Caporegime
They all do it @Joxeon they have been for a long time.
-
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 4" thread (inc AM5/APU discussion) ***
I just think for a CPU test AMD shouldn't be forcing reviewers to use their over spec ram.
Caporegime
AMD are just wising up to what everyone else has been doing for a long time.
This is the first time I've seen reviewers say they were required to use a specific ram kit though.
In ADL reviews half the reviewers didn't even use DDR5 etc so I'm sure there was no requirements.
I just think that Intel should play fair, you know like not crippling compilers, using 'contra revenue' or even quote the real power usage, but hey, that's just me.
Caporegime
I haven't seen that, but i'll take your word for it i haven't seen many reviews.
Its one specific thing, and i'm not going to argue its for any other reason than to show them in the best light, that is what they have all been doing for a decade + so far as i can tell, no body cared and still don't, so why should i care about this? Honestly i don't, sometimes i feel like we are only supposed to care when AMD do it.
Look at the difference between how Jay and Steve Burke explained the 95c thing, Jay explained the technical reasons for it, like he's speaking to people who have some intelligence, Steve Burke near as damn it used the tired old memes from the Bulldozer era, like he think his audience are infantile idiots.
I just don't care about virtue signalling right and wrong when it comes to tech journalism, too many of them are hypocrites and when you boil it down be it AMD, Intel or Nvidia.... they are all the same.
Last edited:
is there any benefit to using EXPO if standard kits works?
Steve ranting on and on about 95c. LOL. Just looked foolish to me. Especially considering ****lake's power draw. Yep, it's ok unless AMD do it.
)
Caporegime
Steve ranting on and on about 95c. LOL. Just looked foolish to me. Especially considering ****lake's power draw. Yep, it's ok unless AMD do it.
In one of his videos from around the Zen 3 launch He had the bare faced cheek to look right into the camera and say Intel are honest about their power consumption and AMD aren't, while in the same ####'ing video he had a slide with a 10900K pulling 200+ watts with a 125 watt TDP and a 5950X pulling 120 watts with a TDP of 105 watts.
I mean.... Yeah that floored me. Do you think my eyes are painted on???
Last edited:
Really AMD should have come out and put this information about boost behaviour and temperature in their Zen4 announcement, not leave it for reviewers
According to Linus, 95c is not Ryzen 7000s hard temp limit, 95c is just the stock power target temperature, and if you do a manual overclock you can set your own temp limit up to 115c
According to Linus, 95c is not Ryzen 7000s hard temp limit, 95c is just the stock power target temperature, and if you do a manual overclock you can set your own temp limit up to 115c
Last edited:
Also, sure we all want a fast CPU's but IMHO, if it wasn't for Intel hell bent on 'willy waving' we would be happy benching at 65w. If you can't win by design then just pump up the power. We all get dragged into this power thing and to hell with the consequences. Power / performance curves say it all. If I could afford a 7950 it would never see 66w.Steve ranting on and on about 95c. LOL. Just looked foolish to me. Especially considering ****lake's power draw. Yep, it's ok unless AMD do it.
yep, that had me. skipped most the video after that.
and I didn't realise that he had 'supercharged' ram forced on him. LMAO.
Tech reviews.
Maybe it's because i'm old school but i'm no fan of the video reviews. I admit the first reviews I went to was Anand and Tom's. I prefer a written piece, segmented with explanations etc. Black and white to be referenced. Not a man with his 'influencer shirt and wizard hat on.
With a written review, the author has thought about it, reviewed it, put his name to it. It maybe not always correct but at least to the author it must be a genuine attempt at being honest.
YouTubers? nah not for me. (only on fast forward) with the sound off.
Maybe it's because i'm old school but i'm no fan of the video reviews. I admit the first reviews I went to was Anand and Tom's. I prefer a written piece, segmented with explanations etc. Black and white to be referenced. Not a man with his 'influencer shirt and wizard hat on.
With a written review, the author has thought about it, reviewed it, put his name to it. It maybe not always correct but at least to the author it must be a genuine attempt at being honest.
YouTubers? nah not for me. (only on fast forward) with the sound off.
Caporegime
Part of the problem is the Youtube algorithm, if you don't have catchy titles and get a minimum level of minutes viewed that algorithm doesn't work for you if not against you, this is certainly the reason for those infantile thumbnails, its also part of the reason even very seasoned and large channels demean themselves by being obnoxious.
Youtube themselves know this, but that's the point, its the common denominator, its the sort of content most people like so Youtube are more than happy to push people into that direction, the centre of the bell curve have all eyes on adverts.
The thing is i like to listen to Youtube channels while i'm playing games, its how i maximise the time i have for two of my hobby interests.
However, if i want to learn something, lets say about a new PC hardware product that's just been launched, i go to print media, like AnandTech, if its about learning something, rather than just being entertained, it demands my undivided attention anyway, that's really the difference between Youtube and print media. One is just entertainment.
On a note to what we have been talking about over the last dozen or so posts, i think some of them are afraid of Nvidia and too close to Intel, AMD have just never had the clout to be any of those things to these people.
Last edited:
Well today's reviews of the 7000 series cpus knocked the prices of the 5950x back up to £700 ..
www.overclockers.co.uk
And the 5900x to £500.
www.overclockers.co.uk
EDIT:
Wow and OCUK is currently the cheapest for them... Other retailers are £600 for 5900x and £908 for 5950x ... and another well known retailer 5900x £550.
All remaining 5000 series have shot up everywhere.
AMD Ryzen 9 5950X Sixteen Core 4.9GHz (Socket AM4) Processor - Retail
Order AMD Ryzen 9 5950X Sixteen Core 4.9GHz (Socket AM4) Processor - Retail now online and benefit from fast delivery.
www.overclockers.co.uk
And the 5900x to £500.
AMD Ryzen 9 5900X Twelve Core 4.8GHz (Socket AM4) Processor - Retail
Order AMD Ryzen 9 5900X Twelve Core 4.8GHz (Socket AM4) Processor - Retail now online and benefit from fast delivery.
www.overclockers.co.uk
EDIT:
Wow and OCUK is currently the cheapest for them... Other retailers are £600 for 5900x and £908 for 5950x ... and another well known retailer 5900x £550.
All remaining 5000 series have shot up everywhere.
Last edited:
Same.. Videos are the most inefficient method going... just give me the benchmarks and thermals
Associate
Zen 4 a bit of a let down. Will be interesting to see what comes of the 13900k but I'm pretty sure I'm gonna just wait for Zen4 3D cache chip.
Last edited: