AMD Zen 2 (Ryzen 3000) - *** NO COMPETITOR HINTING ***

[Thekwango]

It's not the truth though is it? You are saying "Intel deliver". They haven't. At all. They only released 6 and 8 cores when AMD forced their hand. And they are riddled with bugs. That is NOT delivering. You don't talk the truth.

so who have been delivering the fastest/bestestp) cpu's in, lets say, the past 10 years? (general use, gaming etc - not uber niche, specific use cases)

Literally the only one with hardware bias in this thread is you, just you, and only you are complaining about it, all your doing is trying to distract from your blatant bias by accusing a bunch of others of doing exactly what you do.

in fairness in regards to the post dg is replying to he is spot on. whether we like it or not, intel have been the dominant force in cpu's for, what, 10(+?) years? year in year out they have delivered the fastest desktop cpus (certainly for gaming and usually for most other non-specific use cases too)

some of the silly sausages above saying intel 'haven't delivered' are looking a tad silly by trying to argue something that is demonstrably true - and they also come across as a bit faboi-ish, so no dg isn't the only one in this thread displaying bias.
how intel achieved that dominance is irrelevant, the fact they have drip fed cpu increases is irrelevant. the cold hard facts are they have been delivering the fastest cpu's.

while dg might hold some off the wall views (he and i have had some 'lively' discussions in the past so i know all about his posting style), he's bang on with this one and if some people took their blinkers off and responded to the content of his posts rather than to the person they would realise that.

 

[4K8KW10]

in fairness in regards to the post dg is replying to he is spot on. whether we like it or not, intel have been the dominant force in cpu's for, what, 10(+?) years? year in year out they have delivered the fastest desktop cpus (certainly for gaming and usually for most other non-specific use cases too)

some of the silly sausages above saying intel 'haven't delivered' are looking a tad silly by trying to argue something that is demonstrably true - and they also come across as a bit faboi-ish, so no dg isn't the only one in this thread displaying bias.
how intel achieved that dominance is irrelevant, the fact they have drip fed cpu increases is irrelevant. the cold hard facts are they have been delivering the fastest cpu's.

while dg might hold some off the wall views (he and i have had some 'lively' discussions in the past so i know all about his posting style), he's bang on with this one and if some people took their blinkers off and responded to the content of his posts rather than to the person they would realise that.

When most of the consumers sit on slow pentiums and i3 which cann't even run Google Chrome without being sluggish as snails, I think it's irrelevant that intel offered i7.
In practice, intel didn't deliver proper performance for the masses, nor it helped for the innovation and the progress of the CPUs in the last 10 years.

 

[humbug]

so who have been delivering the fastest/bestestp) cpu's in, lets say, the past 10 years? (general use, gaming etc - not uber niche, specific use cases)


in fairness in regards to the post dg is replying to he is spot on. whether we like it or not, intel have been the dominant force in cpu's for, what, 10(+?) years? year in year out they have delivered the fastest desktop cpus (certainly for gaming and usually for most other non-specific use cases too)

some of the silly sausages above saying intel 'haven't delivered' are looking a tad silly by trying to argue something that is demonstrably true - and they also come across as a bit faboi-ish, so no dg isn't the only one in this thread displaying bias.
how intel achieved that dominance is irrelevant, the fact they have drip fed cpu increases is irrelevant. the cold hard facts are they have been delivering the fastest cpu's.

while dg might hold some off the wall views (he and i have had some 'lively' discussions in the past so i know all about his posting style), he's bang on with this one and if some people took their blinkers off and responded to the content of his posts rather than to the person they would realise that.

Sandy Bridge was fantastic, great CPU, that's when they dominated and i'm not taking anything away from that, Intel did a good thing with Sandy Bridge, but, what have they done since then? The same 4 core 8 thread CPU's on smaller and smaller nodes with incremental tiny IPC up lifts.

AMD have been out of it for a Decade, very true, but one cannot deny Ryzen with its multichip Infinity Fabric, number of CPU cores in the mainstream, the performance per watt, and levels of IPC equal to Coffeelake, back in 2016 AMD slapped Intel with a wet kipper and 3 years on they are not catching up on a technology level, AMD have been ahead since Ryzen and now pushing even further ahead, while Intel are stagnating.

 

[d_brennen]

wccftech is wrong when they have to think or interpret its moles' informations. In this case, you have a figure which shows an exact metric - in this case the performance of an ES at 4.2 GHz.
I don't know why it's so difficult for some to understand simple things.

wccf is just click bait nonsense. Not long til news

 

[LePhuronn]

Fact is, they were beaten to 8c+ on the consumer platform, beaten to PCIe4, beaten to 7nm. I say beaten...Intel have not delivered on either yet.

Beaten to 5GHz too, because apparently that number means something.

 

[KungFuSpaghetti]

Literally the only one with hardware bias in this thread is you, just you, and only you are complaining about it, all your doing is trying to distract from your blatant bias by accusing a bunch of others of doing exactly what you do.

Complaining? No, just being realistic I think.
There's some laughably cult like AMD fandom in here bordering on obsessive. One guy even quit his job because his company wouldn't buy AMD for the datacenter... That's utter lunacy...

These chips are aimed at gamers, it's a gaming cpu which is what Lisa Su said at the last trade show, so really it has to be faster than Intel whilst retaining a core/thread advantage and being cheaper. Lot to live up to!

 

[4K8KW10]

One guy even quit his job because his company wouldn't buy AMD for the datacenter... That's utter lunacy...

This is just a pure lie. That was one of the reasons. One of the reasons. You can't work with incompetent colleagues because in many cases you must work not only for yourself but for them, as well.
Nowhere it has been said for the datacentre. Only simple stupid office machines.

Enjoy

 

[humbug]

Complaining? No, just being realistic I think.
There's some laughably cult like AMD fandom in here bordering on obsessive. One guy even quit his job because his company wouldn't buy AMD for the datacenter... That's utter lunacy...

These chips are aimed at gamers, it's a gaming cpu which is what Lisa Su said at the last trade show, so really it has to be faster than Intel whilst retaining a core/thread advantage and being cheaper. Lot to live up to!

I missed that, in this thread? that is lunacy and of course there are AMD faboys but i stand by what i said, Dg trolls the thread with Intel crap and then points at people who do nothing more than challenge him on the things he says crying "AMD fanboy"

 

[KungFuSpaghetti]

I missed that, in this thread? that is lunacy and of course there are AMD faboys but i stand by what i said, Dg trolls the thread with Intel crap and then points at people who do nothing more than challenge him on the things he says crying "AMD fanboy"

Yeah in this thread... I even asked the guy if that was the sole reason, as it seemed like the irrational behaviour of a female during a menstrual cycle!

Maybe dg's delivery isn't the best at times, but he makes a valid point. When it comes to gaming, even on 14nm Intel are kings currently, there's no escaping that. As a new Ryzen returnee I'd be seriously disappointed if they can't match the overall gaming performance of the 9900k (a clocked one too).

I'm quietly optimistic they will be faster though.

 

[Random Guy Esq.]

Edit: Not worth the effort really.

 

[humbug]

Yeah in this thread... I even asked the guy if that was the sole reason, as it seemed like the irrational behaviour of a female during a menstrual cycle!

Maybe dg's delivery isn't the best at times, but he makes a valid point. When it comes to gaming, even on 14nm Intel are kings currently, there's no escaping that. As a new Ryzen returnee I'd be seriously disappointed if they can't match the overall gaming performance of the 9900k (a clocked one too).

I'm quietly optimistic they will be faster though.

I don't know how long you have been watching this thread but i have made that same Ryzen vs Coffeelake argument time and time again in this thread, he can't get me or as far as my observations in this thread are anyone to disagree with him 'on that', so what he does is exaggerates, by quoting 20% better IPC, 50 FPS faster in games without giving any context and so on..... knowing its crap because he's had those tropes shown to be wrong to him over and over again.

There is something that is true, many in here say the same thing that your talking about, and then there's utter hyperbole, that's where Dg stands in this discourse.

 

[4K8KW10]

When it comes to gaming, even on 14nm Intel are kings currently, there's no escaping that.

Another lie.

i7 9700k started getting stuttering in games https://www.reddit.com/r/intel/comments/axuny2/i7_9700k_started_getting_stuttering_in_games/

 

[humbug]

Another lie.

i7 9700k started getting stuttering in games https://www.reddit.com/r/intel/comments/axuny2/i7_9700k_started_getting_stuttering_in_games/

Check the 0.1% lows...

 

[Thekwango]

Intel did a good thing with Sandy Bridge, but, what have they done since then?

continued to release the fastest/best cpu's on the market surely? unless i'm missing a trick and amd were level pegging with them ever since?

The same 4 core 8 thread CPU's on smaller and smaller nodes with incremental tiny IPC up lifts.

I already covered this in my post you quoted. it's irrelevant to the argument dg was making. irrespective how intel have drip fed us they have had the fastest chips for (give or take) unless again I am missing something?

AMD have been out of it for a Decade, very true, but one cannot deny Ryzen with its multichip Infinity Fabric, number of CPU cores in the mainstream, the performance per watt, and levels of IPC equal to Coffeelake, back in 2016 AMD slapped Intel with a wet kipper and 3 years on they are not catching up on a technology level, AMD have been ahead since Ryzen and now pushing even further ahead, while Intel are stagnating.

again irrelevant to the conversation regarding Intel 'delivering', irrespective of the fact I agree with you.

 

[alec]

This forum would not exist if overclocking used to be an easy exact science. I think we can all agree on that.

Manufacturers are taking overclocking into their own hands. They do all the binning and pushing to the limit. Both 9900k and 2700x can't be made much faster using manual overclocking other than throwing out all power limits for all-core improvement. My journey with Vega was one of undervolting, not so much overcloking

 

[humbug]

continued to release the fastest/best cpu's on the market surely? unless i'm missing a trick and amd were level pegging with them ever since?

I already covered this in my post you quoted. it's irrelevant to the argument dg was making. irrespective how intel have drip fed us they have had the fastest chips for (give or take) unless again I am missing something?

again irrelevant to the conversation regarding Intel 'delivering', irrespective of the fact I agree with you.

continued to release the fastest/best cpu's on the market surely? unless i'm missing a trick and amd were level pegging with them ever since?

Do you think we would have 8 core 16 thread CPU's from Intel right now if it was not for AMD? look at the slide above you, if we didn't we'd have problems, i think its only because of AMD that we have 5Ghz 8 core CPU's, and a CPU can be faster on paper, in a slide, doesn't mean its the best CPU for the job.

I already covered this in my post you quoted. it's irrelevant to the argument dg was making. irrespective how intel have drip fed us they have had the fastest chips for (give or take) unless again I am missing something?

I don't know how long you have been watching this thread but i have made that same Ryzen vs Coffeelake argument time and time again in this thread, he can't get me or as far as my observations in this thread are anyone to disagree with him 'on that', so what he does is exaggerates, by quoting 20% better IPC, 50 FPS faster in games without giving any context and so on..... knowing its crap because he's had those tropes shown to be wrong to him over and over again.

There is something that is true, many in here say the same thing that your talking about, and then there's utter hyperbole, that's where Dg stands in this discourse.

Also, seemingly faster gaming is the only thing Intel have left, without that, what do they have?

 

[4K8KW10]

Check the 0.1% lows...

Six and octo-cores stuck at 100% load in gaming causing the minimums to be low and causing micro-stuttering. That's by the "kings"...

 

[beany_bot]

As a marketer I think this is both vile and a bad move.
You should never resort to slagging off your competition. If you believe in your product you should stand behind it and show it off on its own merit. Not to mention, these are "people" in this advert, with familys to support and AMD is joking that they are now unemployed? Worst. Advert. Ever.

 

[Firestar_3x]

Bet you are fun at a party.

 

[beany_bot]

Bet your fun at a party.

Amazingly, when i'm at parties I'm not creating adverts for my work.