XFX Bilking the masses - replacing GDDR5 memory with DDR3

[Red Storm]

Easy answer , instead of just saying," this is wrong, and should not be happening", it turned into a defend AMD because Nvidia does it also thread.
way off topic...but....

back on topic....
At least Intel got it right, they changed the 2100 cpu with a 2000 series gpu to a 2105 cpu because it now has a 3000 series gpu. See how easy that was.
AMD and Nvidia should take notice!

But that's the whole point, it's not wrong, they are not deceiving anybody when the title clearly displays the differences. I don't think you'll agree with us though, so I'll just leave it at that.

Mods, can we at least get a title change if this thread is going to stay open? XFX isn't "bilking" the masses, nor are they replacing GDDR5 with DDR3. They are simply releasing a slower, cheaper version of a card to compliment the more expensive reference model, something many vendors have been doing for years.

 

[Gikaseixas]

Because the product sku has the same name

DDR3 Card SKU - XFX HD-667X-ZHF3

DDR5 Card SKU - XFX HD-667X-ZAF3

Sku is different and there's not a rebate on the DDR5 card, it costs $100 when the other card is only $74 with a rebate.

And no, we're not asking customers to simply know differences based on the memory type. We're telling a DYI capable guy to do his research a bit better to avoid making a fool of himself.

 

[Gikaseixas]

but to simply wave it off like there is nothing wrong at all is alarming to.

what's alarming is how clear it was made by newegg, a very well laid out website, super user friendly and still someone found it XFX's fault that they purchased the wrong card.

 

[Termie]

DDR3 Card SKU - XFX HD-667X-ZHF3

DDR5 Card SKU - XFX HD-667X-ZAF3

Sku is different and there's not a rebate on the DDR5 card, it costs $100 when the other card is only $74 with a rebate.

Hey, where'd the $25 rebate go? I think XFX is listening! Except instead of lowering the price of the DDR3 HD6670, they raised the price of the GDDR5 version!

 

[SirPauly]

what's alarming is how clear it was made by newegg, a very well laid out website, super user friendly and still someone found it XFX's fault that they purchased the wrong card.

You made your point clear as crystal -- you see nothing wrong at all.

 

[Pantalaimon]

Because the product sku has the same name with a huge distinction in bandwith. How is this not a problem; at least to a small degree?

You're asking consumers to simply know the difference off the top-of-their-heads, the difference between GDDR-3 and GDDR-5 and the band-with differences, which the band-with is not clearly marked or offered. The differences in band-with are very stark.

I don't think this is a huge issue and a bit disingenuous but to simply wave it off like there is nothing wrong at all is alarming to.

Okay, so a 'Joe Sixpack' consumer who doesn't know / understand that DDR3 is slower / worse than DDR5, would somehow magically understand the significance of the bandwith difference, and what it means for the performance if this bandwith difference is stated in the product description?

As for those who thinks that the manufacturer of the card should add some label to distinguish these two versions like 6670GIMP, what's the difference between adding this suffix at the end of the GPU name and having the DDR3 in the product name? Don't you guys always say how ignorant consumers will assume bigger numbers means better performance? Isn't DDR3 < DDR5?

 

[bryanW1995]

Yeah I'm not sure how that got turned into a Nvidia vs. AMD thing. But, there are currently three 32-bit and five 128-bit versions of the 210 on Newegg, while Nvidia only lists the 64-bit version on their site. Are you saying they are all misprints? Even if one or two of them are, my point still stands. Both sides are "guilty" of this offense, and have been so for many years. It doesn't matter, not one bit. This thread has gone no where and should be closed IMHO.

Sorry, I failed to mention that since there are 3 of them then it's highly unlikely that all 3 are misprints. Especially since we're comparing this to 4 of the ddr3 6670's, which everybody just assumes are NOT misprints. If there was just one then maybe, but 3 or 4 are both highly likely to be legit.

 

[SirPauly]

Okay, so a 'Joe Sixpack' consumer who doesn't know / understand that DDR3 is slower / worse than DDR5, would somehow magically understand the significance of the bandwith difference, and what it means for the performance if this bandwith difference is stated in the product description?

As for those who thinks that the manufacturer of the card should add some label to distinguish these two versions like 6670GIMP, what's the difference between adding this suffix at the end of the GPU name and having the DDR3 in the product name? Don't you guys always say how ignorant consumers will assume bigger numbers means better performance? Isn't DDR3 < DDR5?

All I am saying it is a bit disingenuous and not a huge deal in the big picture. Perfectly understand that it takes research to learn the differences on technology from GPU's to monitors. The difference in band-with is outrageous though from a GDDR-3 and GDDR-5 sku and it is a bit misleading to have both named the same number, considering the number helps the consumer understand the performance metric. All I am asking for is a bit more clarity for the consumers that may not understand -- not blaming or pointing fingers or saying anyone is wrong, bad or evil.

For example:

6670 GDDR-5 product sku
6650 GDDR-3 product sku

 

[bryanW1995]

Because the product sku has the same name with a huge distinction in bandwith. How is this not a problem; at least to a small degree?

You're asking consumers to simply know the difference off the top-of-their-heads, the difference between GDDR-3 and GDDR-5 and the band-with differences, which the band-with is not clearly marked or offered. The differences in band-with are very stark.

I don't think this is a huge issue and a bit disingenuous but to simply wave it off like there is nothing wrong at all is alarming to.

I've offered to do a comparison with 6670 ddr3 vs 6670 gddr5. It would be limited to 1680x1050 b/c that's all I have, but with cards like these I don't think we're in too much danger of needing 1920x1080 benches, anyway. i can get a 6670 gddr5 from alienbabeltech, but somebody needs to help me track down a 6670 ddr3 model.

 

[bryanW1995]

[snip]
6670GIMP

ROTFLMAO!!!! That would be a hilarious naming convention. You wife/girlfriend/blow up doll might give you funny looks when you keep shouting "Speed up, GIMP!" while playing BF3, but it would definitely be worth it!

Hopefully amd or nv start doing this instead of SE/pro/etc. How about 7970 GIMP instead of 7950? Who wouldn't buy that?

 

[SirPauly]

I've offered to do a comparison with 6670 ddr3 vs 6670 gddr5. It would be limited to 1680x1050 b/c that's all I have, but with cards like these I don't think we're in too much danger of needing 1920x1080 benches, anyway. i can get a 6670 gddr5 from alienbabeltech, but somebody needs to help me track down a 6670 ddr3 model.

There are not many but there is a solid difference in performance based on this small sampling:

http://tech2.in.com/reviews/graphics-cards/his-hd-6670-1gb-ddr3-graphics-card/231692

 

[bryanW1995]

Ouch, benching them at 1920x1080 with high AA is definitely a worst-case scenario. I'd prefer to look at them at lower res, maybe 1680x1050, 1440x900, and even 1366x768. Those results are surprising to me, I expected more of a dropoff.

 

[TheDarkKnight]

Hey, where'd the $25 rebate go? I think XFX is listening! Except instead of lowering the price of the DDR3 HD6670, they raised the price of the GDDR5 version!

This company is still offering the $25 rebate on the same card:
http://www.ncix.com/products/index.p...anufacture=XFX. Yeah, its Canada but its just to make the point.

I did refuse delivery of the product and told newegg why. They must be investigating.