lack of objectivity. Don't you agree?

Anyway, I didn't realize you were joking, my mistake! :oops:
 
S

SiliconWars

Platinum Member
Dec 29, 2012
2,346
0
0
No smoke without fire imo. While I believe money is changing hands in some cases and that is buying reviews, some of them are just plain fanboys of either side.
 
AdamK47

AdamK47

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
15,844
3,632
136
This is the same site that posts return rates on OCZ drives. You guys love to gobble up that "data", therefore this must be true and AMD GPUs simply suck. You cannot argue "facts".
 
A

Abwx

Lifer
Apr 2, 2011
11,993
4,949
136
AdamK47 said:
This is the same site that posts return rates on OCZ drives. You guys love to gobble up that "data", therefore this must be true and AMD GPUs simply suck. You cannot argue "facts".
Click to expand...

Since we are in return rate ratios they point that OCZ is not really worse than the rest and that their bad total number is due to only two models that ruin their overall return ratio , looking at the numbers without thoses two models they would be better than average, another hint that thoses surveys are to be , well, badly surveyed to extract something other than meaningless statistics, as proved by this very thread initial concern.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom