[around the net] Intel vs Ryzen

[FlanK3r]

AMD Ryzen and Intel




*** Removed by Buckeye ***

[AliG]

This is potentially a really big issue and needs to be publicized as much possible; can you change the thread title to something more appropriate?

There's nothing to indicate what's actually in the thread from "Starting bad game again."

[Sparky]

If this is true, then, well, Intel, you're losing me as a customer again. This kind of nonsense is a major reason why I shunned Intel for a long time.

Yeah, I know, they couldn't care less about me and the few systems I build...

[Sly Fox]

I by no means think AMD is some kind of charity, looking out solely for our best interests as customers...

But man, if this is true, Intel really are one scummy company.

[Sparky]

Part of me is willing to believe it simply because intel pulled that stunt before. I'd hope they wouldn't do it again, but...

[Luka_Aveiro]

Now, would AMD just launch their whole Ryzen series ASAP and make customers buy their product instead of Intel's overpriced quad-cores? If they want to put pressure on the current market situation they need a winner (1600x...?) on the 200-300 gap, NOW!!!

[BenchZowner]

The information material is probably true.
They always circulated such material to chip partners and the personnel working for their "Retail Edge" program shops.

The pmurphy post is questionable however.
Not saying it isn't true, but it can be just an imposter acting like he's one of the big guys of the industry.
Can we verify that he is really working for a datacenter/big business ? nope.

[zanzabar]

Now, would AMD just launch their whole Ryzen series ASAP and make customers buy their product instead of Intel's overpriced quad-cores? If they want to put pressure on the current market situation they need a winner (1600x...?) on the 200-300 gap, NOW!!!

they have always pushed that kind of info. they even had a pamphlet on why sandforce drives were bad, but the drives they sold with intel firmware (and the same sandforce controller) was good.

the pushing for shop exclusivity is illegal but they have never stopped doing it and other companies like NV, GB, corsair, crucial, samsung all also do it (i am sure others do too, but i have no experience with it.)

[BenchZowner]

There's no saint company guys.
Given the power and opportunity every single company out there would do it.

Having a disadvantage however makes things more difficult.
If you have a big brand name you can get away with plenty of things.

See the Ferrari vs The Press case for example ( Chris Harris for example and his public posts regarding Ferrari's bad attitude ).

[Tim]

There's no saint company guys.
Given the power and opportunity every single company out there would do it.

Having a disadvantage however makes things more difficult.
If you have a big brand name you can get away with plenty of things.

See the Ferrari vs The Press case for example ( Chris Harris for example and his public posts regarding Ferrari's bad attitude ).

Good post, these things unfortunately happen a lot behind the scenes. But then again, they want to have their products highlighted in the best possible scenario and the competition in the worst. What can I say. It's Intel, but then again, AMD has had a very shady history when it comes to this as well. But people will always back the underdog and Intel will be Intel!

Shame to read the racial bigotry in the second picture though, in my opinion that should be removed immediately Flank3r (not your post, I appreciate that), as it's in quite poor taste. Maybe it's just a saying in some parts of the world, but I'm unfamiliar with that saying. Still wouldn't make it right I don't think.

[FlanK3r]

Yeah, we need healthly competition, but be sure, I have many,many Intel CPUs also and last year Im benched more Intels chip (with KabyLake I was unhappy, one my mistake and all LN2 fan was gone-CPU died )

[justapost]

Shame to read the racial bigotry in the second picture though, in my opinion that should be removed immediately Flank3r (not your post, I appreciate that), as it's in quite poor taste. Maybe it's just a saying in some parts of the world, but I'm unfamiliar with that saying. Still wouldn't make it right I don't think.

I'd also appreciate if that second picture get's removed because of that anti semitic comment. Thanks in advance.

[Ket]

lol some of the silly, desperate remarks I've heard coming from the intel side are laughable. Best one is that core count doesn't matter as much as raw performance. Erm.. sorry intel, while that was true some 5 years or more ago moving with the times strongly indicates you need at least a Hex core now, even a Octa isn't considered overkill any more. Games based on the latest engines also show that there is a marked improvement when moving from a 4c/4t or 4c/8t CPU to something with 6 cores, while 8 cores are "nice to haves" with small gains over 6 core CPUs. About time software started catching up with the hardware, just need more software that can use multiple cores effectively now.

Bottom line: More cores = better now intel. Raw core speed isn't everything anymore. You had your chance to continue to innovate and progress technology by releasing Hex and Octa CPUs, you didn't. Instead you stuck your thumbs up your arses and did nothing. I for one, am glad AMD is about to rudely slap you off of that high horse.

[JPQY]

Intel Kaby Lake and Skylake Processors Get Massive Price Cuts By Retailers Prior To AMD Ryzen Launch ? Core i7 7700K Up For $299, Core i5 7600K For $199, Core i5 6600K For $179

http://wccftech.com/intel-amd-price-...medium=related

JP.

[Ket]

Saw that earlier myself. Knee-jerk worried move if ever I saw one but the cuts aren't enough IMO. Intel CPUs use more power and for the most part the price cuts apply to CPUs that will still have less cores/threads vs. AMD alternatives. Best deal right now I've seen is for the 5820k, 319 new (or about 240 used). Still not a very attractive offer as you will be putting it on the "Home Improvement", now hilariously cobbled together with 3rd party components, X99 platform. AMD have got this one right if you ask me, big mistake not having the 1600X available for pre-order but as a whole looks like AMD will be handing it to intel for the next 18 months or so based on what info is available at this time.

[AliG]

This is starting to gain some traction, news sites are now covering Charlie's comment about Intel PR and the history behind the FTC lawsuit:
http://wccftech.com/intel-playing-di...cut-amd-ryzen/

[Ket]

This is starting to gain some traction, news sites are now covering Charlie's comment about Intel PR and the history behind the FTC lawsuit:
http://wccftech.com/intel-playing-di...cut-amd-ryzen/

I think people are just hyper aware of the possibility based on intels past, utterly despicable moves to undermine AMD. I'd hope AMD are keeping a close eye for any evidence of intel attempting anti-competitive practices. Lets hope things can be more gentlemanly this time around though.

[AliG]

I think people are just hyper aware of the possibility based on intels past, utterly despicable moves to undermine AMD. I'd hope AMD are keeping a close eye for any evidence of intel attempting anti-competitive practices. Lets hope things can be more gentlemanly this time around though.

I don't know that's necessarily true; I bet a ton of younger gamers don't even know what a P4 is.


IMO it's good to get the information out there and let the public decide on how they want to spend their dollars.

[vario]

well, that was unexpected

[Buckeye]

I'd also appreciate if that second picture get's removed because of that anti semitic comment. Thanks in advance.

Agreed and its removed.

[Ursus]

Wow, long time since I was on these forums, Ryzen made me check back and then I see this thread.. History on repeat it seems.
I really hope Intel management learned from its mistakes and will put its time and energy into great future CPU's instead of sabotaging the competition.

[zanzabar]

lol some of the silly, desperate remarks I've heard coming from the intel side are laughable. Best one is that core count doesn't matter as much as raw performance. Erm.. sorry intel, while that was true some 5 years or more ago moving with the times strongly indicates you need at least a Hex core now, even a Octa isn't considered overkill any more. Games based on the latest engines also show that there is a marked improvement when moving from a 4c/4t or 4c/8t CPU to something with 6 cores, while 8 cores are "nice to haves" with small gains over 6 core CPUs. About time software started catching up with the hardware, just need more software that can use multiple cores effectively now.

Bottom line: More cores = better now intel. Raw core speed isn't everything anymore. You had your chance to continue to innovate and progress technology by releasing Hex and Octa CPUs, you didn't. Instead you stuck your thumbs up your arses and did nothing. I for one, am glad AMD is about to rudely slap you off of that high horse.

remember BD and amd saying each thread was a core when each module was. that line goes back to that.

[chew*]

I really have avoided this thread but I will comment on this based on zanzabars comment.

Prior to BDs launch I tried to clear the speculation and there was a crap load of it that BD was cluster based and while AMD was calling it a native 8 core the reality was it was a 4 core with 2 clusters per core. Imo it should have been represented as such (4 core 8 thread ).

[alpha0ne]

I think people are just hyper aware of the possibility based on intels past, utterly despicable moves to undermine AMD. I'd hope AMD are keeping a close eye for any evidence of intel attempting anti-competitive practices. Lets hope things can be more gentlemanly this time around though.

Dream on...................I think the thought of ethical/legal business practices and intel in the same sentence = oxymoron

[FlanK3r]

I really have avoided this thread but I will comment on this based on zanzabars comment.

Prior to BDs launch I tried to clear the speculation and there was a crap load of it that BD was cluster based and while AMD was calling it a native 8 core the reality was it was a 4 core with 2 clusters per core. Imo it should have been represented as such (4 core 8 thread ).

Agree, I heard, engineers want not named as 8 core, but marketing is sometimes (always ) stronger...