AMDisappointed

[papajo]

31 minutes ago, Mark Kaine said:

This is now over with the "3rd" gen, very disappointing gains, sorry I don't really care about some techno mumbo jumbo of density gains or whatever, I'm seeing disappointing performance jump and ludicrous price increases - they're now actually pulling an Intel, whereas intel is pulling an AMD recently (except the die sizes, but that's obviously going to change soon) AMD gotta prepare themselves when that happens... 

That holds true if you are talking about the 5000 (leting aside that "no gains" thing since they are better IPC wise, which is not some techy obscure thing means better in single thread applications and in general e.g gaming etc than intel and AMD before that held this advantage only to the point where multiple cores -more than a given intel cpu had- were utilized )  in the current state of the market so with MSRP being a joke and availability almost non existend. 

 

the 3000 series had competitive pricetags (and it is not only the CPUs, intel needed you to change mobo with every CPU not only that but the mobos were more expensive for the same featureset compared to AMD ones last but not least intel made overclockability a commodity locking it out of CPUs only to increase the pricetags of the CPUs that could get overclocked while AMD had free overclocking for all SKUs, not to mention that you ponied up e.g lets say 400-500+ USD for a CPU and got toothpaste as a TIM under the lid as where AMD kept good quality and thermal conductivity by soldering the lids) 

[camieabz]

19 minutes ago, Mark Kaine said:

I'm seeing disappointing performance jump and ludicrous price increases

60-75% increase in 3 years on CPUs with same cores, platform and pretty much same power draw (105w for all, but the 1800x was 95w)?

 

 

When I bought my 2700x in 2018, it was £300. Given I'm looking at the same vendors, and it's 2.5 years later, notice this:

 

3700x - £286

3800x - £325

3800XT - £338

5800x - £420

 

Now bear in mind that the 5xxx CPUs have only been out 1-3 months, depending on model. Also, I could get a 2700x last year for about £150 (price has since gone back up with less availability), so there are still a lot of older CPUs still out there. Even allowing for 5% inflation per year, the £300 should be £340 today (or 3800XT prices). Maybe be a little more patient with new CPU prices.

 

If you saying that you think we should be getting 12-16 cores (little use to gamers anyway) on 5xxx CPUs (just released) for less than £400, I think you're being too demanding of the system.

 

Also bear in mind that these Zen+ and Zen 2 CPUs aren't suddenly slow. They'll be more than enough for most folks' needs, short of searing fast single core stuff, which is the reserve of those that can justify a new CPU every year.

 

I just realised. It's 20 years later and people are still arguing over bang for buck, without noticing the performance levels of 2-3 years (or more) ago. When I consider a 65w E8400 with a Passmark score of 1,148 and a 65w 3700x with a Passmark score of 22,811 (almost 20x faster after 10 years), I'm not too disappointed. Even if we only consider single thread performance, we've got double the perf for the same wattage, and less noise from coolers, and far far better gaming !!

 

And don't get me started on the differences since PIII CPUs, with SDR ram, AGP GPUs with 32Meg of vRAM, 7200rpm 60Gig drives being 'performance', and the era when RAID 0 was an expensive must have (and an even more expensive disaster when the drive controller died). My first proper PC cost me £2400 in 1997. My palms sweated when I signed the purchase sheet. My current 2018 one cost £2000 with two monitors. You kids don't know you're living. 

[papajo]

24 minutes ago, camieabz said:

5800x - £420

that's 480 euros 

 

(so by that I think you paid a steap pricetag for your 400 pound 2700x) 

 

I paid on amazon (which usually doesnt have the best prices for CPUs  I just preferred the convenience) 430 euros for my 3900x like a couple of months after release

 

And its not only that since it's release I could just order one from wherever (including my own small country: Greece) without waiting times, pricegauging or any other issue (well maybe the first couple of days prices were a little high but not by much and I cant remember anyway) 

 

then after a month or so I could get to a store and buy one that would be on the shelf at near MSRP price or exactly at MSRP price (depending on the store) 

 

 

Now I couldnt find ANY 5000 CPU especially 5900x and 5950x for weeks after launch searching the entire continent of Europe and once some became available a month  deep, or more, the pricetags were horrendous (especially for the 5900x and 5950x)  and again more like "not currently available wait 14 days" or things like that

 

 

And the situation hasnt become any better (maybe for 5800x and below but still 420 pounds for a 5800x is too much and I am sure it is not like it is widely available) 

 

the experience is night and day... not to mention that I got the short stick because a few weeks before the release I sold my 3900x in hopes of adding some cash and getting a 5950x which I predicted would run for more than its MSRP the first weeks but I didnt care but the sum I ponied up now isnt enough to buy even a 5900x lol 

 

24 minutes ago, camieabz said:

If you saying that you think we should be getting 12-16 cores (little use to gamers anyway) on 5xxx CPUs (just released) for less than £400

Why not? flagships used to cost that much back in the day (and technology was supposed to get cheaper by each new gen... ) the only reason I didnt held anything against amd for their prices (even for previous gens of ryzen) is because intel had shat all over us with ridiculous prices and amd is small and said hey... they tried something good let them get a bit extra for that np.... 

[WhitetailAni]

25 minutes ago, camieabz said:

And don't get me started on the differences since PIII CPUs, with SDR ram, AGP GPUs with 32Meg of vRAM, 7200rpm 60Gig drives being 'performance', and the era when RAID 0 was an expensive must have (and an even more expensive disaster when the drive controller died). My first proper PC cost me £2400 in 1997. My palms sweated when I signed the purchase sheet. My current 2018 one cost £2000 with two monitors. You kids don't know you're living. 

And here's me getting a full Pentium III computer with 3 hard drives for free.

Except the hard drive.

RIP Seagate drive... except every single Seagate drive I've owned has committed suicide.

And 2 monitors!

3 minutes ago, papajo said:

Why not? flagships used to cost that much back in the day (and technology was supposed to get cheaper by each new gen... ) the only reason I didnt held anything against amd for their prices (even for previous gens of ryzen) is because intel had shat all over us with ridiculous prices and amd is small and said hey... they tried something good let them get a bit extra for that np.... 

Remember Linus talking about how his Athlon XP (or 64, can't remember which) cost him like $900?
Just the processor?

[camieabz]

It was £300 for the 2700x (340-ish Euros). It was marked up a bit, partly due to the CPU pricing at that moment in time, partly due to it being the flagship. However, the stock cooler was free, and I didn't have to consider an extra £50-£100 there.

[papajo]

4 minutes ago, ragnarok0273 said:

And here's me getting a full Pentium III computer with 3 hard drives for free.

Except the hard drive.

RIP Seagate drive... except every single Seagate drive I've owned has committed suicide.

And 2 monitors!

Remember Linus talking about how his Athlon XP (or 64, can't remember which) cost him like $900?
Just the processor?

That was like a special edition (similar to intel's extreme edition) aimed for richguys and didnt have significant performance increase compared to the flagships that cost way less (and also it probably wouldnt even cost 900... maybe 900 Canadian pesos in the mid 2000s which would be like 600 usd or something like that) 

[D13H4RD]

4 hours ago, Doug_Dangger said:

What's going on with AMD?

A lot of it boils down to "They're a for-profit publicly listed corporation, jackass". Seems that people have only just woken up to the fact that AMD's not your friend after countless periods of circlejerking and such for years.

 

When AMD managed to surpass Intel in terms of gaming performance in a more significant number of titles compared to Ryzen 3000 v 9th-gen Core, they saw fit to increase prices across the board in order to be the "premium" option as a way to increase their average selling prices demanded by shareholders. Naturally, this made them less value parts versus some of Intel's parts, notably after they were discounted by some retailers, compounded by TSMC not being able to make enough to meet demand.

 

That thing about TSMC not being able to make enough to meet demand is also why RX 6000 is in a miserable situation as of right now.

[papajo]

35 minutes ago, D13H4RD said:

A lot of it boils down to "They're a for-profit publicly listed corporation, jackass". Seems that people have only just woken up to the fact that AMD's not your friend after countless periods of circlejerking and such for years.

 

When AMD managed to surpass Intel in terms of gaming performance in a more significant number of titles compared to Ryzen 3000 v 9th-gen Core, they saw fit to increase prices across the board in order to be the "premium" option as a way to increase their average selling prices demanded by shareholders. Naturally, this made them less value parts versus some of Intel's parts, notably after they were discounted by some retailers, compounded by TSMC not being able to make enough to meet demand.

 

That thing about TSMC not being able to make enough to meet demand is also why RX 6000 is in a miserable situation as of right now.

Corporations are not humans (in the sense that you can not judge them as if they are a single person through the years) they are led by people (which are not the same through the years) 

 

but before I dive into AMD in particular I want to address this "low hanging fruit argument" everybody in tech forums slaps in thinking he is enlightened  in the loop wise guy  who saw the light of true knowledge and the rest who are complaining are illiterate peasants that dont know better 

 

"They're a for-profit publicly listed corporation, jackass"

 

Ok so what? ALL CORPORATIONS ARE FOR PROFIT... the guys that sell cartons of milk in the supermarkets are for profit corporations the ones that sell water, electricity etc etc are FOR PROFIT they are not charities. 

 

But being a for profit corporation doesn't  mean you can profiteer or scheme to F people badly just because you are a cartel or a monopoly 

 

It is not normal nor legal nor ethical and many such companies have tasted the stick of the law once people started complaining about that which lead journalists to research on that which lead to lobbying, in our particular case the people involved-PC consumers, but especially tech journalist if any real one still exists-  just dont care as much at least not in numbers to form a critical mass which would get noticed by governments and legal authorities to review said companies. 

 

 

Now with that aside AMD (under different leaderships through the years) wasnt just an underdog it was infact better than intel in the early two thousands and somewhat in the 90s while still competitive and through the years they brought lots of innovations (first to launch 64bit, first to reach 1Ghz,5GHz, first to launch dual core CPUs etc) 

 

and they werent scheming against the consumer once they had the upper hand (and what people seem to forget that there were times when AMD didnt have the upper hand per se in total numbers but was still very competitive lacking only behind incrementally in some scenarios and during that time they still were consumer friendly! Especially in the opensource department)  and in most ways they still are except what's happening now. 

 

Now under this leadership (and in lew of recent events with both the new CPU and GPU lineup) it seems that they have forgotten their roots 

 

 

[Moonzy]

8 hours ago, Doug_Dangger said:

What's going on with AMD?

Doing business as a company

 

8 hours ago, Doug_Dangger said:

They were doing well being the performance per dollar on cpus until the middle of last year when their prices went up and Intel's 10th actually becoming the performance per dollar champs. 

They hold the performance crown, and the "popular" crown, so they didn't need to play the performance per dollar card, and try to get as much money as possible, like any other company would

 

8 hours ago, Doug_Dangger said:

During AMD's press release, they said that the 6000 series was going to be available en mass.  That was a lie.  They actually produced less than Nvidia.  This is quite disappointing.

Those who said it'll be widely available are talking out of their rear.

 

Their 7nm wafer is split between CPU GPU and consoles soc, I doubt they'll do well in any field

 

Their 2020Q4 CPU market share actually dropped by 0.7% even though they released a new product and sold everything they have.

Meaning they just don't have the volume to meet the explosive demand, which highlights how heavy is the demand for a gaming PC today.

[Dabombinable]

5 hours ago, camieabz said:

And don't get me started on the differences since PIII CPUs, with SDR ram, AGP GPUs with 32Meg of vRAM, 7200rpm 60Gig drives being 'performance', and the era when RAID 0 was an expensive must have (and an even more expensive disaster when the drive controller died). My first proper PC cost me £2400 in 1997. My palms sweated when I signed the purchase sheet. My current 2018 one cost £2000 with two monitors. You kids don't know you're living. 

And that £2000 is far less than that the £2400 you spent back then. £4,467 is how much it costs after inflation.

I still feel sorry for anyone who bought a PIII 1000 back then before the Durons and Athlon XP launched. Initial prices were insane.

[papajo]

1 hour ago, Dabombinable said:

My first proper PC cost me £2400 in 1997.

I find this kinda hard to believe unless you had something very exotic or whatnot... what kind of hardware were you running? And obviously you include the monitor and speakers/peripherals into that possibly a printer and a scanner ? 

 

Or was it a laptop? 

 

 

in the late 90s an imac would cost less than 1000 pounds for example  

 

 

I remember paying (actually my father  lol)  the equivalent of 1900-2000ish pounds back then for a pentium pro rig.  

 

but prices went  down in computing (it was the norm until -unfortunately- very recently that new tech brought down the prices of old tech while also being cheaper itself) 

 

 

I remember paying around 1000 pounds for the fastest p4(I believe it was a 3.2Ghz one),2GB ram a Microstar (MSI)Geforce Ti 4200 128MB and 40gigs (not sure to be honest ) HDD + two drives one of which a x48 or x52 (again cant remember :P) plextor cd recorder a 15" sony TFT 1024*768 monitor  back in 2003 it wasnt the best of the best but it was a formidable rig non the less

 

 

Then I remember paying around 1500 pounds in 2007 or there about for a top killer rig Intel core 2 quad 6700, Asus Striker II extreme, XFX Geforce 9800 GX2 black edition (best gx2 out there) 8GB of OCZ Reaper X (which allowed in warranty overvolting up to 1.9 volts) CPU cooler Zalman CNPS 9700 NT  PSU Thermaltake 850 watt cant remember the name but it was the best in the line and as a case Thermaltake Xaser VI (Thermaltake was something like corsair back then not a cheapo firm like it is now), sound card creative soundblaster audigy x-fi fatal1ty Pro, two DVD-r best plextors cant remember the name and (although I might have added later on ) the best LG bluray recorder of the time, as for HDD I cant remember surely a big capacity for the time though by western digital

 

IT WAS THE TITS!!!!!!!!   That's why I remember it that fondly around 2007 was the best time to be a computer enthusiast great value for money it was the pinnacle of price to performance and price to quality ratio every year following that things were little disappointing as far as price tags go well actually they were not that much expensive but they wouldnt get cheaper up untill about 2012 or so when they started to get really expensive, sponsored/ "free sample but say good things about me"youtubers and RGB culture kicked in and the retailers just realized how easy it is to sell to a child something at 100% profit when slapping some RGB and put "gamer/PRO" in the name. 

 

 

Now (and I mean even before the rtx3000 series or amd 5000 series launch) you need to spend like 1000 pounds only for the graphics card and it still wont be the best in the lineup lol 

 

 

[Dabombinable]

29 minutes ago, papajo said:

-snip-

I was referencing part of @camieabz 's post. That definitely wasn't my first PC (no idea how much that cost - was from 1993 with a 386 DX-40, an 80MB HDD and a dual gameport card in place of a soundcard and was also my Mum's first PC).

[camieabz]

PII 300Mhz

64MB RAM

4MB Gfx

6.4GB HDD

All the trimmings, including a 17" monitor.

 

It was top of the line that year.

 

But you find it hard to believe. Fair enough.

 

https://www.cnet.com/news/300-mhz-pentium-ii-box-for-1999/

[RejZoR]

AMD did bump up the prices, but my god their Zen 2 CPU's are amazing. I got the 5800X and the thing is awesome. Fast, cool, can't blame AMD for expecting us to pay premium for a premium product. They had to play the cost card when they had inferior products, but now they have superior products. Guess what that means for prices. I know we all want lower prices, but we can't ignore the fact AMD is just a company and like any other, they really care the most about profits. And I can't blame them. It's just how it is and how market works. Same goes for Radeon branch. They used to be inferior compared to GeForce cards, but now they very much can and are competing. Their availability is poor, but so is RTX 3000... Scalpers and this damn virus as well as TSMC capacities have a toll...

 

We had a laugh at Intel and now I hope they'll pull their shit together and make something incredible. They had many comebacks in the past and they'll have one again for sure. I just hope both will have the momentum to compete with each other in the future. Coz that means we, the consumers benefit the most.

[papajo]

13 minutes ago, camieabz said:

PII 300Mhz

64MB RAM

4MB Gfx

6.4GB HDD

All the trimmings, including a 17" monitor.

 

It was top of the line that year.

 

But you find it hard to believe. Fair enough.

 

https://www.cnet.com/news/300-mhz-pentium-ii-box-for-1999/

The article you are linking talks about PIIs being cheap and for sub $2000 systems which means less than 1200 pounds at 1997 exchange rate

 

Also when I say that I find it hard to believe I dont meant that you lied I mean that it sounds very expensive for the prices I remember. since it was a full set though + probably you didnt got the best quote it sounds more rational now 

[Moonzy]

12 minutes ago, RejZoR said:

AMD did bump up the prices, but my god their Zen 2 CPU's are amazing. I got the 5800X and the thing is awesome.

Isn't the 5800x zen 3? Or your statement is to be separated

 

AMD and their naming scheme needs to... Be fixed IMO

 

Ryzen 5000, 4th gen ryzen, zen 3 architecture

Not to mention they mix several architecture in a single ryzen generation.

[camieabz]

Factor in US pricing tends not to include tax. UK Pricing does. Of £2400, £300-$400 would have been VAT, so £2100 ish. Also factor in that I walked in off the high street with zero knowledge of PCs and bought it. Yup, I probably got stiffed, but that was always the case for newbies in high street PC stores.

 

Since then, I always built my own. Anyway this got way off point.

[Kavamale21]

i am idiot so if would i wont buy anything with less that 8cores/16 treads cpu in 2021 less than 32gb ram. because then i build my pc even if i think i will upgrage in future usualy it just comes after 4-5 years with new build not changing almost any part. i still like amd because of cheaper mobos and hi core caunt that give longer lifetime for pc. 1000 for top cpu and basic mobo is still steal even now. gpu prices insane now but at least we have some competition and shortage afects just rush buyers. it wont last forever. and as i understod ryzen 5000 series is end of life for amd4 socket, so i am still puzled about people crazynes about 5600...

[Vishera]

AMD are using the market share they gained and Intel's struggles for a price increase,hoping we will just deal with it,just like what happened with graphics cards and smartphones,one moment you can buy a flagship for $550,the next time you buy it's $1000 for a flagship.

 

Here is MSRP price history for you:

1700 - $329

2700X - $329

3700X - $329

5800X - $449

[RejZoR]

18 minutes ago, Moonzy said:

Isn't the 5800x zen 3? Or your statement is to be separated

 

AMD and their naming scheme needs to... Be fixed IMO

 

Ryzen 5000, 4th gen ryzen, zen 3 architecture

Not to mention they mix several architecture in a single ryzen generation.

Yes, I meant Zen 3. Also yes, that Zen+ in between cocked up the numbering badly as well as all the shifted mobile versions.

[Moonzy]

3 minutes ago, Vishera said:

Here is MSRP price history for you:

1700 - $329

2700X - $329

3700X - $329

5800X - $449

Tbf, there's also 3800x which is bad value

But I'm pretty sure AMD ain't putting out 5700x anytime soon, if at all, because of the shortage on 7nm wafers

 

What ticks me is them removing stock coolers but did not reduce the MSRP, or include one upon request

The wraith prism isn't too bad of a cooler

[RejZoR]

People say 5800X is also a bad value. I'm just not sure how. Also with much higher clocks and superior IPC of 5800X, people claiming 3700X is a better "deal" is even weirder. 3700X was rather disappointing to me and 5800X is really what 3700X should've been in the first place. I mean 5800X is regularly hitting 4850MHz on all cores under certain lighter loads like games. When has that happened on 3700X where it could hardly hit advertised boost clocks even for single thread loads...

[Vishera]

41 minutes ago, RejZoR said:

People say 5800X is also a bad value. I'm just not sure how. Also with much higher clocks and superior IPC of 5800X, people claiming 3700X is a better "deal" is even weirder. 3700X was rather disappointing to me and 5800X is really what 3700X should've been in the first place. I mean 5800X is regularly hitting 4850MHz on all cores under certain lighter loads like games. When has that happened on 3700X where it could hardly hit advertised boost clocks even for single thread loads...

What you are saying would have been true if price was not an issue,but it is.

$449 is a bad value for an 8 core/16 threads processor.

Remember that each generation you could buy a Ryzen 8 core/16 thread CPU for $329,now the only current gen option is $449,

That's a huge price increase,the difference in price between the 3700X to the 5800X makes the 3700X a better value.

[RejZoR]

1 hour ago, Vishera said:

What you are saying would have been true if price was not an issue,but it is.

$449 is a bad value for an 8 core/16 threads processor.

Remember that each generation you could buy a Ryzen 8 core/16 thread CPU for $329,now the only current gen option is $449,

That's a huge price increase,the difference in price between the 3700X to the 5800X makes the 3700X a better value.

Did you just entirely ignore the massive clock jump and IPC improvements? I think you have...

[Blademaster91]

1 minute ago, RejZoR said:

Did you just entirely ignore the massive clock jump and IPC improvements? I think you have...

The 3700X is significantly faster than a 1700X and yet the price stayed the same. But I think the 5800X is a great CPU, faster than an Intel 10th gen CPU in most tasks yet consumes much less power, although I would've liked to see a $50 lower MSRP or include a cooler at $449.