Nvidia rebrands 210 as 310

In this day and age the vast majority of users don't need a latest gen card, but most people also don't like to feel they're buying "old" tech. The renaming thing is just a marketing gimmick to solve this conundrum, and hardly a ploy to pull the wool over higher end users eyes. As has already been said in this thread, it's not like they are trying to charge a premium for the renamed cards. I think they just want to keep the naming for their current offerings consistent, and I have no problem with that.

If anyone here has actually been fooled into making a bad purchase because of this, feel free to post and get ridiculed.
 
Himajin said:
If anyone here has actually been fooled into making a bad purchase because of this, feel free to post and get ridiculed.
Click to expand...

Everybody who bought a MX440.

Everybody who was even dumber and bought a laptop with a MX440 Go...
[hide] *raises hand. barely*[/hide]
 
next month, just relace the geforce 2XX, with 3xx, bingo! I hope nvidia releases a real, next generation card, My step up expires in feb 2010....ya, and i wish I had another gts 250 so I could chuck my hd 5850 away.
 
vengence said:
:D

I just have to lol at the people who think Nvidia does it to "mislead consumers into buying 'old' tech". Especially when the 'old' tech (GTS 250) is still just as good as the 'new' tech ATI puts out.
Click to expand...

So true. The G92 core is without a doubt, one of the most versatile graphics cores in recent history. It has survived 3 generations of ATi graphics cards, and managed to still keep on kicking 'till recently (when it was just simply outclassed utterly in sheer power - but not price/performance!).
 
jeremyshaw said:
So true. The G92 core is without a doubt, one of the most versatile graphics cores in recent history. It has survived 3 generations of ATi graphics cards, and managed to still keep on kicking 'till recently (when it was just simply outclassed utterly in sheer power - but not price/performance!).
Click to expand...
I have no idea what planet you two live on, but on this one the g92 was outclassed the minute the 48xx series was released. It's a good chip and NVIDIA has kept it competitive by dropping prices and tweaking it for the low-end gaming/HTPC market, but don't talk it up to something it's not.
 
It was released and used over 3 generations of nVidia cards, I'm sorry.
That is what I meant to type.

I don't know why I put ATi in there!
 
jeremyshaw said:
So true. The G92 core is without a doubt, one of the most versatile graphics cores in recent history. It has survived 3 generations of ATi graphics cards, and managed to still keep on kicking 'till recently (when it was just simply outclassed utterly in sheer power - but not price/performance!).
Click to expand...

the g92 was released on Oct 29, 2007 (8800gt). How many high end parts has nvidia released since then? 1, the gt200. if you really think about it, the g92 wasn't even a true new part, it was a modified g80 (Nov 8, 2006). What has nvidia done since? rename old stuff and pass it off as new. I'm wondering what the gtx 260/75/85 cards will turn into when they get renamed.
 
tricky0502 said:
the g92 was released on Oct 29, 2007 (8800gt). How many high end parts has nvidia released since then? 1, the gt200. if you really think about it, the g92 wasn't even a true new part, it was a modified g80 (Nov 8, 2006). What has nvidia done since? rename old stuff and pass it off as new. I'm wondering what the gtx 260/75/85 cards will turn into when they get renamed.
Click to expand...

The G92 has survived in nVidia's lineup since then...

But you are right, the 'full' g80 and the 'full' g92 specs are near identical, short of a few minor things like video acceleration support, and some CUDA features (apparently).
 
vengence said:
comparisonh.jpg
Click to expand...

I suppose if one is too retarded to click on the bright green links that say "view details" listed no less than 5 times at the very top of the page, one might think nVidia's picture is clearer. Your example has far more to do with website design then ethics.
 
RamonGTP said:
I suppose if one is too retarded to click on the bright green links that say "view details" listed no less than 5 times at the very top of the page, one might think nVidia's picture is clearer. Your example has far more to do with website design then ethics.
Click to expand...

don't worry, he was just poking fun:p
 
tricky0502 said:
the g92 was released on Oct 29, 2007 (8800gt). How many high end parts has nvidia released since then? 1, the gt200. if you really think about it, the g92 wasn't even a true new part, it was a modified g80 (Nov 8, 2006). What has nvidia done since? rename old stuff and pass it off as new. I'm wondering what the gtx 260/75/85 cards will turn into when they get renamed.
Click to expand...

And the GTS 250 is still competitive with the 5770 today. If you want to be pissed at someone, be pissed that ATI is feeding you a "new architecture" that can't beat an architecture that is over 2 years old.
 
RamonGTP said:
I suppose if one is too retarded to click on the bright green links that say "view details" listed no less than 5 times at the very top of the page, one might think nVidia's picture is clearer. Your example has far more to do with website design then ethics.
Click to expand...

I was just poking fun, but really go ahead and click that view details... looks like the 4890s has a faster "engine". And it would be silly to hold ATI responsible for what is on their website. :rolleyes:

4890or5870.jpg
 
My comment wasn't directed towrads you, just a generalization. Clicking on the details seems to give you the same info as nVIdia's page though. I will whole heartedly agree that nVidia's page is setup far better.
 
jeremyshaw said:
it gets compared to a gtx260, and is consistently beat by the gtx260.

EDIT:

5770 ~ GTS250 1GB
5750 ~ GTS250 512MB.
Click to expand...

did you even look at the link? the gtx 250 doesn't beat the hd 5770.

Edit: i just went back to the review. the only game the gtx 260 had better fps then the 5770 was batman.

how about this link

http://www.hardocp.com/article/2009/10/12/amd_ati_radeon_hd_5770_5750_review/1

here the hd 5750 gets compaired to the gtx 250. oh yeah, the gtx 250 gets owned!!!
 
tricky0502 said:
did you even look at the link? the gtx 250 doesn't beat the hd 5770.

how about this link

http://www.hardocp.com/article/2009/10/12/amd_ati_radeon_hd_5770_5750_review/1

here the hd 5750 gets compaired to the gtx 250. oh yeah, the gtx 250 gets owned!!!
Click to expand...

did you? The first link you gave compared the 5770 to a gtx260, and the 5770 is constantly getting it's [heiny] handed to it on a plate by the GTX260.

As for the second link you have pasted, the GTS250 512MB...

whaddya know... it is >= to the 5750...

Read it carefully, as the [H] review process puts 'recommended settings' first, then tests the "Apples to Apples" at the bottom.
 
Last edited:
jeremyshaw said:
did you? The first link you gave compared the 5770 to a gtx260, and the 5770 is constantly getting it's [heiny] handed to it on a plate by the GTX260.

As for the second link you have pasted, the GTS250 512MB...

whaddya know... it is >= to the 5750...

like I said.

Read it carefully, as the [H] review process puts 'recommended settings' first, then tests the "Apples to Apples" at the bottom.
Click to expand...

where is the gtx 260 owning the hd5770???





 
you forgot to post one.

and the gtx260 is faster in 3 out of the 6 tests.... and on top of that, Ghostbusters draws even.
 
jeremyshaw said:
you forgot to post one.

and the gtx260 is faster in 3 out of the 6 tests.... and on top of that, Ghostbusters draws even.
Click to expand...

i would call every game even except need for speed, and a 260 get owned on that one.
 
tricky0502 said:
what card are you saying is faster then the hd 5770???
Click to expand...

The GTX260.

Here is a somewhat direct quote (memory here :)) from another user of this forum:
"No matter how much FUD you may post, it doesn't change the truth"

The GTX260 is faster then the 5770 in 3/6 of the tests... and it draws even in one more of the tests.


That's better then the 2/6 the 5770 can claim, and the additional test which draws even.

tricky0502 said:
i would call every game even except need for speed, and a 260 get owned on that one.
Click to expand...

Whatever, suit yourself :)

If you want a 5770, go straight ahead.

Just know a GTX260 is faster then the 5770.
 
jeremyshaw said:
it gets compared to a gtx260, and is consistently beat by the gtx260.

EDIT:

5770 ~ GTS250 1GB
5750 ~ GTS250 512MB.
Click to expand...

can i update your chart?

hd5770 ~ gtx 260
hd5750 ~ gtx 250 (it can have 512, 1024 or 2048 cause it doesn't matter)
 
All ethics and "which card is better" issues aside, every time you buy a rebranded card, you give the manufacturer absolutely NO reason to innovate and improve. If they feel they can foist off their back stock on their customers, why should they make substantial improvements on the technology?

Simple answer: They don't need to.

Video card technology is not at the point where, like Alexander, they can survey their domain and cry because there are no more lands to conquer.
 
Did you guys know nvidia renamed the GT210 to the GT310? What the fuck is up with that shit?
 
Holy god at you nvidia fanboys. Give it up.


Yep the 260 is faster thhan the 5770.

The 5770 is smaller, lighter, uses FAR less power, is far quieter (as in, totally silent even XFiring them is silent in every game i played). They draw 100w and use almost nothing in 2d.

Sure the 260 is faster by a small margin. Like the 4870 is also faster...but overall the better card for the money is the 5770 with all things considered.

As for the 5750, its a junky average card and will probably compete fine against the 250...with ALL of the above benefits too.

Lets not forget the massive overclocking headroom in the 5770. You can wind that thing into the stratosphere and it still doesnt make a fan noise, its awesome.

The 260 is great too, but the entire picture sees the 5770 a better card.
 
sirmonkey1985 said:
should put a poll up on the top of this thread asking how many people jumped to AMD because of Nvidia's rebranding scheme/scam over the last 2 years.. you would probably be pretty surprised..
Click to expand...

don't think that would matter much on a small enthusiast forum compared to most consumers at large where nvidia still holds an unchanged (for the most part) majority share of the discrete gpu market. i would think most people going from one brand to another would do so due to better performance and not so-called "ethical" reasons, but that's just me.

but just for fun, here is the poll you described, lol:

http://hardforum.com/poll.php?do=showresults&pollid=6120
 
denali said:
All ethics and "which card is better" issues aside, every time you buy a rebranded card, you give the manufacturer absolutely NO reason to innovate and improve.
Click to expand...

Right now the main thing that gives the manufacturer no reason to improve is the fact that there are few games made to push even the current technology, let alone DX11, etc. It's a simple fact that cards from several generations back are more than enough to run most current games at mainstream resolutions.

I have a GTX250, and personally it doesn't bother me than it's old tech, as it does everything I need and more. I'm not going to shell out extra cash for a card that gives me little in the way of real-world benefits just so the industry can "innovate."
 
Himajin said:
Right now the main thing that gives the manufacturer no reason to improve is the fact that there are few games made to push even the current technology, let alone DX11, etc. It's a simple fact that cards from several generations back are more than enough to run most current games at mainstream resolutions.

I have a GTX250, and personally it doesn't bother me than it's old tech, as it does everything I need and more. I'm not going to shell out extra cash for a card that gives me little in the way of real-world benefits just so the industry can "innovate."
Click to expand...

Then you don't have to buy new cards and nvidia doesn't have to rename old ones.

Also GTS250? Moar lik 8800GTS 512mb AMIRITE?
 
I didn't mind nVidia renaming the old to new to keep the product series in relative order. 8800gts = 9800gtx = 9800gtx+ = GTS250? At least the GTX+ was 55nm and the GTS250 uses less power (I think), plus I don't think any of us here on [H] need worry about being tricked by product names.

What pissed me off was that nVidia had multiple different cards all going by the same name. I think there were 3 different 9600gso cards - a renamed 8800gs was fine, but then they also had a 9600gso that was a gimped 9600gt with only 48 shaders plus another 9600gso with 64 shaders bu 128-bit memory (I think) - made it very difficult to know what you were buying and was just crappy of nVidia to do.
 
There are 9800GTX+ 65nm models, too. The "+" was for a higher stock clock.

Crazy, isn't it?

I'm lucky to have a "good" 8800gs :D.
 
Lol you have to love natural selection....people will fall for this no doubt.
I can honestly say I have never made an uninformed purchase, I research the product forwards and backwards, if I get screwed I got no one to blame other then myself......yeah what NV is doing is blatantly underhanded, but if it didn't work do you think they would be doing it... you know the saying "sucker born every minute"....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top