Braveheart
Member
personally i wouldn't go assuming that they're "cherry picked", maybe just the finished versions? i would say wait until they release them in full, have anandtech make a killer review on them 🙂 and than talk about it.
-
We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.
Nvidia cuts out reviewers for the GTS250
Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
This whole situation reeks of stupidity. Nvidia should not be trying to dictate review policy to anyone. I don't even like this "our games, or cherry picked benchmark crap either". If AMD did this the internet would be crucifying them but Nvidia seems to have some sort of PR buffer that hasn't been emptied yet. HardOCP screwed up, if they did in fact agree to some sort of precondition on the review. If they went down that route and made an agreement and now are pissed at being cut off that is their own fault. You want to a be pioneer then tell Nvidia the buck stops here and you will do reviews how you want them or you will do them via another means. Your readership will respect you more that way.
And shame on Nvidia for this rebranding. You want to fix your naming scheme then do it when you phase out the 9xxx series. This reminds me way too much of the Geforce 4MX debacle. Trying to use one successful naming scheme to pedal lesser cards on unsuspecting consumers. At least these cards aren't "lesser" but they don't stack up with the GTX 2xx series.
And shame on Nvidia for this rebranding. You want to fix your naming scheme then do it when you phase out the 9xxx series. This reminds me way too much of the Geforce 4MX debacle. Trying to use one successful naming scheme to pedal lesser cards on unsuspecting consumers. At least these cards aren't "lesser" but they don't stack up with the GTX 2xx series.
Cookie Monster
Diamond Member
Same happened to techreport and the launch of the NV30. They were cut off from nVIDIA because techreport was revealing the truth behind the NV30 and its weaknesses. They did review it though, after purhcasing one off ebay!
I've always thought it was a little dodgy for reviewers from TPU, SPCR, and some other enthusiast sites to be FS/FTing things that had been sent to them by companies for review. Even if the company OKed them keeping the review samples, the fact that those reviewers are profiting from the samples kind of makes you wonder about how much you can trust those reviews.
imported_Asianman
Member
they are incredibly biased, against everybody. (I forgot the word for it) Still, NV must be getting desperate to regain publicity by launching new cards identical to the old ones
exar333
Diamond Member
That is a little far-fetched. Although I am not a huge fan of "re-branding", it makes sense to have a product numbering system that makes sense. What I don't agree with is that they are making so much fanfare of this "launch". They should just re-brand it as the new model number, discontinue with the old model, and move on. Plain and simple. This isn't a new card, so why should any reviewing site be that excited to review it?
Heheh ya, Kyle loves to think he's connecting to his audience by catering to their interests, which is obvious as his "too cool for school" attitude embodies the whole uninterested ADHD slacker/gamer culture over there. While it may be true he is giving his readers what they want, it certainly goes against the innovative, genuinely earnest attitude you'd expect from someone who makes a living reviewing new technology.
Yep, very true although if anything, I'd say there's less interest in the area of graphics as there was say, 5-6 years ago. Seems like if anything, people feel everything has just been more of the same, which again, makes it surprising people who claim to be enthusiasts would be so against new technologies like PhysX or 3D Vision that are true innovations in this area.
It really is just a label though, this seems like standard marketing streamlining the presentation of their offerings.
Coca Cola company just relabeled Coke Classic as simply "Coke", not going to see me or anybody including Pepsi drinkers running around decrying the evils of Coca Cola's marketing dept manipulating naive would-be cola drinkers.
Regardless whether we enthusiasts care for NV's business strategy it is designed to accomplish one thing, make NV more money.
And we should want them to be smart enough to strive to accomplish this, because it is the money they make selling today's products that is being funneled into the R&D for tomorrow's products which we want to buy tomorrow and not the day after tomorrow on some cash-flow starved delayed timeline.
The same goes for ATI. We enthusiasts should be hoping they figure out how to move more volumes of mainstream product in order to get themselves back into net-positive earnings this year so OUR chances of getting our hands on next-gen GPU technology next year are not jeopardized.
WelshBloke
Lifer
Didn't really want to get into this but Hardware PhysX has been about for 3 years and 3D glasses for ages.
So people who arnt that excited may just have heard all the hype before and are waiting for something concrete.
But this really has *nothing* to do with the thread 😱
I'm going to have to raise my hand in a guilty plea there. I bought 3D stereoscopic glasses for a video card waaaay back around 2000, it work as advertised, I just rapidly discovered I didn't need 3D at the time to extract enjoyment from my system.
When I saw the NV headlines about their latest 3D glasses I literally thought exactly what you just stated, I didn't bother reading an article on them for a couple weeks as I didn't want to waste my time. After reading some articles I still conclude I wasted my time, it is yet-another-3D-gonna-rock-your-world iteration. Yawn.
I'll get excited when the revolution actually happens, until then I understand why the hype has to be created, not all hype leads to a revolution but there won't be a revolution if there is no hype to begin with.
Also, I've seen this mentioned a few times, where people are asking "Why should we care about reviews for this GTS 250". The answer is simple, we shouldn't. Again it'll be shocking if any of these sites find significantly different results than what you'd expect from a 9800GTX+.
The real question is why does Kyle care about the GTS 250? He's stated his readers don't care to read reviews on low-end parts like this and other tech like Physix (sic), CUDA and 3D Vision are obviously uninteresting to him. Yet he's making a huge stink about it. The reason is simple, you've got to look at the big picture here and the ramifications of this incident are going to reach far beyond this meaningless GTS 250 review.
If you're going to pick a fight with Nvidia, you'd certainly want to do it over something that mattered instead of a rebranded part you claim you and your readers don't care about. The GTS 250 launch itself doesn't matter, but it certainly will down the road when Kyle is trying to get a GT300, GT300 GX2, etc. for review. Actually looking back at the title, you can get a pretty good idea of what happens when you print enough bile to get blacklisted by Nvidia (see exhibit A: Charlie and the Inq).
The real question is why does Kyle care about the GTS 250? He's stated his readers don't care to read reviews on low-end parts like this and other tech like Physix (sic), CUDA and 3D Vision are obviously uninteresting to him. Yet he's making a huge stink about it. The reason is simple, you've got to look at the big picture here and the ramifications of this incident are going to reach far beyond this meaningless GTS 250 review.
If you're going to pick a fight with Nvidia, you'd certainly want to do it over something that mattered instead of a rebranded part you claim you and your readers don't care about. The GTS 250 launch itself doesn't matter, but it certainly will down the road when Kyle is trying to get a GT300, GT300 GX2, etc. for review. Actually looking back at the title, you can get a pretty good idea of what happens when you print enough bile to get blacklisted by Nvidia (see exhibit A: Charlie and the Inq).
Uh, you can't compare hardware PPU PhysX to CUDA PhysX simply because the tech was irrelevant up until the point Nvidia made it relevant by increasing installed user-base exponentially. Going from 100K to 100 million overnight is a huge difference. Not only did PhysX become nearly ubiquitous overnight, its also free.
3D Glasses have been around but from what I've read about it, Nvidia's implementation is clearly superior on every level, from driver/game support to the actively shuttered glasses and the true 120Hz displays.
tbh it seems like a lot of fuss about nothing. Like others have said hardocp haven't reviewed anything slower then a 4850 for years, so why do they care? Both nvidia and ati are always rebranding slower parts. 8800GT->9800GT was worse as it suggests that it was a new high end part which it wasn't so if anything I would understand making a big fuss about that. 9800GT -> 240 seems more reasonable as it suggests a new mid range part (high end being 280).
Actively shuttered glasses have been around for a decade, so that's nothing new. 120Hz displays really have nothing to do with Nvidia . It was developed for televisions and is slowly filtering down to computer monitors as well, as is the norm. The only improvement Nvidia has with their stereoscopic glasses over the older glasses is through software. So yes, Nvidia has taken 3D stereoscopic gaming forward a step over its previous incarnation. It's simply not the giant leap that their PR dept is trying to portray it to be.
More?
It's all true, I swear! :laugh: http://online.wsj.com/article/...tml?mod=googlenews_wsj
(and you know my disappointment in early 3D tech was really because contrary to my expectations they did NOT make my 8bit 48x48 Pr0n thumbnails in 1998 appear in 3D 😛)
There is a difference though. I'm all for competition, but not competition that relies on an oblivious user-base. If they want to use high quality products and new tech to persuade me, then I'm more than happy to purchase. But rebadging old tech and putting it up for reviews just because they don't want people to forget about their ~ $145 offerings is redundant.
Is there any other kind? Serious question.
What industry do you know of which operates with a consumer-base for which the majority (>50%) are knowledgable on the details of the technical merits of the products they sell as well as the industry-standard sales tactics employed by the marketing dept to get them sold?
I can understand your position of taking exception to the tactic, and this is not my attempt to defend NV or the tactic in question, but I just want to point out that this tactic was not invented by NV.
It may be underhanded of NV to use this tactic; and this action on their behalf may very well factor into your decision making process for future GPU purchases, after all its not atypical of conscience investors to purposefully avoid investing in "sin" industries like the tobacco, alcohol and porn industries.
But if I were an NV shareholder and NV did not explore ALL their options to get product moving then I'd be a might bit pissed about that. When I invest in a company I'm none too concerned whether there be clubbed baby seals left in their wake, I'm happy to leave that to government regulations and laws to assuage any concerns I might have regarding potential malfeasance at corporate HQ. Presumably whatever NV is doing with these rebadges the business practice has been assessed in the past by the government and deemed acceptable behavior. That's good enough for me.
(note I am not and never have been an NV shareholder)
Nah, I know that. I didn't mean to come off as if they did.
Yes. Competition that relies on the end-product.
If instead a "GTS 250" were a different type of technology that differed from previous cards and outperformed a GTX 285, it would be competitive not because we're oblivious to the difference - but because it delivers.
I'm okay with the rebadge from 9800 GTX+ to GTS 250. Whatever they want to call it, *I* don't care as I'm interested in purchasing it for other reasons than the name.
It's just that I see those types of practices as desperate. Even if I were a shareholder in nVidia I'd still laugh. I'd rather see my money go towards better tech than the ink and stickers for the rebadge. But, to each their own.
thilanliyan
Lifer
The ink and stickers cost less than a new architecture so at least in the short term they'd make more money, benefiting shareholders.
The glasses are new in that they're wireless and sync'd to the driver or monitor. 120Hz monitors for the PC are linked to Nvidia's implementation as higher frame rates make the 3D experience better. They certainly weren't mainstream prior to NV's 3D Vision launch and while its certainly a chicken and egg scenario, 120Hz monitor availability as a by-product of Nvidia's 3D Vision launch isn't a bad consolation prize for those uninterested otherwise.
With advancements in just about every aspect, it certainly sounds like the end result is greater than the incremental sum of its parts. But no need to take my word for it, as I've never tried it myself, unlike these people. Seeing is believing I guess, and those reactions are pretty convincing. 🙂
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 24K
-
-
