NVIDIA shows signs ... [2008 - 2017]

Status
Not open for further replies.
Wow that has GOT to be a good chip. Not only is the GTS360M a generation up on the GT240 (3rd gen instead of 2nd) it's also a whole speed category higher (x6x instead of x4x) AND it's a GTS and not just a plain GT. This thing MUST absolutely blow the doors off the GT240.

Well at least they let people know it's a mobile part... :p

Regards,
SB
 
Last edited by a moderator:
It's on the level of selling G92 as a gt200mobile.

But kids, wait! CES is around the door, while everybody is waiting for Furby to be announced (it won't) nvidia has a slew of new cards!

Yes, expect the impossible from nvidia, they will launch so many new products you won't believe your eyes.

First, they will downclock a handful of cards and introduce a completely new "Green" product line (guess how much they cost compared to the original products) and then, the big bang of the show Will be a revelatION.

Get tissues ready.
 
Lol, how ever would you entertain yourself if Nvidia ever shaped up? :LOL:

With respect to the GTS360M I wish people would just accept it as Nvidia's standard operating procedure. The pretend outrage about the renaming is getting far more annoying than the renaming itself. It's a victimless crime after all (i.e the people who actually care what graphics card is in their laptop are going to know the deal).
 
trinibwoy said:
Lol, how ever would you entertain yourself if Nvidia ever shaped up? :LOL:

With respect to the GTS360M I wish people would just accept it as Nvidia's standard operating procedure. The pretend outrage about the renaming is getting far more annoying than the renaming itself. It's a victimless crime after all (i.e the people who actually care what graphics card is in their laptop are going to know the deal).
Click to expand...

I don't see why it should be accepted just because Nvidia won't stop doing it. It is misleading, and designed to market old products to those who think they are getting something new. It's like trying to excuse a con-man who's selling old stuff in new boxes by saying "everyone who's getting fooled deserves it".

It's generally considered bad form in lots of industries, and I don't see why Nvidia should get a clean pass on it. It's just another symptom of Nvidia's inability to execute, but that doesn't stop them shifting that problem to the customer in the form of "fake new products". It's a shame you're asking for us to accept that as standard operating procedure.
 
neliz said:
First, they will downclock a handful of cards and introduce a completely new "Green" product line (guess how much they cost compared to the original products) and then, the big bang of the show Will be a revelatION.
Click to expand...
You seem to be forgetting about Tegra2 :)
 
Bouncing Zabaglione Bros. said:
It's a shame you're asking for us to accept that as standard operating procedure.
Click to expand...

Not telling you what to accept but unless your complaining actually has a chance of changing something I just don't see the point. OEM's obviously don't mind peddling the products and they are more informed than anybody else. They would be the frontline in any pushback.

With respect to other industries many products are brought forward into lower price segments (in a different guise sometimes but identical specs). Car manufacturers are notorious for this. Same thing goes for stuff like audio receivers - compare the specs of the flagship two years ago to the mainstream stuff today. It seems that it's only the 3D community that goes batshit crazy over it though.
 
trinibwoy said:
(i.e the people who actually care what graphics card is in their laptop are going to know the deal).
Click to expand...

I've told this story before, but I guess you had to be there, listening to me trying to convince a GS-13 engineer in 2002 that his GF4 MX was far closer to a GF2 than a real GF4. The fact that it was branded a GF4 boggled his mind and it took quite a bit of arguing with him to convince him otherwise. So, no, I don't agree with that line of thinking at all. I believe your typical consumer thinks more along the lines of the SKU or product line: It's a high-end laptop or desktop, all parts should be quality items. Wait, what's integrated graphics? Wait, this laptop has a fast CPU and gobs of RAM, but its video is how many generations old?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Kaotik said:
Not quite the same, if RV770 would be sold as 58xx mobile, it would be same as selling G92 as GT200 mobile (or GT215 as GTS300 Mobile). Juniper is same gen as Cypress, G92 isn't same gen as GT200 and GT215 isn't same gen as GTx300
Click to expand...

The only real difference is that both - juniper and g92 - have no dp function. Other things like more threads and more SM per cluster are not really must have features for the GT200 cards.
So we have juniper which is 1/2 cypress and we have g92 which is a litte less than 1/2 of GT200. At the end it's the same. :LOL:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
John Reynolds said:
I've told this story before, but I guess you had to be there, listening to me trying to convince a GS-13 engineer in 2002 that his GF4 MX was far closer to a GF2 than a real GF4.
Click to expand...

Yeah but that's desktop discrete and that was even more of a niche than it is now. We're talking about OEM built laptops here where consumers buy a laptop based on how big the screen is and how much RAM it has. You seem to be alluding to a segment of the market that is aware, yet ignorant. I haven't met many people like that myself though.

Kaotik said:
Not quite the same, if RV770 would be sold as 58xx mobile, it would be same as selling G92 as GT200 mobile (or GT215 as GTS300 Mobile). Juniper is same gen as Cypress, G92 isn't same gen as GT200 and GT215 isn't same gen as GTx300
Click to expand...

The distinction you're making is pretty irrelevant. The chip used, its die-size, manufacturing node and "generation" are only interesting to technology geeks. Price, performance, features and power consumption are the only things that matter. If those targets can be hit with a die shrunk chip from 4 years ago, so what?
 
Sontin said:
Or selling Juniper as 58xx mobile. :LOL:
Click to expand...

Except that Juniper is at the very least from the same generation of products.

TV's manage to brand based on same generation. Printers manage to brand based on same generation. PSU's seem to brand based on same generation. Cars generally brand based on same generation.

Features and performance will vary within that generation obviously but the branding is almost universally limited to products of the same generation.

Yet Nvidia can't do this very simplest of things. Rather instead they would prefer to mislead and bilk the end consumer by taking a past generation product and advertising it as a new generation product.

Even snake oil salesmen and Used car salesmen don't stoop down to that level usually.

Regards,
SB
 
Sontin said:
The only real difference is that both - juniper and g92 - have no dp function. Other things like more threads and more SM per cluster are not really must have features for the GT200 cards.
So we have juniper which is 1/2 cypress and we have g92 which is a litte less than 1/2 of GT200. At the end it's the same. :LOL:
Click to expand...
The real difference is that Juniper has DX11, don't you think?
 
Florin said:
The selective outrage is once again quite revealing.
Click to expand...

What? That I don't ding Nvidia for marketing same gen products but lower performance as higher branded for mobile parts? Or ATI for that matter?

Oh wait, nm, Nvidia couldn't even get that right for the mobile GT2xx branded parts.

I'm not sure where I said it was peachy. Just because I was pointing out that it is not the same, does not automatically equate to this is good.

But at least even in that case, it's consistent with the highest performant mobile part getting the highest performance nomenclature. Although I'd certainly prefer that the naming was more consistent with the desktop counterparts.

Regards,
SB
 
OpenGL guy said:
The real difference is that Juniper has DX11, don't you think?
Click to expand...

Nah, that's not the point. The G92 and GT200 share the same feature set too, certainly for their DX version compatibility.

Like the mobile 58xx and Cypress do.
 
trinibwoy said:
Not telling you what to accept but unless your complaining actually has a chance of changing something I just don't see the point. OEM's obviously don't mind peddling the products and they are more informed than anybody else. They would be the frontline in any pushback.
Click to expand...

I am constantly surprised by the amount of slack you are prepared to cut Nvidia for what are pretty dishonest practices - something we've seen and heard of from insiders for years now that are Nvidia's standard operating procedures.

Pointing it out (or "complaining" if you prefer) does change things. It gets the message out there, it gives people an understanding of how they are being conned by dubious business practices, and it helps people make informed choices to spend their money elsewhere on better products and with companies that don't treat their customers with such a level of disrespect.

I used to buy Nvidia products, but by learning directly from customer's experiences (both here and elsewhere), as well as my own, I now steer clear of them. When I build PCs for friends and relatives, when I advise people on what to buy, I use the same knowledge to tell them to get other products. Spreading knowledge always changes things, especially when it's about dishonest company practices that those companies would rather brush under the carpet, but that they can no longer do in the age of the internet.

You may shrug your shoulders and say "why bother complaining, nothing changes", whereas I am living proof that it does. Customers do care, and those customers do make a difference. Maybe not all of them, but enough of them.
 
Silent_Buddha said:
What? That I don't ding Nvidia for marketing same gen products but lower performance as higher branded for mobile parts? Or ATI for that matter?
Click to expand...

Actually I remember we had a discussion about rebranding ATI products as lower level next generation parts and you were opposed to it, even if the parts were refresh parts on a lower process node. You are consistant and I do commend you for it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Unknown Soldier
Rumors Surface Again Claiming NVIDIA will Leave Chipset Business
Replies
8
Views
4K
ChrisRay
C
A
NVIDIA Q2 Results
2 3
Replies
47
Views
10K
Razor1
R
A
  • Locked
NVIDIA Q3 Earnings + CC
2
Replies
32
Views
9K
Arun
A
A
NVIDIA Morgan Stanley Webcast: Sony, G80 and 80/65nm
2
Replies
25
Views
13K
Nelsieus
N
C
Nvidia Financial Results. 4Q 2005
Replies
18
Views
5K
KimB
K
Back
Top