Tuesday, December 5th 2017

AMD Officially but Silently Downgrades Radeon RX 560 with an 896 SP Variant

The phenomenon of Radeon RX 560 graphics cards with 896 stream processors is more widespread than earlier thought. It looks like RX 560 cards with 896 stream processors will be more widely available than the previously thought Greater China region; with AMD silently editing the specifications of the SKU to have either 896 or 1,024 stream processors, as opposed to the 1,024 it originally launched with. There are no clear labeling guidelines or SKU names to distinguish cards with 896 stream processors from those with 1,024.

The Radeon RX 560 and the previous-generation RX 460 are based on the 14 nm "Polaris 11" silicon, which physically features 16 GCN compute units (CUs), each packed with 64 stream processors. The RX 560 originally maxed this silicon out, with all 16 CUs being enabled, while the RX 460 has two CUs locked. The decision to change specs of the RX 560 effectively makes it a re-brand of the RX 460, which is slower, and provides fertile grounds for bait-and-switch lawsuits.

Source: Heise.de
Add your own comment

129 Comments on AMD Officially but Silently Downgrades Radeon RX 560 with an 896 SP Variant

#1
EarthDog
Vya Domus said:
Only thing that I can blame AMD for is that they didn't police the AIBs better to make sure they market these things appropriately. But then again that's not really their job.

As far as I am concerned AIBs have engaged in false advertising tactics without doubt.
LOL, there isn't a clear specification for it on their website Vya. There is literally NO DISTINCTION on their website between the two. They are literally showing ONE CARD which has two distinctly different set of specs and performance. Most would call that two different cards, because, well, they are. AMD should have made the distinction. They did not, period. The AIBs are surely not saints, but that does not absolve AMD for not being more clear these are separate SKUs.

AIBs aside, how can one tell the difference between a 560 and a 560D reference card? At least ASUS had EVO (which, was not clear, lol!). I mean, I would be pissed if I walked in to a car dealership, asked for a Mustang GT, and ended up with a turbocharged 6 cyl instead of the 5.0 liter which it is supposed to come with.

Again, the AIBs are not saints, but does that make AMD NOT a sinner in this case? Hardly.


EDIT: Side note.. when you have the time and if you have the inclination, can you PM me whatever you were on about RE: GTX 1060's? I never heard of that before and my googlefoo is failing me. :)
Posted on Reply
#2
bug
Vya Domus said:
Only thing that I can blame AMD for is that they didn't police the AIBs better to make sure they market these things appropriately. But then again that's not really their job.

As far as I am concerned AIBs have engaged in false advertising tactics without doubt.
You're still dodging the question: why do you think AIBs should have made a distinction AMD clearly doesn't? I mean, AMD doesn't even have a page for 560D, but AIBs should bend over backwards just because?
Posted on Reply
#3
xkm1948
This is sketchy AF. Bad AMD, very bad!

And WOW, damous just keep on defending AMD. Man i am impressed! That is the finest example of a diehard AMD fanboy. :D
Posted on Reply
#4
ExV6k
RejZoR said:
Didn't they also upgrade RX 560 into more shaders from RX 460? So, they are just downgrading it back to RX 460 shader count again?
Exactly, these 896 Shaders RX 560s are basically renamed RX 460s.
Posted on Reply
#5
RejZoR
ExV6k said:
Exactly, these 896 Shaders RX 560s are basically renamed RX 460s.
But the initial RX 560 were actually using more shaders, making it an actual upgrade compared to RX 460. But now that they got people on the drug, they'll silently downgrade it back to RX 460 level. This reeks of Kingston sending better SSD for review and later selling lesser quality models under same model name. I think it was V300 model. That's just really shitty practice. I can forgive basically renaming to refresh models and push them one level lower model wise, because it's still easy to distinct them and tell people what not to buy, but how will a casual user tell a difference here. Not cool AMD, not cool.
Posted on Reply
#6
Vayra86
Typical AMD which is STILL too laissez-faire with its products. They probably still think its 'charming' that we can unlock shaders, brick cards with BIOS flashes and whatnot. At the same time, it damages their brand, like it does here. The overall image I get here is once again: this company is not in tight control of itself.

Remember, the first thing we heard of the RX560 (and the reason it existed) was 'the improved process', while in fact AMD just pulled a Kaby Lake and bumped the base clocks a little, with power draw to match.

There's a pattern here of self destructive behavior, and remarkably its only the GPU division that repeatedly manages to screw up.
Posted on Reply
#7
Franzen4Real
Vya Domus said:


You know , it's funny I just remembered how there are 2 1060s on the market with the exact same name as well but somehow anything associated with Nvidia gets a pass while similar happenings turn AMD into a shady ass company . :)
I like to give the benefit of the doubt and think you are probably capable with making your point without bending facts to fit your argument.

the nVidia situation played out here on TPU exactly the same as this AMD situation---no pass given--- with people basically making the exact same comments and suggestions on naming. Or perhaps you were referring to other websites....

To help your "memory" :)

https://www.techpowerup.com/225017/nvidia-geforce-gtx-1060-3gb-equipped-with-fewer-cuda-cores#comments
Posted on Reply
#8
the54thvoid
Franzen4Real said:
To help your "memory" :)

https://www.techpowerup.com/225017/nvidia-geforce-gtx-1060-3gb-equipped-with-fewer-cuda-cores#comments
If I could thank you twice I would. It's ridiculous the amount of misinformation people will try. @Vya Domus - you need to really check facts out before throwing things out there. It makes you look bad (and I know you're not all bad :p) but worse - it utterly shreds any credibility when arguing a point.

Nah man, trust me, Nvidia get it hard when they do anything like this.

EDIT: FWIW, if anything, Nvidia are generally touted as the far shadier company. Years of TPU have shown this and when they step outta line there is a fervour of abuse from team red and of course, defence from team green.

Fact is - both companies do things we techy people think are a bit 'misleading'.
Posted on Reply
#9
Vya Domus
the54thvoid said:
@Vya Domus - you need to really check facts out before throwing things out there. It makes you look bad (and I know you're not all bad :p) but worse - it utterly shreds any credibility when arguing a point.
Uhm, no. But then again I know when to give up , can't always change people's skewed perceptions.
Posted on Reply
#10
EarthDog
Vya Domus said:
can't always change people's skewed perceptions
Funny.. we were thinking the same thing. So far, in 35 posts, you are the only soul who appears to feel this isn't AMD's fault or at least part of it. Perhaps we are all wrong? It is possible. Or, perhaps, its the Radeon Red tinted glasses looking at a cup half full while others look at it half emtpy with green tinted glasses? Perhaps tinted glasses have nothing to do with it. ;)

the54thvoid said:
If I could thank you twice I would. It's ridiculous the amount of misinformation people will try. @Vya Domus - you need to really check facts out before throwing things out there. It makes you look bad (and I know you're not all bad :p) but worse - it utterly shreds any credibility when arguing a point.

Nah man, trust me, Nvidia get it hard when they do anything like this.

EDIT: FWIW, if anything, Nvidia are generally touted as the far shadier company. Years of TPU have shown this and when they step outta line there is a fervour of abuse from team red and of course, defence from team green.

Fact is - both companies do things we techy people think are a bit 'misleading'.
I thanked and QFT... double thanks. :p
Posted on Reply
#11
Vya Domus
EarthDog said:
you are the only soul who appears to feel this isn't AMD's fault or at least part of it.
Read the very first comment in this thread. :)

But I know you never really read what I say and just disagree with me on the spot:p.

Kidding , but it sure lools like that sometimes.
Posted on Reply
#12
EarthDog
Vya Domus said:
Read the very first comment in thread. :)
You are the first comment in the thread... the first soul. If there was another who agreed later, I missed it. Apologies.

EDIT: Maybe it was someone I have on ignore?

Because........

Posted on Reply
#13
xkm1948
Man you gotta give it a break man, Domus. You are really pushing it in terms of logic reasoning. What are these called, mental gymnastics?

Also is that you Domus, Lajos Nemeth?

Posted on Reply
#14
Vya Domus
EarthDog said:
You are the first comment in the thread... the first soul. If there was another who agreed later, I missed it. Apologies.

EDIT: Maybe it was someone I have on ignore?

Because........


It's confirmed that you're not reading my comments. :)

Maybe I have to make it even more obvious:

Vya Domus said:
So the fault lies in both.
@xkm1948 Don't try to bait me with your troll posts mate because it ain't working. Don't you have another FUD inducing thread to start again or something ?
Posted on Reply
#15
EarthDog
I thought you were talking about someone else, not you. Hence why my edit a while ago asked if there was someone I had on ignore that posted there...

Sorry, looks like you did an about face later in the thread...
Vya Domus said:
Only thing that I can blame AMD for is that they didn't police the AIBs better to make sure they market these things appropriately. But then again that's not really their job.

As far as I am concerned AIBs have engaged in false advertising tactics without doubt.
That is a far cry from 'both', IMO. In that post, it felt you absolved them of any wrong doing and blamed the AIBs.

Again, apologies if I got those two signals crossed...hopefully you are able to understand why.



EDIT: Also not both...
Vya Domus said:
Yet again AMD is blamed for the greed of AIBs and their piss poor marketing and naming schemes.
Anyway, who gives a rats ass. At this point we are not discussing the merits, but having a personal back and forth... so, on that note, I digress.
Posted on Reply
#18
T4C Fantasy
CPU & GPU DB Maintainer
Vya Domus said:
So 3 manufactures is "all of them" ?. And they are not even among the bigger ones.
only sapphire and gigabyte of the (major) is missing and 7!

Maxsun is huge by the way...

Edit: you didnt look at the link HIS BIG, XFX BIG for AMD ASUS BIG
Posted on Reply
#19
EarthDog
Asus as well...

So, this is interesting....

Again, AMD doesn't mention the change, and the specs clearly do not discern between models. I can see why the AIB's ran with it as AMD wasn't clear. While it isn't their job to police them, providing clear whitepapers/specs IS their responsibility and something we clearly do not have. AMD calls is a 560 on their website. A simple edit and correction would be awesome for those looking. :)

Who the hell is Maxsun? What country are they huge in?
Posted on Reply
#20
T4C Fantasy
CPU & GPU DB Maintainer
EarthDog said:
Asus as well...
i dont like it when noobs know nothing of the amount of SKUs per variant, i work on this all day long

MSI too
Posted on Reply
#21
Vya Domus
T4C Fantasy said:

Edit: you didnt look at the link HIS BIG, XFX BIG for AMD ASUS BIG
No , I did. They don't have '560D' in the name of the cards which is the whole point of this debate.
Posted on Reply
#22
T4C Fantasy
CPU & GPU DB Maintainer
Vya Domus said:
No , I did. They don't have '560D' in the name of the cards which is the whole point of this debate.
they are the same US version doesn't include D

give it a break you are wrong
Posted on Reply
#23
Vya Domus
T4C Fantasy said:
they are the same US version doesnt include D
Your point ?
Posted on Reply
#24
T4C Fantasy
CPU & GPU DB Maintainer
Vya Domus said:
Your point ?
my point is Specs, Device ID with Revision ID is 560D
its a 560D :)

manufacturers false advertise
Posted on Reply
#25
EarthDog
T4C Fantasy said:
they are the same US version doesn't include D
And there is the crux of the situation... will the US see the "D"? So far it doesn't appear to be so. Hopefully AMD corrects their botched entry and the AIBs get on board.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment