Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Closed

Nvidia hits a hilarious new low in rebranding.

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
a b U Graphics card
October 25, 2011 7:32:07 PM

Not content with rebadging old hardware with new stickers, Nvidia is now rebadging current hardware with new stickers.

http://vr-zone.com/articles/nvidia-preparing-revised-gt...

Yes that's right, a cut-down 570 is now a 560 Ti (448 core). With this shady tactic Nvidia fanboys can now finally stop lying about the 560 Ti being faster than the 6950...just don't ask about the shader count. :lol: 


Rumour has it that the entire Kepler series will be badged 660 Ti (+core count). :D 
a c 271 U Graphics card
a c 168 Î Nvidia
October 25, 2011 7:36:53 PM

Didn't AMD just rename the 5770 to a 6770? Why didn't you get up in arms about that? At least this is a different core count from either the current 560Ti or the current 570.
a c 216 U Graphics card
a c 80 Î Nvidia
October 25, 2011 7:43:46 PM

The 6950 is nothing but a cut down 6970. The 6850 is a cut down 6870. As mentioned the 5830 and the 5850 were cut down versions of the 5870.

These practices started as a result of not getting enough good chips to sell them at their optimum frequencies, so they cut the bad parts off and sell them as a lesser chip. As manufacturing improves, they often sell perfectly good chips cut down to meet demands for the different price points.
Related resources
a c 104 U Graphics card
a b Î Nvidia
October 25, 2011 7:46:39 PM

Sad thread. Really.
a c 271 U Graphics card
a c 168 Î Nvidia
October 25, 2011 7:49:17 PM

GreenDutchAlien said:
Sad thread. Really.

Check out the OP's posting history and you'll see how it's not really much of a surprise.
a b U Graphics card
October 25, 2011 7:55:43 PM

Lol as usual the nvidia fanboys jump in to defend their corrupt company.

It's not the same, you realise this is a 570 that is chopped down and rebranded as a 560 Ti.

There are now FOUR different 560 cards (3 560 Ti's) with four different speeds. It's marketing at it's very worst.
a c 271 U Graphics card
a c 168 Î Nvidia
October 25, 2011 7:58:00 PM

eyefinity said:
Lol as usual the nvidia fanboys jump in to defend their corrupt company.

It's not the same, you realise this is a 570 that is chopped down and rebranded as a 560 Ti.

There are now FOUR different 560 cards (3 560 Ti's) with four different speeds. It's marketing at it's very worst.

Three 560Ti's? How so?
a c 216 U Graphics card
a c 80 Î Nvidia
October 25, 2011 8:04:45 PM

eyefinity said:
Lol as usual the nvidia fanboys jump in to defend their corrupt company.

It's not the same, you realise this is a 570 that is chopped down and rebranded as a 560 Ti.

There are now FOUR different 560 cards (3 560 Ti's) with four different speeds. It's marketing at it's very worst.


Let's assume you are right, that they have 3 different methods in creating 560 ti's. I'm not sure you'd call this rebadging.

Rebadging is what they did with the 8800 -> 9800 -> 240 (I'm unsure on the GT/GTX names on them, just that they renamed the same chip several times).

I don't know what you'd call this type of thing. Where they make the same card with different sources of chips.

I'm also not an Nvidia fanboy. My other system has 6950's unlocked to 6970's. I only use Nvidia due to 3D vision. That said, I have no issues with either.
a b U Graphics card
October 25, 2011 8:08:07 PM

bystander said:
Let's assume you are right, that they have 3 different methods in creating 560 ti's. I'm not sure you'd call this rebadging.

Rebadging is what they did with the 8800 -> 9800 -> 240 (I'm unsure on the GT/GTX names on them, just that they renamed the same chip several times).

I don't know what you'd call this type of thing. Where they make the same card with different sources of chips.

I'm also not an Nvidia fanboy. My other system has 6950's unlocked to 6970's. I only use Nvidia due to 3D vision. That said, I have no issues with either.


It's cynical marketing at it's worst. All Nvidia is trying to do is sell broken cards on the back off the 560 name. There are 4 cards with 4 different speeds...does anyone even want to hazard a guess at how fast or slow that 560 Ti OEM is? These 4 cards could range in speed from slower than the 6850 to faster than the 6950...all with the same name?

With this latest move, the "560 Ti" becomes even faster. Like I said in my OP, finally Nvidia gets a 560 Ti that beats the 6950. This is purely and simply deceptive marketing. 4 different 560 SKU's is utterly retarded.
a c 271 U Graphics card
a c 168 Î Nvidia
October 25, 2011 8:21:30 PM

eyefinity said:
http://www.geforce.com/Hardware/GPUs/geforce-gtx-560-ti...

(yes it's another 570 cut down even more).

Aside from the fact that it's OEM only!! That's more of a cut down 560Ti rather than a cut down 570.
bystander said:
Let's assume you are right, that they have 3 different methods in creating 560 ti's. I'm not sure you'd call this rebadging.

Rebadging is what they did with the 8800 -> 9800 -> 240 (I'm unsure on the GT/GTX names on them, just that they renamed the same chip several times).

I don't know what you'd call this type of thing. Where they make the same card with different sources of chips.

I'm also not an Nvidia fanboy. My other system has 6950's unlocked to 6970's. I only use Nvidia due to 3D vision. That said, I have no issues with either.


The GTS240 was (is) an OEM only version of the 8800/9800GT.
October 25, 2011 8:33:18 PM

eyefinity said:
It's cynical marketing at it's worst. All Nvidia is trying to do is sell broken cards on the back off the 560 name. There are 4 cards with 4 different speeds...does anyone even want to hazard a guess at how fast or slow that 560 Ti OEM is? These 4 cards could range in speed from slower than the 6850 to faster than the 6950...all with the same name?

With this latest move, the "560 Ti" becomes even faster. Like I said in my OP, finally Nvidia gets a 560 Ti that beats the 6950. This is purely and simply deceptive marketing. 4 different 560 SKU's is utterly retarded.


Ovious troll is ovious
a b U Graphics card
October 25, 2011 8:49:04 PM

Quote:
What the hell are you talking about.
Not been funny but you are hardly no fanboy are you....


Quote:
I think there is some sort of flame war starter here^^^


GreenDutchAlien said:
Sad thread. Really.


Mousemonkey said:
Check out the OP's posting history and you'll see how it's not really much of a surprise.


Quote:
You are a trolling flame starter...you do it in almost every thread you exsist in.
Please for heavens sake give me MOD powers.


Quote:
Why are you nit picking on GPU's...
Get a life.
I game with my GPU's.
Maybe you should try using your gpu instead of trying to justify your damn choice of manufacturer.


sp0nger said:
Ovious troll is ovious


Ok, these kinds of comments aren't helpful in a civil discussion. If you don't agree with the OP, then debate it objectively. Attack the topic, not the person.
a c 376 U Graphics card
a b Î Nvidia
October 25, 2011 8:49:56 PM

Reusing the same name is kind of retarded. Why not call it a GTX 565 or at least give it a different suffix other than Ti?
a b U Graphics card
October 25, 2011 8:50:57 PM

Thanks for sharing that Im actualy interested in that card. HA
I didn't see is the 560ti 448 a 1 GB card ?


As for the 560ti OEM I didn't see much data aside from the lower core count.
Does it retain the 570 mem interface ?
a c 376 U Graphics card
a b Î Nvidia
October 25, 2011 8:54:57 PM

spentshells said:
I didn't see is the 560ti 448 a 1 GB card ?

If it is keeping the 320-bit bus it is very likely to keep the 1.25gb as well. It will basically be an updated version of the GTX 470.
a c 271 U Graphics card
a c 168 Î Nvidia
October 25, 2011 8:55:08 PM

aford10 said:
Ok, these kinds of comments aren't helpful in a civil discussion. If you don't agree with the OP, then debate it objectively. Attack the topic, not the person.

I wasn't attacking, I was adding insight. :whistle:  :ange: 
a b U Graphics card
October 25, 2011 8:58:20 PM

Both have there ups and downs end of story!
a b U Graphics card
October 25, 2011 9:01:54 PM

Quote:
No offense but take a look at his history of posts on other threads...


I am familiar with many of the AMD vs NVidia wars that have broken out, and those in them. I'm addressing this thread, as I have a few before.

Quote:
I quote "With this shady tactic Nvidia fanboys can now finally stop lying"


You're correct, that kind of statement also is not needed.

Now let's see if we can play nicely. [:aford10:7]
a c 104 U Graphics card
a b Î Nvidia
October 25, 2011 9:59:19 PM

I did attack the thread, not the person :kaola:  ( very stupid this, annoying a mod, i know . . . ) ( i'll start running now :lol:  )
a b U Graphics card
October 25, 2011 10:28:45 PM

I didn't mean anyone here personally, I meant it in general. However I will try to refrain from using the phrase "nvidia fanboys" in future.
a b U Graphics card
October 25, 2011 10:31:03 PM

spentshells said:
Thanks for sharing that Im actualy interested in that card. HA
I didn't see is the 560ti 448 a 1 GB card ?


As for the 560ti OEM I didn't see much data aside from the lower core count.
Does it retain the 570 mem interface ?


Not quite sure actually. Some people are saying it's an overclocked 470 with the same TDP now...
a c 271 U Graphics card
a c 168 Î Nvidia
October 25, 2011 10:33:31 PM

eyefinity said:
Not quite sure actually. Some people are saying it's an overclocked 470 with the same TDP now...

Who are these "Some people"?
a b U Graphics card
October 25, 2011 10:47:46 PM

http://hardforum.com/showpost.php?p=1037930188&postcoun...

It has the same specs as a 1GB 470 right? We won't know until we see clock speeds I guess.

Why didn't they just name it the 565 anyway? Was it because the 465 was such a flop and they don't want to keep that association? I mean jeez 4 cards all with the same number....it's a bit silly at best.
a c 271 U Graphics card
a c 168 Î Nvidia
October 25, 2011 10:50:53 PM

eyefinity said:
http://hardforum.com/showpost.php?p=1037930188&postcoun...

It has the same specs as a 1GB 470 right? We won't know until we see clock speeds I guess.

Why didn't they just name it the 565 anyway? Was it because the 465 was such a flop and they don't want to keep that association? I mean jeez 4 cards all with the same number....it's a bit silly at best.

Why don't you ask somebody at Nvidia that? I'm sure the BOD would give you the consideration you deserve.
a c 104 U Graphics card
a b Î Nvidia
October 25, 2011 10:58:07 PM

Don't agree with the rest but about the number 565 the op could be right. I still have nightmares from my very unhappy one year marriage with it. It shortened my life with at least a couple of years. Seeing the number 565 directly gave me the shivers . . . Brrrrr.
a c 104 U Graphics card
a b Î Nvidia
October 25, 2011 10:59:03 PM

marriage with the 465 obviously.
a b U Graphics card
October 25, 2011 11:36:00 PM

Im a lil pumped up if the new 448 core 560 comes out.
a b U Graphics card
October 26, 2011 12:08:34 AM

spentshells said:
Im a lil pumped up if the new 448 core 560 comes out.


Even though it's actually a cut down 570? This is the thing, would you still be pumped about it if it was called a 565, or 570 SE? This card has no more in common with a 560 Ti than say, a 550 Ti does.

It is directly comparible to the poorly-regarded 465 (a cut down 470 that got universal terrible reviews). You only think it's better because Nvidia have branded it a 560 Ti instead of 565.
October 26, 2011 12:24:28 AM

If the new GTX 560 Ti retains the GTX 570's core clock speed of 732MHz then it'll probably turn out slower than the current GTX 560 Ti. In order for it to match or beat the GTX 560 Ti (Standard) it'll need a core clock of at least 790MHz which will make the power consumption of the card absolutely CRAZY compared to the standard GTX 560 Ti. Possibly even more than the current GTX 570.

Given that the GTX 560 Ti OEM retains the GTX 570's core clock I'm betting that so will the GTX 560 Ti 448 core will too. This will mean similar performance to the GTX 470, and thus making it slower than the current GTX 560 Ti (Standard).

So my theory is that the GTX 560 Ti 448 Core will turn into a massive SHINY object for all silly builders who don't read benchmarks to buy.

I really don't see why NVidia needs another competitor to the HD6950. The GTX 560 Ti comes close enough as it is. The only other reason is that they have a whole bunch of partially broken GF 110 lying around.

BTW: I'm NOT an AMD fanboy. I currently have a computer running a GTX 560 Ti SITTING RIGHT BESIDE ME!!
a b U Graphics card
October 26, 2011 3:32:40 AM

Quote:
448 cuda cores.
This version will be faster than the standard 560 Ti even with a slightly lower clock speed.


I agree 100% The additional core count and additional memory bandwidtch will way more than make up for 100mhz in clock speed
a b U Graphics card
October 26, 2011 1:58:44 PM

anybody here understands the word "yield"?

that should pretty much sum up why nvidia came up with this.
a c 376 U Graphics card
a b Î Nvidia
October 26, 2011 4:53:50 PM

spentshells said:
I agree 100% The additional core count and additional memory bandwidtch will way more than make up for 100mhz in clock speed

Well, it will basically be an update of the GTX 470 it seems and the GTX 470 is slightly slower than the GTX 560 Ti. So they will probably bump up the clock speed on the new cards at least slightly would be my guess.
a b U Graphics card
October 26, 2011 5:02:24 PM

jyjjy said:
Well, it will basically be an update of the GTX 470 it seems and the GTX 470 is slightly slower than the GTX 560 Ti. So they will probably bump up the clock speed on the new cards at least slightly would be my guess.


Being a chopped up 570 the chip should be a lot cooler, I see no reason the speeds of the 560ti (384 cores) can not be replicated on the regular. There should be more thermal headroom since part of the 570 is disabled lowering heat a lil bit.
a b U Graphics card
October 26, 2011 6:06:32 PM

spentshells said:
Being a chopped up 570 the chip should be a lot cooler, I see no reason the speeds of the 560ti (384 cores) can not be replicated on the regular. There should be more thermal headroom since part of the 570 is disabled lowering heat a lil bit.


Yes but surely these are 570's that didn't quite make the cut for whatever reason? I can't see how they will reach 560 Ti clock speeds if that is the case, and the 570 was already a bad overclocker. It would need a 12% overclock to reach current 560 Ti speeds.

A 448 core 570 at stock speeds will be about 3% faster than a stock 560 Ti.

They could also just be unsold 570's I suppose, which is bad enough but if that was the case why not just lower the price on them instead? It's already good value compared to the 6970 so it would seem unlikely to be selling all that badly.
a b U Graphics card
October 26, 2011 6:19:03 PM

Eye where do you get that number of 3% ? Im interested.
I'm not looking to argue or anything but I don't think that is accurate.
I'll guess they are doing this to fill in a gap as mentioned 240-280 range.
It sounds like they are filling a gap with unsold chips the 570 lost a lot of ground Im sure to the 560 ti.
a c 376 U Graphics card
a b Î Nvidia
October 26, 2011 6:36:20 PM

eyefinity said:
Yes but surely these are 570's that didn't quite make the cut for whatever reason? I can't see how they will reach 560 Ti clock speeds if that is the case, and the 570 was already a bad overclocker

These would be GF110 chips with manufacturing defects that necessitate disabling 2 of the 16 shader blocks. With the extra shaders they would only need to give the GPU a mild boost over the GTX 570s reference clocks to match a current GTX 560 Ti and that shouldn't be a real issue.
a b U Graphics card
October 26, 2011 6:36:31 PM

This topic has been closed by 4ryan6
!