Slash Boxes

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Sunday May 26 2019, @12:48PM   Printer-friendly
from the what's-in-a-name? dept.

AMD's RX 3080 has been rumoured for quite some time, a GPU name which is designed to 1-up Nvidia's RTX 20XX series in a literal sense, copying the tactics of the company's CPU division when they released their Ryzen-based X370 platform to compete with Intel's Z270 offerings.

The idea is simple, you see two products on a shelf and you look at the numbers. X370 must be better than Z270; the number is bigger, right? It's a simple marketing tactic, and it makes sense for AMD to reuse it within the graphics card market. AMD's naming schemes have moved from RX 580 to RX Vega 64 to Radeon VII; it's not like AMD has a defined branding scheme to follow within the GPU market anymore, so why not piggyback on Nvidia? Nvidia even went to the effort of changing GTX to RTX on the high-end, simply begging to be confused with AMD's established RX graphics lineup.

[...] Now, it looks like Nvidia wants to stop AMD's games, with recent trademark applications showing that Nvidia claims ownership of the numbers 3080, 4080 and 5080, at least within the world of PC graphics. This move appears to be Nvidia's attempt to stop Radeon calling their next graphics card the RX 3080, a name which would inevitably cause confusion when Nvidia releases their RTX/GTX 30XX series, which should include a model called the RTX 3080.

Original Submission

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 26 2019, @03:01PM (1 child)

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 26 2019, @03:01PM (#847893)

    Windows must be using the opposite tactics.

  • (Score: 1) by shrewdsheep on Monday May 27 2019, @01:55PM

    by shrewdsheep (5215) on Monday May 27 2019, @01:55PM (#848179)

    This is due to a sign error induced by the pentium bug when running code written by Billy the Kid in MS Basic that is still in use to calculate Windows version numbers.