Again, forgetting that the leaks are 8 months old and AMD clearly didn't expect Intel to be so woefully behind, so in the absence of competition AMD pushed the SKUs around last-minute. But, no it's all Jim's fault.
-
Competitor rules
Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.
AMD Zen 2 (Ryzen 3000) - *** NO COMPETITOR HINTING ***
- Thread starter Jamin280672
- Start date
I don't give a damn about AdoredTV's leaks.
I think his previous videos such as on the history of Nvidia and monopoly of Intel are truly excellent pieces of work. Those past achievements don't just suddenly dissapear because he got a leak right or wrong or somewhere in between.
I think his previous videos such as on the history of Nvidia and monopoly of Intel are truly excellent pieces of work. Those past achievements don't just suddenly dissapear because he got a leak right or wrong or somewhere in between.
So Gamers Nexus, RedGamingTech and Moore's Law Is Dead (off the top of my head) are all similarly BS-peddling liars then? Because they all have the same info but from apparently different sources, and MLID even did a video recently
Unless it's, in fact, one massive AMD troll?
Think AMD are going to try and flog as many 12core as possible then when the sale drop below a certain level release the 16 core "once intel show their hand"....Think they are following intel's drip drip feed method "but not as extreme" and trying to get as much return on their investment in 7nm as they can at the different price point's
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 26 Oct 2013
- Posts
- 4,173
- Location
- Scotland
His vids are entertaining and interesting to take in but I don't rely on them as 100% fact.
Associate
- Joined
- 2 Jan 2019
- Posts
- 617
No-one is claiming them to be fact, not even the author himself.
Jeez, some people need to get a little perspective here.
Jeez, some people need to get a little perspective here.
Lol no.
To be fair, PUBG was already a bad case for AMD CPUs so if they've really caught up that bodes well for gaming performance in general. Depends what their test case was - probably not 1080p low with a 2080 Ti as a few on this forum seem to care so much about!
Not really. The R7 3800X is still $100 cheaper than an i9-9900K and has a bunch of other advantages (PCIe 4.0, not dead platform, power efficiency, fewer security flaws). The R7 3700X is $70 cheaper still and has SMT, unlike the rest of Intel's line-up, which'll make it far better for any productivity work. Let's not even get started on the mid-range parts...
Nah I highly doubt it
Soldato
- Joined
- 26 Oct 2013
- Posts
- 4,173
- Location
- Scotland
In one game at one specific setting and resolution maybe. Overall no way. 5% maybe.
Soldato
- Joined
- 19 Feb 2011
- Posts
- 5,849
There is currently a lot of speculation going round that the new 3xxx series chips are at the clocks they are for a couple of reasons.
1) To enable backwards comparability with the older X370 / B350 series motherboards, as AMD had promised this would be the case and to avoid lawsuits of people blowing up their rigs by plopping in some highly clocked core count chip and burning down their house when the VRM's etc fail lol.
2) The CPU Clocks etc dont align with what should be expected from the node shrink, this reinforces the point above that the chips have been clocked conservatively for compatability with older chipsets.
3) This leads into the newer X570 series of motherboards all seemingly over engineered, because the chips have OC headroom that these motherboards will be able to exploit fully, with rumors of 5ghz single core being actually realistic, and many thinking 4.5-4.7ghz all Core OC being a real possibility on one of these motherboards.
Seems kinda plausible i guess, in reality we wont know the truth until official reviews are released, but it does kind of make sense that these chips dont seem to be clocked as high as you would expect on the node that was used, TSMC High Performance, they are barely better than the 12nm LP node Zen+ was on.
So if it turns out to be true, that indeed they have been clocked conservativly to enable compatability with older motherboards, AMD could be onto a winner, as could the motherboard manufacturers, as soon as benchmarks release for the chip on the old and new platforms, to show the newer platform pushing the chip a lot further, people will be selling motherboards to ugpade! But it also allows the casual non OC users to get in on the act with more reasonable clocks on older motherboards.
Again there is still lack of info on PBO, XFR etc.. maybe this was intentional, due to the difference in what the chips can potentially achieve on the various motherboard versions? its all speculation but it does get you thinking. Coupled with the fact the vendors have seriously gone all in on X570, something tells me this may actually have some remnants of truth in it.
1) To enable backwards comparability with the older X370 / B350 series motherboards, as AMD had promised this would be the case and to avoid lawsuits of people blowing up their rigs by plopping in some highly clocked core count chip and burning down their house when the VRM's etc fail lol.
2) The CPU Clocks etc dont align with what should be expected from the node shrink, this reinforces the point above that the chips have been clocked conservatively for compatability with older chipsets.
3) This leads into the newer X570 series of motherboards all seemingly over engineered, because the chips have OC headroom that these motherboards will be able to exploit fully, with rumors of 5ghz single core being actually realistic, and many thinking 4.5-4.7ghz all Core OC being a real possibility on one of these motherboards.
Seems kinda plausible i guess, in reality we wont know the truth until official reviews are released, but it does kind of make sense that these chips dont seem to be clocked as high as you would expect on the node that was used, TSMC High Performance, they are barely better than the 12nm LP node Zen+ was on.
So if it turns out to be true, that indeed they have been clocked conservativly to enable compatability with older motherboards, AMD could be onto a winner, as could the motherboard manufacturers, as soon as benchmarks release for the chip on the old and new platforms, to show the newer platform pushing the chip a lot further, people will be selling motherboards to ugpade! But it also allows the casual non OC users to get in on the act with more reasonable clocks on older motherboards.
Again there is still lack of info on PBO, XFR etc.. maybe this was intentional, due to the difference in what the chips can potentially achieve on the various motherboard versions? its all speculation but it does get you thinking. Coupled with the fact the vendors have seriously gone all in on X570, something tells me this may actually have some remnants of truth in it.
Yes he done a couple of well researched video's on some interesting topics ....he could have been correct at the time,It was back in november after all a lot can change in a short space of time but yes don' believe all that people tell you as gospel! like the old saying goes
they had all the same info because it wasn't really that hard to make an educated guess at what we were going to get to within a margin of error given there was enough info already floating round relating to what amd were doing or planning to do. the bs peddling and lying comes from posting their information as 'leaks'. they weren't leaks, they were educated guesses. nothing more. but that doesn't generate the clicks - if people weren't so invested in these sites and people (for reasons i cannot even begin to fathom) they would see them for the click bait that they are. unless people start calling these people and sites out for what they are they will continue to post their super exclusive inside scoops disguised as leaks - actually they'll keep posting them even if they are being called out on them because people love a hype story. but it's important people realise that all they are really seeing is these people posting their own opinions and guesses but dressing it up as insider info/leaks. there's nothing wrong with that but it's the almost reverence in which some of these sites and people are being held in that causes me concern - as can be highlighted by the immediate defences thrown up on here when anyone questions their supposed leaks.
as i said before - if you take all the bs artists out of the equation most folk would have been overjoyed by what amd announced and what R3K is shaping up to be - a product line that at the very least matches intel, if not beating it at a much more palatable price point. that's a win for everyone. a massive win.........but some people ended up being taken in by these sites and thinking that they were going to see 12c/24t 5ghz chips going on sale for a fiver and as a result are hugely disappointed. if AdoredTV for example had said - here's what i think we are going to get, i've drawn this conclusion from the following......that's fine and all good.....but no, what you get is all this pomp and razzamatazz and lies with banner headlines about leaks, insider info, reliable amd sources etc - that's wrong no matter how much anyone may have a throb on for Jim.....when you have bullpoopery dressed up as fact that does no one any favours.
@Thekwango Until you can back up your pet theory it's no better than your claim of his being guesses. Belittling him because of your own inadequacies is just daft though, something you've been doing for pages now.
Looking forward to the full SKU list though, we don't have that data yet from AMD, so to say his SKU list was off is still utter bullfaeces at the moment. We do know the stack shifted up one grade though. Something that's quite easily comparable vs the leak.
The strawmen you have to create to back up your theory is impressive, that I will admit to. Many mental hoops to jump through to get to that level of nonsense. Nobody's even suggesting a 5GHz 12c for a fiver, even if you are just being facetious, it's not even in the ball park of exaggeration...
Looking forward to the full SKU list though, we don't have that data yet from AMD, so to say his SKU list was off is still utter bullfaeces at the moment. We do know the stack shifted up one grade though. Something that's quite easily comparable vs the leak.
The strawmen you have to create to back up your theory is impressive, that I will admit to. Many mental hoops to jump through to get to that level of nonsense. Nobody's even suggesting a 5GHz 12c for a fiver, even if you are just being facetious, it's not even in the ball park of exaggeration...
Soldato
- Joined
- 26 Apr 2004
- Posts
- 9,581
- Location
- Milton Keynes
This would actually make sense, and I can see the possibility of there being an element of truth to it; we still dont have the full story, and it IS possible AMD have sandbagged on true performance in X570 boards; if PBO/XFR push the performance of the chips closer to 5GHz ie 4.4GHz boost becomes 4.7/8 on PBO/XFR single or dual core.
I did see news out of Computex/Asia some of the ES Zen 2's had been going up to single core around 5GHz when overclocked, so its possible, I'm not saying its true, but we all know that motherboard manufacturers were completely caught off guard with Ryzen Gen 1 after Bulldozer, and didn't support it properly until later into Gen 1 and 2, so it simply could be this really is a compatibility thing. Limit official clocks to ensure older motherboards can keep up, unlock potential on new boards with stronger VRM, ensuring AMD hasn't lied about AM4 compatibility, but also GIVING A REASON TO BUY A NEW BOARD.
They have already nixxed PCI-E 4 on older boards for compatibility reasons, so its not like they haven't begun to show this hand already.
Again, could be completely wrong, but the simple massive, MASSIVE support from motherboard manufacturers, and the lack of info on PBO/XFR does make me wonder.
We will know soon
Permabanned
- Joined
- 23 Apr 2014
- Posts
- 23,552
- Location
- Hertfordshire
Literally dont care about headline XFR boosts, most modern games dont seem to use it and it just does all core clocks. All about the all core clock for me.
Soldato
- Joined
- 26 Apr 2004
- Posts
- 9,581
- Location
- Milton Keynes
Thats the thing.
What if the official boost/all core clock is what AMD have already advertised, that is what everyone on all boards can expect B350 upwards, BUT they are delimited in AGESA on X570/B550 which seem to all have stronger VRM, and run at a higher performance state out the box there...
Look at how much work AMD did with AGESA on RAM control, I'm sure something like the above would NOT be hard for them by comparison. There's also rumours there were AGESA clock locks on the ES 16C part floating around behind the scenes at Computex, again suggesting AMD have controls in place here, either for compatibility, control, or sandbagging reasons.
Not saying its true, not saying it will happen, but there is a distinct level of sense to it; ensure compatibility, whilst offering people a REASON to buy a new board and not just keep an older one...
It'd be also please the motherboard manufacturers, as I am sure some of them can't have been happy buyers dont need a new motherboard each generation like Intel has played in recent years. This could be something else AMD has agreed with them.
Good for AMD as ensures compatibility, good for the motherboard manufacturers as its a way to sell more board upgrades legitimately.
Like I say, this is also theory, but there is a sense to it, that follows with the hand that has already been played with PCI-E 4.0. We will know more soon, either at E3, or on release when final BIOS are released to the masses/reviewers.
This would also be a very clever sandbagging technique, as they've not lied, not at all, just, they've not told us everything yet.
What if the official boost/all core clock is what AMD have already advertised, that is what everyone on all boards can expect B350 upwards, BUT they are delimited in AGESA on X570/B550 which seem to all have stronger VRM, and run at a higher performance state out the box there...
Look at how much work AMD did with AGESA on RAM control, I'm sure something like the above would NOT be hard for them by comparison. There's also rumours there were AGESA clock locks on the ES 16C part floating around behind the scenes at Computex, again suggesting AMD have controls in place here, either for compatibility, control, or sandbagging reasons.
Not saying its true, not saying it will happen, but there is a distinct level of sense to it; ensure compatibility, whilst offering people a REASON to buy a new board and not just keep an older one...
It'd be also please the motherboard manufacturers, as I am sure some of them can't have been happy buyers dont need a new motherboard each generation like Intel has played in recent years. This could be something else AMD has agreed with them.
Good for AMD as ensures compatibility, good for the motherboard manufacturers as its a way to sell more board upgrades legitimately.
Like I say, this is also theory, but there is a sense to it, that follows with the hand that has already been played with PCI-E 4.0. We will know more soon, either at E3, or on release when final BIOS are released to the masses/reviewers.
This would also be a very clever sandbagging technique, as they've not lied, not at all, just, they've not told us everything yet.
Last edited:
perfect example of what i am talking about. why are you so intent on defending some random youtuber? did you fall into the trap of believing his 'leaks'?? surely not, you seem intelligent and smart enough to have drawn your own conclusions - you didn't need someone to draw conclusions for you then post it in a nice video claiming it to be a leak??
belittling him?! catch yourself on - i've belittled no one. inadequacies?! what exactly are you talking about here?
A straw man is a form of argument and an informal fallacy based on giving the impression of refuting an opponent's argument, while actually refuting an argument that was not presented by that opponent. - what part of what i posted is strawmaning?! i've never tried to refute any specific argument that was not presented by AdoredTV or anyone. i've simply said that it's my opinion that their leaks were nothing more than their own guesses. i've been pretty clear on that i thought.
edit:
how about this - i'll just say that i don't believe these so called folk with their insider information and we'll say you do (to a certain extent - you're obviously not going to believe everything they spout) that way everyones happy and we don't have to keep this silliness going for umpteen more posts.
i more interested to see the full line up, like most are, as opposed to slabbering on about how useful/useless these 'leakers' are. hopefully i caused you no offence as that was not my intention
Last edited:
Also consider the clocks and TDPs of the 8 core parts
3800X: 3.9GHz, 4.5GHz, 105W
3700X: 3.6GHz, 4.4GHz, 65W
Why would 300Mhz base and 100MHz boost warrant an extra 40W TDP on the 3800X? It can't be from junk/leaky silicon because why would you put that into the more expensive model? But that extra headroom would give XFR significantly more room to do its thing and ramp those clocks up.