Home
Creators
Search Recent Missing Random
Posts
Search DMs Popular Hash Lookup Tags Random
Importer
Import FAQ
Register Favorites Keys Review DMs Logout
Community
Telegram ThePornDude
Home Creators Posts Import Register Favorites Logout

Ranking Nvidia's Shady VRAM SKUs - Die Shrink Telegrams (Patreon)

Published:
2022-12-16 21:55:53
Imported:
2026-06
Tags:

Content

There's one half-finished script for a video Tom decided to dust off for a fun Die Shrink to listen to over the holidays - Debating which example of Nvidia naming different GPUs the same thing was the most Anti-Consumer!

The examples noted by the MLID team thus far are as follows:

GTX 460 768MB

GTX 1060 3GB

RTX 2060 12GB

RTX 3080 12GB with No MSRP

RTX 3060 8GB

RTX 4080 12GB

Which one was the most dishonest?  Which one was the most Anti-Consumer? 

Write-in below with your thoughts and questions, but be sure to use good grammar and be as concise as possible!  You have ~24 hours to submit (Till Early Afternoon US Central Time on Saturday).

https://www.techpowerup.com/gpu-specs/geforce-gtx-460.c2125

https://www.techpowerup.com/gpu-specs/geforce-gtx-460.c265

https://youtu.be/xSi6wf4V_CA

https://youtu.be/9BR9HtSe6H0

https://youtu.be/8rz32GVndEM

https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/geforce/news/12gb-4080-unlaunch/

Comments

Rootknight

I will cast my vote on the 1060 because I distinctly remember how often people would compare the 580 with the 6GB performance and the 3GB price

AI Generated Fish

Can we make a mention of something that has seemingly gotten worse every generation: Laptop and desktop cards having the same name and nowhere near the performance. Laptop 3080 wasnt even the same die as desktop 3080 and was more than one tier below in performance (falling short of desktop 3070). Manufacturers show off laptops with MSRP's north of $3000 with GPU's the same name of the flagship desktop parts that can't hope to match the desktop parts in performance. They seem to exist only to fleece ignorant consumers with deep pockets.

CompressedAIBlocks

Tom, can we point out that Nvidia has been doing this for literal decades? I think the 1060 was one of the worst cause they were literally different performance tiers. The other thing that I think is more agregious than this is rebranding GeForce 2 class cards as GeForce 4 IMO. That just held the industry back.

Sarcastro

Hi Tom, don't let the logo fool you, Jensen here. I'd like to sell you a Chevy Corvette. It's a two door coupe with a hatchback trunk, a 97.6 cu in OHV I4 engine with a 4 speed transmission, a 2470mm wheel base and curb weight of 836 kg. With a T body and FR layout this is the best Corvette Chevy has ever made........starting at only $38,500!!!!!!! It's definitely not a Chevy Chevette but a COR-VETTE, The 4080 12 GB was set to be my greats grift yet, damn you all for being able to MATH!!!!!!!!!!! (hehehe they'll never notice the 3060 8gb now........) DAN, LOOK OVER THERE!! (smoke bomb!)

jedi95

You forgot about: GT 1030 DDR4 (around half the performance of the GDDR5 version) GTX 1060 5GB (160-bit bus, mostly sold in China) GTX 970 (3.5GB of "fast" memory and 0.5GB of "slow" memory)

Max Eliaser

gt 1030 ddr4 and some of the gt710 rebrands

Cleansweep

The GTX 1060 variants (3GB and 5GB) have to be up there, just due to their popularity and how many people must have gotten gimped cards by accident. The GT 1030 DDR4 is probably the worst overall, just because of how much worse getting scammed is for ultra-budget gamers that would make up the 1030's target demo back in the day. Honorable mention for the GTX 970, which was such a total scam with its 3.5GB VRAM, Nvidia lost a class action lawsuit over it.

Woody Chang

My vote would be for the GT 1030 DDR4. It's really scummy because at least with most of the other ones, there was a quantitative RAM difference in terms of size. The GT 1030 DDR4 was still 2GB, just with crappier RAM that made it super slow and cheating the low end of the market which can ill afford a loss of performance like that. The GTX 1060 3GB would be up there, but at least there was a fighting chance that a mid-range gamer would be able to see why a 1060 might be cheaper than expected.

Timo H

Hi, I dont like RTX 3080 12GB with No MSRP, why? cos it fricking cost so much... yes GT 1030 was there but you dont pay kidneys for that or expect top tier perf. GTX 460 I dont have any own memory. 1060 3GB lacked 7% in gaming perf and cost 250euros vs 350euros so that was justified tradeoff. 3060 8GB came so late so it was day late and dollar short. Then again GT 700 series should burn in fire, 20$ gpu vs 50$ GT 1030 doesnt make any sense. Even GT 1030 doesnt cut it for desktop (2d) use in some scenarios. Why? ignorant people always buy cheapest coz they dont see difference and then some "IT guy" has to waste hours and hours patching up their stupid buy and smoothly try to explain they wasted money. Though what is and was devious for example 1060, you had no way to know as customer it is also perf hit, other than checking reviews. Same for 4080 12GB, 2080 and so on, using tier below or cutdown dies what name suggests.

HOBAKAS

The 2 worse are the 3060 8Gb and the 1030 with DDR4 because they come out with the same name of an already launched product far more powerful !

Earth Taurus

All of 'em, but if I had to choose it would be the same two as Hobakas mentioned above. 3060 8Gb and 1030.

Jen-Hsun Huang, AI is not circular

Increasing consumer choice by providing more different GPUs at different price points is never anti-consumer when Nvidia does it!

A few cheeky memes

Hi TND, I think its the 1030, in my opinion when its happening to a product thats sits so low in the product stack it makes the most difference becuase the performance loss will more often be the difference between a game being playable and not

Woody Chang

If you want to go even further back, there was naming chaos-- back in the olden days of early 2000s, the Geforce 4 series of cards. The Ti4200 had both 64MB vs 128MB SKUs. It was even more confusing in that case because the 64MB model had slightly fast clocked RAM, so it would run better than the 128MB model so long as the textures loaded wasn't above 64MB total. Let's not even get to the whole Geforce 4 MX mess, which was basically a rebranded Geforce 2 card. If you were expecting DirectX 8.1 support or hardware pixel/vertex shaders that were standard on the normal Geforce 4 series, you were SOL

Crast

I think that while many got bamboozled by the 1060 3G, sadly the GT 1030 DDR4 is the worst offender of these, because it honestly is not just another tier, it's an entirely different world. Like we're not expecting to play much on those basic GPUs, mostly low end & esports, but to go from 1030 GDDR5 to 1030 DDR4, we're talking going from say 100 FPS in esports to 40 FPS with severe input lag. (Dawid does tech has done a number of these tests - even the GT 1010 GDDR5 will kick the pants of the 1030 DDR4... but sadly the 1010 also has a DDR4 cousin and the box labeling is poor on many of these just like the 1030)

Chris Rijk

How about the card that was too shady even for Nvidia - the "unlaunched" 4080 12GB (though that might have had more to do with the economic conditions at the time)

Durmij

I'm biased, but I'm going to vote for the 2060 12GB. It's currently rotting on retail shelves after being foisted on stores at the height of the shortage with prices higher than current 3060s. Since it's not a current product, there will be no back end rebates coming to help mitigate the loss. No one wanted to carry it, but no one was given a choice. Now we're all stuck with Nvidia's mining refuse. The 12GB 3080 definitely caused the most confusion though.

MarkCentral

I think the second sku of the GT1030 that swapped GDDR5 for DDR4 is the most egregious Nvidia sin. As the GN review stated: The average consumer cannot reasonably be expected to look at “GT 1030 2GB OC LPD4” and understand that is 55% slower than “GT 1030 2GB OC LPG5.”