19.4 Gb/s. Sure it's fast, but it's not absurdly fast. It's less than four or less times the maximum you get out of high-end consumer drives now, and those are bottlenecked by SATA 6Gb/s.
Database servers runnig 24/7? How many people need to worry about one of those?
Besides, if one SSD can replace 20 hard drives (where speed, not capacity is required), it might still be cheaper to use SSDs even if they have to be retired a bit earlier than HDDs were.
Gee, you're a pedant. Am I going to have to start opening Windows calculator every time I want to point something out?
Honestly, it doesn't sound like a joke, more like you're making fun of people who got less than they hoped for when purchasing a product. It doesn't matter if it's a graphics card or a car, false advertising is false advertising (assuming this is all more than a few misbehaving cards, of course).
Say you buy 1kg of *insert favorite nourishment here*. Wouldn't you get pissed if you found out it was actually only 0,8kg? Same principle.
Please don't misunderstand me, everybody says something that sounds stupid occasionally. That doesn't mean the person is stupid and pointing something out is not generally meant as an insult.
I know about that, but selling it and bundling it are two quite different things.
Nope. The 290/290X is a much larger chip - similar architecture, but bigger (and mildly improved).
It's surely common in any industry, but the performance difference in this case (assuming no weird stuff is going on) is more than what is considered reasonable by the collective.
The problem is probably the lack of a specific lower threshold to which the cards are held (would also help explain the aggressive pricing).
As far as I remember, those were plainly slower than the ones they were to replace, let alone Intel's products, even running at significantly higher clocks.
They performed to spec, but the spec wasn't what AMD had originally hoped for.
Oh gosh I hope this doesn't result in some poor sap attempting to drive his car and while thinking they should achieve a pure 40mpg they only hit a measly 20mpg and their lives are runied forever. The consequences will never be the same.
See how stupid you sound? Please redeem yourself by thinking carefully about the situation (potentially mislabeled product) and ideally apologizing for an utterly useless comment.
What kind of power supplies do you use that don't work with 100~250V?
"Gee, I wonder what that power cable running from a power outlet to that car's charging port is doing..."
How about you give him a proper upbringing instead of calling him "my idiot son"?
Fact: The safety of all is more valuable than your freedom to be stupid.
That's why there are laws prohibiting such diverse stupid activities as:
Starting a fire (sure, there are exceptions, but you can't just start a fire in the middle of a street without causing a fuss)
Firing weapons in inappropriate locations
Driving with worn-out tyres.
What's the common factor? Your disregard for safety puts others at unnecessary, completely preventable risk that has no associated benefits for society.
If you want to drive however you want, do so in a closed track, not a public road. I'll welcome the day non-self-driving cars are banned on most public roads. We'll all be better off for it in many ways.
You're egocentric if you think your freedom is worth more than everyone else's.
Honestly, people like you disgust me. It's your choice to risk yourself, but it's not your choice to risk others. You don't have that right. If you think you do, I hope you get locked up and treated.
Easily solved. This will take at the very least a year to show up and a year to be widely adopted. Plenty of time for our bureaucrats to fix that.
And it turns out it's not quite a mandate, at leats in practice. I'll believe it when iPhones come with microUSB adapters.
What if I want the goat?
If there's a chip in the middle controlling it, it's definitely not USB. It may blatantly copy some USB elements (not that that's a bad thing), but it's not USB.