AMD Zen Discussion Thread

Lukker- · 23-02-2017 4:48pm

L wrote: »

That's my thought as well. Extreme overclocking is more of a destructive test of the hardware than representative of day to day use. Still, impressive & cause to be optimistic.

The rumoured clock speeds of 3.3/3.7 turned out to be false for the r5 1600x.

3.6/4.0 suggests that those with less cores will achieve a higher clock speed.

It wouldn't surprise me if the 4ct/4t and 4c/8t managed 4.2 Ghz turbo out of the box.

K.O.Kiki · 23-02-2017 4:53pm

L wrote: »

So it looks like they definitely overclock well. Mental setup but snagging a world record is encouraging that Ryzen is making AMD a serious contender again.

Of note, that record was held by an i7-5960X @6.0GHz on LN2
http://hwbot.org/benchmark/cinebench_-_r15/rankings?cores=8#start=0#interval=20

Lukker- · 23-02-2017 5:10pm

K.O.Kiki wrote: »

Of note, that record was held by an i7-5960X @6.0GHz on LN2
http://hwbot.org/benchmark/cinebench_-_r15/rankings?cores=8#start=0#interval=20

Shows how much better AMD is at multithreading if with same core count and nearly a full GHz it can still beat it.

5960X TDP is 140w too
R7 1800x is 95w

BloodBath · 23-02-2017 6:15pm

82 different motherboards at launch. Pretty insane. The reviewers have a lot of work on their hands.

Did the Excavator/bulldozer line even get that many in their entire life cycle?

Lukker- · 23-02-2017 7:33pm

BloodBath wrote: »

82 different motherboards at launch. Pretty insane. The reviewers have a lot of work on their hands.

Did the Excavator/bulldozer line even get that many in their entire life cycle?

Definitely much less. In the high end especially seems to be loads of choice. It's a good sign anyways that chipset makers are showing so much faith in AMD.

They stand to make a good bit more per board compared to Intel chipsets, LGA charge a fair chunk to use them.

Slutmonkey57b · 23-02-2017 8:45pm

BloodBath wrote: »

82 different motherboards at launch. Pretty insane. The reviewers have a lot of work on their hands.

Did the Excavator/bulldozer line even get that many in their entire life cycle?

I'd say yes, just pointlessly fragmented along overlapping chipsets/sockets that I'm sure even the manufacturers had trouble understanding.

BloodBath · 24-02-2017 4:30pm

There's mounting evidence that Ryzen actually has slightly better IPC than Kabylake only kabylake clocks higher. AMD really outdid themselves this time.

http://wccftech.com/amd-ryzen-1700x-benchmarks-leaked-beats-kaby-lake-ipc/

Most of the other benchmark comparisons I've seen have had big gaps in clock speeds but if you scale Ryzen speeds up to match they should push ahead. Only problem is 7600k/7700k's clock to around 5Ghz.

Hopefully with the right cooling and board most of the Ryzen line can get to around 4.5ghz. The 7600k/7700k could stay competitive in the gaming markets if intel slashes the prices by about 30-40%.

Serephucus · 24-02-2017 4:33pm

Well now that's very interesting.

I can't remember the last time I was so interested in a CPU launch, never mind excited. The i7 920, maybe?

cherryghost · 24-02-2017 4:36pm

Yes the 1st gen Core i series was the last time I had a real interest in the market, that was the point AMD lost their ground hard on Intel. It seems that AMD really have hit the nail on these CPUs and of course the consumers pocket will come out on top after all this. Delighted for all concerned really.

K.O.Kiki · 24-02-2017 4:48pm

My poor Xeon is going to lose so much value though

BloodBath · 24-02-2017 4:51pm

Has anyone pre ordered anything yet?

Ryzen is supposed to support DDR4 memory speeds up to 3600Mhz as well. Ryzen boards will have a feature like intels extreme memory profile (XMP) called AMD Memory Profile (AMP). It will probably be board dependent but some of the boards listed show support for 3600Mhz through AMP.

http://wccftech.com/amd-ryzen-cpus-support-ddr4-memory-speeds-3600mhz/

dazberry · 24-02-2017 4:56pm

AMD Ryzen 7 1700 Overclocked To 4GHz On All 8 Cores.

We just tested a 1700, it hit 4.0GHz stable in everything, but ONLY in the Crosshair mainboard, the lower-end boards it was hovering around 3.80GHz as the VRM’s were cooking with extra voltage. It however was maxing around 4050MHz, so I’d say 1700 can do 3.9-4.1GHz, of course the 1800X will probably do 4.1-4.3 as no doubt better binned, but if your clocking the motherboard has a big impact on the overclock and so far Asus Crosshair and Asrock Taichi seem the best two.

D.

game4it70 · 24-02-2017 5:06pm

I'm so tempted to pre-order but common sense says wait for reviews

The ipc looks good so far but i want somthing that i can overclock (play with) a bit more than 2-300 mhz.
I have 4x4gb ddr4 atm and was going to use that but its seems that 2x8gb will be better for oc'ing with only two of the dimms populated

On the plus side EK are sending me out FOC a bracket for my cpu block to fit the new AM4 boards.

Serephucus · 24-02-2017 5:07pm

I am very tempted to pre-order as well, but just as a matter of principle I'm waiting for reviews. I'm also curious to see how much motherboards will affect overclocks.

But I'm sorely tempted to go nuts and do Ryzen+Evolv+WC build.

Edit: Speaking of!

BloodBath · 24-02-2017 5:08pm

dazberry wrote: »

AMD Ryzen 7 1700 Overclocked To 4GHz On All 8 Cores.

D.

I figured it would at least match the 1800x once overclocked which is insane value. A €360 i7 6900k killer. Your average workstation is about to get a big upgrade.

Gamers are going to want higher clocks though. The upper end 4/8's should be the best overclockers with the 6/12's somewhere in between.

Serephucus · 24-02-2017 5:09pm

I think... I think Tom might be in the absolute **** for releasing this...

BloodBath · 24-02-2017 5:14pm

Serephucus wrote: »

I think... I think Tom might be in the absolute **** for releasing this...

There's no NDA on the boards though is there? That's a really nice board though. If you're going for an 8/16 and want to overclock the bejasus out of it then it might be the go to board.

I've seen some of the Asrock boards have more power phases though.

Serephucus · 24-02-2017 5:16pm

I'm not sure. I assumed there would be something because of the launch date, or we'd probably have seen something from someone else before now. The only reason I'm thinking not is that Tom is happily showing the socket, which doesn't usually happen with reviews, but then I'm basing that off Intel boards, maybe AMD does things different.

game4it70 · 24-02-2017 5:23pm

Serephucus wrote: »

I am very tempted to pre-order as well, but just as a matter of principle I'm waiting for reviews. I'm also curious to see how much motherboards will affect overclocks.

But I'm sorely tempted to go nuts and do Ryzen+Evolv+WC build.

Edit: Speaking of!

Thats the mobo i have my eye on although a fair bit more than i want to spend.

I saw someone else doing an unboxing of it this morning so I'd say he will get away with posting it early as it doesn't really give anything away imo.

Lukker- · 24-02-2017 5:35pm

Serephucus wrote: »

I'm not sure. I assumed there would be something because of the launch date, or we'd probably have seen something from someone else before now. The only reason I'm thinking not is that Tom is happily showing the socket, which doesn't usually happen with reviews, but then I'm basing that off Intel boards, maybe AMD does things different.

NDA got lifted a few days ago

Dair76 · 24-02-2017 5:47pm

Well played AMD. I won't be ordering until the summer, but I'm looking forward to my first non-Intel CPU in yonks!

Slutmonkey57b · 24-02-2017 7:32pm

I think given the level of hype these leaks are generating, AMD is as concerned about nda agreements as Ryan Reynolds was about deadpool. :-)

lmimmfn · 24-02-2017 7:46pm

K.O.Kiki wrote: »

My poor Xeon is going to lose so much value though

yeah, same situation here, im going to lose out on my 80euro x5650

Venom · 25-02-2017 12:09am

game4it70 wrote: »

Thats the mobo i have my eye on although a fair bit more than i want to spend.

I saw someone else doing an unboxing of it this morning so I'd say he will get away with posting it early as it doesn't really give anything away imo.

There's always a performance cost to pay for having a top tier motherboard but at least unlike Intel, AMD tend not to change CPU sockets as often so there is a bit of future proofing.

It's also worth nothing the Ryzen CPU's are more in competition with Intel's more pricey X99 platform that the Z270/Z170 platform.

Icyseanfitz · 25-02-2017 12:27am

got this over in overclockers forum

its from a big hardware publication in hungry. To sum up the things he stated;

"Overclock is no problem at all. Though we can not say a certain frequency due to NDA, I can say that it is impressive. Overclockers will be happy."
"I have friends from AMD Engineering department due to my experience in the hardware industry. Zen 2 or Zen B will be even more competitive. So we can say that Intel shall brood on the future"
"With our overclocked 1800x sample,under Noctua cooler given by AMD, we have passed beyond the stock single thread performance of 7700k, in a specific bench, and the temps were great. We had no concern about temps during our run which passes the ST performance of 7700k."
"In some benchmarks AMD(!). It seems ironical yes but AMD is presenting a CPU performance that Intel can not keep up with even with their 10 core 6950x!"
"Breaking NDA won't be a problem since the scores are beyond fantastic. But we will stick with the tradition."
"With one click I can reach great OC's. So I won't really bother with the manual OC no more."
"Single thread score will be so great. According to this performance we can say that 7700K will be history, even for gaming, from now on" he said.
"Intel shall shake themself. Because Ryzen will be a great choice for Overclock enthusiast."

sounding like some mighty impressive stuff amd have pulled

wotzgoingon · 25-02-2017 12:49am

I wonder which motherboard they were using as I have read on a number of forums that the cheaper motherboards aren't overclocking as good due to phases.

When I was reading those forums and I decided to look up my current motherboard specs and my board has a 24 phase VRM, I wish they spent that much money on VRM's now and not RGB and japanese capacitors for sound and gigabit LAN's. I am still on a 3 MB connection so what they hell do I need gigabit.

AlmightyCushion · 25-02-2017 12:53am

wotzgoingon wrote: »

I wonder which motherboard they were using as I have read on a number of forums that the cheaper motherboards aren't overclocking as good due to phases.

When I was reading those forums and I decided to look up my current motherboard specs and my board has a 24 phase VRM, I wish they spent that much money on VRM's now and not RGB and japanese capacitors for sound and gigabit LAN's. I am still on a 3 MB connection so what they hell do I need gigabit.

Gigabit lan probably adds very little to the price and lots of people have >100Mb connections and many more will in the future so why not add it. How many people who are looking for great overclocks would save a few quid by getting a motherboard with only a 100Mb ethernet port? I doubt it would be more than a very small amount.

Icyseanfitz · 25-02-2017 1:04am

the asus hero motherboard seems to be the one all the overclockers on the different forums are looking at

game4it70 · 25-02-2017 8:01am

Venom wrote: »

There's always a performance cost to pay for having a top tier motherboard but at least unlike Intel, AMD tend not to change CPU sockets as often so there is a bit of future proofing.

It's also worth nothing the Ryzen CPU's are more in competition with Intel's more pricey X99 platform that the Z270/Z170 platform.

I've had a fair few Intel mobos over the years and in general for cpu overclocking having a top end board didn't improve the overclock over a mid range.Unless you need specific features a top tier board isn't worth it imo.
Your right that at least with Amd you have a decent upgrade path as they dont eol sockets like Intel.

The prices of the cpu's are very good when compared to Intel's counterparts.My concern is that top tier boards are needed for better clocks but hopefully when reivews come out we will see more mid range boards that can clock well.

I have a 5820k but my mobo needs replacing so my options where to buy a new x99 board and keep the cpu or sell and the cpu and go for Ryzen.I was looking at a decent x99 board for £165 so thats why i dont want to pay £250 for an Am4 board.
It makes so sense to change for me but the upgrade itch needs scratching badly as the wait for vega has been so long

Cuddlesworth · 25-02-2017 11:08am

Icyseanfitz wrote: »

got this over in overclockers forum

its from a big hardware publication in hungry. To sum up the things he stated;

"Overclock is no problem at all. Though we can not say a certain frequency due to NDA, I can say that it is impressive. Overclockers will be happy."
"I have friends from AMD Engineering department due to my experience in the hardware industry. Zen 2 or Zen B will be even more competitive. So we can say that Intel shall brood on the future"
"With our overclocked 1800x sample,under Noctua cooler given by AMD, we have passed beyond the stock single thread performance of 7700k, in a specific bench, and the temps were great. We had no concern about temps during our run which passes the ST performance of 7700k."
"In some benchmarks AMD(!). It seems ironical yes but AMD is presenting a CPU performance that Intel can not keep up with even with their 10 core 6950x!"
"Breaking NDA won't be a problem since the scores are beyond fantastic. But we will stick with the tradition."
"With one click I can reach great OC's. So I won't really bother with the manual OC no more."
"Single thread score will be so great. According to this performance we can say that 7700K will be history, even for gaming, from now on" he said.
"Intel shall shake themself. Because Ryzen will be a great choice for Overclock enthusiast."

sounding like some mighty impressive stuff amd have pulled

Christ I am half tempted to just give away my 5820k and pick up a 8 core.

sheepy01 · 25-02-2017 1:19pm

Always the same BS from AMD every year... they always launch a product saying "is better than", then ends being always below expectations. If you see they are always very picky in comparisons, no real world tests or whatsoever. They started going doing since they bought ATI in 2006. Intel has the monopoly, they just haven't put out in the market nothing new yet because they do not have competition.
Even developers hate AMD due to their crashes when programming anything, it is not reliable.

To sum things up: if you are cold and poor, get AMD, if you are rich, buy Intel. End of story.

I will never rely on AMD for my work. Always had problems, and still see them on some customers devices.

game4it70 · 25-02-2017 1:29pm

sheepy01 wrote: »

Always the same BS from AMD every year... they always launch a product saying "is better than", then ends being always below expectations. If you see they are always very picky in comparisons, no real world tests or whatsoever. They started going doing since they bought ATI in 2006. Intel has the monopoly, they just haven't put out in the market nothing new yet because they do not have competition.
Even developers hate AMD due to their crashes when programming anything, it is not reliable.

To sum things up: if you are cold and poor, get AMD, if you are rich, buy Intel. End of story.

I will never rely on AMD for my work. Always had problems, and still see them on some customers devices.

Wow much hate there :eek:
I'm glad that having an issue with a brand doesn't cause me to never buy from them ever again.I much rather actually read unbiased reviews and decide what product suits me best.
I've owned Intel,Amd and Nvidia products and would never buy from them just because of their name as unlike yourself i dont look at brands with rose coloured glasses.

Cuddlesworth · 25-02-2017 1:30pm

sheepy01 wrote: »

Always the same BS from AMD every year... they always launch a product saying "is better than", then ends being always below expectations. If you see they are always very picky in comparisons, no real world tests or whatsoever. They started going doing since they bought ATI in 2006. Intel has the monopoly, they just haven't put out in the market nothing new yet because they do not have competition.
Even developers hate AMD due to their crashes when programming anything, it is not reliable.

To sum things up: if you are cold and poor, get AMD, if you are rich, buy Intel. End of story.

I will never rely on AMD for my work. Always had problems, and still see them on some customers devices.

But how do you really feel?

Icyseanfitz · 25-02-2017 1:44pm

sheepy01 wrote: »

Always the same BS from AMD every year... they always launch a product saying "is better than", then ends being always below expectations. If you see they are always very picky in comparisons, no real world tests or whatsoever. They started going doing since they bought ATI in 2006. Intel has the monopoly, they just haven't put out in the market nothing new yet because they do not have competition.
Even developers hate AMD due to their crashes when programming anything, it is not reliable.

To sum things up: if you are cold and poor, get AMD, if you are rich, buy Intel. End of story.

I will never rely on AMD for my work. Always had problems, and still see them on some customers devices.

You remind me of my one friend who has to buy Intel+nvidia just out of brand loyalty. You know amd has had better processor's than Intel in the past right? Ati+amd have had better gpu's than nvidia in the past. Pick what's best by performance not brand

Cinebench isn't really an amd specific program so can't see how that was cherry picked either

Venom · 25-02-2017 2:03pm

When is the NDA lifted so we can get some full on reviews?

EoinHef · 25-02-2017 2:11pm

sheepy01 wrote: »

Always the same BS from AMD every year... they always launch a product saying "is better than", then ends being always below expectations. If you see they are always very picky in comparisons, no real world tests or whatsoever. They started going doing since they bought ATI in 2006. Intel has the monopoly, they just haven't put out in the market nothing new yet because they do not have competition.
Even developers hate AMD due to their crashes when programming anything, it is not reliable.

To sum things up: if you are cold and poor, get AMD, if you are rich, buy Intel. End of story.

I will never rely on AMD for my work. Always had problems, and still see them on some customers devices.

Who the f**k is this guy?? :P

Redfox25 · 25-02-2017 2:17pm

EoinHef wrote: »

sheepy01 wrote: »

Always the same BS from AMD every year... they always launch a product saying "is better than", then ends being always below expectations. If you see they are always very picky in comparisons, no real world tests or whatsoever. They started going doing since they bought ATI in 2006. Intel has the monopoly, they just haven't put out in the market nothing new yet because they do not have competition.
Even developers hate AMD due to their crashes when programming anything, it is not reliable.

To sum things up: if you are cold and poor, get AMD, if you are rich, buy Intel. End of story.

I will never rely on AMD for my work. Always had problems, and still see them on some customers devices.

Who the f**k is this guy?? :P

Mr Intel from the sounds of things.
ðŸ€£ðŸ€£

sheepy01 · 25-02-2017 3:23pm

Icyseanfitz wrote: »

You remind me of my one friend who has to buy Intel+nvidia just out of brand loyalty. You know amd has had better processor's than Intel in the past right? Ati+amd have had better gpu's than nvidia in the past. Pick what's best by performance not brand

Cinebench isn't really an amd specific program so can't see how that was cherry picked either

LOL it sounds like an Intel pro I know. The sad thing in this story is that there are only 2 brands in this market monopolizing the industry.
We have worked a lot with systems and you cannot compare one to the other.

And for me, the greatest graphics card in history was the ATI 5970, that was WAY ahead for its time back in 2009. But now they remain unusable due to drivers. Still have massive power nowadays. Something happened back then, because they were on its way to glory. They should have spent money in software development for stability in the following years. I always got tired of waiting for AMD, as it was always the same story since.

I wish there were more than 2 companies to choose for.

sheepy01 · 25-02-2017 3:37pm

game4it70 wrote: »

Wow much hate there :eek:
I'm glad that having an issue with a brand doesn't cause me to never buy from them ever again.I much rather actually read unbiased reviews and decide what product suits me best.
I've owned Intel,Amd and Nvidia products and would never buy from them just because of their name as unlike yourself i dont look at brands with rose coloured glasses.

I get your point, I really do, from an end consumer view. I gave my opinion based on systems we were working on.

We've been studying flip chip-designs for the last 3 years and stability remained in Intel. Its like saying Android is more stable than iOS. Nothing else.

I entered the thread somehow hardcore lol. But you cannot imagine how much pain we suffered when having issues with AMD.

wotzgoingon · 25-02-2017 3:38pm

How much are they paying you?

K.O.Kiki · 25-02-2017 3:50pm

sheepy01 wrote: »

Always the same BS from AMD every year... they always launch a product saying "is better than", then ends being always below expectations. If you see they are always very picky in comparisons, no real world tests or whatsoever. They started going doing since they bought ATI in 2006. Intel has the monopoly, they just haven't put out in the market nothing new yet because they do not have competition.
Even developers hate AMD due to their crashes when programming anything, it is not reliable.

To sum things up: if you are cold and poor, get AMD, if you are rich, buy Intel. End of story.

I will never rely on AMD for my work. Always had problems, and still see them on some customers devices.

Cinebench R15 is an industry standard test, and based on a real-world scenario (rendering).

Intel just released Kaby Lake, so I doubt they have ANYTHING in the pipeline other than i5-7640K / i7-7740K.

Icyseanfitz · 25-02-2017 3:52pm

Had a 7970 for 4 years, fantastic card, now have a 1080, I go where the performance is and from everything I've read these new ryzen CPUs are shaping up to give Intel's entire range a good trouncing in price and performance, and Intel need a good waking up, theve all but brought desktop CPU development to a standstill with their monopoly.

But I agree that we do need to wait for user benchmarks for more details, specifically over clocking.

IMO though, Intel are about to have a bad time for a while. Well deserved as well

game4it70 · 25-02-2017 4:06pm

Venom wrote: »

When is the NDA lifted so we can get some full on reviews?

Tuesday 28th afaik.

Cuddlesworth · 25-02-2017 4:08pm

sheepy01 wrote: »

LOL it sounds like an Intel pro I know. The sad thing in this story is that there are only 2 brands in this market monopolizing the industry.
We have worked a lot with systems and you cannot compare one to the other.

And for me, the greatest graphics card in history was the ATI 5970, that was WAY ahead for its time back in 2009. But now they remain unusable due to drivers. Still have massive power nowadays. Something happened back then, because they were on its way to glory. They should have spent money in software development for stability in the following years. I always got tired of waiting for AMD, as it was always the same story since.

I wish there were more than 2 companies to choose for.

There is so much bias in your posts its hurts.

You claim this launch has no real world benchmarks, where AMD have been doing nothing but trying to show real world benchmarks since multitasking is where 8 cores will shine. Lots of hype is coming out but its not from AMD. Its from the reviewers who have watched Intel stagnate hard, like they did in the past.

You claim that Intel has had zero competition, when the reality is AMD has been competing well everywhere except the high end in the cpu market. Their APU's have gotten very good over the last few years and are a better cost/performance buy over Intel. Both chip makers are loosing badly right now to ARM.

You claim that AMD chips crash all the time, implying that they had some fundamental x86 flaw. They don't.

You claim developers hate Intel chips. Most developers have little to no knowledge about hardware. For a good while in Bulldozers life, the 8 core AMD chips were better then the equivalent priced 4 core non hyper-threaded Intels.

And most good companies are pushing developers onto VDI so they can share resources for compiling, compounding the fact they have no idea what hardware they are running on.

You claim the 480 is some power hog in comparison to the 1060. Its not, 120watts to 150watts isn't exactly mind-blowing difference here for their market segment.

You claim AMD have horrible driver issues, well they don't. Both companies have long since left such major problems behind them.

Everything you have said is heavily tinged with observational bias.

wotzgoingon · 25-02-2017 4:15pm

Well said man. All I could come up with was how much are they paying you?

I wouldn't put it past Intel to be paying trolls to talk **** about AMD.

Icyseanfitz · 25-02-2017 4:29pm

wotzgoingon wrote: »

Well said man. All I could come up with was how much are they paying you?

I wouldn't put it past Intel to be paying trolls to talk **** about AMD.

ha intel would do better than that to be fair, like lock 4k netflix to kabylake........

BloodBath · 25-02-2017 4:33pm

sheepy01 wrote: »

Always the same BS from AMD every year... they always launch a product saying "is better than", then ends being always below expectations. If you see they are always very picky in comparisons, no real world tests or whatsoever. They started going doing since they bought ATI in 2006. Intel has the monopoly, they just haven't put out in the market nothing new yet because they do not have competition.
Even developers hate AMD due to their crashes when programming anything, it is not reliable.

To sum things up: if you are cold and poor, get AMD, if you are rich, buy Intel. End of story.

I will never rely on AMD for my work. Always had problems, and still see them on some customers devices.

The biggest load of crap I've ever seen posted on this forum.

Icyseanfitz · 25-02-2017 4:34pm

its up there all right haha

BloodBath · 25-02-2017 4:36pm

Not having a go at the poster. I'm sure you have your reasons but all of the evidence suggest AMD are on to a winner this time around.

sheepy01 · 25-02-2017 4:53pm

Cuddlesworth wrote: »

There is so much bias in your posts its hurts.

You claim this launch has no real world benchmarks, where AMD have been doing nothing but trying to show real world benchmarks since multitasking is where 8 cores will shine. Lots of hype is coming out but its not from AMD. Its from the reviewers who have watched Intel stagnate hard, like they did in the past.

You claim that Intel has had zero competition, when the reality is AMD has been competing well everywhere except the high end in the cpu market. Their APU's have gotten very good over the last few years and are a better cost/performance buy over Intel. Both chip makers are loosing badly right now to ARM.

You claim that AMD chips crash all the time, implying that they had some fundamental x86 flaw. They don't.

You claim developers hate Intel chips. Most developers have little to no knowledge about hardware. For a good while in Bulldozers life, the 8 core AMD chips were better then the equivalent priced 4 core non hyper-threaded Intels.

And most good companies are pushing developers onto VDI so they can share resources for compiling, compounding the fact they have no idea what hardware they are running on.

You claim the 480 is some power hog in comparison to the 1060. Its not, 120watts to 150watts isn't exactly mind-blowing difference here for their market segment.

You claim AMD have horrible driver issues, well they don't. Both companies have long since left such major problems behind them.

Everything you have said is heavily tinged with observational bias.

ARM is on a different level and cannot be compared to desktop processors, they are on mobile devices which architecture is used by Apple, Samsung or Qualcomm in SoC. Still you can find Intel on mobile platforms too, not like AMD.

If AMD was going so well, Samsung or Microsoft wouldnt have been interested in buying it, as they both wanted it for the mobile industry. It has had massive losses.

AMD had horrible driver issues and still has. APUs had more issues because of the integrated GPU than the processor itself, but now are way better, that's true.

AMD has own the low and mid market, yes. But nothing more than that.
Nothing high end. And as my point of view was applied for work, stability or heavy load in other industries, Im sorry mate, but never seen AMD there.
And what about the 480, why do you bring it up? because its funny, it didn't even make it past 2 weeks since it had its first issue. And again I insist on the drivers thing I said before.

I hope I am wrong this time with this new line of processors, I really hope. I did trust AMD back when the 5970 era when their work was stunning.

But now saying this about AMD makes me an Intel pro lover? do I have anything else to rely on for work? I wished!!
I hate Fiat, am I a Honda lover? why? maybe because there are 100 other car brands?

As I said before, its like comparing Android to iOS!! I will eat my shorts if someone here says Android is more stable. And again there is not much to chose in that market either.

AMD Zen Discussion Thread

Comments