I purchased a solid-state drive R5SL120G. It is marked with your company's trademark. But on your site this model is not found. It turns out it releases one unknown company, which is listed in the manual, as "GALT advanced technology Corp.". For support, it is offered to contact the website http://www.amd-memory.com/, loot there is no mention of this product. This is an obvious deception. Question: Do I need to handle a lawsuit against your company or is it just a forgery of your trademark?
Message was edited by: Matt B
We have updated the title of this discussion with relevant details to better describe your issue.
AMD's brief (thankfully, because they were overpriced and slow) flirtation with SSDs ended long ago, and the webmaster just hasn't updated the website. AMD never actually made any of them, they just put their stickers on OCZ drives.
For the current Range of AMD Radeon Branded SSD
GALT Advanced Technologies Corp. is the Hong Kong-based Technology Company that produces them for AMD,. and have been the only producers of said SSD.
So... no, it's not Fake.
Also, I didn't see them as Overpriced or Slow.
I mean Performance is Fairly Average and Prices for the sizes available (at least here in the UK) are fairly "Average" as well... £60 for the 120GB, £80 for the 240GB and £140 for the 480GB. They're not "Great" Price or Performance, but I mean hardly bad by any measure.
Yes, they're junk. The original R7 SSDs were, well they were junk too, but they were made by OCZ, these R3 SSDs are made by Galt using Toshiba NAND, and they're not made anymore, given their absence and deactivation on Newegg.com, Amazon.com, and Overclockers.co.uk. Even comparing the lowest capacity (and therefore slowest) Samsung 850 Evo to the highest capacity (and therefore fastest) AMD R3 (the 960gb never materialized), the 850 Evo blows it away. While sequential speed may be decent, its write speed and random performance are abysmal. Also remember that when these drives were released, May 2016, the 240gb cost $80, while the Samsung 850 Evo 250gb cost about $85 (using the launch price of $80 and data from camelcamelcamel for the 850 Evo), which is the main reason they flopped, they pit a Volkswagen Beetle against an Audi R8.
I apologize, but put on sale the product under its own brand, give it a 3-year warranty, support and service to an unknown company, which, apparently, does not exist, and whose traces are nowhere to be found, to refuse any liability for the goods, which allowed to put its name, can only scammers.
GALT do exist., they produce the Silicon Power SSD, which are fairly common Budget SSD.
Now the reason that references no longer (openly) exist is because by the time AMD redesigned their Website, the License agreement had already run it's course and wasn't extended. Thus it was essentially a Defunct Product.
What's more AMD themselves never produced the Products., thus their Liability is Non-Existent... you can of course always contact GALT (bare in mind they're Chinese) about issues or concerns.
I mean the same scenario is true for Motherboards or Graphics Cards., sure AMD produces the base Technology (and in the case of Graphics, the key GPU Component) but beyond that each individual AIB Product, even though it's Branded is the Liability of the AIB Partner not AMD.
Now as for Black_Zions performance figures., SSD Benchmarking is often highly System Configuration Dependant on their Performance... on top of this these were sold as HTPC / Multimedia / Gaming SSD; which all three of those tasks benefit from Sequential Performance rather than Random R/W, which is more useful for Workstation / Business Purposes and Windows / Application Load Times.
Honestly Windows Boot Time is relatively unimportant for the Average Consumer / Gamer as you're rarely Cold Booting but instead Waking from Hibernation / Sleep. The same is true for Application Boot times, even in Business Scenarios as you're not constantly restarting the Application but running it once.
As such the Performance Benchmarks can give the illusion of poor performance as they're covering performance metrics that really have little baring on the Average User., which is great for Marketing of "Out SSD is the most awesome on the market", such-as the Samsung 850/950 EVO that absolutely dominates but in reality for most Users it's actually fairly average Performance having some of the Lowest Sequential Read / Write Speeds.
Thanks for the answer, but let me disagree with you. If I buy the ASUS motherboard, I'm not interested in where, by whom, and how this device was made. Because I know that from ASUS I can get support for this product, in case of failure I can contact the ASUS service center, etc. That is, they bear full responsibility for their products. Here, I'm offered to understand the technological chains of the company AMD and find its supplier. Maybe I will go to Hong Kong in case of a product breakdown ?
A link to the actual product/sales site might be useful.
You mean such-as:
It was quite clearly on the Page I originally linked., which is still an active part of the AMD Website ... it simply has no direct means to access it since the update last year that omitted all no-longer supported products and software.
You should also have said information on the Warrant / License Note that is Supplied with the Product.
Given the entire point in the post was the Question of "Is this Legit?"., which said information has been very concisely provided.
Anything beyond that is simply a matter of opinion on how well it is / has been handled by AMD / Galt.
Personally speaking I agree with Black Zion, that AMD have handled this extremely poorly with the most minimal of effort or quality control... that they used a Start Up 3rd Party, was frankly a terrible lapse in judgement. Something that has hurt rather than helped further build the Radeon Brand.
Still regardless of how half-baked and poorly executed the entire affair was., it doesn't make it any less legitimate.
AMD might be somewhat content to attempt sweep the entire affair under-the-rug today... but it doesn't mean they don't still have to honour their commitments, which unless you can prove otherwise I'd have to assume they do.
This said given AMD stopped production in 2015., this means that any retained stock is bound by the Warranty until 2018 (i.e. this Year).
They have ZERO Obligation to honour the Warranty on Stock sold after the Production Year.
Websites like Amazon do list the Production Year because of this. It's your job as a Consumer to be aware of said Warranty Limitations.