AMD is not done with the bullshit. (Unconfirmed)

[S w a t s o n]

This is a side effect of AMD trying to cover it bases, it really should have just gone with Cezanne, they have been so efficient in die usage until now. 1 GPU die, 1 CPU die for server and desktop and 1 die for mobile. But now they will have 3 die for mobile (Renoir is too new to exclude yet).

 

In any case, assuming they dont fuck it up even further by bending to the community outrage the numbering SHOULD be fully fixed with Ryzen 6000 series being Zen 3+ or Zen 4 if there is no Zen 3+.

[thechinchinsong]

5 hours ago, LAwLz said:

For example, if you buy a computer with a Ryzen 3000 series CPU, it might be Zen, Zen+ or a Zen 2 processor. They have three CPU generations using the same series of names.

There was a Zen processor in the 3000 series?

[S w a t s o n]

By the way, Intel has 3 generations of CPU in 10th gen Core series. Cannon Lake, Ice Lake, Comet Lake. Not any better than AMD

 

Edit: It's actually Cascade Lake, Ice Lake, Comet Lake, Amber Lake. 4 total architectures under 10th gen Core branding.

[LAwLz]

32 minutes ago, Arika S said:

funny how no other company is afforded the same "defense"

I distinctly remember people raking NVidia over the coals when it came to the GT 1030 and the DDR4+ GDDR5 variations

I might actually have defended Nvidia on that decision, but if I did then it was because they were clearly labeled as different cards.

In the case of the 1030 DDR4 vs GDDR5 customers could tell that it was the same GPU core but different memory just by looking at the name of the product. In this case of AMD, it is literally impossible to tell which CPU cores you are getting unless you look it up on for example Wikipedia.

 

Ryzen 3100 - Zen 2

Ryzen 3200U - Zen

Ryzen 3500C - Zen+

Ryzen 3500 - Zen 2

Ryzen 3400G - Zen+

 

 

I agree with you that (if it's the point you're making) AMD seems to get away with far more BS than other companies though.

I wish companies could just be honest and name their products in a clear and consistent way. 

 

 

  

13 minutes ago, thechinchinsong said:

There was a Zen processor in the 3000 series?

I might actually have been wrong about that. I was referring to the Ryzen 3 3200U.

Some sites say it is Zen based, and some say Zen+ based. It seems like I was wrong and it is actually Zen+ based though.

 

 

  

11 minutes ago, S w a t s o n said:

By the way, Intel has 3 generations of CPU in 10th gen Core series. Cannon Lake, Ice Lake, Comet Lake. Not any better than AMD

Cannon Lake does not belong to the 10th gen core series.

Cannon Lake CPUs were named 8XXX.

 

Ice Lake and Comet Lake are both "10th gen core" though, despite having different CPU architectures.

[thechinchinsong]

1 hour ago, MageTank said:

Now this isn't to say Intel isn't bad at naming things (We almost had the 9900KFC and a man can still dream), or that Nvidia isn't bad either (RTX 3080 Ti Super Max Q Titan X Quadro Tesla X2 6GB Edition), but AMD is still the king and has been for quite some time now, both in CPU and GPU markets. We went from the RX 500 series to the Vega 56/64 to the Radeon VII to the 6000 series. If someone could explain this to me, I am all ears, lol.

The GPU segment naming disaster is a completely different situation from the CPU side. AMD GPU's have the least consistency with their products since they've consistently tried to rebrand into something that would be competitive with Nvidia and each generation, they've failed. If you take a look at AMD/ATI's old naming schemes back in the 4000-7000 series GPUs, there was a lot better consistency, but that was when they weren't trying to reinvent themselves every generation or two. 

1 hour ago, MageTank said:

I'll be bold enough to say we can go ahead and remove the "might" from your statement and double down on them absolutely being worse with their naming conventions. AMD is intentional with their naming. They do it on purpose with the intent to confuse the consumers into believing their product is superior (Which is weird, because all signs are pointing to this being true without the shenanigans being required). Intel releases Z270, AMD releases X370. Intel releases X299, AMD releases X399. I can't imagine how many poor retail workers had to deal with explaining the difference between X370 and Z370 and why they were different motherboards for different processors. 

I would argue that the X370 and motherboard naming conventions that AMD can up with are actually a good thing up to a certain point. When coming from a place of absolutely no relevance and obscurity, AMD HAD to mimic the style and naming convention of Intel in order to anyone to actually know how their products performed, relative to themselves and Intel. I'm happy they didn't try to continue with their FX and AM3+ motherboard naming convention. The R-3/5/7 naming schemes were just a product of necessity and smart marketing of the time. AMD's naming conventions are definitely intentional and definitely bad, its just this isn't a good example for it.

1 hour ago, MageTank said:

AMD also has no problem confusing their own customers within their own product stacks, as evidenced by their APU's. You have the 2200G/2400G based on the original Zen architecture despite sharing the same name as the Zen+ CPU's, the 3200G/3400G based on the Zen+ architectures despite sharing the same nomenclature as the Zen 2 CPU's and you have the 4000 series APU's that were based on Zen 2, which the average consumer would assume was automatically better than the desktop 3000 series just because of the logic of "bigger number = better".

I agree with the in-product stack naming shenanigans. There's really no excuse, whether it comes from Nvidia, Intel, or AMD. I can't actually think of a time where Intel was inconsistent with their generation branding. AMD is probably the worst of the bunch, but it gets written off since they usually have convincing products.

[S w a t s o n]

15 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

Cannon Lake does not belong to the 10th gen core series.

Cannon Lake CPUs were named 8XXX.

 

Ice Lake and Comet Lake are both "10th gen core" though, despite having different CPU architectures.

Sorry I meant Cascade Lake, Ice Lake and Comet Lake, also technically Amber Lake with the Y series are all 10th gen Core, so 4 archs.

[thechinchinsong]

7 hours ago, TOMPPIX said:

 

  Hide contents

i wouldn't be surprised if the zen 3 non x desktop cpus had a locked multiplier or just limited to a lower frequency than the x versions, like they did with the rx 5600 xt, for those who don't know. the 5600 xt is locked to 1820mhz otherwise it would cannibalize the rx 5700.

 

What's your reasoning behind this? From what I know, AMD's GPU and CPU divisions act like 2 different companies under the same name. 

[samcool55]

8 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

I might actually have defended Nvidia on that decision, but if I did then it was because they were clearly labeled as different cards.

In the case of the 1030 DDR4 vs GDDR5 customers could tell that it was the same GPU core but different memory just by looking at the name of the product. In this case of AMD, it is literally impossible to tell which CPU cores you are getting unless you look it up on for example Wikipedia.

 

Ryzen 3100 - Zen 2

Ryzen 3200U - Zen

Ryzen 3500C - Zen+

Ryzen 3500 - Zen 2

Ryzen 3400G - Zen+

 

 

I agree with you that (if it's the point you're making) AMD seems to get away with far more BS than other companies though.

I wish companies could just be honest and name their products in a clear and consistent way. 

Yeeaa nvidia does this multiple times in just the rtx 2000 series alone.

Never heard anybody complain tho...

 

Also the disaster that the 1030 is, it's REALLY difficult to figure out if it uses DDR4 or GDDR5. The average consumer will NOT know the difference between a GT 1030 2GB OC LPD4 and a GT 1030 2GB OC LPG5. And the fact the DDR4 one performs around half of the GDDR5 one is just disgusting.

 

Also with the 3000-series, you at least know what you get looking at the model. It gives you enough information.

3000 no letter = zen 2

3000G or 3000C = zen+

3000U = zen

Usually just looking at the form factor tells you which architecture it is. Just knowing there's 3000-series inside is enough to figure out the rest.

[Doobeedoo]

Hmm we'll have to see, though if so and for very low end SKUs I'd expect a different naming added. 

[Sorenson]

5 hours ago, Dream Machines Official said:

Apple has gone even further now. They are selling Iphone 12 without the adapter. Come on customer go and spend another 40-50 USD or soo..

in addition 120Hz refresh rate screen was supposed to be an advantege now the only advantage we are left with is... 5G. Because in my opinion TBH releasing smaller version of the iphone is nothing new.

First off this thread should be about AMD’s upcoming CPUs. But while we’re at it, why is everyone crying about this? A USB C to A adapter is like $6. Most people already have the cable to charge their phone, if they don’t then they add on $20 to the cost of an $800 device. Big who cares. 

[LAwLz]

51 minutes ago, samcool55 said:

Yeeaa nvidia does this multiple times in just the rtx 2000 series alone.

Never heard anybody complain tho...

That's different from what AMD are doing.

 

Nvidia = Same GPU, different prices, different boosts.

Pay more? Get higher clock speed.

Quite simple really.

 

 

As for the 2060 KO, that's a case where you got the same generation GPU core but significantly higher performance in some workloads.

 

AMD = Sneak in old products with very similar names of the new products to try and sell older products to people who think they are buying something else.

Nvidia in your examples = Pay more and get a better binned product, or in the case of the 2060 KO you think you are buying a cheap(er) product but you get the performance of a more expensive product.

 

The former just makes sense (better binned GPU costs more) and the latter is just a massive win for consumers.

 

 

51 minutes ago, samcool55 said:

Also the disaster that the 1030 is, it's REALLY difficult to figure out if it uses DDR4 or GDDR5. The average consumer will NOT know the difference between a GT 1030 2GB OC LPD4 and a GT 1030 2GB OC LPG5. And the fact the DDR4 one performs around half of the GDDR5 one is just disgusting.

Dude, when you buy the 1030 you know which memory you are getting by just looking at the names. The DDR4 version of the cards are literally named "DDR4".

 

I agree that users might have a hard time understanding how GDDR5 and DDR4 are different, but that's a completely different issue than "Nvidia are trying to trick people by intentionally naming their products in confusing ways".

 

 

 

51 minutes ago, samcool55 said:

Also with the 3000-series, you at least know what you get looking at the model. It gives you enough information.

3000 no letter = zen 2

3000G or 3000C = zen+

3000U = zen

Usually just looking at the form factor tells you which architecture it is. Just knowing there's 3000-series inside is enough to figure out the rest.

You gotta be kidding me.

1) That is not easy to differentiate. You can't say knowing the difference between GDDR5 and DDR4 is hard, but knowing what you just described is easy.

2) Your list isn't even accurate. The 3300U is zen+ despite having a U at the end. The 3600X is Zen 2 despite having a letter at the end.

[Mateyyy]

1 hour ago, samcool55 said:

Also with the 3000-series, you at least know what you get looking at the model. It gives you enough information.

3000 no letter = zen 2

3000G or 3000C = zen+

3000U = zen

The 3000G is Zen, not Zen+, despite the fact that the 3200G and 3400G are Zen+. 

Pretty funny that you missed that, considering the context lol

[MageTank]

1 hour ago, thechinchinsong said:

The GPU segment naming disaster is a completely different situation from the CPU side. AMD GPU's have the least consistency with their products since they've consistently tried to rebrand into something that would be competitive with Nvidia and each generation, they've failed. If you take a look at AMD/ATI's old naming schemes back in the 4000-7000 series GPUs, there was a lot better consistency, but that was when they weren't trying to reinvent themselves every generation or two. 

I would argue that the X370 and motherboard naming conventions that AMD can up with are actually a good thing up to a certain point. When coming from a place of absolutely no relevance and obscurity, AMD HAD to mimic the style and naming convention of Intel in order to anyone to actually know how their products performed, relative to themselves and Intel. I'm happy they didn't try to continue with their FX and AM3+ motherboard naming convention. The R-3/5/7 naming schemes were just a product of necessity and smart marketing of the time. AMD's naming conventions are definitely intentional and definitely bad, its just this isn't a good example for it.

I agree with the in-product stack naming shenanigans. There's really no excuse, whether it comes from Nvidia, Intel, or AMD. I can't actually think of a time where Intel was inconsistent with their generation branding. AMD is probably the worst of the bunch, but it gets written off since they usually have convincing products.

I don't think AMD had to name it that similarly to Intel though. They could have called their chipset the AMD X300 back when Intel had the Z270. 300 is still a larger number than 270, if that was their plan the entire time. X399 vs X299 was by far the biggest slap in the face seeing as both had the same starting letter as well, but luckily that was comparing two enthusiast platforms and I'd hope that enthusiasts were harder to confuse.

 

For actual CPU naming, I don't really have a problem with AMD's adoption of the R3, R5, R7 nomenclature in the CPU segment at all, especially considering they had already used this nomenclature on their GPU's before Zen ever existed. The actual naming of the CPU's (aside from the APU fiasco) is completely fine by me as it doesn't really encroach upon being predatory to consumers in my opinion, at least from an intentionally deceitful or manipulative manner as what they've done with their recent chipset naming convention. That being said, I completely agree with you on their AM3 chipset naming convention, that was awful beyond comprehension.

 

 

[TOMPPIX]

2 hours ago, thechinchinsong said:

What's your reasoning behind this? From what I know, AMD's GPU and CPU divisions act like 2 different companies under the same name. 

Tinfoil hat speak. Wish I could rename the spoiler. If I remember correctly you could do that in the old days of the forum.

[cj09beira]

its always been interesting to me how they are making the new apus, zen 3 + vega and zen 2 plus rdna, will have to wait and see how they market it and what they are trying to do with such weird specs.

naming wise at the end of the day architecture doesn't matter much, what matters is performance, price and it not being confusing (to normies), as long as higher number equals better it should be fine 

[Taf the Ghost]

Intel's back-channel marketing is normally pretty terrible, but this is probably the saddest its dropped to. And that's saying something. The stuff to hit AMD for is there supply & distribution network outside of the USA. It's generally quite poor and leads to AMD being rather noncompetitive in a lot of areas because they basically don't exist.

 

This is reaching for a complaint by pure conjecture. People are complaining about the performance & naming of two entire silicon designs THAT NO ONE HAS TESTED PUBLICLY. Also, no one knows if they're even sold in the same OEM distribution channels. And, here's a hint, they probably won't be. No one has a clear answer on why AMD has something like 20 APU designs landing on 7nm, but there's clearly specific customers that want specific things. The APU division is clearly now OEM focused, so they're making designs to fill segments of the market. Welcome to basic business.

 

And, if you want to make a real complaint, smack AMD around for the utter lack of Renoir supply. It's basically disappeared from the major OEMs.

[Taf the Ghost]

38 minutes ago, cj09beira said:

its always been interesting to me how they are making the new apus, zen 3 + vega and zen 2 plus rdna, will have to wait and see how they market it and what they are trying to do with such weird specs.

naming wise at the end of the day architecture doesn't matter much, what matters is performance, price and it not being confusing (to normies), as long as higher number equals better it should be fine 

GCN, at its core, is probably the best singular iGPU design. It's extremely scalable from 5w to about 150w. Note where APU dGPUs always ran out of steam? Yeah, that was the problem. The extremely solid mix of Graphics & Compute are the generally correct choice for the iGPUs in most situations. Right down to Intel basically bringing over core GCN people from AMD for their Xe design. That isn't an accident.

[whm1974]

5 hours ago, Arika S said:

funny how no other company is afforded the same "defense"

I distinctly remember people raking NVidia over the coals when it came to the GT 1030 and the DDR4+ GDDR5 variations

How many actual Gamers even brought GT 1030 based video cards? The only people who brought them are those who needed something better then whatever iGPU they had...

[bit]

the only people that will care about this are in this thread complaining lmao, overestimating the average consumer

[TVwazhere]

11 hours ago, SavageNeo said:

Average customer should do his research before buying. it is not AMDs fault. it is customers fault

.....

5 hours ago, LAwLz said:

Ryzen 3100 - Zen 2

Ryzen 3200U - Zen

Ryzen 3500C - Zen+

Ryzen 3500 - Zen 2

Ryzen 3400G - Zen+

 

I might actually have been wrong about that. I was referring to the Ryzen 3 3200U.

Some sites say it is Zen based, and some say Zen+ based. It seems like I was wrong and it is actually Zen+ based though.

5 hours ago, samcool55 said:

Also with the 3000-series, you at least know what you get looking at the model. It gives you enough information.

3000 no letter = zen 2

3000G or 3000C = zen+

3000U = zen

Usually just looking at the form factor tells you which architecture it is. Just knowing there's 3000-series inside is enough to figure out the rest.

3 hours ago, Mateyyy said:

The 3000G is Zen, not Zen+, despite the fact that the 3200G and 3400G are Zen+. 

Guys... We're the fucking NERDS. If we cant get this shit recalled correctly, what reason does anyone have saying "It's the consumers fault for not being informed"? Half the time we tech enthusiasts are the one providing the information to new consumers, so if we cant get it straight, newcomers will never get it right. 

 

It's 100% AMD's fault and they definitely did it intentionally. Whether it's a huge deal or not is debatable. I definitely find it annoying as a tech enthusiast, but the average consumer usually puts less emphasis on MAXIMUM CLOCKS AND PERFOEMANCE AND AIRFLOW and more about does the system turn on? If so, yay  so AMD is likely to continue their number scheming to "outnumber" intel/Nvidia

[soldier_ph]

AMD becoming what they swore to Destroy: Intel. 

[Helpful Tech Witch]

Just now, soldier_ph said:

AMD becoming what they swore to Destroy: Intel. 

no, as long as they keep making diffrent cpus, they arent intel. now, if there is a zen 3+++++++ on 7nm++++++++, they are intel.

[Bombastinator]

The assumption here is strange.  There is this thing that ryzen didn’t do and this totally unrelated thing that they did do.  Somehow there was an assumption that because a given thing wasn’t done, or stopped, or whatever, that this would mean that nothing that resembled that thing in anyway in the view of the poster would ever be done?  That’s not logical.  AMD is a for-profit company.  It has a marketing department.  How could one assume that something else would not occur?

[Moonzy]

In the end, I don't really care what architecture it is if the performance in every aspect is comparable with the "current" line up that shares the same "generation"

 

Which probably isn't the case here, so AMD still screwed up this time.

 

I can't believe rumors about them screwing up the product name would come before 5000 series even launches

 

Also, someone mentioned about AMD's chipset naming thing. Yea honestly, screw them.

Stop trying to be memer like Elon.

 

As for Nvidia's bad naming scheme, it's not that bad apart from some deceptive marketing like 1030 being paired with different vram, but at least that's labelled on the box afaik

But the one that kicks is the 1060 with the same GPU name but different amount of cuda cores, that's no go in my book.

 

Don't get me started on AMD GPU naming, because I still haven't figured out what is what, and which one performs better than which.

[imreloadin]

8 hours ago, spartaman64 said:

what's the difference between renior and lucienne 

One word...Lucienne seems to be a refresh of Renior from what I can tell:

https://www.techpowerup.com/272519/amd-lucienne-silicon-to-power-certain-ryzen-5000-series-apus