facebook rss twitter

QOTW: Are graphics card rebrands acceptable to you?

by Parm Mann on 11 October 2013, 16:30

Tags: AMD (NYSE:AMD), NVIDIA (NASDAQ:NVDA)

Quick Link: HEXUS.net/qab3xr

Add to My Vault: x

Earlier this week, AMD proudly took the wraps off its 'new' Radeon R9 280X and 270X graphics cards.

"Engineered from the bottom up to enable a new era of hyper-realistic ultra resolution gaming," said cards have been eagerly anticipated by PC gamers, who are looking for new technology to push the PC experience well beyond anything that's on offer from the games console market.

Trouble is, the new range is more than just a tad familiar. Read between the lines and you soon discover that, for all intents and purposes, the R9 280X is 2012's Radeon HD 7970 going by another name, while the R9 270X is essentially a Radeon HD 7870.

Look, Ma! It's Magic!

And those who live and breathe PC hardware will know that this isn't a rare occurrence. Nvidia's recent GTX 760 and GTX 770 were ultimately derivatives of older-generation parts, and there have been plenty of other examples in recent years. Remember the Radeon HD 6770 and HD 6750? Or how about the GeForce GTX 250? They were all old technology dressed up in a new skin.

The saving grace is that when rebrands do occur, prices tend to drop, which is a good thing for the consumer. It's a fine line to walk, however, as the enthusiast audience doesn't always take kindly to new cards based on old architectures. So for this week's QOTW, let's hear it from you, the consumers: are graphics card rebrands acceptable to you? Share your thoughts, for and against, using the comments section below.



HEXUS Forums :: 65 Comments

Login with Forum Account

Don't have an account? Register today!
If its cheaper than the old and updated then yes they are acceptable.
In this case they are cheaper, use newer firmware and are updated then yes. However rebrands where the card is more expensive and advertised as next generation are not.
It's not acceptable unless the re-branded card is at least slightly faster than the fastest version of what its based on.
NVidia were kind of justified, because they took their top-of-the-line old card (The 680) and rebadged it as a middle-of-the-range card (The 760), then introduced a brand-new top-of-the-range card.

AMD have taken their top-of-the-line card (the 7970) and re-badged it as their new top-of-the-line card (The R280X). I'm not so much a fan of that particular maneuver.

However, AMD have fallen from grace with me recently anyway, with their CPUs performing so poorly and my investment in their AM3+ architecture being such a poor choice. Add to that micro-stuttering issues, and the poor quality of their software and drivers, and I'm afraid they're not getting my business any time soon.
Anaerin
NVidia were kind of justified, because they took their top-of-the-line old card (The 680) and rebadged it as a high-end card (The 770), then introduced a brand-new top-of-the-range card.

AMD have taken their top-of-the-line card (the 7970) and re-badged it as a high-end card (The R280X). I'm not so much a fan of that particular maneuver.

However, AMD have fallen from grace with me recently anyway, with their CPUs performing so poorly and my investment in their AM3+ architecture being such a poor choice. Add to that micro-stuttering issues, and the poor quality of their software and drivers, and I'm afraid they're not getting my business any time soon.
Fixed that for you.

Also AMD Piledriver chips perform very well and are great value for money. Their software and drivers are pretty solid nowadays, maybe not as good as Nvidias but still perfectly fine.