NVIDIA GPP: Meet ASUS AREZ Radeon Series

exlink said:
I think you're missing my point. Yes, Nvidia is to blame for this anti-consumer program; but AMD is also to blame for their lack of competition that put Nvidia in a spot to be able to implement this type of shit in the first place. Do you think that if AMD had more than the measly 20-30% market share they currently have that these AIBs would bow down to the GPP? Absolutely not.

AMD released Vega 16 MONTHS after the Pascal cards and they can only "hold their own"? That's pathetic. Not to mention the cards pretty much sell for the same price as their counterparts on both sides.

You can label me a Nvidia fanboy all you want for saying this despite that fact I hate any brand loyalty, but I hope that this program finally puts AMD over the edge to sell RTG. I hope they sell it off to an actual competent company that can provide Nvidia the competition they need. It's getting boring waiting for AMD to continuously play catch up and I'd love to see what actual competition would bring in regards to technological advancements and pricing.
Click to expand...

sell them to Intel IMO, the R cpus are going to go over well for average users would make sense if they were all their own, and Intel has the cash to back GPU R&D to make more competitive products

im kind of annoyed with AMD, i wanted a vega for free sync, when the finally did come I couldn't find one anywhere, then the numbers came out they were dismal, bought a 1080 for 550$ and still using it a year later, and a year later I cant even find a vega 64 if i wanted. they really need to get their shit together for the GPU market, their CPU stuff seems to be back on track and somewhat competitive again
 
exlink said:
I think you're missing my point. Yes, Nvidia is to blame for this anti-consumer program; but AMD is also to blame for their lack of competition that put Nvidia in a spot to be able to implement this type of shit in the first place. Do you think that if AMD had more than the measly 20-30% market share they currently have that these AIBs would bow down to the GPP? Absolutely not.
Click to expand...

I love this argument. So we should hold Nvidia only 50% responsible for giving into the dark side and having no business ethics? Especially when they don't really need to worry about it as they control a majority of the market performance and often price wise?


auntjemima said:
There are many cards from ASUS that can be used for gaming (example: all of them), yet not every Nvidia or AMD card had the ROG branding. See where I'm going with this? ROG wasn't on every card even though every card could technically play games.

What dictates what card is a gaming card and what's not? You and me, that's who. I don't think the ROG branding should be on mid-tier cards.
Click to expand...

Do you understand that having ROG on the top end trickles down to the bigger sellers of the 1060/1070 mid tier? So yes, they're going to use ROG on their mid tier cards along with things like Strix branding or GamingX, Classified (just lol at Evga's marketing strategy these days, see SC, SSC, SSSC Extra lazy cooler designSC) etc. because people will go, "oh thats the best model they have at my price point".
 
Ranulfo said:
I love this argument. So we should hold Nvidia only 50% responsible for giving into the dark side and having no business ethics? Especially when they don't really need to worry about it as they control a majority of the market performance and often price wise?
Click to expand...

So we should continue complaining about stagnation of GPU technologies, but still support AMD who has their head up their ass most of the time to produce anything competitive in a reasonable time frame?

I'm not saying Nvidia isn't to blame, but they are a business. They made a sound business decision (even if its not "ethical") because AMD's poor market performance allowed them to do so. AIBs would rather sacrifice a small share of their AMD sales in favor of Nvidia sales that likely make up the majority of their GPU revenue. If the market share was 50/50 or even 40/60 in favor of Nvidia; I have a hard time believing that GPP would've been as successful as it is.

This would be the opportune time to sell RTG given all the AIBs that participate in GPP will need to release new brands anyway for their Radeon divisions.
 
How sound the GPP decision is, has yet to be determined. For me, nvidia's PR stunts and price/perf have soured me on them in the last 4-5 years. I don't recall saying that one should support AMD blindly but hey, many people stuck by Intel during the P4 days. Still do despite their current issues too. Hell, to me Intel's issues with their cable modem chips (puma 6/7) are a bigger issue than spectre/meltdown.
 
exlink said:
... They made a sound business decision (even if its not "ethical") because AMD's poor market performance allowed them to do so. ...
Click to expand...

It may not be as 'sound a business decision' as you think. It's not only not ethical it's probably illegal as well.
 
Brand dilution? Im wondering if all these new brands will dilute established brands, as well as Nvidias own recognition... Unintended consequences and all that.
 
Danny Dawg said:
So let's see what old adages come to mind here:

- if there is a will, there is a way (around anything)
- necessity is the mother of invention
Click to expand...

A rose by any other name is still a rose.

I don't see why people are so distraught over this whole naming deal. The top tier AMD card will still be the top tier AMD card, no matter what moniker is attached to it. I built a rig with a 1070 in it for family - it is an Asus Strix. When I describe the rig, I describe it as a 1070 with zero weight given to any branding labels. I never say, "It's got an Asus Strix 1070 GPU!", I just call it a 1070 and go on down the road. Same with my 980Ti rig, it's an MSI card and I don't even really recall what the whole name is, I think it's MSI Gaming 6G or something like that. I've never called it by that name, it's a 980Ti to me. Most of my video cards are Titan Xs of some generation, I remember the Maxwells were an EVGA SC version or something, but they were cheaper than the plain vanilla Titan X when I bought them. I never call them EVGA Titan X SC, they are just Titan X Maxwells.

Oh noes! They are changing the label on my video card! What ever will I do?
 
exlink said:
I think you're missing my point. Yes, Nvidia is to blame for this anti-consumer program; but AMD is also to blame for their lack of competition that put Nvidia in a spot to be able to implement this type of shit in the first place.

AMD released Vega 16 MONTHS after the Pascal cards and they can only "hold their own"? That's pathetic. Not to mention the cards pretty much sell for the same price as their counterparts on both sides.

You can label me a Nvidia fanboy all you want for saying this despite that fact I hate any brand loyalty, but I hope that this program finally puts AMD over the edge to sell RTG. I hope they sell it off to an actual competent company that can provide Nvidia the competition they need. It's getting boring waiting for AMD to continuously play catch up and I'd love to see what actual competition would bring in regards to technological advancements and pricing.
Click to expand...

I'm not labeling at all, that's not my intent or purpose with my previous statements.


I don't care if it took 16 months, sure it sucks but why does that matter in the here and now when trying to make a decision to purchase?
The results of AMD taking 16 months speak for themselves, no market share, low profits, low consumer confidence.
However when we take the Vega64 and a 1080, both companies currently available comparable products, they compete with one another, as do the Vega56 and 1070.
I think people in general get a little too caught up in details that can be irrelevant.
If Nvidia had released a 1080 replacement, then it would be a very different conversation on this point, but that hasn't happened yet.


So, we're victim blaming AMD? That's not cool..
Nvidia made the decision based on current market trends and their outlook on the future.
If there's a desire to justify Nvidia making this decision by blaming a competitor for not competing enough, it does not come from sound logical reasoning.

Nvidia has had the market and mind share for a long time, so why push GPP now?
I believe it's because they are worried/scared/concerned of AMD's recent success and future potential, along with Intel's desire to make GPUs and other misc. factors that
Based on not just VEGA performance but also the results of Ryzen CPUs, combined with the cozy appearance of their new relationship with Intel on Hades Canyon.

It simply does not make a whole lot of sense from other perspectives, but I'm open to logical reasoning otherwise.
Nvidia could implement a similar program without the 'must align gaming brand' requirement, achieve the same results and not have a potentially huge fine shadowing them for years to come.

Nvidia's intent here is the long-term gain of disrupting AMD's inclusion in the GPU market, and whether the GPP is legal or not, Nvidia is betting that their gains will outweigh their losses if a suit is successfully brought against them and results in a fine. Especially when those fines have generally been a drop in the bucket compared to the gains.

This GPP program will have subtle influences across the board, ranging from ACTUAL 'gaming' brand SKUs, to any and all components that interface with them.
Nvidia is hoping that influence will be in their favor, and that no companies will question the GPP, and of course that no regulators will either..
 
Inacurate said:
I'm not labeling at all, that's not my intent or purpose with my previous statements.


I don't care if it took 16 months, sure it sucks but why does that matter in the here and now when trying to make a decision to purchase?
The results of AMD taking 16 months speak for themselves, no market share, low profits, low consumer confidence.
However when we take the Vega64 and a 1080, both companies currently available comparable products, they compete with one another, as do the Vega56 and 1070.
I think people in general get a little too caught up in details that can be irrelevant.
If Nvidia had released a 1080 replacement, then it would be a very different conversation on this point, but that hasn't happened yet.


So, we're victim blaming AMD? That's not cool..
Nvidia made the decision based on current market trends and their outlook on the future.
If there's a desire to justify Nvidia making this decision by blaming a competitor for not competing enough, it does not come from sound logical reasoning.

Nvidia has had the market and mind share for a long time, so why push GPP now?
I believe it's because they are worried/scared/concerned of AMD's recent success and future potential, along with Intel's desire to make GPUs and other misc. factors that
Based on not just VEGA performance but also the results of Ryzen CPUs, combined with the cozy appearance of their new relationship with Intel on Hades Canyon.

It simply does not make a whole lot of sense from other perspectives, but I'm open to logical reasoning otherwise.
Nvidia could implement a similar program without the 'must align gaming brand' requirement, achieve the same results and not have a potentially huge fine shadowing them for years to come.

Nvidia's intent here is the long-term gain of disrupting AMD's inclusion in the GPU market, and whether the GPP is legal or not, Nvidia is betting that their gains will outweigh their losses if a suit is successfully brought against them and results in a fine. Especially when those fines have generally been a drop in the bucket compared to the gains.

This GPP program will have subtle influences across the board, ranging from ACTUAL 'gaming' brand SKUs, to any and all components that interface with them.
Nvidia is hoping that influence will be in their favor, and that no companies will question the GPP, and of course that no regulators will either..
Click to expand...
YOU might not care that it took them 16 months, but it matters here to many people because we're tech enthusiasts who want to be on the bleeding edge of innovation. AMD taking 16 months to produce a card that just holds it's own to a previous generation is a prime example of stagnation. AMD gave Nvidia absolutely no reason to release Volta cards because their year and a half cards still weren't beaten by the competition. These details aren't irrelevant just because you choose to ignore them as they don't matter to you.

And yes I am blaming AMD. The reason they're in this position is due to years of poor choices that led to underwhelming products. They didn't just suddenly lose this market share over night. They slowly lost it to the competition over years. Nvidia chose to push GPP now because of what I stated; it wouldn't work if AMD had more market share. Someone at the company decided to make this risky decision finally after what I'm sure has been a LONG time of market analysis and legal review. Of course it's to weaken the competition, AMD never fell off of Nvidia's SWOT analysis. They still make up market share that Nvidia wants.

Everyone keeps looking at this situation from the "ethical" side and not the business side. This type of shit happens all the time in other industries as well with contractual agreements between companies. Sure it sucks from a customer perspective, but it is what it is. Companies like Nvidia exist to make money and please their investors; they're not here to be your friend. Not to mention no one knows what AMD would have done if the shoe was on the other foot. Don't like what is happening? Blame capitalism and not just Nvidia.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top