Do you agree with Hardocp?

AMD's GPU program for the first time has truly reminded us of its CPU program.

  • Total voters
    372
durquavian said:
Did you even watch the video? Doesn't look as though you did.
Click to expand...

I did, but i didn't watch it through AMD hyped eyes. He disliked the mass rebrandings (you know that all new silicone with power improvements and such), was questioning the results provided by AMD for Fury X and had the audacity to question what happen to the public demos of the card.

Before the Fury X reviews gone up, we could have argued that it was a beast and Amd was keeping the card close for a big surprise to Nvidia. Well it kinda was/is, but not for nvidia.
 
roberta said:
Bias in review .....never
Quote:The GeForce GTX 980 Ti is giving the middle finger to AMD in this game.
About as blatant and unprofessional as you can get
Click to expand...

You fail to demonstrate bias with that quote. You also fail to see that [H] has a sense of humor in their reviews. If the tables were turned it would have been nVidia getting the bird. Shit I bet if they were doing benchmarks and saw the Fury winning it would have been exciting. Remember the 4870 review? Yeah it was a bit slower than the GTX 280, but [H] gave it fair praise for the price/performance ratio. Loosen the tie and pull that stick out bro.
 
If you look at review sites such as HardWare Canucks, Jays2Cents, Anand, and several other sites/youtube channels they are very objective and unbiased. As other have said, H's review wasnt very professional and not very objective.
 
Igroock said:
If you look at review sites such as HardWare Canucks, Jays2Cents, Anand, and several other sites/youtube channels they are very objective and unbiased. As other have said, H's review wasnt very professional and not very objective.
Click to expand...

Sounds more like hurt feelings. Also, nobody's following a script here, or walking on eggshells. If you can't take the heat then stay out of the testbed.
 
My takeaway was [H] basically concluded the Fury X cost too much. It's the same price as the 980ti and after factoring in OCs there's no reason to purchase a Fury X over a 980ti. If the card was cheaper it would of had a more positive review.

It's a good card. It just doesn't measure up to a 980ti. It shouldn't be priced exactly the same.

Other sites also criticized AMD because their benches show the Fury X beating nVidia in about every game. When it was released the exact opposite happened.

As for [H] livening up the article a little bit. I like it. It's a review for enthusiast that like to make their games look pretty, not a technical paper for a scientific journal.
 
TaintedSquirrel said:
Now isn't the time to be soft on AMD. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
Thats not the point. A website/reviewer does not review products for personal use. Personal color preference is one thing, but knocking a product/company and calling it names is unprofessional.

It should be reviewed based on what it offers. The whole review sounded like the card is not even worth looking at and you should just get last years 290x with 4gb of RAM.
Review sites I mentioned, even with OC results were still at the same number as a 980ti which was stock. That is still competition, period. Overclocking an already warm 980ti will only get it to throttle, which many fail to mention. The card runs 5 degrees hotter than a 980 at stock speeds, again many fail to mention that fact saying 980ti has a boatload of OC headroom with stock cooling...it simply doesnt.
 
ITSTHINKING said:
Sounds more like hurt feelings. Also, nobody's following a script here, or walking on eggshells. If you can't take the heat then stay out of the testbed.
Click to expand...

You sound like a typical citizen watching a single news channel like FOX or NBC. Read other review site results and overall presentation. Its far different than that of H. That was my point.
 
Igroock said:
You sound like a typical citizen watching a single news channel like FOX or NBC. Read other review site results and overall presentation. Its far different than that of H. That was my point.
Click to expand...

Did AnandTech even get review samples? I didn't see anything for Fury or even the 300 series. They must be on AMD's shit list.
 
jwcalla said:
Did AnandTech even get review samples? I didn't see anything for Fury or even the 300 series. They must be on AMD's shit list.
Click to expand...
No they didnt, that was a mistake on my part. But it was a general post as a whole, usually Anand is very professional. Not to say H is unprofessional, it just seems they let personal bias get to them when doing the Fury Review.
 
Igroock said:
No they didnt, that was a mistake on my part. But it was a general post as a whole, usually Anand is very professional. Not to say H is unprofessional, it just seems they let personal bias get to them when doing the Fury Review.
Click to expand...

What bias is that exactly and how exactly did it get to us? Please explain.
 
Any engineer can tell you what it feels like to be behind the 8ball thanks to the marketing team. When you come out of the gates saying your product is ready to change the world, recolor the rainbow, and plow the competition like cheap date...the delivery better be perfect. Even if you're close, missing those kinds of expectations sets you up for a wave of "look how they failed" headlines ignore what has been accomplished.

If AMD can stay on the ball with driver updates and push Mantle a bit more, there's good opportunity to play some catch-up. In the end, this the 290/390 generation of cards is hopefully enough to buy AMD time to let DX12, Mantle, HBM, and the rest mature a bit. At the least, AMD's shown more life in the last two generations than I ever expected to see.
 
You're lucky Gordon Ramsey isn't a hardware enthusiast. His review would have been GOLD.

[H] told it how it is. If things change they'll let us know. And there's nothing wrong with a little jab after all the hype that didn't deliver as advertised. Bottom line is, it's their site. They can review how they please. I for one like their style.
 
durquavian said:
And I already explained this to you. With the wording so early in the review and throughout you open yourself up to scrutiny. It seems, whether its the case or not, that an agenda is present and makes the whole review suspect.

A good example of this, other than the middle-finger comment, is the 4K results. In the one the Fury is ahead it is mentioned that none are playable setting, yet the FPS numbers are all playable and more so than any other 4K result. Even so far that it seemed no other 4K result garnered any comment other than to say the percent that the 980Ti was ahead. Seemed bias was the prime motivator or in the least an opportunity to flame, bash, or incite for so many reasons that seem akin to sensationalist media like those papers that speak on alien pregnancy.
Click to expand...

It sounds like they didn't get shipping info from AMD and so they weren't able to sign for the card and it was delayed, so maybe thats why they started out "upset". The review definitely seemed to downplay the card even though its much faster than the 290x (and 390x since they want to say those are identical rebrands) and comes with stock watercooler, is priced the same as the 980 TI and only performs a little worse, and sometimes better. Funny how you can't compare it to the Titan X's cost because the 980 TI exists, yet its still compared against it in FPS.
 
DracoNB said:
It sounds like they didn't get shipping info from AMD and so they weren't able to sign for the card and it was delayed, so maybe thats why they started out "upset". The review definitely seemed to downplay the card even though its much faster than the 290x (and 390x since they want to say those are identical rebrands) and comes with stock watercooler, is priced the same as the 980 TI and only performs a little worse, and sometimes better. Funny how you can't compare it to the Titan X's cost because the 980 TI exists, yet its still compared against it in FPS.
Click to expand...

Fury X is more comparable to a 980 which costs $150 less. The reason most people are disappointed is that you don't wait for new technology to come out and it does less than already existing technology. It's like if Sony comes out with the world's largest TV at 52" and a month or so later LG launches a 50" at the same price. Not one will give a shit about the LG.
 
durquavian said:
And I already explained this to you. With the wording so early in the review and throughout you open yourself up to scrutiny. It seems, whether its the case or not, that an agenda is present and makes the whole review suspect.

A good example of this, other than the middle-finger comment, is the 4K results. In the one the Fury is ahead it is mentioned that none are playable setting, yet the FPS numbers are all playable and more so than any other 4K result. Even so far that it seemed no other 4K result garnered any comment other than to say the percent that the 980Ti was ahead. Seemed bias was the prime motivator or in the least an opportunity to flame, bash, or incite for so many reasons that seem akin to sensationalist media like those papers that speak on alien pregnancy.
Click to expand...
I read into it with more of a sense that [H] came in with the attitude to directly scrutinize the marketing AMD had with this card, which is why they mention the fact AMD says this is the best card for 4k gaming throughout the review. That the card is about on-par with the competition in raw FPS goes against that claim from AMD. If you take the FCAT results from other sites into account it's clear that through AMD's own marketing the Fury X does not stand above the competition at 4k. From a consumer's perspective, there really is no reason to go with Fury X over 980 Ti at this price point unless you want to stick it to "The Man®" .
 
Armenius said:
From a consumer's perspective, there really is no reason to go with Fury X over 980 Ti at this price point unless you want to stick it to "The Man®" .
Click to expand...

Actually, you cannot even do it for that reason anymore, since AMD is definitely part of "The Man" with their current pricing. They do not even have the excuse that they cannot price the Fury-X any lower without losing money, since they are vastly overpricing the 300 series as well. The only people buying Fury Xs are fanboys acting like religious fanatics for AMD.
 
PRIME1 said:
Fury X is more comparable to a 980 which costs $150 less. The reason most people are disappointed is that you don't wait for new technology to come out and it does less than already existing technology. It's like if Sony comes out with the world's largest TV at 52" and a month or so later LG launches a 50" at the same price. Not one will give a shit about the LG.
Click to expand...

Except its much better than the 980...

http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/amd_radeon_r9_fury_x_review,26.html

Its matching the 980 TI constantly and even closer to the Titan in some cases than the 980 TI.
 
DracoNB said:
Except its much better than the 980...

http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/amd_radeon_r9_fury_x_review,26.html

Its matching the 980 TI constantly and even closer to the Titan in some cases than the 980 TI.
Click to expand...

We can all cherry pick benchmarks.

Here we see Fury losing to a 980 :eek:

http://techreport.com/review/28513/amd-radeon-r9-fury-x-graphics-card-reviewed/5

Most sites have Fury 10-15% slower than the 980ti. Combine that with only having 4GB of memory and it's a 980 competitor. In fact I bet if you strapped a watercooler onto a 980 and clocked it to match Fury's high power usage it would beat Fury.
 
PRIME1 said:
We can all cherry pick benchmarks.
Click to expand...

Exactly. There are a few reviews that show the Fury X beating the gtx 980 Ti in certain settings, and most others where the gtx 980 Ti shows a significant margin ahead of the Fury X. I have read about 10 reviews on the Rage X and gtx 980 Ti beating it by about 10% seems like the average. The amount it jumps around really seems odd though. I also wonder if more mature drivers will make the Rage X more balanced with the gtx 980 Ti or even faster, but I would buy based on what's the best bang for the dollar now. Not on the hope of some potential increase.
 
Remember when [H] were biased towards Nvidia during the Fermi launch? Man those were the days.
 
Kor said:
Remember when [H] were biased towards Nvidia during the Fermi launch? Man those were the days.
Click to expand...

We get called biased, shills, paid off, etc. etc. etc., ever single day by somebody somewhere.
 
Not sure why people are unable to make the distinction between being critical and being professional.
 
Kor said:
Yep, though it's been a lot more pervasive over the passed say 8 years than it was in the years prior. People are becoming increasingly hard wired to look for an agenda in everything now, I blame aggressive marketing strategies for stoking the proverbial flames.
Click to expand...

Not really, it has been this way since day 1.
 
Mister E said:
You're lucky Gordon Ramsey isn't a hardware enthusiast. His review would have been GOLD.

[H] told it how it is. If things change they'll let us know. And there's nothing wrong with a little jab after all the hype that didn't deliver as advertised. Bottom line is, it's their site. They can review how they please. I for one like their style.
Click to expand...

Exactly. Of coarse a company will hype their product. When that hype doesn't meet reality it should be clearly spelled out by reviewers. I don't need a sugar coat I need hard facts!
 
I expected the Fury X to kick ass and take names. Instead I saw it getting bested by the competition - just like their CPU line for the last 9 years. They may get close at times, but never crossing the finish line first.
 
Igroock said:
You sound like a typical citizen watching a single news channel like FOX or NBC. Read other review site results and overall presentation. Its far different than that of H. That was my point.
Click to expand...

Actually, I did read the other sites reviews, which is what I was referring to in the first place. But feel free to resort to personal insults (or accusations) if that makes you feel better. How did you know that I only read reviews from one website? You mean there are others out there? You make a great point. *cough*
 
DeadSkull said:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gfK0Yr1xTFo

Fury X vs 980TI is a lot closer at 3840 or 4K. [H] picked some weird games this time around. No Crysis 3 for starts which is still a staple of gamer reviews.
Click to expand...

Who still plays crysis? Might as well use futuremark. I think the newest and most graphically intense games with an active playerbase should be priority and all features should be enabled including gameworks.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top