@catdad the 1060 thing? not sure i agree. at least there is a (relatively) clear delineation between the lower-performing variant with 3GB memory and the faster 6GB part. i don't love it, but 3GB or 6GB is obvious in every product title i just saw (in an, admittedly, very small sample size based on a google search of "1060"). plus the worst part is that they did this (way) after launch...quietly...with no announcement. nVidia was up front about the ambiguous name choice, at least.

@nickchapman
I was talking about the 4GB 970 actually having 3.5GB

@catdad that was pretty crap, but they didn't release a card with 'x' performance then later lower the performance but not give the item a different name so consumers could easily spot the difference. the 970 always had the 970 performance...it was just marketed as a 4GB card when technically it really had 3.5GB of one speed and .5 of another, I think? whatever it earned in the benchmarks, though, were valid for it despite the misleading numbers.

@catdad to be clear, I still think the #nvidia deal is shady...but I think #amd making this change later, after initial launch, when reviews were already old news...is more likely to catch users unawares.