zen 4 AMD Ryzen 7000X3D series coming February/April, 16-core Ryzen 9 7950X3D features 144MB cache: 21-30% higher gaming performance at 1080p (Update #3)

[HenrySalayne]

30 minutes ago, BiG StroOnZ said:

In American English you can also write the date in all-numeric, with periods as the separators.

It's not common and the dd.mm.yy(yy) format is literally the standard format in most European countries. Just - don't ... There is no need. If you would show this slide to random people around the globe, the vast majority will think they'll launch the 7800X3D on 4th of June.

 

40 minutes ago, BiG StroOnZ said:

I don't think they are trying to be deceptive, but it was an aesthetic choice; as with the full stops it does look more appealing compared to using the forward slash or hyphen as separators. 

They might not be deceptive, but it's either ignorance or arrogance to dismiss a big chunk of their audience while creating those slides.

Even worse, the most aesthetically pleasing format would have been "April 6th" - with no margin for interpretation (except "which year?", but that's only funny after a manufacturer tells you 3 years in a row that their new model will be available in September).

[mdk777]

14 minutes ago, HenrySalayne said:

It's not common and the dd.mm.yy(yy) format is literally the standard format in most European countries. Just - don't ... There is no need. If you would show this slide to random people around the globe, the vast majority will think they'll launch the 7800X3D on 4th of June.

Well, as far as I know  AMD is still a US company.

Yeah, I live in AUSTIN TX and it does seem like a different country than the rest of TX ....but still.

 

Our dates are different, we still measure in inches, and our speed limit is 85 mph....that's the way we roll in the US...our house current is 110v...

Yeah, the US is a little different than the rest of the world.

When I read press releases from the EU, I make allowances for their standards.

"it's either ignorance or arrogance to dismiss a big chunk of their audience while creating those slides."

What happened to all the tolerance and inclusion ??

[BiG StroOnZ]

1 hour ago, Dracarris said:

Of course. Why would the units be monotonically increasing or decreasing.

 

Well it doesn't always work out that way. It just happens to be in this instance it works out that way. It can be non-monotonic:

 

Say for example the date was 04/01/23 or 04-01-23 or 04.01.23.

 

Same goes for if the month is higher, like 12/04/23 or 12-04-23 or 12.04.23.

 

Regardless, I see how it can be confusing for those who are not used to the format. Nevertheless, AMD is considered an American company; so it makes sense why they went with that format. 

 

51 minutes ago, HenrySalayne said:

It's not common and the dd.mm.yy(yy) format is literally the standard format in most European countries. Just - don't ... There is no need. If you would show this slide to random people around the globe, the vast majority will think they'll launch the 7800X3D on 4th of June.

 

They might not be deceptive, but it's either ignorance or arrogance to dismiss a big chunk of their audience while creating those slides.

Even worse, the most aesthetically pleasing format would have been "April 6th" - with no margin for interpretation (except "which year?", but that's only funny after a manufacturer tells you 3 years in a row that their new model will be available in September).

 

I mean, it's pretty common in marketing. I also understand this might be considered a standard format in most European countries, in America you can be flexible with the date format. If you showed this slide to random people in America, they would most certainly say the 7800X3D launches on the 6th of April or probably April 6th. However, if you asked most Americans what temperatures were in Celsius or Metric System measurements, many would probably have difficulty in doing so. Nothing you can really do, just different education systems based on location. When I'm reading European publications I make sure I make mental adjustments for their standards. Simply a matter of being mindful. 

 

I don't really see it as ignorance or arrogance. While a large chunk of their audience is not from America, AMD is still an American company. They have to cater to their main demographic.

 

I agree that perhaps writing out the date might have been more respectful to the other demographic. I still don't see it necessarily as harmful, as if you watch the video he announces the release dates fully. Also, the AMD blog post writes out the release dates. Plenty of other sources write out the release dates too. So the information is widely available if someone was having difficulty understanding. I have to do a double take sometimes when I read publications outside of the USA and they list the day, followed by the month, followed by the year.

[starsmine]

44 minutes ago, HenrySalayne said:

It's not common and the dd.mm.yy(yy) format is literally the standard format in most European countries. Just - don't ... There is no need. If you would show this slide to random people around the globe, the vast majority will think they'll launch the 7800X3D on 4th of June.

 

They might not be deceptive, but it's either ignorance or arrogance to dismiss a big chunk of their audience while creating those slides.

Even worse, the most aesthetically pleasing format would have been "April 6th" - with no margin for interpretation (except "which year?", but that's only funny after a manufacturer tells you 3 years in a row that their new model will be available in September).

mm.dd.yy(yy) is very common in the US as well. the dot delimiter is not the MOST common, but we still use it a lot. 

And its an english language thing, not really specifically a US thing, its because we say June 4th, 4th of June is wordy and gets you looks outside of trying to be poetic.

[mdk777]

1 hour ago, starsmine said:

4th of June is wordy and gets you looks outside of trying to be poetic.

Yeah, I took German.

If you were to compose and or speak a long sentence in English and wait till the end to provide the verb people would assume you were autistic or a star wars character.

 

Hey its a big world out there, embrace the inclusion !!!

 

Just because it is different doesn't always mean its wrong.

 

 

 

[HenrySalayne]

1 hour ago, mdk777 said:

Yeah, the US is a little different than the rest of the world.

When I read press releases from the EU, I make allowances for their standards.

"it's either ignorance or arrogance to dismiss a big chunk of their audience while creating those slides."

What happened to all the tolerance and inclusion ??

Asking for precise information has nothing to do with inclusion. We have standards to communicate, even a standard for dates (ISO 8601).

We're not saying "5 units of weight", we use "5 pounds" or "5 kg" so people don't have to guess. If you use the notation order of one part of the world (the US) and the standard separator of another part of the world (definitely not the US) and present it to an international audience, you failed to be clear or precise with your statement.

04/06/23 and especially 2023-04-06 would have been much clearer.

 

My point was not to complain about the MM/DD/YY format (it is stupid, but that's not the point).

Spoiler

 

1 hour ago, starsmine said:

The dot delimiter is not the MOST common, but we still use it a lot. 

AFAIK the dot is borrowed from European date formats and that's a rather recent development.

[mdk777]

15 minutes ago, HenrySalayne said:

"5 pounds" or "5 kg" so people don't have to guess.

sorry wrong, not in the US.

5 pounds is a unit of force. 

kg is a unit of mass.

the US unit of mass is a slug.

So you are mixing two different standards to describe something.(mass and force)

What? just like mixing two standards of date presentation???

 

So, what is precise to you is not so precise in the US.

 

Get over it. 

 

Edited February 2, 2023 by mdk777
clarity

[LAwLz]

1 hour ago, HenrySalayne said:

Asking for precise information has nothing to do with inclusion. We have standards to communicate, even a standard for dates (ISO 8601).

People not following ISO 8601 is a pet peeve of mine. Especially when placing files inside a shared folder. 

It just works so well. No confusion and sorting "alphabetically" causes them to be in chronological order. Even works with hours, minutes and seconds for when you need that resolution. 

[Curufinwe_wins]

1 hour ago, mdk777 said:

sorry wrong, not in the US.

5 pounds is a unit of force. 

kg is a unit of mass.

the US unit of mass is a slug.

So you are mixing two different standards to describe something.(mass and force)

What? just like mixing two standards of date presentation???

 

So, what is precise to you is not so precise in the US.

 

Get over it. 

 

The hilarious thing is you are wrong.

 

The correct official US customary units standard for unit of force is the lbf (pound-force), the lb is the pound-mass, or more precisely the avoirdupois pound, which is **legally** defined as 0.45359237 kg.

 

https://books.google.com/books?id=4aWN-VRV1AoC&pg=PA13#v=onepage&q&f=false <-United States. National Bureau of Standards (1959). Research Highlights of the National Bureau of Standards. U.S. Department of Commerce, National Bureau of Standards. p. 13. 

 

 

Emphasis mine.

 

 

[mdk777]

4 minutes ago, Curufinwe_wins said:

The hilarious thing is you are wrong.

 

The correct official US customary units standard for unit of force is the lbf (pound-force), the lb is the pound-mass, or more precisely the avoirdupois pound, which is **legally** defined as 0.45359237 kg.

 

https://books.google.com/books?id=4aWN-VRV1AoC&pg=PA13#v=onepage&q&f=false <-United States. National Bureau of Standards (1959). Research Highlights of the National Bureau of Standards. U.S. Department of Commerce, National Bureau of Standards. p. 13. 

 

 

Emphasis mine.

 

 

You are simply referencing the official agreement on conversion.

There is indeed international bureau of standards that spends all their time on this.

How you define conversion does not change the original unit.

 

You may or may not know that the definition of things like seconds and even kg change over time.

The metric system is no longer based on standard platinum bars stored in a vault in Paris.

International  agreements use other reference points for comparison.

 

A pound is indeed a force measurement no matter the abbreviation you use.

 

You will not see it in ANY engineering text in the US used as a measure of mass.

 

The legal definition you reference is a conversion of an imprecise colloquialism into a definable transactional legal binding unit.

   

 

 

[Curufinwe_wins]

13 minutes ago, mdk777 said:

You are simply referencing the official agreement on conversion.

There is indeed international bureau of standards that spends all their time on this.

How you define conversion does not change the original unit.

 

You may or may not know that the definition of things like seconds and even kg change over time.

The metric system is no longer based on standard platinum bars stored in a vault in Paris.

International  agreements use other reference points for comparison.

 

A pound is indeed a force measurement no matter the abbreviation you use.

 

You will not see it in ANY engineering text in the US used as a measure of mass.

 

The legal definition you reference is a conversion of an imprecise colloquialism into a definable transactional legal binding unit.

 

Oh yes. Please tell the US professional engineer how to do dimensional analysis or how units are actually defined or used. Tell me how demarcations of lbf or lbm are used within the profession as well as the courses I have both taken **and taught** to collegiate students. 

 

NIST standards define almost everything you interact with, including that '5lbs of flour', expressly in terms of mass. Every piece of food you buy or interact with is sold in units of mass, demarked often in US Customary Units (amongst them pounds). If you would like a history lesson, I can recommend https://www.nist.gov/document/appb-12-hb44-finaldocx 

 

The pound, when not stated explicitly in terms of thrust/force, is referring to a unit of mass that has for the last 65ish years been *defined* by way of the standard kilogram. If you want to try to pretend that any of the quasi-recent changes in methodology and efforts to synchronize the standard kilogram/meter etc are fundamentally altering the very aspect of reality they are attempting to measure... we have much bigger gaps in understanding to be discussing.

[HenrySalayne]

1 pound is exactly 500 g where I'm coming from. I don't know why there is any confusion about this. And it's a measurement of mass.

150 km of where I'm coming from, a pound can also be 240 pieces. Or 1 pound could be 1/20 yoke (area measurement).

17 minutes ago, mdk777 said:

A pound is indeed a force measurement no matter the abbreviation you use.

You should correct Wikipedia then.

Quote

The pound or pound-mass is a unit of mass used in British imperial and United States customary systems of measurement. Various definitions have been used; the most common today is the international avoirdupois pound, which is legally defined as exactly 0.45359237 kilograms, and which is divided into 16 avoirdupois ounces.^[1]

Nobody is even remotely trying to dispute the use of kg (Kilogram) in my original post. Just saying. Makes you wonder why... 

[Dracarris]

3 hours ago, BiG StroOnZ said:

Well it doesn't always work out that way. It just happens to be in this instance it works out that way. It can be non-monotonic:

It's not about the numbers, but day < month < year. So, for the 1st of April of 2023, either use

 

01.04.23 -or-

230401 resp. 20230401 to get chronological-by-name-sorting in a file explorer.

[mdk777]

56 minutes ago, Curufinwe_wins said:

Tell me how demarcations of lbf or lbm

 

 

56 minutes ago, Curufinwe_wins said:

The pound, when not stated explicitly in terms of thrust/force, is referring to a unit of mass that has for the last 65ish years been *defined* by way of the standard kilogram.

 

 

So now you are defining pound mass in reference to kilogram.

Then you no longer have self defined unit do you?

 

Someone posts that it is .500 kilo

Then,  "which is legally defined as exactly 0.45359237 kilograms,"

 

Well what is it 500 or 453 ?

 

A self defined unit needs no reference to other system of units.

pound =slug x gravity

 

If we are going to define things based on a conversion of a different system.....why have the system at all?

 

Hey, send me over 20 tons of material.

Sure, short tons, long tons, metric ton....do you care which one I bill on?

Can I ship you short tons and bill as if they were long....hey its a ton right?

 

meh.....mince words any way you want. The precision that you and others seem to think they have is an illusion.

You only have the precision that the clarity of your AGREEMENT with others provides.

 

If you can't agree that there is more than one "right way" to denote a date, I have no hope that you will agree that there is more than one "right way" to measure a commodity for trade. 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited February 2, 2023 by mdk777
clarity

[Curufinwe_wins]

2 hours ago, mdk777 said:

sorry wrong, not in the US.

5 pounds is a unit of force. 

kg is a unit of mass.

the US unit of mass is a slug.

So you are mixing two different standards to describe something.(mass and force)

What? just like mixing two standards of date presentation???

 

So, what is precise to you is not so precise in the US.

 

Get over it. 

 

So just so we are clear, my only comment was, is and continues to be that your previous note... that lbs was a unit of force **in the US** is demonstratively false. You can try to conflate me with other commentors if that helps you deflect, you stated untruths and were called out on it. Or rather, you made logical (in the formal sense) claims, which are incorrect. Unless you want to also now argue the 'definition' of 'is'. Unlike the science of metrology as practiced in the US and indeed the many societies whose codified measurements dictate the appropriate terms of discourse (ASME/NIST/etc come to mind here), one may be fortunate to note that arguing about definitions that are not policed by codified bodies (aka the english verb 'to be') is not particularly productive. I did not mince words however. You did. Oh and why should we have the US Customary system? We shouldn't. It is bad. Stupid. Disastrously mistake-prone. But socio-political inertia often disrupts more elegant solutions in science and technology.

 

--- Anyways...

 

Talking in terms of metrology, the difference is between equivalence in base units, and what is called derived units. A lbf is a derived unit, as is the N. The kilogram is considered a base unit. Its standard of reference refers to two other base units (s and m) in applying fundamental constants of the universe (so much as we understand them today), but said constants are only definable with inclusion of its own existence so that standard is by requirement self-referential (it is not possible to define a kilogram without referring back to some unit or constant that references its existence). Amongst the US customary unit system, the pound (which is explicitly mass, as noted previously) is a base unit within that system. It does indeed, standardize its magnitude against the definition of another unit, but only one outside of that standard, and within that system, nothing can describe it without self-reference.

30 minutes ago, mdk777 said:

 

 

 

 

So now you are defining pound mass in reference to kilogram.

Then you no longer have self defined unit do you?

 

Someone posts that it is .500 kilo

Then,  "which is legally defined as exactly 0.45359237 kilograms,"

 

Well what is it 500 or 453 ?

 

A self defined unit needs no reference to other system of units.

pound =slug x gravity

 

If we are going to define things based on a conversion of a different system.....why have the system at all?

 

Hey, send me over 20 tons of material.

Sure, shorth tons, long tons, metric ton....do you care which one I bill on?

 

meh.....mince words any way you want. The precision that you and others seem to think they have is an illusion.

You only have the precision that the clarity of your AGREEMENT with others provides.

 

If you can't agree that there is more than one "right way" to denote a date, I have no hope that you will agree that there is more than one "right way" to measure a commodity for trade. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[BiG StroOnZ]

1 hour ago, Dracarris said:

It's not about the numbers, but day < month < year. So, for the 1st of April of 2023, either use

 

01.04.23 -or-

230401 resp. 20230401 to get chronological-by-name-sorting in a file explorer.

Well your first example, "01.04.23", reading it as an American would be considered January 4th, 2023. This is obviously not your goal. Of course it could be argued that if it was 04.01.23 people from elsewhere, outside of USA, would have determined it meant January 4th, 2023 as well. However, I think that's the basis of the discussion. That to some this is considered partially in European format and partially in American format. Assuming you never saw Americans use periods as separators before. 

 

Your second example appears to be done in ISO 8601. You do need YYYYMMDD naming convention if you want files to be sorted directly by date name in chronological order. I believe YYYY-MM-DD also works fine in file explorer.

 

However, at least with 2023-04-01 it's slightly more clear that it's 04/01/23 (April 1st, 2023). With "230401", you don't know if "23" is the day or the year. Same goes with "0401". It could be either the month or the day (even the year depending on the data set you're working with). Even some Americans might interpret 2023-04-01 as January 4th, 2023. "20230401" to most Americans would also be perplexing. However, it's understood by many using certain applications and machines that this is the standard used to avoid uncertainty when trying to communicate data internationally. Despite this, if you are never exposed to alternative date formats you might be left puzzled when reading different formats. I'm not sure if this is an educational barrier or about being cultured. 

 

Regardless, while I understand many of these are American problems. I believe that if an American company decides to use an American format, then there is no issue when people used to other formats from other countries have to also figure out what the date is denoting by doing some mental translations. It's like faulting an American company for using English, when there are other countries that speak other languages.

 

I understand it can be confusing, but these are some of the issues you may face when you are a multinational company like AMD. 

[mdk777]

5 minutes ago, Curufinwe_wins said:

Amongst the US customary unit system, the pound (which is explicitly mass, as noted previously) is a base unit within that system.

We agree to disagree. It is and always has been a derived unit just as you mention.

If the only thing you can come up with to define a base unit, is a conversion factor.....well you have no base unit.

 

Tell me the mass of a pound that I can verify in my lab if I have no access to international standards for comparison.

 

I can verify the mass of something in my lab in kg without comparing to a standard kg.

I can create my own standard by definition alone.

 

I can't do that with pound mass.

 

Hence, whether you say it is derived from gravity acting on a slug,,,,or derived from a conversion from a measurement of a kg mass....it still remains a derived unit of measure.

 

 

[HenrySalayne]

13 minutes ago, BiG StroOnZ said:

Even some Americans might interpret 2023-04-01 as January 4th, 2023

Eh, what? They are used to MM/DD/YY formats, so they are used to month before day. But now they jump to the conclusion that they need to interpret this date format in the most illogical way imaginable - YYYY-DD-MM? Coming from MM/DD/YY? Really?

 

19 minutes ago, BiG StroOnZ said:

I believe that if an American company decides to use an American format, then there is no issue when people used to other formats from other countries have to also figure out what the date is denoting by doing some mental translations.

I'm still pretty confident the dots are stolen from Europe.  And only 30% of their revenue comes from MM/DD/YY users.

So:

5 hours ago, HenrySalayne said:

but it's either ignorance or arrogance to dismiss a big chunk of their audience while creating those slides.

 

 

 

 

 

The MM.DD.YY is not found in this xkcd cartoon from 2013 so I think that's all the proof you ever need that it's uncommon and should not be used.

[Dracarris]

31 minutes ago, BiG StroOnZ said:

Well your first example, "01.04.23", reading it as an American would be considered January 4th, 2023.

Which is the full problem to begin with. Basically no one but the US read it this way which lacks basically any reasoning.

1 minute ago, HenrySalayne said:

The MM.DD.YY is not found in this xkcd cartoon from 2013 so I think that's all the proof you ever need that it's uncommon and should not be used.

I'm jolly fine with YYYY-MM-DD - lets ALL use it.

[mdk777]

15 minutes ago, Dracarris said:

'm jolly fine with YYYY-MM-DD - lets ALL use it.

You all are so ethnocentric!!!!

 

year 4721 for over a billion people in the world.

 

or going back even further, 

 

Long Count Date 

13.0.10.4.15

 

 

 

 

[BiG StroOnZ]

1 hour ago, HenrySalayne said:

Eh, what? They are used to MM/DD/YY formats, so they are used to month before day. But now they jump to the conclusion that they need to interpret this date format in the most illogical way imaginable - YYYY-DD-MM? Coming from MM/DD/YY? Really?

 

Well it's really simple actually; we are used to MM-DD-YYYY format and 2023-04-01 read backwards is 01-04-2023 (MM-DD-YYYY). It's really not that illogical if you're already used to the MM-DD-YYYY format. Also, for us, seeing the "04" in between doesn't make sense as being the month. It seems out of place.

 

1 hour ago, HenrySalayne said:

I'm still pretty confident the dots are stolen from Europe.  And only 30% of their revenue comes from MM/DD/YY users.

 

I've always remembered when writing the date by using numbers only; separating them by using a hyphen, a slash, or a dot were all accepted. It might have been borrowed from Europe, but the origin of its usage is not well-identified. Growing up choosing which format you used was flexible in school, as long as you followed MM DD YY. I know at least with phone numbers using a dot or a period has become more popular. For instance, usually a number is (XXX)-XXX-XXXX but you have started seeing it written as (XXX).XXX.XXXX. Like I said earlier, I believe this is an aesthetic choice though.

Regardless, I would like to see a source that only 30% of their revenue comes from America.

 

1 hour ago, HenrySalayne said:

The MM.DD.YY is not found in this xkcd cartoon from 2013 so I think that's all the proof you ever need that it's uncommon and should not be used.

 

Personally, I think MM.DD.YY looks more appealing, or as they say, neat. 

[BiG StroOnZ]

1 hour ago, Dracarris said:

Which is the full problem to begin with. Basically no one but the US read it this way which lacks basically any reasoning.

 

Well the same thing could be argued about many things the American education systems do differently than the rest of the world. It's also hard to reeducate the masses after changing a system that has been in place for probably over a hundred years. 

[HenrySalayne]

9 minutes ago, BiG StroOnZ said:

 

Well it's really simple actually; we are used to MM-DD-YYYY format and 2023-04-01 read backwards is 01-04-2023 (MM-DD-YYYY). It's really not that illogical if you you're already used to the MM-DD-YYYY format. Also, for us, seeing the "04" in between doesn't make sense as being the month. It seems out of place.

 

 

I've always remembered when writing the date by using numbers only; separating them by using a hyphen, a slash, or a dot were all accepted. It might have been borrowed from Europe, but the origin of its usage is not well-identified. Growing up choosing which format you used was flexible in school, as long as you followed MM DD YY. I know at least with phone numbers using a dot or a period has become more popular. For instance, usually a number is (XXX)-XXX-XXXX but you have started seeing it written as (XXX).XXX.XXXX. Like I said earlier, I believe this is an aesthetic choice though.

Regardless, I would like to see a source that only 30% of their revenue comes from America.

https://ir.amd.com/sec-filings/xbrl_doc_only/2416

[mdk777]

5 minutes ago, BiG StroOnZ said:

their revenue comes from America.

All of the revenue is derived from US IP. 

I don't think they own Fabs anymore ...so accounting from where the revenue comes from apart from the IP is going to be an accounting definition issue.

 

 

[BiG StroOnZ]

42 minutes ago, HenrySalayne said:

https://ir.amd.com/sec-filings/xbrl_doc_only/2416

 

According to that report, only 11% of their revenue comes from Europe. While 24% of their revenue comes from China, which uses a different date format than Europe. Being that China and USA are the majority share of revenue. It could also be argued that they should have used Chinese date format (YY-MM-DD) too. Although, I think we both agree that YYYY-MM-DD is more widely understood. 

 

42 minutes ago, mdk777 said:

All of the revenue is derived from US IP. 

I don't think they own Fabs anymore ...so accounting from where the revenue comes from apart from the IP is going to be an accounting definition issue.

 

The source provided is pretty elaborate, although it only goes as far back as 2020. From that source the majority of AMD's Revenue comes from USA and China. 

 

But you are correct they don't own Fabs anymore.