Sapphire Technology faced condemnation from a group of enthusiasts for its cut-down graphics cards featuring RADEON 9800 PRO graphics processors. An individual accuses one of the largest makers of Powered by ATI products in unfair and misleading policy of marking its graphics cards.
Jack Kielsmeier, an individual from Armes, Iowa, has established a web-site that urges to stop buying graphics cards from Sapphire Technology because of the company’s alleged unfair policy. The author of the “Boycott Sapphire” web-site believes that the company wrongly advertised and marked its RADEON 9800 PRO “128-bit Edition” graphics card and mislead customers about its performance.
Sapphire Technology’s ATLANTIS RADEON 9800 PRO “128-bit Edition” started to emerge for sale in late May. The graphics cards features fully-fledged RADEON 9800 PRO graphics processor with 8 rendering pipelines, but is based on PCB similar to that of RADEON 9500 PRO – with 128-bit memory bus for 128MB of DDR SDRAM memory.
The original RADEON 9800 PRO 128MB graphics cards were clocked at 385MHz/680MHz for chip/memory and equipped with 128MB of DDR SDRAM with 256-bit bus. Cutting down the memory bus width to 128-bit is likely to seriously reduce performance of the graphics card in applications that rely on rapid memory access as well as in situations when full-scene anti-aliasing is enabled.
Sapphire is known for making rather exotic graphics cards powered by chips from ATI Technologies. The company was among the first to go with the RADEON 9800 SE and also created a number of other designs typically considered as extraordinary. Making unusual graphics cards allows Sapphire to address more clients with its offerings and also offer more cost-effective solutions.
The web-site states that the “RADEON 9800 PRO” brand-name means something more powerful than the ATLANTIS RADEON 9800 PRO “128-bit Edition” products are. It claims that the “unfair marketing trick” that mislead a number of “victims” should be punished.
Mr. Kielsmeier and representatives for Sapphire Technology could not be reached for comment at press time.
Comments currently: 8
Discussion started: 06/16/04 02:27:13 AM
Latest comment: 06/16/04 09:33:29 AM
Expand all threads |
Collapse all threads
[1-5]
1.
If the card is cheaper than a original 9800 (256-bit), what's the problem?
I only see a problem if they sell it a the same price level of a 9800 256bit one.
[Posted by: I | Date: 06/16/04 02:27:13 AM]
+ expand thread (2 answers)
- collapse thread
Teh problem is, that 90% of users have no idea what 128bit mens but know from friends that 9800 Pro is a very good buy now.
Another thing is that 128bit cards ake sold merely 5% cheaper than normal 98oo Pros, thus it is likely that many people might thin it's just discount and be happy they saved 10 bucks.
This is clearly unfair branding, because Radeon 9800 Pro has nothing to do with 128bit interface !
[Posted by: mino | Date: 06/16/04 03:42:21 AM]
Sorry for errors ;)
[Posted by: mino | Date: 06/16/04 03:43:27 AM]
2.
The problem is, they're using the name 9800 Pro, when its not clocked as a 9800 Pro. Its a naming thing that consumers expect to buy one thing and actually get a lower performing product. READ the article.
[Posted by: 22 | Date: 06/16/04 03:40:03 AM]
+ expand thread (1 answer)
- collapse thread
U're right, but the clock difference is negligible problem here, the biggest problem is 128bit interface, since it effectively halves performance in contrast to some 10-15% difference by clock decrease.
[Posted by: mino | Date: 06/16/04 03:45:49 AM]
3.
I think the difference is the 128bit mem interface only, the clock speed is still the same of the original PRO.
So 9800 PRO is to much. 9800 "only" still alot, 9800 SE is not ok either.
Maybe ATI should take actions....
[Posted by: I | Date: 06/16/04 05:41:52 AM]
4.
i totally agree, 128 bit edition sounds like its a 128 mb memorycard, if i was joe shmoe, i wouldnt get it, that this card was infact a gimped card ala the SE cards.
[Posted by: magnetmannen | Date: 06/16/04 08:15:16 AM]
5.
Cut down speed lost:
FarCry 16%
Halo 0%
Tomb Raider 16%
Deux Ex 20%
Unreal2004 0%
Unreal2004 4xFSAA 8XAF 37%
MaxPain2 0%
MaxPain2 4xFSAA 8XAF 6%
Prince of Percia 24%
Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic 12%
Command & Conquer Generals: Zero Hour 0%
[Posted by: I | Date: 06/16/04 09:33:29 AM]
[1-5]
You must log in to add comments.
Unfortunately, the old registrations do not work anymore. Please register again. We apologize for the inconvenience.
Forgot password? Registration