NVIDIA's Recent Rebranding Practice

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

taltamir

Lifer
Mar 21, 2004
13,576
6
76
the new pbc is 1.5 inches shorter, it allows 3 way sli, and it improves power handling resulting in a cooler running card AND in needing only one 6 pin power plug instead of two.

however even if you buy a 512MB version with the same PCB it is still totally acceptable for them to rename it.
 

Wreckage

Banned
Jul 1, 2005
5,529
0
0
Originally posted by: taltamir
the new pbc is 1.5 inches shorter, it allows 3 way sli, and it improves power handling resulting in a cooler running card AND in needing only one 6 pin power plug instead of two.

however even if you buy a 512MB version with the same PCB it is still totally acceptable for them to rename it.

Some people think it will unfairly take away sales from ATI

Apparently people will go into a store looking to buy a quad crossfire setup, but will see the shiny new GTS250 and be swayed by the new number into buying it.

:laugh:
 

taltamir

Lifer
Mar 21, 2004
13,576
6
76
you mean some people with two 9800GTX+ SLI will go to the store looking to upgrade to a quad xfire, and then seeing the higher number name will decide to "upgrade" to a GTX250 :)
 

jiffylube1024

Diamond Member
Feb 17, 2002
7,430
0
71
There's two schools of thought on the rebranding concerning the GTX250 / GTX 280M, and both are correct, which is why there will never be a consensus on the rebranding.

1.) On the one hand, the GTS250 is a new card with lower power, a smaller PCB, higher performance, and 1GB of RAM. It performs close to a GTS 260 216 even. You get about what to expect extra from a minor product launch like this.

2.) On the other hand, the GTS250 uses G92 tech, not GT200 technology as the name implies (GTS 250), which is very misleading for those who have any knowledge about the G92/GT200 architecture.

For the people in group 1, their view is easily justified because what if the GTS 250 used the GT200 architecture that was either redesigned to have fewer pipelines/shader units, lower clockspeeds, or just even more shaders/pipelines disabled? The end result is the exact same - you get a card that performs exctly like a card with the name GTS 250 should.

For the people in group 2, their view is also logical because any card in the GT_ 2xx series should logically contain a GT200 architecture CPU.

The thing is, there aren't really major featureset differences between G92 and GT200 - they both support Direct X 10.0, etc. There are architectural improvements and optimizations, of course, but really, this is nothing but an argument of semantics.

Me personally, I do think that the GTS 250 card name is misleading, so I'm kind of in group 2, but with that said, it performs like a card with the name GTS 250 should, so I really don't think the name is that bad. The worry, of course, is the precedent that it sets; that there will eventually be a GT or GTS 220 or 230 or something like that that performs like total crap. But even then, it's a moot point, and it has no relevance towards the name of the GTS 250 card.
---------

To the argument that people with two 9800+ GTX SLI's will go to "upgrade" to a GTX 250; I think that's a very weak argument. I can understand the confusion of paying more for a GTS 250 over a 9800GTX+ (which frankly, the price difference is almost nothing), but if you are the kind of person who is buying two or three cards and putting them in SLI, then you should damn well do the research before plunking down hundreds of dollars on a complex setup like that.
 

OCGuy

Lifer
Jul 12, 2000
27,224
37
91
Originally posted by: taltamir
you mean some people with two 9800GTX+ SLI will go to the store looking to upgrade to a quad xfire, and then seeing the higher number name will decide to "upgrade" to a GTX250 :)

Those people would deserve what they get for not researching products before they buy.
 

taltamir

Lifer
Mar 21, 2004
13,576
6
76
Me personally, I do think that the GTS 250 card name is misleading, so I'm kind of in group 2, but with that said, it performs like a card with the name GTS 250 should, so I really don't think the name is that bad. The worry, of course, is the precedent that it sets; that there will eventually be a GT or GTS 220 or 230 or something like that that performs like total crap. But even then, it's a moot point, and it has no relevance towards the name of the GTS 250 card.
Apple is selling GTX120 and 130 (9400GT and 9600GSO respectively)
 

videogames101

Diamond Member
Aug 24, 2005
6,783
27
91
Originally posted by: taltamir
Originally posted by: videogames101
It makes me long for the days of unlocking pipes on 6800s.

huh? what?

The Nvidia 6800xx series, a few models were just rebrands of higher end models, and you could do some simple mods on lower-end models to unlock all the pixel pipes of the higher-end model.
 

nosfe

Senior member
Aug 8, 2007
424
0
0
what i don't get in the renaming is why its GTS instead of GTX and also a lower number. What's the point of using both of them? i could understand a GTS 280 for the 9800gtx+ and GTS 260 for the 9800gt for instance but the current naming scheme is imho a bit redundant
 

taltamir

Lifer
Mar 21, 2004
13,576
6
76
the whole concept of GT (grant tour) is retarded, race cars analogies for video cards are stupid