| Edit Reply |
|
derFunkenstein |
It won't do a bit of good unless the numbers consistently show the faster GPU...Intel's done a pretty good job of this by differentiating different CPU types by teh first number...an E6600 is faster than an E4600. The only possible difference is in the pair of 2MB E6x00 chips.
But with both AMD (where their CPUs don't really suffer from this but their GPUs still do) and nVidia, the numbers still aren't terribly indicative of performance - an 8400 should be faster than a 7900, and a Radeon HD 3450 should be faster than the HD 2900. So I think that at least for a few years, they could do the same thing as Intel - the first number be the relative performance, the second number be within that family... 8400 and successors become the GeForce Awesome X 2000 family 8600 and successors become the GeForce Awesome X 3000 family 8800 and successors become the GeForce Awesome X 4000 family And then each generation, bump the hundreds number by 1 or 2. So if the 8800GT is the Awesome X 4000, the 9800GTX should be the Awesome X 4100 and the 9800GX2 should be the Awesome X 4500.  |
| Edit Reply |
|
moose17145 |
wait... didn't they used to have a solution to all this years ago? I think it went something like this if memory serves correct
x200 x200 Ultra x600 x600 Ultra x800 x800 Ultra (or replace 800 with 900 and you pretty much have the same thing) Not saying they need to bring back the Ultra, but going back to this basic naming scheme and following it would fix much of the confusion. Of if you needed to have more names for junk because you had more video cards just follow something like this Number (vanilla) Number Ultra Number GTX ATI did the same thing back when they introduced the XT's 9600 9600 Pro 9600 XT 9800 9800 Pro 9800 XT See... Simple! Sorry... guess i just dont understand why they need to evaluate how to make it simpler when they already have a way of making their naming simple. |
| Edit Reply |
|
Majiir Paktu |
Yes, Nvidia is a bit weird with their naming scheme.
But if you can't understand the difference between a 9600GT and an 8800GT, you clearly have not done enough research on your product anyway, and therefore you cannot expect to be satisfied with your results anyway. If you are a good shopper, you will understand it, and their product naming isn't a problem at all. Consumer responsibility, folks. You can't blame the manufacturer if you buy a product that doesn't do what you expect it to do, solely based on a misunderstanding of their numbering system. |
| Edit Reply |
|
Jive |
I miss those naming schemes when it was just:
Geforce 3 Ti 4200 Geforce 3 Ti 4400 Geforce 3 Ti 4600 Simple and easy, why not go back to that... |
| Edit Reply |
|
StashTheVampede |
They are running out of numbers, it's tough to start over.
ATi started over, they went from the the 9X series are are now back to 3X. Summer introduces the 4X series, right? |
| Edit Reply |
|
GTVic |
Web sites don't help either. Intel, AMD and NVidia all have code names that either refer to a family of products or a subset and then they have all the actual product names once in production.
All the tech sites freely switch between these naming schemes and unless you have the time to keep on top of it, you can quickly lose track and interest. How about a handy reference??? Like others have said, the sheer volume of names makes people shrug and give up which leads to lost sales and skipping what could have been informative articles. Calling people ignorant because they don't want to waste time memorizing all this crap is moronic. All of this is easy to fix. The manufacturers and tech sites could all do better. |
| Edit Reply |
|
l33t-g4m3r |
they gotta get rid of the last gen products somehow.
anyone wanna buy a geforce4mx? it's a gf4, so you must be getting dx8. |
| Edit Reply |
|
ThelvynD |
I actually prefer the way ATI has done away with the GT, XT, LE scheme and gone to the numbers it's more clear as to what level of card you are buying by just looking for the higher number rather than guessing as to which GT, XT or whatever is the best. Intel and AMD saw this long ago when they changed thier numbering scheme to a simpler pattern rather than continuing to use the MHz that they loved using back in the P4 days. nVidia really has been a bit behind on getting on this numbering scheme for awhile now it's good that they finally realize this.
|
| Edit Reply |
|
cegras |
It will never be simple, since all nvidia is doing is renaming old products to new products.
|
| Edit Reply |
|
GTVic |
"Nvidia CEO Jen-Hsun Huang stated last month that he wants Nvidia GPUs in more consumer PCs"
I'm sure Nvidia is glad they've got this guy thinking up these innovative goals. |
| Edit Reply |
|
JustAnEngineer |
NVidia's evil marketing geniuses have long profited by confusing the consumer into overpaying for a crappy card with a name that is confusingly similar to a good card. Why should they change this successful strategy of world domination now?
|
| Edit Reply |
|
MadManOriginal |
NVs naming scheme has been missed up ever since the first wave of G80-based cards and their derivatives. I blame the marketers for making the initial G92s 8800's, they should have been 8900's at least but they couldn't do that because there were still too many G80 cards in the channel. Having a card every $30 isn't bad for choice but it does make things needlessly confusing.
|
| Edit Reply |
|
herothezero |
Wow...imaging that. Simplifying the product line so you can sell more product more easily.
|
I suppose this confirms that "X" and "Extreme" aren't trendy any longer. Gods be praised.