Self-inflicted AMD PR Drama [Nano Fury Edition]

Discussion in 'Graphics and Semiconductor Industry' started by Moloch, Sep 2, 2015.

Tags:
  1. ImSpartacus

    Regular Newcomer

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2015
    Messages:
    252
    Likes Received:
    199
    That probably didn't help, but at least AMD deserved the beating after claiming that the stock Fury X could beat the 980 TI and that it could overclock even further with minimal effort.

    I think what really pissed off AMD was Scott's obsession with the Fury X's pump noise. Yes, early retail Fury X units had some very annoying pump noise, but not all sites communicated AMD's response to this issue in the same manner.

    Where places like Anandtech and Tom's presented AMD's entire response and said that AMD would ensure that affected units could be replaced through the typical warranty process, Scott only presented part of AMD's message, leaving out the part about how AMD "will work with its graphic card partners to ensure the satisfaction of the small number of initial customers who observed this specific sound." Instead, they just kept pounding the issue down people's throats with numerous links to other reviews, creating an image that AMD was somehow "denying" that this issue existed and it was up to TR to prove that it did exist. That TR article left a bad taste in my mouth after I read AMD's entire response on a different site. :cry:

    And it really upsets me because I love how TR reviews GPUs. They really do frame time benchmarking about as "properly" as I could want. I'm only aware of like one other website that does anything remotely as thorough as TR.
     
  2. Moloch

    Moloch God of Wicked Games
    Veteran

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2002
    Messages:
    2,981
    Likes Received:
    72
    Yes, pricing is out of line and AMD's fucking terrible PR isn't helping them sell me thinks.
    Yes and AMD sold the Fury X as an overclocks dream and we all know how they turned out, not only doesn't it overclock for shit but it doesn't seem to scale very well, mostly just uses more power.
    TR's article on pump noise didn't bother me much but I could see how it might.
     
    #22 Moloch, Sep 4, 2015
    Last edited: Sep 4, 2015
  3. gamervivek

    Regular Newcomer

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2008
    Messages:
    715
    Likes Received:
    220
    Location:
    india
    Fury X isn't the better buy over 980Ti, but Fury certainly makes a better case compared to 980 when you look at reviews at 4k. Which is why it's surprising that it didn't look far better than 980 at TR while demolishing it in other reviews. As for Alatar's defense of the review, the Fury non-ref card they used wasn't overclocked and using the OC'ed 980s without mentioning such in the graphs only led one to come away with the impression that once you overclocked the 980 it left Fury in the dust. From his own forum one user writes,

    Or even the AMD subreddit,

    https://www.reddit.com/r/AdvancedMi..._tech_reports_review_of_r9_fury_390_and_390x/

    Hocp end up testing best playable IQ settings and won't do 4k by default. Besides their usage of games like Dying Light where performance can swing from 15% in favor of 980 over Fury and 31% in favor of Fury over 980 once nvidia DoF is disabled won't show Nano in best light if they are using the highest IQ settings.

    Why not give the sample instead to Tom's whose Fury X review had it topping Titan X?

    http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-r9-fury-x,4196.html
     
  4. homerdog

    homerdog donator of the year
    Legend Veteran Subscriber

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2008
    Messages:
    6,153
    Likes Received:
    928
    Location:
    still camping with a mauler
    I can't tell if this is sarcasm, but just in case I must point out that sending a card to Scott would not preclude AMD from sending one to Tom's. Well, I sincerely hope it doesn't.
     
  5. gamervivek

    Regular Newcomer

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2008
    Messages:
    715
    Likes Received:
    220
    Location:
    india
    290X does better in 'frame time consistency' than 980 here,

    http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/1059?vs=1351

    And besides XDMA crossfire was acclaimed to have put AMD ahead of nvidia, so the if there was some catching up to do it was for nvidia.

    Well they did have an accurate shortage of Fiji cards to be sent to reviewers, one sample got around in Europe. And Nano is a niche product anyway.
     
  6. ToTTenTranz

    Legend Veteran Subscriber

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2008
    Messages:
    9,956
    Likes Received:
    4,553
    HardOCP's reviews are terrible. Their "highest playable settings" are a complete joke, some kind of motive they found to impose their own subjective tastes on framerate-vs-quality onto their readers. Not to mention that they can use these tests to let their bias run free.
    Add to that the fact that MSAA, AF, texture detail settings, etc. have different impacts on different architectures, and you get test results that are completely useless from a practical point of view.

    I don't understand how anyone with even a shred of interest and knowledge about PC gaming can ever bother to read HardOCP's reviews.


    There. I said it.
     
  7. dbz

    dbz
    Newcomer

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2012
    Messages:
    98
    Likes Received:
    41
    Maybe AMD just don't have that many cards to hand out. Period.
    TechSpot, one of the few mainstream sites that do timely game GPU/CPU performance testing, has neither a Fury X or Fury (Steve Walton had to hand the review samples on). While MGS, isn't exactly graphics intensive, it still looks like AMD are content to aim a big gun at their own feet by not cashing in on a marketing opportunity.
     
  8. Grall

    Grall Invisible Member
    Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2002
    Messages:
    10,801
    Likes Received:
    2,172
    Location:
    La-la land
    The official AMD response was almost entirely bullshit though. They said only some review units had this noise, and in reality these boards were all over the retail channel as well.

    AMD deserved a bloody nose for that issue. Being forthright and honest with customers and potential customers alike is much better than trying to deny or sweep your fails under the rug.
     
    swaaye, pharma and homerdog like this.
  9. Moloch

    Moloch God of Wicked Games
    Veteran

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2002
    Messages:
    2,981
    Likes Received:
    72
    http://techreport.com/r.x/radeon-r9-fury/w3-99th.gif
    http://techreport.com/r.x/radeon-r9-fury/fc4-99th.gif
    http://techreport.com/r.x/radeon-r9-fury/c3-99th.gif
    Was talking about Fury though and XDMA didn't put them ahead, it just helped them, a lot.
     
  10. lanek

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2012
    Messages:
    2,469
    Likes Received:
    315
    Location:
    Switzerland
    Dont forge that TR stilluse Fraps, this is way different than FCAT.. used by other sites.

    There's a debate aboutt Fraps or FCAT anyway .... I dont know.

    Personally i have allways respect TR and even for me they are still a large reference, this said, when i compare the reviews of Fury with the TR one (both was mostly the the Asus Strix ), really theres not one game numbers who seems in scope....

    Every reviewers have their own lineup, workflow, whatever we will allways see difference, some most obvious that other, so understand i dont want at all discredit the TR one. And this is not at all the far big difference i have seen between reviers.

    I take the guru one, because it was the most easy to find ( note, that i dont find their review more accurate ), i dont even post the fps, because it is really funny if i will do.. ( complete invert results )

    http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/asus_radeon_r9_fury_strix_review,31.html



    [​IMG]
    Guru3D


    [​IMG] [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
     
    #30 lanek, Sep 4, 2015
    Last edited: Sep 4, 2015
  11. 3dilettante

    Legend Alpha

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2003
    Messages:
    8,122
    Likes Received:
    2,873
    Location:
    Well within 3d
    The messaging in the TR story is not a truncation of what was given in the stories published at the other sites, the wording is different and those stories were published about a week afterward.

    Can you provide a link to that response? It's not the ones in the other sites linked, unless the additional claim is that one of the three sites heavily rewrote AMD's response(s).
     
  12. ImSpartacus

    Regular Newcomer

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2015
    Messages:
    252
    Likes Received:
    199
    Oh wow, you're right about that. I definitely didn't remember that correctly. Idk, maybe I mistook that TR article with a later one. I appreciate you pointing that out.
     
  13. Alatar

    Newcomer

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2014
    Messages:
    26
    Likes Received:
    18
    Techpowerup isn't getting a sample either:

    http://www.techpowerup.com/215776/amd-radeon-r9-nano-review-by-tpu-not.html
     
  14. 3dilettante

    Legend Alpha

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2003
    Messages:
    8,122
    Likes Received:
    2,873
    Location:
    Well within 3d
    I suppose it could be open to interpretation whether AMD is punishing some reviewers, or if it chose not to give its reason for not broadly sampling to reviewers. Perhaps the latest rejections now have the "not enough samples" reason given how negatively not giving one (clarification: not giving a reason) to TR seems to have turned out.
    The cases of Fury X samples being taken back seemed to make it clear why AMD was refusing to give them, although that could be a case of having a ready excuse to hide a lack of samples.

    Less seriously, AMD is picking fights with reviewers until the last one standing gets the one Fury Nano sample.
     
    #34 3dilettante, Sep 4, 2015
    Last edited: Sep 4, 2015
  15. Grall

    Grall Invisible Member
    Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2002
    Messages:
    10,801
    Likes Received:
    2,172
    Location:
    La-la land
    Who will be given official Nano review samples?

    It's problematic (on multiple levels!) if AMD says it has limited stock and thus picks and chooses who it gives out samples to. Because A: one might conceivably believe they would choose sites they reckon will give favorable reviews, and as a function, withhold samples to sites they think might be prone to more negativity. Also, because B: if they have so few Nanos that they can't hand out a few dozen (at most) samples to the press, then fucking hell, what on earth are they doing over there...?
     
  16. Moloch

    Moloch God of Wicked Games
    Veteran

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2002
    Messages:
    2,981
    Likes Received:
    72
  17. Esrever

    Regular Newcomer

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2013
    Messages:
    594
    Likes Received:
    298
    Why are review sites entitled to review samples at all?
     
  18. BRiT

    BRiT (╯°□°)╯
    Moderator Legend Alpha Subscriber

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2002
    Messages:
    12,492
    Likes Received:
    8,693
    Location:
    Cleveland
    Because its how companies get free publicity for their products.

    If a company doesn't want publicity for their products then they can act like AMD is acting like, but they shouldn't because AMD is getting negative publicity now.
     
    DSoup, Razor1, I.S.T. and 2 others like this.
  19. Esrever

    Regular Newcomer

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2013
    Messages:
    594
    Likes Received:
    298
    But why are company obligated to give out samples at all? The negative publicity is only become this is deviating from the norm. The whole idea of generating publicity because you send out review samples is something that shouldn't really matter to people but yet they expect it. They are then mad that they did not get what they want. The whole system is just weird.
     
  20. BRiT

    BRiT (╯°□°)╯
    Moderator Legend Alpha Subscriber

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2002
    Messages:
    12,492
    Likes Received:
    8,693
    Location:
    Cleveland
    They're not, except they're deviating from the norm that they have supported for decades. The negative publicity comes from them selectively bypassing sites for review samples. They would have been better off going with a new policy of no review samples at all for all products going forward. The fact they they haven't done so at all over the past decades suggest it is more valuable to the company to seed review samples.

    Tl;dr the companies deem it beneficial to seed review samples.
     
    DSoup, Razor1, I.S.T. and 3 others like this.
Loading...

Share This Page

  • About Us

    Beyond3D has been around for over a decade and prides itself on being the best place on the web for in-depth, technically-driven discussion and analysis of 3D graphics hardware. If you love pixels and transistors, you've come to the right place!

    Beyond3D is proudly published by GPU Tools Ltd.
Loading...