Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

Why I Still Love Intel...

And this video shall henceforth be referenced to show how much of an Intel shill Linus is.

CPU: AMD Ryzen 3600 / GPU: Radeon HD7970 GHz 3GB(upgrade pending) / RAM: Corsair Vengeance LPX 2x8GB DDR4-3200
MOBO: MSI B450m Gaming Plus / NVME: Corsair MP510 240GB / Case: TT Core v21 / PSU: Seasonic 750W / OS: Win 10 Pro

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, TetraSky said:

And this video shall henceforth be referenced to show how much of an Intel shill Linus is.

Bruh, he praised the people that he's interacted with at Intel -- he didn't praise the company.  

AMD Ryzen 3900X  |  Fractal Design S36 360 AIO w/6 Corsair SP120L fans  |  Asus Crosshair VII WiFi X470  |  G.SKILL TridentZ 3600CL15 2x8GB @ 3800MHz 14-16-14-14-34  |  EVGA 1070 Ti SC GAMING ACX 3.0 Black w/NZXT Kraken G12 Cooler  |  Samsung 970 EVO M.2 NVMe 500GB - Boot Drive  |  Samsung 850 EVO SSD 1TB - Game Drive  |  Seagate 1TB HDD - Media Drive  |  EVGA 650 G3 PSU | Thermaltake Core P3 Case 

Link to post
Share on other sites

So Linus is an Intel, AMD, Apple, Samsung, Android, Nvidia, AMDagainbecausewhynot shill... oh and LTTSTOREDOTCOM too 🤣

F@H
Desktop: i7-5960X 4.4GHz, Noctua NH-D14, ASUS Rampage V, 32GB, RTX2080S, 2TB NVMe SSD, 2x16TB HDD RAID0, Corsair HX1200, Thermaltake Overseer RX1, Samsung 4K curved 49" TV, 23" secondary

Mobile SFF rig: i9-9900K, Noctua NH-L9i, Asrock Z390 Phantom ITX-AC, 32GB, GTX1070, 2x1TB NVMe SSD RAID0, 2x5TB 2.5" HDD RAID0, Athena 500W Flex (Noctua fan), Custom 4.7l 3D printed case

 

Dell XPS 2 in 1 2019, 32GB, 1TB, 4K

 

GPD Win 2

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, nick name said:

Bruh, he praised the people that he's interacted with at Intel -- he didn't praise the company.  

And overall it's pretty solid. Intel wouldn't have gotten as far as they have without doing things well. Lack of competition caused them to wallow though and now they are caught sitting down but overall I'm sure they'll get back up, which is a good thing for both sides because continued and fierce competition is great for the consumer :)

Current Network Layout:

Current Build Log/PC:

Prior Build Log/PC:

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, nick name said:

Bruh, he praised the people that he's interacted with at Intel -- he didn't praise the company.  

So, he loves the people at intel, not Intel itself, even tho that's the title.

And that's the problem here. The title screams INTEL SHILL. But he isn't.

 

But people probably don't watch or listen the video and go on a keyboard rampage anyway so they should either change the title or prepare for a shitstorm.

 

It's in the details :P

If you want my attention, quote meh! D: or just stick an @samcool55 in your post :3

Spying on everyone to fight against terrorism is like shooting a mosquito with a cannon

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, nick name said:

Bruh, he praised the people that he's interacted with at Intel -- he didn't praise the company.  

For the first few minutes. Then he proceed to praise everything Intel, disregard their flaws (all the various security issues) just because they are unlikely to cause damage to Intel's reputation, of all things.

This video wasn't needed if all he wanted was to praise the people he interacted with.

 

CPU: AMD Ryzen 3600 / GPU: Radeon HD7970 GHz 3GB(upgrade pending) / RAM: Corsair Vengeance LPX 2x8GB DDR4-3200
MOBO: MSI B450m Gaming Plus / NVME: Corsair MP510 240GB / Case: TT Core v21 / PSU: Seasonic 750W / OS: Win 10 Pro

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, TetraSky said:

For the first few minutes. Then he proceed to praise everything Intel, disregard their flaws (all the various security issues) just because they are unlikely to cause damage to Intel's reputation, of all things.

This video wasn't needed if all he wanted was to praise the people he interacted with.

 

Ok, I see what's going on here now.  You have a nice day.  

AMD Ryzen 3900X  |  Fractal Design S36 360 AIO w/6 Corsair SP120L fans  |  Asus Crosshair VII WiFi X470  |  G.SKILL TridentZ 3600CL15 2x8GB @ 3800MHz 14-16-14-14-34  |  EVGA 1070 Ti SC GAMING ACX 3.0 Black w/NZXT Kraken G12 Cooler  |  Samsung 970 EVO M.2 NVMe 500GB - Boot Drive  |  Samsung 850 EVO SSD 1TB - Game Drive  |  Seagate 1TB HDD - Media Drive  |  EVGA 650 G3 PSU | Thermaltake Core P3 Case 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, VegetableStu said:

the world could use a lot more love these days ._.

I agree. Still don't believe this video should exist.

CPU: AMD Ryzen 3600 / GPU: Radeon HD7970 GHz 3GB(upgrade pending) / RAM: Corsair Vengeance LPX 2x8GB DDR4-3200
MOBO: MSI B450m Gaming Plus / NVME: Corsair MP510 240GB / Case: TT Core v21 / PSU: Seasonic 750W / OS: Win 10 Pro

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Lurick said:

And overall it's pretty solid. Intel wouldn't have gotten as far as they have without doing things well. Lack of competition caused them to wallow though and now they are caught sitting down but overall I'm sure they'll get back up, which is a good thing for both sides because continued and fierce competition is great for the consumer :)

Yup remember what linus said :D

Intel will never fade away just like that....

they've been through harder times.

 

Please quote or tag me @Void Master,so i can see your reply.

 

Everyone was a noob at the beginning, don't be discouraged by toxic trolls even if u lose 15 times in a row. Keep training and pushing yourself further and further, so u can show those sorry lots how it's done !

Be a supportive player, and make sure to reflect a good image of the game community you are a part of. 

Don't kick a player unless they willingly want to ruin your experience.

We are the gamer community, we should take care of each other !

Link to post
Share on other sites

Linus told the cold hard truth in the beginning - AMD is much smaller company and it cant compete in RnD.

 

I knew that the drivers will be hell when I bought my 1500x and x370 board. Took me 3 days to finally update the BIOS so the clock would allow the system to boot into windows in under 15 mins. Took months before I could use the full potential speed of my RAM. Still to this day, there are issues from time to time, yet I'm fine with it.

 

A friend of mine was arguing how the current AMD chips could only compete vs the 2nd and 3rd gens I cores in stuff like "squeezing the full potential in OC"and so on BS which YES, that means even so old Intel chips are designed better, but the general consumer DOESNT CARE!

 

From my point of view, I would always prefer the more value, but I also understand Linus point of view about the business end - you can't still trust AMD fully!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I disagree about buying the "product" rather than the brand. I always, always look for the company that seems the least "evil" and doesn't try to screw over their customers through shady marketing or anti-competitive behaviour etc. This means I'll happily buy a product which is inferior to another, as long as it's a company I can get behind.

 

There's a lot I don't know and understand about business, but I still have to wonder what their desktop engineers have been doing for the past 5-10 years. Sure they might have had little to no competition in the desktop space which makes lack of exciting innovation semi-justifiable, but even when the competition finally came around, they were barely ready. Were we really going to be stuck with 4-core mainstream Desktop CPUs forever until a competitor came along and did something?

 

Another thing to note from the video is that Linus seems to like Intel because he knows there are plenty of genuinely good people there, which I'm sure is true, but by continuing to support them in their current form would help validate the mistakes from the people higher up at the company. Are they evil? almost certainly not. But damn it would be interesting to see their thought-processes.

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Astroflash said:

I disagree about buying the "product" rather than the brand. I always, always look for the company that seems the least "evil" and doesn't try to screw over their customers through shady marketing or anti-competitive behaviour etc. This means I'll happily buy a product which is inferior to another, as long as it's a company I can get behind.

 

There's a lot I don't know and understand about business, but I still have to wonder what their desktop engineers have been doing for the past 5-10 years. Sure they might have had little to no competition in the desktop space which makes lack of exciting innovation semi-justifiable, but even when the competition finally came around, they were barely ready. Were we really going to be stuck with 4-core mainstream Desktop CPUs forever until a competitor came along and did something?

 

Another thing to note from the video is that you seem to like Intel because you know there are plenty of genuinely good people there, which I'm sure is true, but by continuing to support them in their current form would help validate the mistakes from the people higher up at the company. Are they evil? probably not. But damn it would be interesting to see their thought-processes.

Almost all companies create a bad product at some point. The good companies learn and try to avoid the same mistake in the future. If you only buy from companies that never made a bad product, you'd only be buying from brand new startups releasing their very first products with no experience.

AMD also has a long history of shooting itself in the foot, just like Intel. For example, the following is from only 1 week ago.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

In my own experience running multiple computers, both Intel and AMD ones.
I do have to say that I don't mind paying the "Intel tax" to a degree, their platforms have simply "just worked".

All the AMD systems I have used have developed problems over the years, not saying that the Intel systems haven't thrown a couple of blue screens too.

Though, partly looking at AMD for my next rig, mainly since they have the only reasonably priced high clock speed and high memory bandwidth CPUs that I can find.
Now most people do not need 8 memory channels, though it is more or less useful depending on the application. And some stuff I do benefit from more memory bandwidth. (Cache really isn't of help since the data sets are way to large.)

I have though also looked at Intel's LGA3647 platform, but they don't have any clock speeds that are high enough for the system to also function as a reasonable desktop for single threaded applications. (And their cost to performance is currently outside of "Reasonable", I can put up with some errors if it means that one gets something for a lot cheaper.)

Though, who knows, Intel might release a new server processor some day with high core clock speeds....

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, RainfallWithin said:

Almost all companies create a bad product at some point. The good companies learn and try to avoid the same mistake in the future. If you only buy from companies that never made a bad product, you'd only be buying from brand new startups releasing their very first products with no experience.

AMD also has a long history of shooting itself in the foot, just like Intel. For example, the following is from only 1 week ago.

 

Yeah I've been following that closely, and it'll be interesting to see how it pans out. From what I've seen though, it did look like AMD was at least slightly deceptive in the marketing department. Sure, companies make bad products and that's fine.. But stuff like that is a big no no as far as I'm concerned. 

 

Maybe I take this stuff too seriously, but I refuse to buy Samsung products on the principle of deceptive marketing. It wasn't long ago they literally used a DSLR to advertise photos taken on their phones. I don't want to give money to a company that is willing to go out of its way to deceive its users. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Astroflash said:

but even when the competition finally came around, they were barely ready.

Here is a little secret about CPU and system development, it can take over a year or three to make a new CPU core implementation.
Making just a new CPU chip can take more than a few months, sometimes over a year. (as in designing a new chip.)
Making a new product skew from an already developed chip can take a week or two in comparison.

So when a competitor comes in and throws a total curve ball, then it can take years before an actual response is made.
In the mean time, one can't really do much more than push out a few new skews, maybe trim the performance a bit, unlock a few features and lower prices.
Though, non of that is a response in form of a new line of products.

Not to mention that a market leader isn't just going to instantly jump onto an idea just because the competitor does something. Though, to be fair, Intel should have released more high core count CPUs for the desktop segment many years ago...

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Astroflash said:

Yeah I've been following that closely, and it'll be interesting to see how it pans out. From what I've seen though, it did look like AMD was at least slightly deceptive in the marketing department. Sure, companies make bad products and that's fine.. But stuff like that is a big no no as far as I'm concerned. 

What they have done this time is absolutely fine with most people, but they created the outrage themselves by constantly criticising other companies that did the same.

 

I've owned 2 AMD graphics cards and 1 AMD CPU. 1 graphics card had artifacting in its completely stock state, the other graphics card outright died at a very young age. The CPU had huge problems with RAM support.

 

Does this mean I'll never recommend AMD? No. I would simply tell someone not to buy those specific products...

Intel has not advanced quickly enough when they were the leader, and AMD has overtaken them. I also wouldn't be purchasing an enthusiast Intel CPU if I was looking for one right now, but what Linus is speaking about is that people have to remember that there are still extraordinary engineers that work there, and it's nice to recognise the work they do, instead of insulting them for working at Intel.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Nystemy said:

Here is a little secret about CPU and system development, it can take over a year or three to make a new CPU core implementation.
Making just a new CPU chip can take more than a few months, sometimes over a year. (as in designing a new chip.)
Making a new product skew from an already developed chip can take a week or two in comparison.

So when a competitor comes in and throws a total curve ball, then it can take years before an actual response is made.
In the mean time, one can't really do much more than push out a few new skews, maybe trim the performance a bit, unlock a few features and lower prices.
Though, non of that is a response in form of a new line of products.

Not to mention that a market leader isn't just going to instantly jump onto an idea just because the competitor does something. Though, to be fair, Intel should have released more high core count CPUs for the desktop segment many years ago...

Well I guess they did release higher core count desktop CPUs a good few years back, but they sure as hell weren't scared to throw a fat price tag on them for the privilege. 

 

And also, I would counter that a company as big as Intel should've been more prepared. But hey, they're not obligated to be ready I guess.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Astroflash said:

Well I guess they did release higher core count desktop CPUs a good few years back, but they sure as hell weren't scared to throw a fat price tag on them for the privilege. 

 

And also, I would counter that a company as big as Intel should've been more prepared. But hey, they're not obligated to be ready I guess.

Yes, their 6 core CPUs were fairly silly high prices to be fair, main reason why few people bought them...

Though, the main reason they were caught of guard were due to AMD breaking rank.
The industry has tried before with multi die approaches to CPU building, Intel used to do that for a lot of their quad and dual core chips back in the day.
(Half the CPU on each chip, if a chip breaks during production, one looses half a CPU, not a whole one. And one can also build a Dual core CPU with half of a quad core one. So bonus.)

Reason the industry stopped doing this were due to inter chip communication becoming a real bottleneck to performance.
Though, AMD tried again and did things a little bit differently. (Their whole Infinity fabric concept)
So suddenly, AMD could build a CPU with 1, 2, 3 or even 4 or more chips and have a very large range of core counts, they could also bin their chips better, and then they had fixed a lot of the interconnect issues. So suddenly, the multi chip approach were very competitive.

Intel one the other hand had largely given up on it at the time, though recently started looking into it again.

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Nystemy said:

Yes, their 6 core CPUs were fairly silly high prices to be fair, main reason why few people bought them...

Though, the main reason they were caught of guard were due to AMD breaking rank.
The industry has tried before with multi die approaches to CPU building, Intel used to do that for a lot of their quad and dual core chips back in the day.
(Half the CPU on each chip, if a chip breaks during production, one looses half a CPU, not a whole one. And one can also build a Dual core CPU with half of a quad core one. So bonus.)

Reason the industry stopped doing this were due to inter chip communication becoming a real bottleneck to performance.
Though, AMD tried again and did things a little bit differently. (Their whole Infinity fabric concept)
So suddenly, AMD could build a CPU with 1, 2, 3 or even 4 or more chips and have a very large range of core counts, they could also bin their chips better, and then they had fixed a lot of the interconnect issues. So suddenly, the multi chip approach were very competitive.

Intel one the other hand had largely given up on it at the time, though recently started looking into it again.

I always assumed that information that critical would leak out of the companies to some degree given they are so big..no?

 

Was Ryzen genuinely a surprise? I would have thought that given the time it takes to design these CPUs, stuff would eventually leak one way or another.

 

Isn't that how the consoles end up with virtually identical specs every time, even though there are huge gaps between releases? Or is that just because the options are obvious..?

Link to post
Share on other sites

If Linus made "Why I still love AMD/Nvidia...", people will call him an AMD/Nvidia shill, instead of an Intel shill.

 

 

Floatplane shill, on the other hand, is true. Just look at him repping a FP shirt instead of one from LTT. /s

Link to post
Share on other sites

We seriously need to make VIA Technologies great again to break the Intel/AMD x86 processor duopoly.

"Mankind’s greatest mistake will be its inability to control the technology it has created."

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Astroflash said:

I always assumed that information that critical would leak out of the companies to some degree given they are so big..no?

 

Was Ryzen genuinely a surprise? I would have thought that given the time it takes to design these CPUs, stuff would eventually leak one way or another.

 

Isn't that how the consoles end up with virtually identical specs every time, even though there are huge gaps between releases? Or is that just because the options are obvious..?

A lot of the people working on implementing a CPU core is generally very keen on not giving out any of that information. Since both they and the company knows that only the people in the team knows of those details. So spilling the beans on it can very quickly make one an "unpopular" dude to say the least, not to mention paying the damage fees....

 

Then the teams are fairly small as well. (And honestly, it is usually a bunch of different teams, each working on their thing. So if something leaks, one can very accurately figure out who did the mistake.)

Though, why consoles tends to get similar specs is likely due to console makers talking to a chip maker, and to game developers during development of the console.
And for the PS2, and PS3, Xbox, and Xbox 360, IBM were the chip maker. For Xbox one (and its variants), and PS4, PS5 AMD is the chip maker. (Nintendo is though not using the same chip maker, nor really the same game developers either, so that is why their consoles have dramatically different specs.)
So it doesn't take long for a "general" spec sheet to be formulated without actually being written down. So that is why consoles tends to have similar specs, some minor differences here and there though.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×