Why is tom'sHARDWARE so biased against AMD GPU's???

[mick500]

Just wondering why tom'sHARDWARE articles and reviews are so biased against AMD GPU's??? Are they paid by Nvidia?? Some of the stuff they come up with in the articles are ridiculous and fanciful, even failing to switch the r9 290x to uber mode for the review and calling it a cherry picked card?? If i were AMD i would never send tom's another product to review after that incompetence mixed with insult.

 

[Avro Arrow]

Consumer friendly...sure, but you do have to admit they have some really snakey marketing schemes, such as letting motherboards be released 6 months before new processors, releasing video cards with the promise of fairly high percentages of gain from mantle while having no provable and reliable way to really know how good mantle will be...not to mention delaying it by a few months in certain games (Yes, primarily DICE's fault, but at least they could have released a public demo). They really rely on the consumers being drawn in on promises, that in the past (it was either bulldozer or piledriver) they just downright did not deliver on performance promises.

The source of most of my stuff comes from either Tom Logan from OC3D, or Logan from tek syndicate or Elric from tech of tomorrow.

Honestly, nothing they do is snakier than anything that Intel or nVidia do but a lot of what they do is more honest. I remember when nVidia changed their drivers so that your GeForce card couldn't run PhysX if a Radeon card was detected in the system (even though you PAID for a card that could run PhysX). Intel makes you buy a new motherboard every time you upgrade your CPU along with all the anti-trust crap they've pulled. You can't compare them because Intel and nVidia are guilty of all the same things that AMD is guilty of and are also guilty of things that AMD has never done. AMD is a corporation out to make money and all I said was that they are more consumer-friendly than Intel or nVidia. That's not necessarily saying much is it? It's true that Bulldozer didn't deliver what was promised but AMD suffered for that more than anyone else. Almost nobody bought their bulldozer CPU which is why it's still available from newegg. If you want to talk about not delivering on promises, how about Intel graphics (in all its forms), Intel Ultrabooks (I can't believe you forgot about that one) and nVidia's Fermi architecture? I get my information here, Guru3D and from [H]ardOCP. If you don't mind his twisted sense of humour, Charlie Demerjian from semiaccurate.com also has brilliant investigative journalism on upcoming industry trends. That's my top four sites right there.

Remember, if AMD dies, what do you think Intel will do to all of us? I can only imagine and none of the scenarios are pretty.

 

[leeb2013]

because AMD GPUs are cra@p!







only joking, I have 2! Seriously, I didn't realise they were biased.

 

[smeezekitty]

Consumer friendly...sure, but you do have to admit they have some really snakey marketing schemes, such as letting motherboards be released 6 months before new processors, releasing video cards with the promise of fairly high percentages of gain from mantle while having no provable and reliable way to really know how good mantle will be...not to mention delaying it by a few months in certain games (Yes, primarily DICE's fault, but at least they could have released a public demo). They really rely on the consumers being drawn in on promises, that in the past (it was either bulldozer or piledriver) they just downright did not deliver on performance promises.

The source of most of my stuff comes from either Tom Logan from OC3D, or Logan from tek syndicate or Elric from tech of tomorrow.

Honestly, nothing they do is snakier than anything that Intel or nVidia do but a lot of what they do is more honest. I remember when nVidia changed their drivers so that your GeForce card couldn't run PhysX if a Radeon card was detected in the system (even though you PAID for a card that could run PhysX). Intel makes you buy a new motherboard every time you upgrade your CPU along with all the anti-trust crap they've pulled. You can't compare them because Intel and nVidia are guilty of all the same things that AMD is guilty of and are also guilty of things that AMD has never done. AMD is a corporation out to make money and all I said was that they are more consumer-friendly than Intel or nVidia. That's not necessarily saying much is it? It's true that Bulldozer didn't deliver what was promised but AMD suffered for that more than anyone else. Almost nobody bought their bulldozer CPU which is why it's still available from newegg. If you want to talk about not delivering on promises, how about Intel graphics (in all its forms), Intel Ultrabooks (I can't believe you forgot about that one) and nVidia's Fermi architecture? I get my information here, Guru3D and from [H]ardOCP. If you don't mind his twisted sense of humour, Charlie Demerjian from semiaccurate.com also has brilliant investigative journalism on upcoming industry trends. That's my top four sites right there.

Remember, if AMD dies, what do you think Intel will do to all of us? I can only imagine and none of the scenarios are pretty.

Big +1
Intel and Nvidia are both snakes that are more greedy than anything.
Intels latest thing was when mobo manufacturers found a way to unlock overclocking on NON-Z motherboards, Intel threw a tantrum

NVidia with their Physx lockout is ridiculous (and may well lead them to sell LESS cards)

AMD is far from perfect but they are usually more open rather than anti-competitive.

Lets not forget AMD also made quite a few contributions to open source software

 

[folem]

Just wondering why tom'sHARDWARE articles and reviews are so biased against AMD GPU's??? Are they paid by Nvidia?? Some of the stuff they come up with in the articles are ridiculous and fanciful, even failing to switch the r9 290x to uber mode for the review and calling it a cherry picked card?? If i were AMD i would never send tom's another product to review after that incompetence mixed with insult.

Their bias isn't in which brand is better, be it Intel vs AMD or NVidia vs AMD. It is how overstated they are about which they prefer. Intel makes a better CPU and NVidia (generally) makes an overall better GPU. In both cases AMD usually wins the performance per price battle, and occasionally they beat NVidia in the target performance branch, but they also almost always use a lot more power, which means more heat, and more noise. Those things matter to gamers and artists, whom are generally the target audience of Tom's. If you ask an Engineer or Scientist, those aren't generally too concerning, but what is to us, is that all AMD GPUs support 64-bit floating point calculations, whereas most nVIDA [Kepler] ones do not, with or without CUDA.

So in general, Tom's does usually pick the winner as far as which chip you want to have if you don't have to pay for it, but they don't consider price as much as most of their readers probably will. That is where their bias lies, the writers and reviewers don't have to pay for the gear they are covering.

 

[folem]

Consumer friendly...sure, but you do have to admit they have some really snakey marketing schemes, such as letting motherboards be released 6 months before new processors, releasing video cards with the promise of fairly high percentages of gain from mantle while having no provable and reliable way to really know how good mantle will be...not to mention delaying it by a few months in certain games (Yes, primarily DICE's fault, but at least they could have released a public demo). They really rely on the consumers being drawn in on promises, that in the past (it was either bulldozer or piledriver) they just downright did not deliver on performance promises.

The source of most of my stuff comes from either Tom Logan from OC3D, or Logan from tek syndicate or Elric from tech of tomorrow.

Honestly, nothing they do is snakier than anything that Intel or nVidia do but a lot of what they do is more honest. I remember when nVidia changed their drivers so that your GeForce card couldn't run PhysX if a Radeon card was detected in the system (even though you PAID for a card that could run PhysX). Intel makes you buy a new motherboard every time you upgrade your CPU along with all the anti-trust crap they've pulled. You can't compare them because Intel and nVidia are guilty of all the same things that AMD is guilty of and are also guilty of things that AMD has never done. AMD is a corporation out to make money and all I said was that they are more consumer-friendly than Intel or nVidia. That's not necessarily saying much is it? It's true that Bulldozer didn't deliver what was promised but AMD suffered for that more than anyone else. Almost nobody bought their bulldozer CPU which is why it's still available from newegg. If you want to talk about not delivering on promises, how about Intel graphics (in all its forms), Intel Ultrabooks (I can't believe you forgot about that one) and nVidia's Fermi architecture? I get my information here, Guru3D and from [H]ardOCP. If you don't mind his twisted sense of humour, Charlie Demerjian from semiaccurate.com also has brilliant investigative journalism on upcoming industry trends. That's my top four sites right there.

Remember, if AMD dies, what do you think Intel will do to all of us? I can only imagine and none of the scenarios are pretty.

I won't hold Intel requiring a new socket motherboard for every new CPU generation because, in general, this allows them to move their chipset capabilities much faster than AMD does. And AMD is starting to do the same thing with their FM series sockets.

 

[rolli59]

Just wondering why tom'sHARDWARE articles and reviews are so biased against AMD GPU's??? Are they paid by Nvidia?? Some of the stuff they come up with in the articles are ridiculous and fanciful, even failing to switch the r9 290x to uber mode for the review and calling it a cherry picked card?? If i were AMD i would never send tom's another product to review after that incompetence mixed with insult.

Their bias isn't in which brand is better, be it Intel vs AMD or NVidia vs AMD. It is how overstated they are about which they prefer. Intel makes a better CPU and NVidia (generally) makes an overall better GPU. In both cases AMD usually wins the performance per price battle, and occasionally they beat NVidia in the target performance branch, but they also almost always use a lot more power, which means more heat, and more noise. Those things matter to gamers and artists, whom are generally the target audience of Tom's. If you ask an Engineer or Scientist, those aren't generally too concerning, but what is to us, is that all AMD GPUs support 64-bit floating point calculations, whereas most nVIDA [Kepler] ones do not, with or without CUDA.

So in general, Tom's does usually pick the winner as far as which chip you want to have if you don't have to pay for it, but they don't consider price as much as most of their readers probably will. That is where their bias lies, the writers and reviewers don't have to pay for the gear they are covering.

If you think they are not concerned about the price you need to read this! http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gaming-graphics-card-review,3107.html

 

[lmaonade200]

rolli's correct, Tom's Hardware articles usually do take price into account, they had the 7870 XT up there on the best GPUs for the money for months when powercolor had those on sale for under 200 bucks, the 7950 was up there when Sapphire had that 200 buck sale going, and the recommended buy articles had the R9 280x on there when that was released because it had unbeatable price/performance. It was only Nvidia dropped their prices did they put the GTXs back into the radar.

 

[bystander]

As a general rule, excluding the forum talks, if someone claims the Review articles are biased towards one company or the other, the person complaining is the one biased. I see people on both sides complain about how the site is biased.

 

[Retaliator]

Ya that's true, never saw Nvidia/Intel criticism on Toms. I've always considered Tom's Hardware as good for Intel & Nvidia benches & reviews, since that is what they come up fairly. Despite the fact that R9 290X beats GTX Titan in nearly all of the tested games (except maybe 2 or 3 that too with just 1-3 fps differences). Put them on 2k gaming with ultra details no AA, with AA, then again on 4k and there you'll see the clear winner is R9 290X (I'm talking about the reference R9 290X that has been tested extensively outside Tom's), despite the fact that GTX Titan has 6 GB VRAM & R9 290X has only 4 GB, so here win is purely based on the cards abilities, which are further enhanced by the 512-bit VRAM interface.
We also have TrueAudio & mantle, which by time is going to hurt Nvidia's sales and reputation a lot since you get best audio and best graphics with high frame rates and quality.

That's the kind of speculation that has people like me giggling our socks off! :lol:

That shows the upcoming A10-7850k. Besides cpu/mobo, everything else was the same in both systems, you can see the direct effect of HSA and mantle, the iGPU has is just a little bit better from the A10-6800k but the HSA+Mantle+hUMA has made it perform really well, I hope you know that HSA, Mantle, hUMA are for AMD processors/GFX only (and others in HSA alliance like TI, ARM, etc.). That's what AMD is heading for, instead of optimizing hardware to infinity they've started to optimize the workload that goes into their products.

I hope that makes clear to you how well HSA & Mantle work towards performance, a maximum of 45% performance gain is guaranteed, even in not so optimized implementation you'll see minimum of 15%-20% gains. That means the R9 270X that you have now would perform equivalent to what r9 290x is now when mantle and hsa are enabled

Sorry but that's just a PR slide, get back to me when you have actual results from independent tests.

I agree with Monkey

I suspect the OP is a wum and was hoping to ignite a fanboi war. Don't fall for it.

Just wondering why tom'sHARDWARE articles and reviews are so biased against AMD GPU's??? Are they paid by Nvidia?? Some of the stuff they come up with in the articles are ridiculous and fanciful, even failing to switch the r9 290x to uber mode for the review and calling it a cherry picked card?? If i were AMD i would never send tom's another product to review after that incompetence mixed with insult.

Sorry I don't really see it.
There are a few hardcore fanboys on here (which a few are incidentally moderators) but the articles seem pretty unbiased to me

The Reason is TH go more in depth and publish what the AMD Fanboys dont want getting out. The fact is ATM Radeon cards have issues , such as micro stuttering , Time frame variance , driver issues and massive crossfire failure. AMD were a great company when they were aiming for Bang for Buck , I mean my last 2 GPU's were Radeons and they were fine cards if u didnt wanna overclock even my HD6970 with Gigabytes Windforce cooler wouldnt overclock past 50mhz without shutting down, when you consider my GTX 780 runs at 1245MHz and doesnt even touch 65 degrees C Under a Full Load stress test. The temps these new 290X cards run at tell me they are pushing their gpus to the limit to get this performance Hence the "UPTO 1000MHz core" with throttling, im sorry but that should be the minimum GPU Clock speed not upto. And from what ive seen even with aftermarket third party coolers these 290X's run at stock Nvidia temps. So ATM Nvidia may cost more but you are paying for a better product when all things considered. AMD need to get things right first before aiming High-End and they had better or Nvidia will have no competiton which is bad for every1.

Funny you say that as I'm running twin HD 7970s in crossfire and I have no issues at all. No micro-stuttering, no "massive crossfire failure", no time variance, nothing. The problem is that you USED to own Radeons and now you don't so you didn't actually experience the problems being solved. To be honest, neither did I. The problems were solved months before I got my Radeons. This industry changes so fast that what you experienced even 3 months ago is no longer relevant. I dropped a good amount of coin on my cards and believe me, if they weren't perfect, I'd be here bitching about it. LOL

Having said all that, right now, because of the stupid litecoin miners, nVidia cards are a better deal for gamers because the Radeon prices have been pushed through the roof. Once the demand levels off, you'll find that the Radeon cards will be the better deal again. AMD has a history of being more consumer-friendly than either Intel or nVidia. AMD is also more supportive of open standards and improving the technology landscape as a whole. To me, that's a good thing.

LOL a mate of mine has 7970 GHZ editions in crossfire and has nothing but issues cant even run BF4 on anything higher than Medium or its unplayable , Each user's experience is different, My personal experience and that of alot of people I know are the same alot of trouble from AMD, Ive had trouble with Nvidia cards in the past too buddy so dont think im an Nvidia Fanboy, but atm I wouldnt touch a Radeon unless it was liquid cooled and not planning a multicard setup.

And I agree that AMD is more supportive but they are trying too hard to beat Nvidia atm and are cutting corners.


Id also like to point out to all those comparing the R9 290X to the Titan check the release dates , Radeon R9 290X - Oct 24, 2013 as opposed to GeForce GTX Titan - February 19, 2013. The newer released High-End card should perform better, And the 290X doesnt perform that much better for the heat and throttling issues, If AMD had of released a decent cooler I woulda brought 1 as I was waiting for them to be released, but due to My mates having crossfire issues with both 79XX cards and 5XXX Series cards and my own AMD issues I chose a GTX780 this time around and am very happy with the hardware and software. And my mate with Crossfire 7970GHZ editions still has so many issues he has to disable X-Fire to make alot of games playable so u may not have issues but alot of others do.

 

[rolli59]

Look at the prices though, the Titan has basically never been worth the asking price!

 

[mr91]

What are your bf4 Multiplayer frame rates with the gtx 780 sc? Just curious

Are you using 1080p or 1440p?

 

[Retaliator]

Look at the prices though, the Titan has basically never been worth the asking price!

This I agree with Entirely, Nvidia Products are always overpriced, No argument here on that.

 

[Retaliator]

What are your bf4 Multiplayer frame rates with the gtx 780 sc? Just curious

Are you using 1080p or 1440p?

Just 1080p ATM, Average frame rates 100-120 Never drops below 80 Even in intense scenes. With Ever setting on Ultra And Filtering at Max.

 

[mr91]

Tom Logan also prefers the 780 ti over the 290x - I find that Tom Logan explains overclocking better than anyone else on the internet.

Tomshardware is the best in general in my opinion however they don't focus on overclocking as much.

 

[Mousemonkey]

A lot of this is due to FUD spread by fanboys who haven't even given AMD hardware a fair chance

How do you know whether people have given AMD hardware a fair chance? Are you in their homes watching what they do? I don't think so.

 

[Mousemonkey]

I remember when nVidia changed their drivers so that your GeForce card couldn't run PhysX if a Radeon card was detected in the system (even though you PAID for a card that could run PhysX).

But do you remember why that situation came about? Do you remember who it was who said that you as an AMD/ATi user didn't want PhysX?

 

[huilun02]

There are AMD fanboys just as there are Nvidia fanboys. My job (well, more of a pastime) here is to help people and suggest the ideal graphics cards to suit people's needs and wants, regardless of it being Nvidia or AMD or Burger King. Everyone has their personal preferences. I have no particular preference although I respect AMD more, because they price their stuff more attractively and don't nickel and dime for every extra bit of performance or tech like some other companies do. It better coincides with the CONSUMERS' interests which I always take into account when helping people out in the forums.

To the OP, If you are not here to seek help or make constructive discussions I suggest not making accusations of anyone/anything being biased. If you insist what you suggest is better then justify it instead of calling other people biased or fanboys.

 

[smeezekitty]

I remember when nVidia changed their drivers so that your GeForce card couldn't run PhysX if a Radeon card was detected in the system (even though you PAID for a card that could run PhysX).

But do you remember why that situation came about? Do you remember who it was who said that you as an AMD/ATi user didn't want PhysX?

You keep citing this argument. But it is irrelevant. You cannot grasp that just
because users didn't care about official support doesn't mean its right to gimp functionality on purpose.

 

[Mousemonkey]

I remember when nVidia changed their drivers so that your GeForce card couldn't run PhysX if a Radeon card was detected in the system (even though you PAID for a card that could run PhysX).

But do you remember why that situation came about? Do you remember who it was who said that you as an AMD/ATi user didn't want PhysX?

You keep citing this argument. But it is irrelevant. You cannot grasp that just
because users didn't care about official support doesn't mean its right to gimp functionality on purpose.

It's not irrelevant it's just that you don't or can't understand how corporations work and how they deal with their competitors and ex employees slagging them off.

 

[smeezekitty]

You don't understand morals

 

[Mousemonkey]

You don't understand morals

Yes I do but you don't seem to as you don't seem to understand the morality of slagging off a former employer and the consequences that may bring.

 

[lmaonade200]

There are AMD fanboys just as there are Nvidia fanboys. My job (well, more of a pastime) here is to help people and suggest the ideal graphics cards to suit people's needs and wants, regardless of it being Nvidia or AMD or Burger King. Everyone has their personal preferences. I have no particular preference although I respect AMD more, because they price their stuff more attractively and don't nickel and dime for every extra bit of performance or tech like some other companies do. It better coincides with the CONSUMERS' interests which I always take into account when helping people out in the forums.

To the OP, If you are not here to seek help or make constructive discussions I suggest not making accusations of anyone/anything being biased. If you insist what you suggest is better then justify it instead of calling other people biased or fanboys.

Burger King fanboi detected, Carl's Jr. is far superior...

 

[hypergon]

Atleast moderators shouldn't be too fanboyish...

 

[Mousemonkey]

Atleast moderators shouldn't be too fanboyish...

As we are humans we are allowed to have preferences and opinions as well as anybody else, if you don't like that then perhaps you should start your own website forum and then you would be able to stipulate how the moderators are allowed to think.

 

[IrwanCahyono]

I guess that's what it is. AMD, Intel, nVidia or whatever it is, .. This what make this business and things looked colorful. Sure do, you can bitching AMD with all you want to say. But, amd is what they are. I love AMD. But currently i use nVidia. It's not about which one the best suit for everyone, it's about which the best suit for anyone.

And my opinion about THW's review toward amd's product is quite fair. I'd pull my last comment in this thread with a certain corrections.

AMD's stuffs has been a great deal for the value segment. Maybe it is destined to be that way..