XFX Bilking the masses - replacing GDDR5 memory with DDR3

[toyota]

Fair enough - but my 1GB card had 1600MHz memory: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16814125277

At 80% of the bandwidth, I think that would hurt performance. And the bigger point here is that it was underclocked versus reference.

well at 1600mhz that is 89% of the what the 1800mhz reference memory should be for 1gb cards. its strange that gigabyte does not even list the memory speed for that card on its site that I can see. and it is odd that they would lower memory speeds by 200mhz. maybe they got a good deal on slightly slower memory, lol.

 

[cusideabelincoln]

In the good old days, a few MHz separated the "xt" from the "xtx", or the "gt" from the "ultra." And getting those few extra MHz cost a lot of money. Today we take for granted that we might actually get some free MHz in a factory overclocked card (which is usually heavily marketed as overclocked even if it only has an extra 10 MHz). That's fine, as long as we don't also get the opposite, which is exactly what we have in the budget market. Underclocked cards that are not marketed as such.

But that's concerning high end cards. Low end card are a different market.

Yes I know it's marketed as "green," but it's not marketed as "underclocked." How is this not a major disservice to consumers? Should we as tech enthusiasts really be saying to the OP "too bad, you're fault, you're a noob"? That's not how we're going to keep manufacturers in check. I do think there's some borderline deceptive marketing going on, and I for one don't believe we should just turn a blind eye to it.

No one is saying we should turn a blind eye to it. In fact contrary to that sentiment we should be more aware of it. That is the point. The criticism to the OP is not to ridicule him for being a noob - at least that is not my intention. The intention is to increase his awareness and learn from his mistake.

Do you particularly think tech enthusiasts are going to make a difference to AIBs for these cards? What exactly are you going to do to put a stop to it?

 

[Zanovar]

"Everyone else is doing it" is not a defense. The OP is right: XFX is a lousy company for doing it, just as the rest are.

It's a bait & switch on the part of these companies. Memory bandwidth massively affects GPU performance. A DDR3 6670 wouldn't be anywhere close to a GDDR5 card as a result. The kicker is that since they did this months after the product launches and reviews, all the reviews are for the GDDR5 cards (making no distinction about memory types because there weren't any DDR3 cards), meaning all the product reviews grossly overstate the performance of the series when the DDR3 cards are factored in. So buyers have every right in the world to be incensed when they go to get a product and have to play spec-hunter because the product was reformulated to allow a much lower performing product.

AMD needs to tighten the reins on its partners (or put them in a chokehold), as they're making AMD look terrible. NVIDIA wouldn't allow their partners to pull off these kinds of shenanigans.

Jeez did you type that with a straight face*laughs*


You have been warned and infracted over and over for insulting / attacking your fellow members here.

Please adjust your posting style or you may find yourself going on much longer vacations.

Moderator jvroig

 

[ViRGE]

The intention is to increase his awareness and learn from his mistake.

He did not make a mistake. He bought a 6670, but what XFX sells is not a 6670.

 

[Gigantopithecus]

He did not make a mistake. He bought a 6670, but what XFX sells is not a 6670.

Hey, now that you mention it, my 2TB hard drive can't hold 2TB worth of files...



You and the OP can argue over semantics and official specs and asterisked disclaimers all you want, nothing is going to change. If OP doesn't want to get aggravated again, they need to learn how to do research.

 

[cusideabelincoln]

He did not make a mistake. He bought a 6670, but what XFX sells is not a 6670.

I'm glad you read the rest of the thread.

From my POV, he made a mistake. He was aware enough to check benchmarks and to research facts, but he was not aware enough to cross check those facts against the actual product he was buying. That is a mistake, especially considering we're all (now) aware low end cards are subject to vary by specifications.

 

[Termie]

...

Do you particularly think tech enthusiasts are going to make a difference to AIBs for these cards? What exactly are you going to do to put a stop to it?

Well, I don't have the perfect solution, but what I do on this site is recommend a certain card at a certain price point, and I'm as specific with specs as possible. If someone wants to spend $75, I send them looking for the 5670 GDDR5, not the 6570, because while in theory the 6570 is the same price and offers the same performance, the 6570 GDDR5 that was benched in reviews does not exist. Similar caveats with the GT240 GDDR5/DDR3 (but at least both were actually benched in reviews and available). At these pricepoints, there's a ton of performance to be lost or gained for a few dollars, or sometimes no cost difference at all. We as enthusiasts can help by pointing new users to the exact spec card that gives them the most for their dollar.

In the end, I wish we didn't have to do this. But in the <$100 market, we absolutely do. There are other games afoot, of course, e.g., the GTX460 vs. GTX460SE and the HD5770/HD6770. The fact that both manufacturers insist on playing games in the mid-range market is infuriating, but at least buyers of those cards usually ask questions first.

 

[tigersty1e]

"Everyone else is doing it" is not a defense. The OP is right: XFX is a lousy company for doing it, just as the rest are.

It's a bait & switch on the part of these companies. Memory bandwidth massively affects GPU performance. A DDR3 6670 wouldn't be anywhere close to a GDDR5 card as a result. The kicker is that since they did this months after the product launches and reviews, all the reviews are for the GDDR5 cards (making no distinction about memory types because there weren't any DDR3 cards), meaning all the product reviews grossly overstate the performance of the series when the DDR3 cards are factored in. So buyers have every right in the world to be incensed when they go to get a product and have to play spec-hunter because the product was reformulated to allow a much lower performing product.

AMD needs to tighten the reins on its partners (or put them in a chokehold), as they're making AMD look terrible. NVIDIA wouldn't allow their partners to pull off these kinds of shenanigans.

You're joking right? AMD released the 6950 1gb a month after all the reviews for 6950 2gb. Oh noes. Bait and switch.

A legit bait and switch would be the GTX 560 version.... or GTX 460 SE version. Now these are what you would call bait and switch.

--------------

Your fanboyism is coming through really loudly. I'm not a fanboy any which way, but merely pointing out something the green side is doing which you have turned a blind eye. Nvidia wouldn't allow their partners to pull these shens because they are doing it themselves. Nvidia partners don't have to do anything.

 

[cusideabelincoln]

Well, I don't have the perfect solution, but what I do on this site is recommend a certain card at a certain price point, and I'm as specific with specs as possible. If someone wants to spend $75, I send them looking for the 5670 GDDR5, not the 6570, because while in theory the 6570 is the same price and offers the same performance, the 6570 GDDR5 that was benched in reviews does not exist. Similar caveats with the GT240 GDDR5/DDR3 (but at least both were actually benched in reviews and available). At these pricepoints, there's a ton of performance to be lost or gained for a few dollars, or sometimes no cost difference at all. We as enthusiasts can help by pointing new users to the exact spec card that gives them the most for their dollar.

In the end, I wish we didn't have to do this. But in the <$100 market, we absolutely do. There are other games afoot, of course, e.g., the GTX460 vs. GTX460SE and the HD5770/HD6770. The fact that both manufacturers insist on playing games in the mid-range market is infuriating, but at least buyers of those cards usually ask questions first.

Yeah, so like I said all we can do is increase awareness by explicitly specifying the differences do indeed exist. Because what you just described isn't going to force the market to change. The best we can hope for is petition to AMD, who will either bring more model numbers to the table to reflect all of these differences or strap down on specifications.

 

[3DVagabond]

AMD does it regularly. SAME thing with the HD 6450. ALL of the tech sites got the DDR5 version to make the GT 520 look bad - but there were none available for purchase; just the DDR3 version (which gets whipped by the GT 520). We had to get our own HD 6450-DDR3 from Newegg.


AMD encourages it.

Well, if the OP can't figure it out from reading the tag line of the card I doubt you running a review could inform him either. I can't believe you are jumping in here with both feet, taking sides on this thing. Especially since plenty of board partners do these types of things. Because it's an AMD exclusive partner though, let's kick crap all over them?

What about gtx 560 ti SOC from gigabyte? Send out 1GHz models to reviewers, get some super binned examples out to e-tailers, then, without sending new models out to reviewers, without a name or model change, manufacture them at 950MHz and tell no one. How many high and mighty moral journalists have rerun their reviews at the lower clocks?

The reference HD6850 was never released to the public. Nobody makes one. +90% of the cards sold are built to a lower standard than the reference design. How many reviews were run though with reference designs?

Now we have multiple board partners releasing cards with lower spec'd parts, as happens all of the time. Let's pick out the AMD exclusive partner, who used to be an nVidia partner, but switched teams, and crucify them.

There's no news here. It's just "business as usual", and you know it. If you want to truly inform people here, then tell them that. Tell them they need to be more careful when making their purchases. Especially when it is plainly stated that it's DDR3 and they missed it. Tell them if they are not it will likely continue to happen to them. Don't make this out to be some moral shortcoming though that in any way affects AMD exclusively. This is life in the big city. Learn to deal with it or continue to be disappointed, is the moral of the story here.

 

[DaveSimmons]

Title should be changed to:

All card makers make non-reference cards! Caveat Emptor! Requiescat in pace!

 

[zebrax2]

1. I doubt AMD would gain anything by convincing their partners to sell the ddr3 editions. They sell the main GPU chip and since both the ddr3 and gddr5 version uses the same chip they most likely earn the same amount on both of them

2. It was indicated in the specs as well as the product title that it was ddr3. How is HD6450 ddr3 and HD6450 gddr5 different from GT560 and GT560 Ti?

 

[toyota]

1. I doubt AMD would gain anything by convincing their partners to sell the ddr3 editions. They sell the main GPU chip and since both the ddr3 and gddr5 version uses the same chip they most likely earn the same amount on both of them

2. It was indicated in the specs as well as the product title that it was ddr3. How is HD6450 ddr3 and HD6450 gddr5 different from GT560 and GT560 Ti?

because the gtx560, gtx560 ti, 6450 gddr3 and 6450 gddr5 are all OFFICIAL products.

but yeah the consumer obviously needs to be more aware and look out for these unofficial gimped versions.

 

[notty22]

Here are more AMD examples. After the launch reviews, besides a slight bump in clock speed the main differences between a 5670 and 5570 seeemed to be gddr 5 / gddr 3 usage.

Here are 4 5670's using gddr3
XFX HD-567X-ZNL3 Radeon HD 5670 1GB 128-bit DDR3 PCI Express 2.1 x16 HDCP Ready Video CardGIGABYTE GV-R567D3-1GI Radeon HD 5670 1GB 128-bit DDR3 PCI Express 2.1 x16 HDCP Ready Video Card
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16814161365
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16814102930

• 
  

 

[SlowSpyder]

This is kind of a sad reflection of the mentality people have today. A part, clearly labeled in the title and the specs as GDDR3 is purchased, then that person blames the company that builds it because he read reviews of and wanted a GDDR5 version.

My VaporX 5870's run at 875/5000 (reference is 850/4800). Maybe I should post messages complaining about how my cards use more power than the reference cards that were reviewed?

 

[ViRGE]

You're joking right? AMD released the 6950 1gb a month after all the reviews for 6950 2gb. Oh noes. Bait and switch.

A legit bait and switch would be the GTX 560 version.... or GTX 460 SE version. Now these are what you would call bait and switch.

--------------

Your fanboyism is coming through really loudly. I'm not a fanboy any which way, but merely pointing out something the green side is doing which you have turned a blind eye. Nvidia wouldn't allow their partners to pull these shens because they are doing it themselves. Nvidia partners don't have to do anything.

Eh? I'm quite serious. XFX released a much lower performing part using the same model name; that's a problem.

As for your other comment: I've moderated this forum for how many years now? So I would hope we're beyond calling me a fanboy. And I stand by my comment: NVIDIA doesn't allow their partners to do this stuff. Which isn't meant to be a comment extolling NVIDIA (they have their own problems), only pointing out that AMD could be doing better. It's a problem for AMD if they let their name get dragged through the mud like this.

Edit: Speaking of labeling, I just took a look at box photos on Newegg for the XFX cards. DDR3 GDDR5 It's actually more ridiculous than the Newegg names - there's nothing to differentiate the cards on the front of the boxes. Woe be on to anyone that buys video cards at retail; they're going to be in for a surprise.

 

[apoppin]

Well, if the OP can't figure it out from reading the tag line of the card I doubt you running a review could inform him either. I can't believe you are jumping in here with both feet, taking sides on this thing. Especially since plenty of board partners do these types of things. Because it's an AMD exclusive partner though, let's kick crap all over them?

What about gtx 560 ti SOC from gigabyte? Send out 1GHz models to reviewers, get some super binned examples out to e-tailers, then, without sending new models out to reviewers, without a name or model change, manufacture them at 950MHz and tell no one. How many high and mighty moral journalists have rerun their reviews at the lower clocks?

The reference HD6850 was never released to the public. Nobody makes one. +90% of the cards sold are built to a lower standard than the reference design. How many reviews were run though with reference designs?

Now we have multiple board partners releasing cards with lower spec'd parts, as happens all of the time. Let's pick out the AMD exclusive partner, who used to be an nVidia partner, but switched teams, and crucify them.

There's no news here. It's just "business as usual", and you know it. If you want to truly inform people here, then tell them that. Tell them they need to be more careful when making their purchases. Especially when it is plainly stated that it's DDR3 and they missed it. Tell them if they are not it will likely continue to happen to them. Don't make this out to be some moral shortcoming though that in any way affects AMD exclusively. This is life in the big city. Learn to deal with it or continue to be disappointed, is the moral of the story here.

Are you talking to me? *Who* is making out that moral shortcomings are exclusive to AMD? Certainly not I

i have my own tech site and forum and i explain the insider view of the industry to our members. i know how it works. ABT is a media partner with both AMD and Nvidia.

Don't pick on one of my posts and attempt to make something out of it. We are dealing with a specific situation - and if you weren't lazy to read all of my posts in this thread - you would realize that i also talk about Nvidia and Galaxy with complete frankness.

 

[Firestorm007]

I'm sorry, but this whole thread is just silly. The card was clearly marked by Newegg. So what's the problem here? It's the OP's fault. There's a lot of fanfare in this thread for nothing. If the OP was duped into buying a card that wasn't labeled correctly, that would be one thing. I'm just disappointed that certain people are making a big deal out of nothing. Let's all read together at the description from the Egg. Where was the OP fooled? My reading skills see DDR3 very clearly.
XFX HD-667X-ZHF3 Radeon HD 6670 1GB 128-bit DDR3 PCI Express 2.1 x16 HDCP Ready Video Card

 

[taltamir]

You're joking right? AMD released the 6950 1gb a month after all the reviews for 6950 2gb. Oh noes. Bait and switch.

Agreed, a bait and switch is when a company changes hardware while hiding the changes; for example, the recent vertex 2 issue.

The DDR3 versions clearly indicate that they are DDR3, and are thus not bait and switch.

 

[Barfo]

Scummy of XFX, HIS and the others to do this.

OP should read the spec sheet of the card he's buying, not something off wikipedia or wherever, and don't trust those Nigerian princes either.

 

[AnandThenMan]

Well, if the OP can't figure it out from reading the tag line of the card I doubt you running a review could inform him either. I can't believe you are jumping in here with both feet, taking sides on this thing. Especially since plenty of board partners do these types of things. Because it's an AMD exclusive partner though, let's kick crap all over them?

apoppin's agenda has been quite clear to me for some time.

I still don't see the need for some massive outcry. I agree with others, all you have to do is read the tag line and there you have it, if you can't do that, well, your own fault.

 

[happy medium]

Are there reviews for the 6670 ddr3 on any of the top 5 review sites?
I'm looking , mabe someone can help me out?

 

[AnandThenMan]

You already know the answer to that. No doubt your next response will be, SEE, AMD cheated you, bad AMD, how could they, BAD AMD BAD. ^_^

 

[happy medium]

You already know the answer to that. No doubt your next response will be, SEE, AMD cheated you, bad AMD, how could they, BAD AMD BAD. ^_^

No, my response is, they released a card with faster specs, had it reviewed, showed the benchmarks, and they expect the millions of average consumers to know that the ddr5 card is faster, how?. I think thats wrong for any company or board partner. It seems just a bit deceiptfull to me.

Point is, even if the op (or millions of others) read the ddr3 label on newegg, how are they to know?

How far should the average consumer have to research?

A thread like this is good for all consumers. I for one think its wrong and just bad business practice.
I feel sorry for all the nubs out there.

 

[jvroig]

Before things get too hot, we should stop throwing around "fanboyism" - we could use far less of that.

Attack the idea, not the person. Accusations of fanboyism only serve to incite further such wars instead of a productive debate. Just because someone does not agree with you doesn't mean he is a fanboy. And if you think someone is just trolling, you do not have to demean yourself by trolling him back - use the Report Post function.

I'm posting this as a general warning for everyone. Beyond this post, there will be no further warnings for insults and personal attacks.

Moderator jvroig