TaintedSquirrel
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Aug 5, 2013
- Messages
- 12,396
Some of this data is old (2014) and from a small sample size (two stores) but since this topic rarely gets discussed, I thought I'd bring it up again... Or for the first time, as the case may be.
https://www.pugetsystems.com/labs/articles/Video-Card-Failure-Rates-by-Generation-563/
http://linustechtips.com/main/topic/255466-huge-list-of-failure-rates-for-all-pc-components/
Averages:
Nvidia: 2.715%
AMD: 5.746%
AMD's failure numbers are roughly twice as high as Nvidia's. Then we have more anecdotal sources like these, reflecting specific problems with one particular card (280X):
https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?43057-R9-280x-DirectCU-II-Top-Artifacts
https://www.sapphireforum.com/showt...-Sapphire-Toxic-Problem!-Artifacts!-New-VBios
Could this be related to the mining craze of early 2014, perhaps? GPU lifespans shortened, increasing their RMA rates later in the year and leading into 2015. Or does it represent a bigger problem with AMD's QA?
And I guess the biggest question of all, why are these numbers not more prevalent? Shouldn't there be some research done into this by bigger hardware sites with the resources to find answers. If we take the numbers at face value then it appears buying an AMD GPU doubles your chance over Nvidia of getting a failed card and that's something consumers should be aware of... and AMD needs to be held accountable for.
How much of this blame belongs on the AIB partners themselves? In the 280X's case, it looks like they were pushing the GPU's too hard (1100+ Core, 1600+ Memory) and it caused reliability problems. How did those cards reach the market in the first place?
https://www.pugetsystems.com/labs/articles/Video-Card-Failure-Rates-by-Generation-563/
The current generation - GTX 7xx and Titans - has so far been better than any other generation to date. The .64% in the field failure rate is like a little lower than it eventually will be since the cards have not been out for as long as the other generations, but the 1.61% failure rate during our initial testing is very, very good.
Unlike NVIDIA, our failure logs show that the latest generation of AMD cards is currently seeing an increase in failure rates. The good news is that most of the Radeon R7 and R9 cards that are failing are doing so in-house, so our customers are mostly isolated from the problems. Historically, AMD has about a 50-50 DOA to field failure rate, so we are actually very happy to see that ratio shifting away from failures in the field. However, a 13.46% failure rate during our testing is really, really high and indicates that there is a problem with the latest AMD video cards.
http://linustechtips.com/main/topic/255466-huge-list-of-failure-rates-for-all-pc-components/
- 2,53% Radeon HD 7850
- 1,66% Radeon HD 7870
- 10,28% Radeon HD 7950
- 7,63% Radeon HD 7970
- 2,81% Radeon R9 270
- 5,79% Radeon R9 270X
- 8,81% Radeon R9 280X
- 6,63% Radeon R9 290
- 5,58% Radeon R9 290X
- 1,57% GeForce GTX 660
- 2,57% GeForce GTX 760
- 3,16% GeForce GTX 770
- 4,75% GeForce GTX 780
- 2,91% GeForce GTX 780 Ti
- 1,33% GeForce GTX TITAN/BLACK
Averages:
Nvidia: 2.715%
AMD: 5.746%
AMD's failure numbers are roughly twice as high as Nvidia's. Then we have more anecdotal sources like these, reflecting specific problems with one particular card (280X):
https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?43057-R9-280x-DirectCU-II-Top-Artifacts
https://www.sapphireforum.com/showt...-Sapphire-Toxic-Problem!-Artifacts!-New-VBios
Could this be related to the mining craze of early 2014, perhaps? GPU lifespans shortened, increasing their RMA rates later in the year and leading into 2015. Or does it represent a bigger problem with AMD's QA?
And I guess the biggest question of all, why are these numbers not more prevalent? Shouldn't there be some research done into this by bigger hardware sites with the resources to find answers. If we take the numbers at face value then it appears buying an AMD GPU doubles your chance over Nvidia of getting a failed card and that's something consumers should be aware of... and AMD needs to be held accountable for.
How much of this blame belongs on the AIB partners themselves? In the 280X's case, it looks like they were pushing the GPU's too hard (1100+ Core, 1600+ Memory) and it caused reliability problems. How did those cards reach the market in the first place?