The juicier the rumor, the more it should be questioned.
AMD 'Big Navi' GPU Leaks Are Fake? SK Hynix Refutes 2TBps HBM2E Claims : Read more
AMD 'Big Navi' GPU Leaks Are Fake? SK Hynix Refutes 2TBps HBM2E Claims : Read more
Because we had our doubts about the legitimacy of this story, we decided not to run it. In hindsight, this was the correct choice: SK Hynix offered up a press release today stating that the news is fake.
Ahhh come on... what a joke... keep doing amazing review like your MSI x570 A Pro and AC Gaming... at least they are not a joke... (sarcasm)
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UZWUOldsxXQ
Rumors are rumors and have no place on a site like this. WCCFTech will throw multiple rumors out in a week about the same hardware. The only thing that should be on a legitimate tech site are actual specs and hard confirmed information.
You're right, but this site has been posting increasing amounts of leaked/rumor news as time has moved on. They long ago left the realm of only official and verifiable news posts.
If there were no such product in the works, why would a "thorough investigation" even be required? It seems like it would simply be a matter of calling up the relevant people in the company and asking them if such a product is being worked on."After a thorough investigation, we conclude that the screen capture of the allegedly internal document is fabricated."
I agree about that being an excessive amount of HBM memory for consumer use, though the Radeon V also arguably had an excessive amount of HBM memory when it launched over a year ago. If this were in fact a top of the line card outperforming Nvidia's current $1000+ models, then there might be a fair amount of room to work with for pricing. Of course, unless there's some technical reason requiring additional HBM packages to avoid bandwidth limitations that would significantly limit performance, AMD would undoubtedly be better off limiting the VRAM to no more than 16GB, if not less, to give them more price flexibility and greater profit margins.The specs seemed way high and for what they would be would only be for HPC uses. Otherwise it would be way too expensive for consumers with 24GB of the latest and greatest HBM memory.
While the clock speeds might not have matched the rumors, if you take into account the 15% or so IPC uplift that had not yet been announced, the current Zen 2 based Ryzen 7 and 9 processors are capable of meeting or exceeding the performance that a Zen+ based processor would have offered at 5GHz. And we did in fact get a 16-core processor running at relatively high clocks on the mainstream AM4 platform. The rumored pricing that accompanied those specifications was quite unlikely though. Of course, Tom's Hardware reported on those rumors too, despite those pricing details not making much sense. : PAhhh yes because one review thats meh means nothing reported is correct. I guess WCCFTech was right about the 5GHz 16 core Ryzen CPUs......
If SK Hynix is sending this kind of threat, then it means there is more truth to this then what they want people to believe: "We can assure you that SK Hynix will take every necessary measure against such media, including all available legal actions."
You don't sue over rumors if they are totally bogus. It is something else when you screw up and leak information under NDA, then you sue.
This doesn't actually confirm that the rumor is fake. Even if it were true, it seems like SK Hynix would deny its existence to avoid leaking details of a big product launch that AMD probably didn't want them talking about yet. Ask yourself, if it were fake, why would SK Hynix go through so much trouble to deny it? I suppose they might not want clients assuming that they leak sensitive information, but the wording of some parts of the document is a bit weird.
If there were no such product in the works, why would a "thorough investigation" even be required? It seems like it would simply be a matter of calling up the relevant people in the company and asking them if such a product is being worked on.
And they didn't actually deny that such a card is in the works. They denied that they created or distributed the specifications document in question, and claimed the HBM2e specifications listed therein to be inaccurate.
One possibility might be that the document is in fact fabricated, but that a lot of the specifications are real. There was already a prior leak about the alleged specifications of the card that this lined up with, and only the memory specifications were new, so that could very well be the case.
I agree about that being an excessive amount of HBM memory for consumer use, though the Radeon V also arguably had an excessive amount of HBM memory when it launched over a year ago. If this were in fact a top of the line card outperforming Nvidia's current $1000+ models, then there might be a fair amount of room to work with for pricing. Of course, unless there's some technical reason requiring additional HBM packages to avoid bandwidth limitations that would significantly limit performance, AMD would undoubtedly be better off limiting the VRAM to no more than 16GB, if not less, to give them more price flexibility and greater profit margins.
While the clock speeds might not have matched the rumors, if you take into account the 15% or so IPC uplift that had not yet been announced, the current Zen 2 based Ryzen 7 and 9 processors are capable of meeting or exceeding the performance that a Zen+ based processor would have offered at 5GHz. And we did in fact get a 16-core processor running at relatively high clocks on the mainstream AM4 platform. The rumored pricing that accompanied those specifications was quite unlikely though. Of course, Tom's Hardware reported on those rumors too, despite those pricing details not making much sense. : P
You don't sue over rumors if they are totally bogus. It is something else when you screw up and leak information under NDA, then you sue.
This very much reads like a "non-denial denial". As others have pointed out, they didn't say no such product exists - just that the screen grab is a fake.After a thorough investigation, we conclude that the screen capture of the allegedly internal document is fabricated.
Careful not to dislocate your shoulder, patting yourselves on the back, guys.Because we had our doubts about the legitimacy of this story, we decided not to run it. In hindsight, this was the correct choice
If this release was accompanied by trading activity by the perpetrator, then it can likely be prosecuted. If not, then I don't think it would be a crime in the US, so long as the data was fabricated and not actually stolen.Manipulation of stock prices through false information is a serious crime.
We don't know that.We aren't talking about idle speculations here.
Really? Was it a lot of trouble? Probably not for someone who knows Korean, and maybe has found similar spec sheets, just to mock that up and take a picture of their screen.The guy went through the trouble of fabricating internal documents.
It's not really clear what a rumor like that would do for stock prices though. Most of those rumored specs were already floating around from a previous rumor. It's just the VRAM details that were new. If anything, I guess it would make the card seem a bit less desirable from a consumer standpoint, since that much HBM memory would drive up the cost without likely providing much benefit to gaming performance. But there could just as easily be lower VRAM variants of the card too, available at much more reasonable price points. So, based on those specifications alone, it's not really clear what that would do for stock prices.Manipulation of stock prices through false information is a serious crime.
Yeah, I was kind of wondering about that too. Maybe if the card were set to be announced relatively soon AMD might be a bit more open with specifications to certain people at their primary suppliers though.I, for one, wonder why a memory vendor would have documents with all of those other GPU specs on it. It's not inconceivable, but it strikes me as odd. If I were AMD, I probably wouldn't even disclose such details to them.
You're over-thinking it. The criminality of something like insider trading doesn't depend on whether the defendant actually made money - it depends on the combination of intent and actions taken that were both illegal, and consistent with that intent.It's not really clear what a rumor like that would do for stock prices though.
What I'm saying is that if someone were trying to manipulate stock prices, one would think they would do so in a way that would have more predictable results. If it were an attempt at stock manipulation, it doesn't seem like it would be a particularly effective one, leading me have some doubts that it was the intended purpose.You're over-thinking it. The criminality of something like insider trading doesn't depend on whether the defendant actually made money - it depends on the combination of intent and actions taken that were both illegal, and consistent with that intent.