AMD Polaris GCN 4.0 Macau China Event

Gotta love all these few days old newb accounts attacking AMD lol, totally legitimate and not astroturfing shills.
In this entire thread, there is exactly one poster with a "Join" date in May of 2016, and that poster attacked (I think) TechReport, not AMD.

So what the heck are you talking about?
 
Friends or enemies it should not matter [H] should be looked at seriously not for Kyle's sake but for us. If we didn't think this site was worth our time we would not be here and in a way AMD is telling us that we don't matter which is unbelievably fucking stupid ....

Except as Kyle said above, we care about the top end so why waste money and resources on the mid level launch for a site that should be included with Vega launch.
If H wants to suck up toss in quantum break with benchmarks, that game makes nVidias driver team look incompetent, and should tone down fanboys on both sides
 
It blows my mind how many idiot fanboys can't figure this out.

It is pointless to even attempt making them realize this when you see posters here , where we are supposedly knowledgeable on the matter .

It is causing brain hemorrhage (quite literally )

Competition means nothing for the prices ?

Ahtlon managed to shove Intel on the back burner for what amount of time again ? 5 years ? Or was it 6 ?

And then Intel took the crown again and dominated the market completely in 3 short years . So in total 9 years (2000-2006 & 2006-2009) - Can someone here tell me - how many new CPU sockets Intel released in that period ?

Let me help you - 3 - namely S.423 ( early Northwood RDRAM P4s ) S.478 ( PresHots ) and LGA 775 - which by the way just happens to be probably the socket with the 2nd longest life span of roughly 5 years ( Socket 7 might actually beat it in that criteria )

And what happened after ?

Intel decided that they pwn teh market nao and could go all happy and do what AMD did like 10,000 years b4 that - to shove the memory controller in the CPU .
But what did InHell do that AMD did not when they put the MC in the CPU ?

Intel had no competition - AMD was down on the ground in pre-mortal spasms - and so it began

THE SOCKET FARTING - oh , c vi habe nu CPU -take 1366 , 1156 , 2011 - oh we shrunk it and removed the OC capability - phrrrttrrr - 1155 , 2011 - V dfault , V whatever V THREE ( like , srsly InHell ) , 1150
DDR4 , die shrink - phrrrtrrrrrrrrrrrr - 1151....1 like for realz - 1150 to 1151 ?

One question should be asked here by any normal sane person- were all those sockets really necessary ?

And the answer should also be known to any sane person - NO

775 went from single core 32bit 90nm CPUs (cant recall if there were 110nm 775s) with DDR1 support through HT CPUs of the 64-bit variety , FrankenMonsters like PENTIUM D ( at least it could heat up an average room in cold days ) right up to Core 2 Quad 45 nm QX9770 with DDR 3 1600 support .

See , if we really were not brand slaves and really voted with our wallets - not a single Intel i(w/e digit) CPU should have been SOLD after 2500/2600 K - or at least the sales should have been way lower for the subsequent iterations OF the same architecture .

Same goes for Nvidia's price gouging for the last 3-4 years - scuse me but I have not been in the loop recently regarding to HW innovations (lost the mojo for few years and did not gave too much attention what is going on on the market)
As far as I am aware , AMD have dropped the ball somewhere before or after HD 6xxx/HD 7xxx generations of products - and I think that HD 7xxx is actually just being extended and chewed upon till death since it technically is still at the core of what ATI currently offers ( Rx 3xx series are roughly the same architecture as HD 7xxx )

Not that the same does not apply for Nvidia's 28nm cards - but point is - AMD is losing this battle as well , and effectively Nvidia is left unchecked and if no one here has noticed - the price/performance for the sweet spot has been raised substantially due to this fact.

Let me give you example

Take ATI HD 3870 - that was a very decent card and it was in the High End of the spectrum back then and it was 269 $ at launch
Then FFWD to 2008 and here comes 4850 @ 199$ and 4870 @ 299$ at launch - again this is High end (HE budget and HE not so budgety)

Anyone remembers that during the time of those cards (and prices ) enthusiast level parts topped at 600-ish $

ATI HD 4870x2 - 559$ @ launch

Now go and check the prices now and see what has happened since Nvidia is running wild - 970 - 329 $ @ launch
Anyone recalling GTX 770 - 399 $ @ launch

Meanwhile the Enthusiast has gone to 999 $ @ launch

I will not go into deep math here ( tho it is really very basic math, just kinda sleepy @ 5:40 AM) - this is the picture with the underdog still being around - if AMD ultimately fails and vanishes for good - prices of PC parts ( well CPU/GPU and MOBO at least) will become even more steep
Give or take the median value for the same grade of GPU was pushed by Nvidia with 25-ish % - imagine now on current level where a 970/770 part will be placed .

Now imagine a 50 % or 75 % or even 100% price increase if there is absolutely NO competition left .
Would you be able to keep your habit of upgrading your rig ever so often so it has good performance ( well EPIC performance and beyond EPIC) ?
And remember - InHell could actually care less for the end USER - it is enough that they spit new sockets for SERVERS - see major enterprises have some strict rules for such systems and such products usually have a certain LIFE span and after that , they become OUT OF SUPPORT - imagine a company having to replace a "tiny" server farm that happens to have 40,000 ( imaginary number) XEONS that just hit their EOL date) ?
You have ever seen the prices such components are traded in the Corporate world ?

Though the server segment is kinda dependent on the End User - especially since the C2D days - XEON X3360/every 771 xeon that were technically C2Ds with some extras added to them - case in point - End User ever lasting greed for performance per $ (or bang for buck) and our everlasting desire to have EPIC rigs always drove the tech so far that Intel decided it is not worth R&D-ing anything different for the server marked and just utilize C2D.


So tl:dr version - Without competition , prices will rise , and we - the End Users will be very unhappy about it.
 
1. "...[H] readership is very much focused on the top end..."

2. "...Honestly, there is likely not much to miss here, as we do not think AMD has any answer for GTX 1080.."

AMD has stated the Polaris products are aimed at the ~$300 (and under) price range, I.E. NOT the top-end.

[H] does not believe AMD has an answer to the 1080, citing RUMOr/SCUTTLEBUTT, rather than actual hands-on experience. The bias/pre-judgement in this statement is not even thinly veiled.

Given the above, it's only logical not to include [H] in the Macau invitee list. As a result, the collective "butt-hurt" from the [H] crew and posters is at best misplaced, IMO.

Ya, this.
The funny thing is AMD isn't behind, it is Nvidia. Doing a paper launch followed by minimal stock launch of a die shrunk Maxwell (Pascal) due to their true next gen a long way off is just a desperate stop-gap move. And the price gouging? Wow.
Nvidia has just mimicked AMD with the 290 to 390 refresh except with a die shrink so there is extra clocking besides ram doubling. So ya really fast at DX11 and still sucks at DX12. Yet because Nvidia, greatest thing ever! LOL.
Nvidia getting their product out first before Polaris launch doesn't equate to AMD not competing. AMD will launch their full next gen mid-range according to their time line as well AMD will launch their HBM2 equipped Paxwell 1080 killer well before Nvidia is ready to compete.
 
"This is censorship from AMD. Nothing more. Nothing less."

BS. [H] is NOT being censored, they can write anything they choose, up to and including purchasing/testing/reviewing AMD Polaris cards, if they choose as well as this very thread.

[H] simply was not invited to an event that pertains to products outside of their readership's stated area of interest. That's it.

That we have this thread and a revolving door of "outrage" as a result says more about the [H] crew for this thread's existence and those posting their "outrage" than about AMD, IMO.
 
  • Like
Reactions: N4CR
like this
Ya, this.
Nvidia has just mimicked AMD with the 290 to 390 refresh except with a die shrink so there is extra clocking besides ram doubling. So ya really fast at DX11 and still sucks at DX12. Yet because Nvidia, greatest thing ever! LOL.

argh?????????????????????????

Talk about contradictions in ones own statements lol.
 
Ya, this.
The funny thing is AMD isn't behind, it is Nvidia. Doing a paper launch followed by minimal stock launch of a die shrunk Maxwell (Pascal) due to their true next gen a long way off is just a desperate stop-gap move. And the price gouging? Wow.
Nvidia has just mimicked AMD with the 290 to 390 refresh except with a die shrink so there is extra clocking besides ram doubling.

208b604322ac4a859ede123cd08e44fde9151eb561d0ef7d4664d7049ad0395a.jpg
 
argh?????????????????????????

Talk about contradictions in ones own statements lol.
Yeah man. Exactly the same as 290x to 390x, except, you know, different process, different architecture, different memory type. Just a rebadge really

This just another one of nvidia's schemes man. They rebadge for 1080, a card that previously didn't exist. Perfect incognito rebadge.
 
Let's just take a step back, and imagine what AMD would've released if they didn't bother with HBM1 on the Fury. Maybe they could've beaten the TitanX with 40-50% core count increase without the ROP bottleneck.
 
Let's just take a step back, and imagine what AMD would've released if they didn't bother with HBM1 on the Fury. Maybe they could've beaten the TitanX with 40-50% core count increase without the ROP bottleneck.

Uh. What? You realize HBM doesn't take up actual gpu die space right. It's on the interposer. If anything, foregoing HBM would give them less die area to play with because of the size and complexity of the g5 imc + phy
 
If AMD wanted to project confidence in their stuff, they'd get as many people there as possible, even if they didn't get along (well, I would at least). Their behavior isn't contributing to their business objectives as everyone will eventually get samples somehow and put it in focus for everyone to see. A bad report will eventually make its way to a popular site....IF the product is deemed bad.

Mid range? sure, why not? If its good in its segment, let it be seen by all. All this farting back and forth is silly.
 
I don't know, being outside the loop does have some very big advantages. When the Nano review was done by HardOCP nothing, I mean no one even came close to the quality of that review. Having a deadline, given a card with certain conditions etc. just would take away from a true good evaluation. I guess the down side is the cost in buying everything to test can get expensive but if that can be managed, HardOCP would be the #1 premiere review site for high end stuff.

Also these types of events, the recent Nvidia one and probably the upcoming AMD ones are just too salesman like type of demonstrations which one should consider as much as a grain of salt. The real value needs to be tested fairly and accurately, analyzed and then put into a good readable format. So this event and probably the next AMD one is mostly a waste of time.

AMD should want to know any weakness in their product - that is how you get better by knowing and addressing the issues. Their worst enemy is the one that won't tell AMD they have a serious problem and let AMD fall over a cliff. TechReport and HardOCP in the past (HardOCP first) kept reporting about CFX stuttering experience - that should be worth gold, it took AMD probably way too long on fixing that issue (which they mostly did) which hurt them.

When I buy my next card, I will just buy what is best for me or my interests, be it AMD or Nvidia. HardOCP not getting a card or not is not in the equation but since I am a reader it sure would not hurt reading about it here.
 
Let's just take a step back, and imagine what AMD would've released if they didn't bother with HBM1 on the Fury. Maybe they could've beaten the TitanX with 40-50% core count increase without the ROP bottleneck.


Without HBM you need more die space for the memory controller and you have to clock that specific area higher too. So nope that would not have happened.
 
I don't know, being outside the loop does have some very big advantages. When the Nano review was done by HardOCP nothing, I mean no one even came close to the quality of that review. Having a deadline, given a card with certain conditions etc. just would take away from a true good evaluation. I guess the down side is the cost in buying everything to test can get expensive but if that can be managed, HardOCP would be the #1 premiere review site for high end stuff.

Also these types of events, the recent Nvidia one and probably the upcoming AMD ones are just too salesman like type of demonstrations which one should consider as much as a grain of salt. The real value needs to be tested fairly and accurately, analyzed and then put into a good readable format. So this event and probably the next AMD one is mostly a waste of time.

AMD should want to know any weakness in their product - that is now you get better by knowing and addressing the issues. Their worst enemy are the ones that won't tell that they have a serious problem and let AMD fall over a cliff. TechReport and HardOCP in the past (HardOCP first) kept reporting about CFX stuttering experience - that should be worth gold, it took AMD probably way too long on fixing that issue (which they mostly did) which hurt them.

When I buy my next card, I will just buy what is best for me or my interests, be it AMD or Nvidia. HardOCP not getting a card or not is not in the equation but since I am a reader it sure would not hurt reading about it here.


Well AMD knows the weakness of their cards and they don't want to share those too soon because it will hurt them. nV did the same thing when they had weakness in their cards too...... This happens but to come out and say it was just a bad move on AMD's part, true the person who said it in such a way that pretty much was interpreted as such by "blaming" reviewers as biased was pretty bad, egg in the face stuff, since he represents AMD.
 
Well AMD knows the weakness of their cards and they don't want to share those too soon because it will hurt them. nV did the same thing when they had weakness in their cards too...... This happens but to come out and say it was just a bad move on AMD's part, true the person who said it in such a way that pretty much was interpreted as such by "blaming" reviewers as biased was pretty bad, egg in the face stuff, since he represents AMD.

Well I hope HardOCP finds out any weaknesses with Polaris and of course broadcast that in a responsible way. Sometimes what is a problem initially is not a problem at all later (Bios update, software etc.) so a list of problems and possible solutions. If AMD totally refuses to talk to HardOCP just indicate AMD lack of response, since HardOCP also represent or helps AMD customers out that will be a sign of AMD customer support I would say. After a period of time the credibility of HardOCP will become virtually unquestionable when showing upmost professional journalism letting the facts lead to the conclusions. Just tell it how it is which I think is HardOCP stance since birth anyways.
 
Then you and Kyle need to get on the same page:

Of which the Nano and Radeon Pro Duo qualify.

In regards to midrange cards, we have never backed away from them. We have plenty of R9 380/X reviews, and GTX 960 2GB/4GB reviews and past generation reviews of midrange cards to prove it. Just look back at what we've reviewed, and you will see this is right up ours, and our readerships alley.

Our main focus is on the top end, but we have been part of every midrange launch from AMD and NVIDIA in the last 15 years, just check our launch reviews and announcements and paper launches, everyone we have been a part of.
 
The nano is still a high end card 2nd to the top.

What? 2nd to what? The Nano is slower than a Fury, the Fury is slower than a Fury X, The Fury X is slower than a 980 Ti, and the 980 Ti is slower than a Titan X.

in what strange, alien world is the Nano '2nd' to anything?
 
Of which the Nano and Radeon Pro Duo qualify.

Sure. But AMD themselves have stated that Polaris is targeting the MIDRANGE, not the top-end.

Ergo, if, as Kyle states the [H] readership is concerned with the top-end and Polaris is NOT top-end, then [H] and it's readership is not the target demographic for Polaris. See how that works?
 
If it gets Fury X performance, then its going to be top end for the foreseeable near future till Vega, cause Fury X will be obsolete, as is the nano, as is the 390x.

If it doesn't then it won't matter to [H].........
 
If it gets Fury X performance, then its going to be top end for the foreseeable near future till Vega, cause Fury X will be obsolete, as is the nano, as is the 390x.

In what strange, 4th dimensional metaversal world does a Nano get Fury X performance!?
 
Sure. But AMD themselves have stated that Polaris is targeting the MIDRANGE, not the top-end.

Ergo, if, as Kyle states the [H] readership is concerned with the top-end and Polaris is NOT top-end, then [H] and it's readership is not the target demographic for Polaris. See how that works?

Our main focus is on the top end, but we have been part of every midrange launch from AMD and NVIDIA in the last 15 years, just check our launch reviews and announcements and paper launches, every one we have been a part of, and done reviews of. We typically don't do reviews below $150, but the $199 price point - $249 price point has been very popular indeed, and we have covered every, single, one. It has been precedent.
 
And in the last several years, as well as in this very post the [H] crew have demonstrated an anti-AMD/pro nVidia slant most evident, as noted above, since the Fury X launch.

So, don't feign outrage when your very words and actions come back to bite [H] in the ass like this non-invite. Action-Reaction.
 
And in the last several years, as well as in this very post the [H] crew have demonstrated and anti-AMD/porn nVidia slant most evident, as noted above since the Fury X launch.

So, don't feign outrage when your very words and actions come back to bite [H] in the ass like this non-invite. Action-Reaction.


Hey do you remember when nV blacklisted [H]?


You have been here longer than I have, you should know better......

Fury line was not as good when it was released it was that simple.
 
Nano doesn't didn't mean to imply that it did
C:\Users\1412038\AppData\Local\Temp\msohtmlclip1\01\clip_image001.png
, talking about P10


Are you drunk?


Lets retrace the conversation....


The nano is still a high end card 2nd to the top.


What? 2nd to what? The Nano is slower than a Fury, the Fury is slower than a Fury X, The Fury X is slower than a 980 Ti, and the 980 Ti is slower than a Titan X.


in what strange, alien world is the Nano '2nd' to anything?


If it gets Fury X performance, then its going to be top end for the foreseeable near future till Vega, cause Fury X will be obsolete, as is the nano, as is the 390x.


If it doesn't then it won't matter to [H].........


In what strange, 4th dimensional metaversal world does a Nano get Fury X performance!?


And that brings us back to the top of this post.


What colour is the sky in your world?
 
I wasn't posting to what you stated......

I was reiterating the fact what Brent and Kyle were stating and then putting in why p10 is also interesting. All based on what SocratesScrotum posted about why they didn't get the nano and now the invite.

Actually I didn't even see your post till ya pointed it out, two other posts came in the middle so yours got drowned out.


If it gets Fury X performance, then its going to be top end for the foreseeable near future till Vega, cause Fury X will be obsolete, as is the nano, as is the 390x.

If it doesn't then it won't matter to [H].........

This statement is specific to P10, not nano.

If P10 gets Fury X performance.........
 
  • Like
Reactions: N4CR
like this
Except that it is inside of our readers interest.

Same with Nano, same with Radeon Pro Duo.
Is it though? I mean on one hand I clearly remember comments about the Nano performing like a 970 and it's a product that has no use. Then all of a sudden we find out that performance was much better later on. But that was AFTER how many posts or articles saying the opposite? Quite a few I recall. I don't know it just sounds like in some instances you want to have your cake and eat it too. On one hand there is a desire to be hypercritical but at the same time expect access to launches, events, cards, etc.

That's not to say AMD is blameless. God knows their ability to handle anything correctly from a marketing perspective is wretched. However, just like children fighting in a car it gets to a point where who started it is irrelevant. Either way this recent back and forth isn't helping anyone.
 
  • Like
Reactions: N4CR
like this
I think we gave Nano a fair and thorough review, and concluded well on it.

Introduction - Radeon R9 Nano Small Form Factor Video Card Review

Radeon R9 Nano Small Form Factor - Radeon R9 Nano Small Form Factor Competition Review

Radeon R9 Nano Overclocking - Radeon R9 Nano Small Form Factor Overclocking Review

Merits should be based off the quality of reviews, and our conclusions, which are fair.

Whatever AMD's next generation brings, I will review it fairly, as I do all hardware. I will talk about the good, I will talk about the bad, I will give my opinion on its value based on experience and decades of doing hardware reviews and gaming.
 
Intel decided that they pwn teh market nao and could go all happy and do what AMD did like 10,000 years b4 that - to shove the memory controller in the CPU .
But what did InHell do that AMD did not when they put the MC in the CPU ?

Intel had no competition - AMD was down on the ground in pre-mortal spasms - and so it began

THE SOCKET FARTING - oh , c vi habe nu CPU -take 1366 , 1156 , 2011 - oh we shrunk it and removed the OC capability - phrrrttrrr - 1155 , 2011 - V dfault , V whatever V THREE ( like , srsly InHell ) , 1150
DDR4 , die shrink - phrrrtrrrrrrrrrrrr - 1151....1 like for realz - 1150 to 1151 ?

Funny thing, when you integrate the memory controller on th CPU and introduce a dedicated interconnect, you end up having to change the socket for a lot more reasons than you used to have to. AMD KNOWS THIS FIRST-HAND!

List of Sockets AMD has introduced since they integrated the memory controller?

Socket 754
Socket 940 to introduce dual-channel
Socket 939
Socket AM2 to introduce DDR2
Socket F
Socket AM2+ (split planes, faster HT, first Athlon64 socket with backward compatibility)
Socket AM3 (DDR3).
Socket FM1 (completely incompatible with AM3 series, Adds APU and integrated PCIe support)
Socket AM3+
Socket FM2 (not compatible with FM1 APUs)
Socket FM2+ (finally, a backward-compatible socket again!)
Socket AM1 (one off cheapie to try to recreate the netbook market, except in desktops).

These are all supposedly going to be unified into AM4

This is covering the range of 2, 4, and eight cores! But this just takes us back to the days of 95w versus 125w rated AM3 motherboards, when people bought cheap motherboards with dual core or slow quads, and wanted to upgrade to fast quads or six cores.

You'd never know how important the TDP rating was until you actually wanted to upgrade and it was too late. And many motherboards didn't make it clear on the spec list what power level they supported.

I feel like the separate sockets with widely different TDP support is really the way to go. The doubled CPU channels of 2011 also make it a fetching platform for Xeons!

And I guarantee since AM4 only has two memory channels, the Opteron 16/32-core Xens wil have a separate socket with four fucking memory controllers. So get your complaints ready!
 
Last edited:
I think we gave Nano a fair and thorough review, and concluded well on it.

Introduction - Radeon R9 Nano Small Form Factor Video Card Review

Radeon R9 Nano Small Form Factor - Radeon R9 Nano Small Form Factor Competition Review

Radeon R9 Nano Overclocking - Radeon R9 Nano Small Form Factor Overclocking Review

Merits should be based off the quality of reviews, and our conclusions, which are fair.

Whatever AMD's next generation brings, I will review it fairly, as I do all hardware. I will talk about the good, I will talk about the bad, I will give my opinion on its value based on experience and decades of doing hardware reviews and gaming.

I don't have a problem with the reviews whatsoever. Even recently with the latest Nvidia review the selection of games is better. So no problem there either. Hell the reviews and the forums are why I stay. It's the other nonsense and I think that's what AMD has a problem with. It's not the reviews it's likely what surrounds them.
 
"This is censorship from AMD. Nothing more. Nothing less."
BS. [H] is NOT being censored, they can write anything they choose, up to and including purchasing/testing/reviewing AMD Polaris cards, if they choose as well as this very thread.
[H] simply was not invited to an event that pertains to products outside of their readership's stated area of interest. That's it.
That we have this thread and a revolving door of "outrage" as a result says more about the [H] crew for this thread's existence and those posting their "outrage" than about AMD, IMO.
Except that it is inside of our readers interest.
Same with Nano, same with Radeon Pro Duo.

Actually I was watching the PCPER weekly podcast about the Radeon Pro Duo and Ryan said something along the lines of that AMD approached him if he wanted to test the card he did not ask for it or expected it to have one for testing since it was outside of their scope (VR). Which is totally weird to tell one guy no and the other you force a card upon him ... Polaris in all honesty would get a fair review. I can't say anything else then that for you SocratesScrotum to say differently would mean you haven't actually looked at any reviews done, if I'm going to look at every AMD card [H] tested last year can I find your comments on any of them about the bias and blatently pro Nvidia attitude in those reviews, I don't think so .....

And in the last several years, as well as in this very post the [H] crew have demonstrated an anti-AMD/pro nVidia slant most evident, as noted above, since the Fury X launch.So, don't feign outrage when your very words and actions come back to bite [H] in the ass like this non-invite. Action-Reaction.

Anti Roy stance yes anti AMD stance no :)
If other senior AMD marketing people have a beef with Kyle take it up with him and not screw us in the process.
 
Last edited:
I have been reading & visiting this site since way back in the early days, I don't post much and I've had a few usernames along the way.

That said, objectively I think both parties need to give themselves an uppercut over the way they have mishandled the relationship. Brinkmanship always will end badly, especially in a symbiotic relationship. The bottom line Kyle is that sites such as yours exist for no other reason than to provide the manufacturer a free advertising service in exchange for privileged information. You may offer a differing opinion but ultimately they don't need you if they spend a shit load on advertising & people get dumber by the day as far as I can see. They take the risk that you may not be entirely on board with their marketing "message" or you may in fact bring to light inadequacies in their product that may negatively affect their sales and share price. You take a similar risk in that an imprudent comment or unfavourable review could lose you access to the source of your site's relevance if you are not careful and approach it consultatively, carefully and allow a right of response or correction prior to publishing.

This balancing act has clearly failed here, whomever is at fault. Ultimately though, Anandtech, THG and a plethora of others will gleefully take your place and ultimately your relevance if you don't seek to build a bridge. Let's face it, journalistic integrity can be achieved whilst not succumbing to hubris and cutting ones nose off to spite ones face.

I read the site daily but as of late I've not been impressed at the tone of the site.

If you value your site and the loyalty of the readers you claim to care for then get off your ass and get on a plane and go and have a rational discussion with whomever at AMD or RTG you need to, to clear the air and come to an amicable settlement. Just my advice as an elder hothead finally grown a brain.

Oh, and mate please, stop publishing passive aggressive shit like this. You are better than that, just be the bigger man and get it sorted.

Cheers,

Anthony
 
Actually I was watching the PCPER weekly podcast about the Radeon Pro Duo and Ryan said something along the lines of that AMD approached him if he wanted to test the card he did not ask for it or expected it to have one for testing since it was outside of their scope (VR). Which is totally weird to tell one guy no and the other you force a card upon him ... Polaris in all honesty would get a fair review. I can't say anything else then that for you SocratesScrotum to say differently would mean you haven't actually looked at any reviews done, if I'm going to look at every AMD card [H] tested last year can I find your comments on any of them about the bias and blatently pro Nvidia attitude in those reviews, I don't think so .....



Anti Roy stance yes anti AMD stance no :)
If other senior AMD marketing people have a beef with Kyle take it up with him and not screw us in the process.
Maybe he didn't but I did read each and every article front to back again and again.

Go back to that FuryX review. Page one they take pot shots using references to the 290/X heat throttling and posting about AMDs 4Gb 4K targeting in a not so professional way. It had a real butt-hurt (hate the word but too early to think of another) feel to it, throughout.

But like I stated earlier, nearly every article after was far more professional. Save the comments for the conclusion and you have no issues. No one questioned the facts or the results in the graphs just the air of the entire article seemed angry and tantrum like.

And lets not forget the threads started here by Kyle when he felt the need to vent during his occlusion with the Nano launch.

Now personally I do agree that AMD should still send out cards to the majority of reputable and recognized tech sites, [H] being one of them. But sometimes one must pay the piper and understand there are repercussions when one is in a position of power ie: a tech site with readership.
 
I have been reading & visiting this site since way back in the early days, I don't post much and I've had a few usernames along the way.

That said, objectively I think both parties need to give themselves an uppercut over the way they have mishandled the relationship. Brinkmanship always will end badly, especially in a symbiotic relationship. The bottom line Kyle is that sites such as yours exist for no other reason than to provide the manufacturer a free advertising service in exchange for privileged information. You may offer a differing opinion but ultimately they don't need you if they spend a shit load on advertising & people get dumber by the day as far as I can see. They take the risk that you may not be entirely on board with their marketing "message" or you may in fact bring to light inadequacies in their product that may negatively affect their sales and share price. You take a similar risk in that an imprudent comment or unfavourable review could lose you access to the source of your site's relevance if you are not careful and approach it consultatively, carefully and allow a right of response or correction prior to publishing.

This balancing act has clearly failed here, whomever is at fault. Ultimately though, Anandtech, THG and a plethora of others will gleefully take your place and ultimately your relevance if you don't seek to build a bridge. Let's face it, journalistic integrity can be achieved whilst not succumbing to hubris and cutting ones nose off to spite ones face.

I read the site daily but as of late I've not been impressed at the tone of the site.

If you value your site and the loyalty of the readers you claim to care for then get off your ass and get on a plane and go and have a rational discussion with whomever at AMD or RTG you need to, to clear the air and come to an amicable settlement. Just my advice as an elder hothead finally grown a brain.

Oh, and mate please, stop publishing passive aggressive shit like this. You are better than that, just be the bigger man and get it sorted.

Cheers,

Anthony

Talk about a Diamond in the rough post. Completely unexpected and pleasantly surprised, well done.
 
Back
Top