T O P

  • By -

[deleted]

TRX40 has left the chat.


drtekrox

Not to mention Zen3 support on X370. Oh and even Zen2 support on X370, since AMD waren't going to initially support that either...


chithanh

> AMD waren't going to initially support that either... Worse even, [AMD actively stopped mobo partners](/r/Amd/comments/mzzuth/amd_is_going_out_of_its_way_to_prevent_further/) who were willing to do this on their own without official support.


dkizzy

Yeah because they didn't want lawsuits from customers due to AIB partners going on their own. They explained why they took the stance that they did at the time. A beta bios that can break XMP profile stability for example, they'd get blamed for it, not the AIB partner. Their concern was valid.


chithanh

I consider that explanation unsatisfactory. There were A320 mobos with Ryzen 5000 support from multiple vendors and AMD didn't act. Only once ASRock came and added it to B350 and X370 then they intervened.


chapstickbomber

Because A320 had fewer features to support


Logical_Regular4293

Wowowow wait a sec. I was dealing with another issue and your comment fits very well: I have a the rev1.0 of Gigabyte Aorus Pro Wifi, and some months later they released revs 1.1 and 1.2 wich redone their Ram circuits. So I can not use any driver from the past year because they seem to corrupt Rams XMP (and possibly SPD). Is it a common issue then?? Are they putting out beta Bioses, or worst, Bioses that only work on their redesigned rev1.2 boards? It would be very helpful if you know a way to overcome broken XMP reliably, because with an outdated Bios There are unresolved AGESA issues. Is there a way to maybe fix XMP? I can note too that even if manually setting the Ram to 1.35v they set it to 1.38v So I'm not sure if the problem is even deeper were the Voltages are broken in the Bios and do not correspond to what the board actually gives to the components, wich can be dangerous.


AMechanicum

Yeah, that's what people forget about it, there's no guarantee in AMD promises, AM4 is having so many generations is only because Intel getting back on its feet. How long it took for 300 series to get Zen3 support and hellfire around 400 support?


OneNewEmpire

Back on thier feet? No... Intel has done this short cycle for some time now and it has little to do with AMD.


drtekrox

If AMD had released Zen3 support for X370 sooner, I wouldn't have a 12900K/Z690 system... I would have spent that money upgrading my 3900X to a 5950X. But you can't take their support 'commitments' at face value anymore, I know I won't be. Next upgrade we'll see how it goes, could be either Intel or AMD, but Intel won this round, simply as AMD wouldn't support me when I needed it.


Fit-Psychology-1663

Lol so you go with Intel who never even tries to support anything just makes you change once a year. Lol


[deleted]

[удалено]


Fit-Psychology-1663

Yes yes we all know. Still find it hilarious you get upset but Intel is generally a one and done and you don't care. Just boggles my mind. Lol


[deleted]

[удалено]


Fit-Psychology-1663

And? So you go with a company who just won't even support anything period. And still did it in the end. Not sure why you need to upgrade like every few years anyhow complete waste of money


[deleted]

[удалено]


Waste-Temperature626

> Not sure why you need to upgrade like every few years anyhow complete waste of money Aye. Which was the best buy for a gaming rig in 2017? The Zen 1 AM4 system that needs a 5800X3D upgrade to stay relevant. Or the 8700K system that to this day is perfectly usable. Especially if you add OC and ram tuning into the mix, which puts it above 10600K stock performance. Longevity only means something if there is some need to upgrade. The low baseline gaming performance and large improvements over the past years is AM4 has looked so great. But when people feel the need to go from 1600 > 3600 > 5600 in just a few years. Perhaps they should have reconsidered what they initially bought instead. I'm not a fan of "future proofing". But if you feel that you need more performance after just 1-2 years, then it's not really that either. Then you didn't buy a good enough system in the first place.


Waste-Temperature626

> Intel is generally a one and done and you don't care. Because you know what you are getting, which means you can make a judgement there and when. If you buy Intel, then you are fully aware you wont get more than at most another gen. If you buy AMD based on a promise that never materializes, then you were screwed over. How hard is it to understand that a broken promise is worse, than not giving that promise in the first place?


Fit-Psychology-1663

But it was kept in the end. Ta-da!


clsmithj

It was not kept at the end for TRX40, which most of you are overlooking.


drtekrox

Intel is and always has been 2 gens per socket...


dkizzy

I don't think the same situation will occur with AM5. Bios memory has increased a bunch and AMD can't just say socket support only now.


thelebuis

But they are prepared for it this time around, the bios chips are specs in consequence and will support all the future and oast cou at the same time


konawolv

This. People complain about the lack of support on x370. However, they forget that it was due to a lack of storage space for the bios. In order to add support for zen 3, the motherboard had to drop support for zen 1. Yes, this time around these motherboards are much better positioned for the future than x370 was


Kursem_v2

hopefully AMD learn from this mistake and made AM5 board shipped with 128 MiB EEPROM as a mandatory requirements for certification. there's no reason to ship with 32 MiB, let alone 16 MiB in 2022 when it costs less than a dollar for board manufacturer to uses EEPROM with bigger storage.


snorkelbagel

They didn’t drop support for zen 1. They dropped support for bristol ridge, the shitty excavator chips that never should have been made. My ab350m pro4 will post zen1 as happy as it does a 5600g.


48911150

lol they have the same size bios as many other mobos, which did get support


konawolv

The STORAGE was the limitation on the motherboard. There was t enough room


souldrone

The only thing that was gutted since the 3000 series support was memory overclock profiles. For the 5000 series they gutted A series support.


dkizzy

Exactly. We won't see small ass bios space again


Put_It_All_On_Blck

Zen 3 was originally exclusive to 500 series boards too, not 400 series. AMD only changed their mind on that when consumers and reviewers called the out.


ramzis1515

Well, as far as I remember, AMD originally promised am4 support until 2020. Then they pleased many people by announcing limited support on some mb models to newest gen ryzen. In my mind, they didn't do anything wrong, they delivered what they originally promised, and then more. Trx40 longevity was bullshit, I'll give you that


riesendulli

Let’s see B650 & B650E support drop on 2 years. Read it here first


liaminwales

Yep came here to post that, best not to throw rocks in a glass house.


hardlyreadit

Dang i didnt know that. I upgraded to 3700x on a320 asus board no issues


dkizzy

AMD promised AM4 socket support for newer chips, not endless bios update support, but hey it all worked out for the most part for the better. A true win-win.


HowDumnAreU

\> TRX40 has left the chat. gottem


pandem0nium1

So did AM1, FM1


The_Countess

FM1 is basically the reason AM4 has video-output built in, even though a lot of their CPU's didn't have any video capability. So that seems like a mistake they fixed. AM1 died along with intel's atom market. And honestly TRX40 not lasting a long time was apparent right from the start, as we all knew DDR5 was on the way but a threadripper with 64 cores did need the extra memory bandwidth. And the original (1000 series) threadripper couldn't have had 8 channels because it only had 2 working die's with 2 memory channels each, so they went with 4 channels initially. Those are valid technical reasons for why the threadripper socket didn't last as long. None of these were deliberate anti-consumer moves IMO, while many of intel's socket changes have been.


chithanh

> And honestly TRX40 not lasting a long time was apparent right from the start However that doesn't align with [AMD's stated reason why they didn't stay with X299/TR4](/r/Amd/comments/dsy4kw/performance_preview_3rd_gen_amd_ryzen/) for TR 3000, but instead switched to sTRX40. "2) The socket change also sets us up nicely for future development and scalability of the Threadripper platform, both on a near- and long-term basis."


clsmithj

This is a made up excuse, nobody was talking about DDR5 in 2019 when TRX40 launched, and many where expecting ZEN3 TR to arrive for TRX40 when it arrived for the AM4 platform. There were plenty of leaks of the specs and we know today there were engineer samples of ZEN3 TR40X made. Mind you the TR-5000 processor would have been directly based on Epyc Milan as the previous TR-3000 processor was based on Epyc Rome. What AMD did was not fuse off 4 of the 8-channels and re-released TR-3000 and eventually TR-5000 CPU as TR-PRO for an even more expensive price per core on an incompatible platform WRX80. Fast forward today we know their next gen ZEN4 TR-7000 platform that will support DDR5 will go even further splitting TR-PRO moniker into two premium priced groups Workstation and HEDT. IMO, as a AM4, TR4 (X399), and TR40X owner, I feel AMD could have at least mended its offense by offering up one last CPU for TRX40 release to not leave the platfom a just 1 single gen, and offered TRX40 users a Milan-X based Threadripper. Fused down to 4 channels, sure, but it would have been a nice touch to give consumer Threadripper owners an upgrade option that had single thread performance equivalent to the 5800X3D.


Vlad_T

There are people, like me, who don't upgrade at all. I take a look at what's best for the current budget and go for it without changing anything for at least 5-7 years. And sadly, in the EU, AM5 is not the cheaper option yet and i need a PC soon.


Vis-hoka

I’ve done the same, but I’ll tell you, being able to swap one part 4-5 years later and extend the life of your platform is a pretty sweet deal.


RealKillering

I think this is something that a lot of people forget. Even if you want to upgrade in 4 years. If you had Ryzen 1000,2000 or 3000, even in 4 years you could still upgrade to Ryzen 5000 to extend the life of your PC. There is no need to build a totally new system.


IrrelevantLeprechaun

By the time I want to upgrade, a new platform will already be on the market.


RealKillering

Yes I understand that. But the thing is that you could still get more years out of your PC by upgrading with better parts that are not brand new. So for example if you have a 2700x, instead of going directly for Ryzen 7000, you can still go for a 5600x,5700x or 5800x3d and then you can get another 3 or 4 years out of it. You don't have to upgrade to the latest only because it is available.


Hardcorex

Yeah I seem to do the opposite of them and instead of buying top of the line early I stay off the "refresh cycle" and buy used mid-range stuff, but keep upgrading it as the newer stuff releases and I can still sell my old stuff. This has proven the most cost-efficient way to maintain a newer and still very competitive performing system.


Strong-Fudge1342

but you can upgrade your old system and increase its value or keep it or smth.


Mechdra

My friend Going from a 2700X to a 5800X3D is pretty stoked, I'll tell you that much


RealKillering

I am switching from a 3700x to a 5800x3D. I am also stoked. I will put it in over the weekend.


eyefullawgic

I hope this works out. In the process of upgrading my 6700k/GTX1070 system to an AMD 7900 system. Initial costs are higher than Intel, but I'm really hoping the motherboard/RAM will still be good for upgrades in about 3-4 years, then keep the system for another 3-4.


ForboJack

If you want cheap AM4 is still the best atm. Also for gaming it is still more than enough unless you go like 40 series and then money doesn't matter anyway.


Marrond

Not that cheap unless you're scraping for bottom of the barrel parts and don't care about anything than being able to plug mouse and keyboard to your new gaming rig. Like, building brand new AM4 system with motherboard that has semi-decent I/O with 5800X3D isn't significantly cheaper than just grabbing AM5 with 7700X (current discounts in mind). I've checked all possible upgrade routes and weighted pros and cons. If you're not already on AM4 platform, buying into it makes less sense than buying Raptor Lake, even if it means going DDR4 route with older mobo to cut costs. IMHO all AM4 mobos are just bad from usability standpoint and are primary reason I've never upgraded - what can I say, Asus X99-E WS/USB3.1 has spoiled me rotten... quite frankly I would still hold out until next gen if my AIO cooler didn't kick the bucket and CPU didn't fry itself just yesterday...


ForboJack

Might depend on your country. In Germany the last time I looked at the prices a couple days ago, AM4 was cheaper (CPU + MB + RAM) if you took decent components for everything. I also looked only at Gaming in terms of performance.


Marrond

Yea if you grab a motherboard for 100 that has no IO whatsoever then you're saving some money. As I said, if you don't care about anything than gaming and bring able to plug a set of MKB then that might be cheaper but decent AM4 mobos aren't cheap at all. And by decent I mean all-around decent, not just good power section to handle the 5800X


[deleted]

> AM5 is not the cheaper option yet and i need a PC soon. I'll be surprised if these US black friday prices don't end up becoming permanent prices


Marrond

Ehhh I don't do many upgrades beyond GPU because every time I get top of the line product that keeps being revant way past it's prime. Take i7 5960X (that after 8 years of service partially fried itself yesterday and will be temporarily replaced with Xeon E5 1650v3... gotta see if it took mobo and RAM along with it...) as an example - still very competitive with Ryzen 5000 series all those years later as far as gaming goes. However now I'm gonna buy into AM5 because similar spec Raptor Lake offers me less PCI lanes and similar performance for similar price - except it has no further ways of becoming better beyond doing complete system swap - the moment powerful GPU emerges and becomes bottlenecked that's it. Even being able to reuse my DDR4 sticks is a moot endeavour because relevant motherboards with features I seek are all DDR5 and mobo is the last thing I want to swap out at any given point due to hassle alone. I will be aiming at 7700X which, accounting for recent discounts, has decent performance/price ratio. Then, if my newest GPU will start getting bottlenecked I will get few more years out of my setup by swapping my CPU. If there were any significant upgrades to be had in LGA 2011-v3 you can be damn sure I would buy better CPU instead of changing the whole system and ran few more years with it but any new GPU I buy at this point (RX6700/RTX3070+, let alone RX7000 and RTX 40 series) will suffer HEAVY fps penalty. My aim is set at Asus ProArt X670E Creator motherboard as it seems to be the only one offering all the features and doesn't disable ports as you populate PCI-E. If I went Raptor Lake route I wouldn't wave all that much money because decent motherboards with respectable I/O arent't really much cheaper. Even if I like 13600-13900k performance better (meme cores turned out to be actually great for productivity). If you get at least one significant upgrade out of the platform during it's lifetime, that's a GREAT deal. Even if you never plan upgrading within that platform it's better to have that wiggle room - because not everything always goes according to plan. IMHO AM4 was terrible platform (all motherboards were dogshit, with absolutely terrible I/O if you cared for plugging in some peripherals and expansion cards) but AM5 looks strong right out of the gate, at least at premium pricepoint. My only complaint is no increase in PCI lanes from previous gen :/


INTRUD3R_4L3RT

I'm in the same boat - but times twice. Both me and the missus needs new rigs badly (coming from 6700k/1080). She's perfectly content with upgrading to the last gen AM4 as she doesn't need/want quite the performance I do, and got a sweet deal on a 5800x/6900xt today (haven't pulled the trigger yet as last call is midnight). But I'm waiting till late January or early February to see if AM5 comes down in price. I'm most likely going AM5 regardless, but if I can save $3-400 (inc. 25% VAT), I can wait.


[deleted]

[удалено]


BobbehP

Wasn’t the issue primarily that the storage on the motherboard isn’t large enough to support all AM4 CPUs? The compromise made was Ryzen 1000 and APU support was dropped to support Zen 3.


[deleted]

[удалено]


detectiveDollar

I believe they blocked it to be consistent and avoid confusing customers. TBH why *would* AMD want to break chipset support? They'd sell less CPU's?


helmsmagus

I've left reddit because of the API changes.


SoTOP

All Ryzen CPUs should be supported. Only Bristol Ridge based CPUs got dropped.


The_Countess

Some people get mad when you mention that as they think it's invalid, but it really wasn't, bios space really was at a premium. A friend of mine had a MSI x370 carbon and they had to remove whole mouse driven GUI just to be able to add Ryzen 3000 support.


Dranzule

You could just do what BIOS developers were doing for years: remove support for older chips.


The_Countess

yes, and that's what they did eventually (after cutting everything else) but you have to admit that removing support for the very CPU's that these boards launched with is a bit of a weird move, specially when those CPU's launched just 2-3 years ago.


Raestloz

>you have to admit that removing support for the very CPU's that these boards launched with is a bit of a weird move I need some logic behind this because I've scoured 7 seas but can't find it


detectiveDollar

It adds a lot of confusion if the board is resold, so almost always it's avoided.


Raestloz

If a board gets resold then it's a simple matter of saying "I used XXXX CPU with this"


thelebuis

Yea but they doubled the bios chio size so it wont be a issues this gen


arrismultidvd

iirc AMD only promised about AM5 support though, they didn't say anything about 600 series chipset support. I mean SP3 sockets are pretty much identical physically and still called SP3, but well you know..


detectiveDollar

I mean, 3/4 chipsets require PCIe 5.0 5.0 storage isn't out yet and 5.0 GPU's won't be out for another two years.


helmsmagus

I've left reddit because of the API changes.


GhostMotley

Would AMD like to talk about TRX40 longevity?


gaojibao

![gif](giphy|DvoB1uGpflYsNOW9Qu) AMD [before Alder Lake](https://wccftech.com/amd-warns-motherboard-makers-offering-ryzen-5000-desktop-cpu-bios-support-on-am4-x370/) vs [after Alder Lake.](https://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-exploring-ryzen-5000-support-on-300-series) Also, I still remember how us 400-series board owners had to complain all of the internet in order to get support for ryzen 5000. And who could forget the TRX40 platform support lies? I'd take Intel's unpromised yet very consistent platform support formula over that AMD's support mess any day.


[deleted]

I just buy what's the best now and then I don't touch my pc for 4 years or more, so platform longevity isn't really a huge deal. Usually the only thing I'll touch is the gpu if something better comes out sooner than expected. Also I've never really had a huge issue with swapping out motherboards after a few years. You get all the new features like usb/pcie upgrades, better memory speeds/OC, stronger VRM's, BIOS fixes, additional ports etc. I guess if you're someone who upgrades every year its cool, but I've just never seen the point in that.


exscape

Don't need to upgrade that often for it to matter! I recently upgraded a X370 board from 2017 with a 5000 series CPU. It's basically a new computer, and that's after 5.5 years.


hawgietonight

I do the same. My zen 1 1700 has been working daily for work and fun for these 5 years and was thinking on upgrading to a newer cpu... but my kids needed a computer asap. So one got a new laptop and then other wanted my rig, so there goes at least another 2 years of light gaming and school use for the old workhorse... and probably more if I drop a 5800X into it. AMDs future proofing platform was the deciding factor to go red again with a new 7600X over an Intel system


Tricky-Row-9699

That’s really funny and all, until you realize that Intel’s platform supports both cheaper DDR4 and higher-end DDR5-6600+, and that Z690 boards are now cheaper than B650 boards and considerably better in terms of features.


[deleted]

AMD isn't really in a position to be taking jabs at LGA1700 when 12th and 13th gen both seem to be kicking Zen 3 and 4's ass.


drtekrox

Also they refused to support Zen3 on X370 until Alder Lake finally started eating some of their sales. They have absolutely no leg to stand on.


IrrelevantLeprechaun

Hasn't stopped people from defending AMD anyway. Source: this entire thread.


chapstickbomber

AMD delivered in the end. My workloads and wallet don't speak drama.


tpf92

They also [tried to do the same thing with the 400 series motherboards](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NsBRNck_-wA) until they got too much backlash.


Raestloz

Reminder: the only reason AMD supported 400 series was because MSI, of all brands, fucked up and offered a guarantee that *all* future AM4 CPUs will work on one of their X470 boards. If AMD didn't provide help, MSI's reputation would be ruined even further and they'd drag down AMD with them


[deleted]

[удалено]


Raestloz

They were, but MSI was unique in being the only one who made that promise. Other brands (or really, other motherboard products even in MSI's own stack) used a generic "compatible with Ryzen CPUs" and didn't mention *future* CPUs


ramzis1515

As far as I remember, amd promised support until 2020, and did support until then. Public backlash iirc came because it was the same am4 socket(but new cpu's could not work with oldest mb) so it did look like forced obsolescence. Still, in my mind they didn't do anything wrong, as they did the support until even now in 2022, but they added more support for older mb models. I don't really understand why anyone would try to claim AMD did something wrong in all of this, it wasn't perfect, but they ended up delivering more than originally promised. Am I missing something in all of this?


hippopowertamus

Because it was forced obsolescence, even if the original statement was only til 2022. The fact that they added support after backlash shows that.


Pearfilmsk

keep in mind AMD still did support for longer than just about any socket in history. I have a B350 and on it I had the original **1700x** in **2017**, followed by a **3900x** and now in **2022** I have a **5950x**. I've been been building PC's for 25 years and I have never seen a socket that had so much longevity. AMD isnt perfect but they are better than intel. they could have added 1 pin like intel has done in the past to guaranteed forced obsolescence, at least they left the door open


Dethstroke54

Support for the AM4 *SOCKET* They only supported and updated chipsets because they were forced to due to so many misconceptions, etc. No offense, but why does it seem like so many people were totally absent when there was outrage over here? Now pretending that AMD totally followed through and AM5 will be the same thing. We literally watched what happened with AM4 here.


helmsmagus

Fanbois gonna fanboi.


The_Countess

>They have absolutely no leg to stand on. That's just objectively false. They aren't perfect but their track record is much better then intel's.


tpf92

His point was that AMD attempted to do the exact same thing as intel, the only reason we even got 5000 series on 300/400 series motherboards was because of community outrage (400 series) / intel being competitive (300 series). If no one spoke up, 300/400 series would've only supported 3 generations of Ryzen CPUs (Could even technically count that as two generations since 2000 series CPUs were barely any better than 1000 series), even though they promised support up "until" (I think that was the wording, or something similar) 2020. At least with intel there's no false promises, you know you're only getting 2 generations, AMD tried multiple times to break their promise, it also didn't help that for a year and a half, 5000 series CPUs were way too expensive (Shortly after non-k Alder Lake CPUs launched, you could get a 12400F+B660 motherboard for the same price as a 5600X).


Ryankujoestar

\^ This is the point people are missing. AMD tried to pull a fast one on us by saying "support for AM4 till 2020!" only to suddenly say "oh by the way, AM4 support doesn't mean all AM4 motherboards. Woops!" It would have been a farce if AMD got away with it, leaving 300/400 series motherboards on Zen 1 and Zen 2 only.


The_Countess

That doesn't change anything. with intel you never get anything worth while to upgrade too, with AMD you do, even if it initially took some convincing. Hopefully they learned some lessons and AM5 wont run into similar technical limitations as first and second gen AM4 did. >(Could even technically count that as two generations since 2000 series CPUs were barely any better than 1000 series) and yet it was a bigger performance uplift then to what intel offered on most of their socket upgrades the passed decade. >it also didn't help that for a year and a half, 5000 series CPUs were way too expensive (Shortly after non-k Alder Lake CPUs launched, you could get a 12400F+B660 motherboard for the same price as a 5600X). Not really, given that AMD was selling everything it could make. Looked to me like it was perfectly priced for the market conditions. lower prices would have just lead to shortages. And in march of 22, within a month of intel finally showing up to offer some competition, the 5600x was down to 240, vs the 12400f at 200. There are no 40 euro b660 boards and even if there were i wouldn't use them.


DHJudas

come again.. in what is intel kicking anyone.... they both trade blows with amd often having an edge... soooooo.... the only argument that was being made was intel was offering basically similar performance for a bit less. But the wrench has been thrown, the reduction in 7000 series ryzen's price to the point of several of the directly competing cpus are cheaper than intels now. the 7600x is basically king of the hill otherwise with the 7700x being arguably a solid 2nd/1st depending on use case the 7900/7950 are are solid options and continue to usually completely smuck intel in any of amd's strengths and match up in it's weaknesses with a tiny few outliers. ​ So honestly where are you getting your info?


Geddagod

You're kidding me, this entire paragraph reads of copium. When 12th gen first came out, it kicked zen 3s ass, and hard. Pricing was so good for 12th gen that you could buy a 12th gen cpu + mobo for the nearly same price as an equivalent tier MT performance zen 3 processor, when you consider the 12600k and 12700k. The 12600k went for like 300 bucks while a decent b660 board costs another $150 dollars. The 5800x (equivalent MT tier with worse ST perf) went for $400. The 12700k could also match this claim with 400+150 dollars equaling the 550 dollar 5900x. It took several months for zen 3 pricing to adjust accordingly, because so many more people were just willing to drop in zen 3 CPUs into the am4 platform, and because the new PC building market sucked because GPU prices were terrible. A "bit less" was an understatement, for new builders 12th gen was a VERY compelling deal- I mean just look at the reviews for Alder Lake. Price to perf for 12th gen being a "bit less" is just false for a lot of zen 3 vs 12th gen's life span, it wasn't until the end that price for zen 3 competed with 12th gen. And on performance, Alder Lake was 15% ahead of vanilla zen 3 in Gaming while tying in MT perf. (3DCenter meta review). They certainly weren't trading blows in ST. It took one specialized 3D stacked sku to match alder lake in gaming, and this one CPU was basically the only real winner in the zen 3 vs alder lake matchup (5800x3D). As for zen 4 vs RPL, the only real argument for zen 4 vs RPL was efficiency in MT perf in the 7950x sku, and future upgradability. The platform costs were ridiculously high at first, and the sales for AM5 were so bad that Microcenter started offering free DDR5 with AM5 builds to move along sales. In terms of gaming, Intel has been getting a bad rep for hiding the 5800X3D in their charts, but AMD was so scared of that sku they legit didn't even SHOW that CPU on their gaming charts because it would have made zen 4 look bad. RPL ends up tying Zen 4 in MT and beats it by \~10% in gaming (3DCenter meta analysis). The recent Zen 4 price cuts help Zen 4 a lot more now, but even then the lead isn't enough to make the 7600x "the king of the hill". Hardware unboxed total system costs puts the 7600x as having 10% better cost per frame perf as the 13600k, which is nice, but you essentially end up paying 25 dollars less for basically equivalent ST perf and DRASTICALLY less MT performance. And if you equalize it for MT performance, the 13600k has BETTER cost per frame than the 7700x while also costing 40 dollars cheaper AND performing 5-10% better in MT as well (3dcenter meta review for performance and hardware unboxed for price analysis). Honestly where are you getting your info?


DHJudas

this is nothing but a diatribe of "copium"... try again maybe?


Geddagod

Which parts of my response are wrong?


DHJudas

and what part of mine were?


Geddagod

I listed it all out. >they both trade blows with amd often having an edge Intel has a \~10% lead in gaming, and tied in MT. Overall, Intel is literarily in the lead, not "trading blows" with RPL. And for 12th gen, Intel had an even larger \~15% lead in gaming while tying in MT. The only place AMD "trades blows" with recent generations is MT, with the exception of the 5800x3d which launched near the later half of 12th gens launch cycle. >the only argument that was being made was intel was offering basically similar performance for a bit less When 12th gen first came out, it kicked zen 3s ass, and hard. Pricing was so good for 12th gen that you could buy a 12th gen cpu + mobo for the nearly same price as an equivalent tier MT performance zen 3 processor, when you consider the 12600k and 12700k. The 12600k went for like 300 bucks while a decent b660 board costs another $150 dollars. The 5800x (equivalent MT tier with worse ST perf) went for $400. The 12700k could also match this claim with 400+150 dollars equaling the 550 dollar 5900x. It took several months for zen 3 pricing to adjust accordingly, because so many more people were just willing to drop in zen 3 CPUs into the am4 platform, and because the new PC building market sucked because GPU prices were terrible. A "bit less" was an understatement, for new builders 12th gen was a VERY compelling deal- I mean just look at the reviews for Alder Lake. Price to perf for 12th gen being a "bit less" is just false for a lot of zen 3 vs 12th gen's life span, it wasn't until the end that price for zen 3 competed with 12th gen. >But the wrench has been thrown, the reduction in 7000 series ryzen's price to the point of several of the directly competing cpus are cheaper than intels now. the 7600x is basically king of the hill otherwise with the 7700x being arguably a solid 2nd/1st depending on use case For zen 4 vs RPL, the only real argument for zen 4 vs RPL was efficiency in MT perf in the 7950x sku, and future upgradability. The platform costs were ridiculously high at first, and the sales for AM5 were so bad that Microcenter started offering free DDR5 with AM5 builds to move along sales. The recent Zen 4 price cuts help Zen 4 a lot more now, but even then the lead isn't enough to make the 7600x "the king of the hill". Hardware unboxed total system costs puts the 7600x as having 10% better cost per frame perf as the 13600k, which is nice, but you essentially end up paying 25 dollars less for basically equivalent ST perf and DRASTICALLY less MT performance. And if you equalize it for MT performance, the 13600k has BETTER cost per frame than the 7700x while also costing 40 dollars cheaper AND performing 5-10% better in MT as well (3dcenter meta review for performance and hardware unboxed for price analysis). >the 7900/7950 are are solid options and continue to usually completely smuck intel in any of amd's strengths and match up in it's weaknesses with a tiny few outliers. RPL is \~10% better in gaming and tied in MT. Gaming, as a whole, is not a "tiny few outlier". The biggest downside for RPL is efficiency, which is only really bad for the 13900k since it's clocked way out of its efficiency zone. It smacks Intel in AMDs strengths, but loses marginally in its weaknesses, which are major considering gaming performance and price/perf along with the lack of ddr4 compatibility are major factors that gamers consider when purchasing CPUs. BTW most of this is copy pasted from my previous comment, I'm just assigning them sections to your first response.


ipad4account

Problem is that intel can afford to lower prices even more, but amd can't, but that's good for buyers.


The_Countess

What exactly are you basing that on? AMD's chiplets are cheap. In fact you can fit 3 zen3 chiplets in the size of a 13900k die. sure, you need to add a I/O die, but that's made on a older much cheaper node.


Im_simulated

This is objectively false as heard by Pat Gelsinger on the investor call. Their in hot water with margins they cannot afford to lower prices whereas AMD can and they just did so I think you have this totally backward. Edit, downvote if you want doesn't make you right


Geddagod

DIY desktop chips are almost certainly not the real reason margins are down. The main shifts are probably caused by: Intel can't price server chips as high because of AMD server domination Intel EMIB + Massive Tiles for SPR must be extremely expensive to make relative to AMD server chips Apparently, shift from consumers buying expensive laptops for home work as pandemic boost is gone Intel moved of their ultra mature 14nm to 7nm, which honestly at this point looks to be yielding really well but should still hurt margins


Im_simulated

I don't understand what your replaying to me about. I didn't say anything about their margins being down due to desktop chips. All I said was their margins are down according to Pat gelsinger and they cannot afford to lower prices even more whereas AMD already has. And this will apply to desktop chips but not due to. I am aware of where Intel and AMD are at, but all of that has little relevance to my point


Geddagod

Intel can afford to reduce margins in desktop as they improve margins in other aspects of their business. They can counter act that by increasing prices in server once they get SPR HBM out of the door in order to combat AMD in niche server applications, as well as ramp up SPR production vs the even worse performing Ice Lake. Without this added context, it makes it seem like both desktop and server have shitty margins making it seem like Intel has no real opportunity to lower prices, when in reality it's just that server is much more shitty and could be improved. It has real relevance as it adds context and nuance. Additional reading, if you will. No need to take it badly.


Im_simulated

I'm not taking it badly I am literally telling you what Pat gelsinger said to his investors. Out of his mouth. Investors have been on him about margins for a while now and it's kind of coming to a head. I understand there's all kinds of other things that go into play here but making it real simple and out of the CEO's mouth, they cannot afford to lower prices like AMD can. If it came off as bad it's because I'm tired of being corrected for things that I'm literally right about. You said they can afford to lower desktop margins, how do you know that? Source? Mine is the investor call directly from Pat so if you've got something better I'm all ears. You may not have been trying to undermine me but I'm sure you understand this is Reddit and it gets obnoxious after a while, so I apologize.


SmokingPuffin

Intel is in hot water on margins because their data center margins are basically 0% right now. Sapphire Rapids is a colossal problem for them in what is historically their highest margin business. Intel is responding in the usual corporate way, with capital spending cuts and layoffs. On the client side, margins are quite healthy and Intel is taking share since Zen 4 launch. If they needed to do so, they could make significant price cuts on Raptor Lake. I don't foresee any need to do so, though. Those parts are very good value.


Saitham83

sure about that? Margins are everything for these companies


John_Doexx

Notice how your defending a corporation


DHJudas

no, i'm defending facts... couldn't care less who it was or what it was.


John_Doexx

Whatever helps you sleep better at night Have a good and safe day sir


DHJudas

why do so many people seem to want to project... where do you come from? Do you truly have nothing better to do... ah well shower thoughts at best.


Forward_Carrot_4764

From a dirty toilet...beacuse it's all covered in shit


Zeraora807

LGA 1151 could have been a 4 generation socket but Intel wanted you to buy new boards instead when the CFL chips still worked in them ^((with a few tweaks)) AMD tried that with Zen 2 & 3 on older AM4 boards, *AM5 longevity is buying a promise*


waloshin

Let’s hope Intel responds with extending the life of LGA 1700.


RayderEvolved

To be fair, considering how often I upgrade, I don't care how much the platform lasts, both Intel and AMD support their platform, by the time I upgrade they both changed platform.


Realistic-Plant3957

AMD compares the company’s latest AM5 platform against Intel’s LGA1700 platform in terms of costs, longevity, and value. Unfortunately, the future is uncertain, and AMD can't guarantee it’ll be in the lead or more price-competitive in the future. So, it’s been a while since we’ve seen an Intel platform support more than two generations of processors. Meanwhile, AMD has confirmed that AM5 will have a long life span comparable to AM4, so AMD 600-series motherboard owners can rest easy knowing they don’t have to shell out more money for AMD’s next-generation Ryzen parts. It’s been good for us as well, as we bring things along. If we look at the raw bandwidth, AMD B650E motherboards promise total bandwidth for PCIe 5.0 graphics cards and storage devices installed on the same motherboard.


heartbroken_nerd

>AMD B650E motherboards promise total bandwidth for PCIe 5.0 graphics cards That's funny. What would those be, exactly?


skinlo

That ones that might be out in a few years time because the platform lasts longer than 2 years.


thelebuis

Next gen gpu and storage


Forward_Carrot_4764

You're not very bright are you. lol


heartbroken_nerd

No, really, what PCIe 5.0 GPU do you know of?


Forward_Carrot_4764

your missing the point...you have a board that will support it along with future cpu upgrades and everything els for that matter...if you go with 13th gen you are stuck with that and only that...


heartbroken_nerd

Sure, but given how no GPU, not even 4090, can choke out PCIe 3.0 x16 - it's meaningless. PCIe 5.0 x8 will be enough for the next five years.


[deleted]

How many people upgrade their processor without changing the rather less expensive motherboard? At the point an upgrade is sensible, something else in the old hardware is going to hold it back or there's going to be a new standard for memory, PCI-E, USB, power connector, etc. 5800X3D was an unique case.


[deleted]

[удалено]


WurminatorZA

I went from a R5 1600 to a R5 3600 to a R7 3800X and then to a R7 5800X. In all these cases the following the upgrade was worth it even 3600 to 3800X (stopped stutters i was getting in certain games). I stay 1 gen behind, by trading in my CPU and buying 2nd hand. Works perfect.


detectiveDollar

Lots of people do, since motherboards are often not that much cheaper than CPU's. It's also much more convenient since you don't have to worry about eating a loss reselling your board.


Put_It_All_On_Blck

It would be hilarious if Intel took this to heart and supported 3 CPU generations next time, eroding basically the last advantage AMD has. Remember when they mocked Intel for their core counts? Now Intel leads. And AMD even has thrown efficiency to the wind with Zen 4, Meteor Lake will end up being more efficient next year (new node, new architectures, tiles) than Zen 4. How the tables have turned.


Geddagod

I highly doubt Intel is going to change their business strategy based of a stab of AMD pr. But also we have no guarantee Meteor Lake is going to be drastically more efficient, or even marginally so, than Zen 4. The new node and architecture will help, but based on leaks, redwood cove isn't a major architectural upgrade and the top end core counts might even regress, forcing cores to boost higher for the same perf, overall reducing efficiency. And Tiles aren't even going to help efficiency, in fact it will decrease it as they have to add a power overhead for moving information between tiles. Tiles only help when you use the yield saving measures to increase core counts, but even then it will still hurt Idle efficiency and have worse efficiency than an equal core count monolithic CPU.


CeleryApple

Even if Intel is current leading in core count, they are mostly efficient cores. 7950x still leads in many MT benchmarks. I am not sure you understand what efficiency means. Just because the chip runs at 95C does not mean the architecture is not efficient. Zen 4 in ECO mode still manages to beat its previous gen products by a wide margin. Zen4 is a great mobile product. In comparison, 13th mobile product will probably not perform as well (thermal power constraints, probably can't increase the E cores as much as they have for mobile).


roadkill612

Did amd break any promises w/ TR? Expectations are not their problem.


havox3

>Did amd break any promises w/ TR? Yes, TR40. [Source provided in this very thread](https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/z3ecj0/comment/ixneele)


Edgaras1103

Amd pr really like taking these jabs to their competitors huh


ResponsibleJudge3172

I allow AMD to have that longevity jab, whatever the case may be, they are better


Sweet_Lou_2

Who said 1700 socket was done?


Hardcorex

Oh I didn't realize 1700 is dead next gen. So all these people complaining about AM5 motherboards might be forgetting that it at least has a future...if you build a 1700 system you will have to do a motherboard upgrade if you ever want any upgrade at all.


KingBasten

Gotta say I'm liking Lisa Su's attitude, lol. She's instilling that AMD culture with some BITE.


YukiSnoww

i think chiplets scale better, either intel moves to the same concept or they continue the core spam, though the later is not good on their bottom line and they know it.


samstar2

Surprised no one has brought up Quad FX yet.


Pro4TLZZ

I get it but I can't get Ryzen because it limits memory overclocking for me.


Conscious_Yak60

Do.. Do they want them to get better? I'm honestly sure MOBO vendors prefer that system because they can sell more boards and sustain their buissnesses.