Intel Playing Dirty to Undercut AMD

[vitor_cut]

47 minutes ago, LabRat said:

ANYBODY SEE the story on GURU3D this morning?

" They question itself was already curious but if we dive deeper into the story we see the claims have been made by Semi-Accurate, not the most unbiased source. Then again, we see no reason for them to make this stuff up. Also some other press apparently received that email. So yes, as it seems Intel has been reaching out to certain media in shameless attempt to influence upcoming benchmark scores in their favor. Intel's PR department is contacting media and calling in favors with the press by issuing them  "guidelines" on how to review AMD Ryzen. Intel's PR emails include this line: "call us before you write." 

So it is true!............ http://www.guru3d.com/news-story/intel-is-trying-to-manipulate-amd-ryzen-launch.html

let's see what happens around the web when these things are released. It should be easy to pick out the scabs really quickly.

Oh sh**t Intel!!!!

Well i consider  Guru3D a respectable site, so if they publish that, i'm starting to be worried about this being really true.

Lets hope its not the case or it will be very bad for Intel

[VagabondWraith]

38 minutes ago, LabRat said:

ANYBODY SEE the story on GURU3D this morning?

" They question itself was already curious but if we dive deeper into the story we see the claims have been made by Semi-Accurate, not the most unbiased source. Then again, we see no reason for them to make this stuff up. Also some other press apparently received that email. So yes, as it seems Intel has been reaching out to certain media in shameless attempt to influence upcoming benchmark scores in their favor. Intel's PR department is contacting media and calling in favors with the press by issuing them  "guidelines" on how to review AMD Ryzen. Intel's PR emails include this line: "call us before you write." 

So it is true!............ http://www.guru3d.com/news-story/intel-is-trying-to-manipulate-amd-ryzen-launch.html

let's see what happens around the web when these things are released. It should be easy to pick out the scabs really quickly.

It's more BS. Same guy, Charlie is who they're quoting. The same AMD shill banned from multiple sites. Honestly, can't believe Guru3D even posted that.

[tomotomov92]

18 minutes ago, VagabondWraith said:

It's more BS. Same guy, Charlie is who they're quoting. The same AMD shill banned from multiple sites. Honestly, can't believe Guru3D even posted that.

Just wait for a while. It's too early to know for sure what's what. The actual news only benefit AMD and are trying to destroy Intel's reputation so the story can be somewhere in these situations:

 

1. Intel has reached to certain media that they have to check with Intel before releasing any benchmark numbers. (No one says it's not possible)

2. This story is completely fake and made up by some media that wants some internet traffic to their website by posting incredibly sensational news. You know - click bait! (Everyone knows this is possible)

3. AMD wants some more publicity just before they get shipping and their benchmarks are let out of the cage that's the NDA. (If you say this is not possible - you have never tried to think like a marketing person )

 

Currently I have some concerns about Ryzen's single-thread performance.

Just to tell you what it is - AMD has shown i7-6900K and R7 1800X single-thread performance to be the same @ stock.

What my concern is:

i7-6900K is the lowest clocked Intel enthusiast chip out of all in their line right now (talking about 8c/16t)

R7 1800X is the highest clocked AMD out of all in their line right now (talking about 8c/16t)

 

My main problem is that I'm seeing a pattern here.

Still waiting on Ryzen's OC to be available publicly and check the performance difference between OC-ed Intel and OC-ed Ryzen.

 

Also we still don't know almost anything about R3 and R5 which may be aimed more at the mainstream market where most of the ppl trying to build budget PCs are shooting for.

[DozerKitty]

According to Guru3D, the story of "give us a call" from Intel is now being expanded. Not only are they, allegedly (Linus TM pending), trying to undercut prices, but they are even trying to influence actual results of the benchmarks. This is a bold claim, and will without a doubt pour gazoline onto the already blazing fire that is AMD vs Intel. Personally, I take this with a huge amount of salt, as it reeks of a third party running interference, trying to smudge Intel, and get the war going even further.

 

Intel is trying to manipulate Amd Ryzen launch

[BloodyWaters]

Intel just isn't prepared for competition. 

[foolishlywise]

..oh dear.

[Ryujin2003]

Reminds me of the DNC fiasco this past election...

[MageTank]

This has been posted, a few times to be exact. 

It's also completely unsubstantiated, which begs the question of whether or not it's even news.

[EPPHO]

Intel if piece of shit. Just imagine how cheaper could have been processors during this "AMD FX only" era when AMD didn't make any better CPUs. They literally have been making CPUs for for example 100$ and selling it for 200$.

[Arc_Jester]

They've done it before and got a hefty fine, I don't think they are stupid enough to do it again.

[MageTank]

2 minutes ago, frozeNNN said:

Intel if piece of shit. Just imagine how cheaper could have been processors during this "AMD FX only" era when AMD didn't make any better CPUs. They literally have been making CPUs for for example 100$ and selling it for 200$.

By your logic, AMD is just as bad. When AMD had the superior product, they charged a fortune for it relative to Intel. This information is readily available on Google.

 

The blind devotion people have for companies is sickening.

[bgibbz]

3 minutes ago, MageTank said:

This has been posted, a few times to be exact. 

It's also completely unsubstantiated, which begs the question of whether or not it's even news.

Its funny, people love to comment on how unbelievable fake news is, but this is a perfect example. A couple vague sources make a claim, and suddenly a huge amount of media is talking about it as if its true. 

[EPPHO]

Just now, MageTank said:

By your logic, AMD is just as bad. When AMD had the superior product, they charged a fortune for it relative to Intel. This information is readily available on Google.

 

The blind devotion people have for companies is sickening.

Sure they did when it was more expensive to create a CPU.

[DocSwag]

3 minutes ago, frozeNNN said:

Intel if piece of shit. Just imagine how cheaper could have been processors during this "AMD FX only" era when AMD didn't make any better CPUs. They literally have been making CPUs for for example 100$ and selling it for 200$.

If AMD was in the same position, they would do the exact same. This is how capitalism works. No competition? Raise the prices! More profits! If you think AMD wouldn't do the same in the same position, then you're crazy. 

[MageTank]

Just now, frozeNNN said:

Sure they did when it was more expensive to create a CPU.

Remove your blinders friend. They just did this not too long ago by charging a fortune for the FX9590, a lackluster CPU that was just an overclocked 8350 on water.

 

Also, how could what you say make any sense, if Intel was selling the cheaper product back then if all CPU's were more expensive to create? The simple truth is, whoever has the superior product, charges a premium for the superior performance. AMD is not this "FOR THE CONSUMER!" company that you people make them out to be. Freesync isn't "free" because they want consumers to have a great experience. It's free because it's inferior to G-Sync (even if only slightly) and because they want to try to maintain market share by offering a similar technology. 

 

For the love of all that is holy, stop putting yourself on the line for these companies. They work for you, not the other way around.

[LabRat]

you know, if there was truly ONE honest reviewer anywhere on the net they would post the letter they received. even if it meant biting the hand that feeds them.

I expect a good review on Ryzen and then towards the end of the video or review there will be a "but hold on there" or a "but wait a minute" or "not so fast"...... or let me figure a way to throw something negative in there without getting caught doing it.... ( mumbles to self ). I think that would be a way to skirt the issue altogether. HONESTY......... is there any?

[LabRat]

I want to see a list of these sites that got the letter.

and MAGETANK above posted the on going thread on this.

[phongle123]

18 minutes ago, BloodyWaters said:

Intel just isn't prepared for competition. 

No matter what. 8 cores 16 threads of the ryzen will always beat 4 core 8 threads of the i7, unless those 4 cores are clocked at like 6-7Ghz. Because that's what it's selling point is at.

[MageTank]

Just now, phongle123 said:

No matter what. 8 cores 16 threads of the ryzen will always beat 4 core 8 threads of the i7, unless those 4 cores are clocked at like 6-7Ghz. Because that's what it's selling point is at.

Except no. Gamers are still going to want faster 4c/8t CPU's because they will be superior for games that don't scale well with more threads. You know, the vast majority of games?

[phongle123]

2 minutes ago, MageTank said:

Except no. Gamers are still going to want faster 4c/8t CPU's because they will be superior for games that don't scale well with more threads. You know, the vast majority of games?

As a person that went from 4 core to the 5930k the frames loss are so minimal. GPU matters more than anything.

[MageTank]

Just now, phongle123 said:

As a person that went from 4 core to the 5930k the frames loss are so minimal. GPU matters more than anything.

Not true. It depends entirely on what's acting as the bottleneck at any given moment. I can assure you, a 7700k will out perform your 5930k in pretty much any title (even the ones that scale well beyond 4 threads) in both average and minimum framerates. 

[porina]

Not in position to link right now, but look up Ryan Shrout on Twitter. He's a major player at PCPer, and earlier toady tweeted about approaches from competitors when there's a big launch expected. In short, it is not unexpected.

[Bouzoo]

1 minute ago, phongle123 said:

As a person that went from 4 core to the 5930k the frames loss are so minimal. GPU matters more than anything.

Not if you're bottlenecking at some point due to your CPU.

[phongle123]

5 minutes ago, MageTank said:

Not true. It depends entirely on what's acting as the bottleneck at any given moment. I can assure you, a 7700k will out perform your 5930k in pretty much any title (even the ones that scale well beyond 4 threads) in both average and minimum framerates. 

I'm not disagreeing with you. But anyone who buys a current generation CPU is not stupid enough to bottleneck their system. And if you'd please read I said the frames lost from a 4 Core advantage isn't enough to justify losing almost double the non-gaming performance for the same price.

 

Then again you rely on your CPU to play games so I'm done here.

[COUPER MILLAR]

6 minutes ago, MageTank said:

Not true. It depends entirely on what's acting as the bottleneck at any given moment. I can assure you, a 7700k will out perform your 5930k in pretty much any title (even the ones that scale well beyond 4 threads) in both average and minimum framerates. 

Then why do most sites benchmark using 6950x?