AMD Quietly Made Some Radeon RX 560 Graphics Cards Worse

So it's the same as with 470D that was launched in China (the one with 1792SP).

560 remains 560 i.e full chip with 1024SP, people just need to be vary of >D< in the name of 560. BTW, D versions were available since launch, they were simply rarer.

https://i.imgur.com/FbPPRN3.jpg
 
That is why I have always doubled checked the specs before buying something. Got to love crap like that.
 
...aaaand just when AMD starts to rebuild some good reputations, they go and shoot themselves in the face :banghead::facepalm:
 
  • Like
Reactions: DF-1
like this
The part I'm struggling with is: why?

What's the real benefit?

It's a low priced SKU. So the markup can't be all that much. How much Goodwill are they lighting on fire for bullshit marketing purposes?

The damn thing is; transparency avoids them looking deceptive.

Call this damn thing RX 460 (which it sure seems to be) or at worst a RX 465.

Call a spade, a spade and nobody cares. Mislead people and risk a PR disaster. PR disasters scare investors, look at what's happening to EA.

There are no performance crowns to be won, kept or lost naming this properly.

I just don't understand this kind of selective obliviousness. They feel like people care about the numbers so they rebadge Polaris (for no damn reason) but with this they don't think anyone will notice or care about the difference in SP?

The demographic for buyers of retail PC components is generally a pedantic group right?
 
_l_ said:
Ryzen mobos speced for DDR4 3600 but can't run it past 2966 ... it's quite a long list actually
Click to expand...
As a Ryzen buyer who took a very long time trying to decide on which MB I would settle with, I do not recall a single board that stated this. Can you point out which ones?
 
Geforcepat said:
well, that's your problem man.(he'll search at some point) have a good day.
Click to expand...

Sounds like your problem actually and no I haven't searched your posts...waste of time other than replying to this stupid back and forth. Every company pulls shady shit and don't pretend either side is different.
 
hexamon said:
Stuff like this is why I think marketing isn't a legitimate career.
Click to expand...
It's not, essentially it's figuring out the best lie your customers will believe. Always question everything.
THUMPer said:
https://www.gamersnexus.net/industry/3163-rx-560-controversy-4gb-means-4gb
Click to expand...
“It’s correct that 14 Compute Unit (896 stream processors) and 16 Compute Unit (1024 stream processor) versions of the Radeon RX 560 are available. We introduced the 14CU version this summer to provide AIBs and the market with more RX 500 series options. It’s come to our attention that on certain AIB and etail websites there’s no clear delineation between the two variants. We’re taking immediate steps to remedy this: we’re working with all AIB and channel partners to make sure the product descriptions and names clarify the CU count, so that gamers and consumers know exactly what they’re buying. We apologize for the confusion this may have caused.”

A little late to the "save your reputation party", aren't we? It should have been done from the start, and they should have to replace cards or do something for people caught in their little lie. All lies are still lies. Anyone believing this was a mistake needs their bs meter checked.
 
SighTurtle said:

Nvidia does it also. (Not excusing it, just good to know both do these things)
Click to expand...

As i said again in a similar thread ( https://hardforum.com/threads/amd-launches-slower-rx-560-with-same-name.1949777/#post-1043362738 ) , the example that you showed isn't the same case.
With what you showed, we have an upgraded version when going from the "Fermi" one to the "Kepler".
Here we have a downgraded version!! This can cause "harm" to the consumer who might think that he just bought an RX560 at a very good price !! With the NV's example that you showed, the consumer gets something stronger instead !!
 
Megalith said:
AMD and its partners quietly began selling Radeon RX 560 cards with fewer compute units and stream processors than originally advertised without changing the name or otherwise identifying the lesser-powered model in any way. The GPUs you can find in stores are a mix of the full-fat version and the cut-down version, making things much trickier. Thanks Blah Blah.

People have started to notice that graphics card vendors are shipping products labelled as RX 560 cards in configurations with 896 SPs, and others with 1024 SPs. Heise Online was the first to report the change in official specs and presence of cards in retail with fewer SPs and no obvious way to detect the difference while casually browsing.
Click to expand...
Hmm. I remember lawsuit when Nvidia did this...
 
c3k said:
At least they didn't try to sell 3.5Gb + .5 Gb as 4Gb of Vram. ;)
Click to expand...
Whats worse? The card was advertised as 4gb. You bought a 4 gb card. The way the memory was divided was not clarified. It was not the flat out lying.

AMD flat out lied. I was a 970 owner BTW.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: N4CR
like this
Sith'ari said:
As i said again in a similar thread ( https://hardforum.com/threads/amd-launches-slower-rx-560-with-same-name.1949777/#post-1043362738 ) , the example that you showed isn't the same case.
With what you showed, we have an upgraded version when going from the "Fermi" one to the "Kepler".
Here we have a downgraded version!! This can cause "harm" to the consumer who might think that he just bought an RX560 at a very good price !! With the NV's example that you showed, the consumer gets something stronger instead !!
Click to expand...

What? Unclear specs hurt the consumer no matter what. For example, say the consumer buys Fermi thinking its Kepler (and may well pay more), how the hell can you tell the difference? What if the OEM charges more based on the name, yet leaves out its Fermi instead of Kepler? Right there, two examples where your "consumer gets something stronger" are negated. Heres a idea, why not have companies release clear, consist product stacks that dont allow funny business.

There is nothing good or different about Nvidia's misleading of consumers any more than AMD's instance here. Unclear, obtuse, misleading specs hurt the consumer no matter what, and both should be ashamed. The fact this happens in the lower-priced, low knowledge markets speaks doubly to the ease of getting away with it.
 
SighTurtle said:

Nvidia does it also. (Not excusing it, just good to know both do these things)
Click to expand...

I'm not saying this isn't also shady but most people buy a GT 730 to put pixels on a screen, not to play games with. The 560 is being sold to play games on and when you cut performance it's going to be significantly more noticeable.
 
Advil said:
No matter how you slice it, those cards should be labeled clearly. "lite" "LE" "basic" something.

And really they should be a different model . 555 or something.
Click to expand...
The only plausible reason to use the same name as the faster card is to fool the unwitting into buying an orange when they're after an apple.

Scumbag move indeed.
 
SighTurtle said:
What? Unclear specs hurt the consumer no matter what. For example, say the consumer buys Fermi thinking its Kepler (and may well pay more), how the hell can you tell the difference? What if the OEM charges more based on the name, yet leaves out its Fermi instead of Kepler? Right there, two examples where your "consumer gets something stronger" are negated. Heres a idea, why not have companies release clear, consist product stacks that dont allow funny business.

There is nothing good or different about Nvidia's misleading of consumers any more than AMD's instance here. Unclear, obtuse, misleading specs hurt the consumer no matter what, and both should be ashamed. The fact this happens in the lower-priced, low knowledge markets speaks doubly to the ease of getting away with it.
Click to expand...

Does the Fermi and Kepler versions, both existed at the same time, same market-period ? Because that's what is happening now with the 2 RX560 versions. They both exist at the same time. If NV stopped the production of the older model (*AMD doesn't do such thing) then where is the problem?
 
Kardonxt said:
I'm not saying this isn't also shady but most people buy a GT 730 to put pixels on a screen, not to play games with. The 560 is being sold to play games on and when you cut performance it's going to be significantly more noticeable.
Click to expand...

Both are shady as shit and they both need to get called out. Don't sugar coat either side. They need to stop pulling that shit. "F" this red or green reasoning why crap.
 
jmilcher said:
Whats worse? The card was advertised as 4gb. You bought a 4 gb card. The way the memory was divided was not clarified. It was the flat out lying.

AMD flat out lied. I was a 970 owner BTW.
Click to expand...

It seems that you and I have different understandings about the meaning of the ;) I appended to my post.

I, too, am a 970 owner. I have eschewed the class action payout. I never noticed a performance hit.

As far as "shaders" missing, if AMD engages in "shady" naming conventions, does that make up for the missing ones? ;)
 
funkydmunky said:
I do not recall a single board that stated this. Can you point out which ones?
Click to expand...

which ones? The ones that showed 3200 and higher for the mem specs but the bios didn't allow past 2966 (well, it was 29XX, I'm not sure about the last two digits)). Later on they updated the BIOS but that came after they were already selling the boards. You can find many videos about this on Youtube; use keywords "Ryzen motherboad reviews" and look for the videos with the older posting dates ...
 
c3k said:
It seems that you and I have different understandings about the meaning of the ;) I appended to my post.

I, too, am a 970 owner. I have eschewed the class action payout. I never noticed a performance hit.

As far as "shaders" missing, if AMD engages in "shady" naming conventions, does that make up for the missing ones? ;)
Click to expand...
LOL. I'm just saying I bought a 4gb card. The performance was insane at the time for the price compared to the 980. I wasn't butt hurt.

I didn't really feel lied to either. But this looks legit like bait and switch.
 
Weren't the 460's originally with 896 and could be flashed to 1024 for a small boost? Did they just get lazy?
 
And some AIB partners began selling 460's with 1024SPs. That's a forgivable sin (blessing in disguise) - unadvertised upgrade. This time it is opposite.
 
Bowman15 said:
Sounds like your problem actually and no I haven't searched your posts...waste of time other than replying to this stupid back and forth. Every company pulls shady shit and don't pretend either side is different.
Click to expand...
Yo "go there" that was my pointo_O I know/experienced both companies and that they both do silly stuff. and that yes the mem config was 3.5+512 but at least it was there. there's no 896 +128 here that extra 128 is gone with no name model change.(n)
 
The 970s were shown in VRAM hungry games to have a performance hit.
The same hit will be across the board for the 560 with the gimped shaders.

Both are different flavours of shady as fuck and I condemn both companies for pulling shenanigans like this, unlike some people who can never shit on their favourite team or admit they are wrong.
 
Geforcepat said:
Yo "go there" that was my pointo_O I know/experienced both companies and that they both do silly stuff. and that yes the mem config was 3.5+512 but at least it was there. there's no 896 +128 here that extra 128 is gone with no name model change.(n)
Click to expand...

Oh FFS you fan boys are just ridiculous in what color you bleed. You all make excuses for shady and wrong shit these companies do then place the "wrongness" on different levels depending on allegiance. "Yo geforce" that is s my point LOL. :LOL: What excuse you got next cuz I thought wrong was wrong?
 
Bowman15 said:
Oh FFS you fan boys are just ridiculous in what color you bleed. You all make excuses for shady and wrong shit these companies do then place the "wrongness" on different levels depending on allegiance. "Yo geforce" that is s my point LOL. :LOL: What excuse you got next cuz I thought wrong was wrong?
Click to expand...
Yo yo yo yall this dawg still doesn't get it:ROFLMAO: i didn't make one excuse. just stated the facts (y) and how can I be a green fanboi if I've been running team red for most of this decade hmm?:rolleyes: looks like I've been more of a team red fan so far this decade. #1024means1024 or #560means1024
 
Geforcepat said:
Yo yo yo yall this dawg still doesn't get it:ROFLMAO: i didn't make one excuse. just stated the facts (y) and how can I be a green fanboi if I've been running team red for most of this decade hmm?:rolleyes: looks like I've been more of a team red fan so far this decade. #1024means1024 or #560means1024
Click to expand...

Yeah, I still don't believe you dawg...so continue to go there princess geforce. Blaming AMD while excusing NV says it all.
 
Megalith said:
AMD and its partners quietly began selling Radeon RX 560 cards with fewer compute units and stream processors than originally advertised without changing the name or otherwise identifying the lesser-powered model in any way. The GPUs you can find in stores are a mix of the full-fat version and the cut-down version, making things much trickier. Thanks Blah Blah.

People have started to notice that graphics card vendors are shipping products labelled as RX 560 cards in configurations with 896 SPs, and others with 1024 SPs. Heise Online was the first to report the change in official specs and presence of cards in retail with fewer SPs and no obvious way to detect the difference while casually browsing.
Click to expand...
Fucking awful of them
 
The wording on the packages really seemed to be intentionally deceptive.

They have all of the "Up to" and "Maximum" specs, and then the "896/1024".
If I didn't know better (now) and was just looking at the specs on the package, I would assume that is a base vs. "turbo" performance spec.

That's how they market GPUs and CPUs these days right? Base speed/turbo speed.

I would never in a million years think the 896/1024 spec is really down to pot luck as to which one (all marked the same) I pick off the shelf!

They need a disclaimer on the box like, "You may get a shitty card in the box that is not as advertised. We aren't telling you if this card in the
box you are holding is a shitty one or not. Just buy it moron."

Anybody here know the details on how to file FTC complaints?


.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top