People convince themselves why they should not buy something easily when there is an active prejudice and it is an uphill battle to fight that. Even if you show evidence and point out facts they will still argue that they are happy with what they buy.
People convince themselves why they should not buy something easily when there is an active prejudice and it is an uphill battle to fight that. Even if you show evidence and point out facts they will still argue that they are happy with what they buy.
Well, I don't think it's wrong to not buy a Ryzen - after all, it's your money and you can buy whatever you want.
But I do take issue with people slinging mud just for the sake of having a good time, or because they think it makes them in with the cool kids.
Ryzen is a darn good CPU, and an impressive comeback from AMD. It's not for gamers though, at least not these 8 cores, any more than Intel's 8 cores are for gamers. And that's ok.
But for people to sit here and badmouth it, when Intel hasn't had a meaningful advance in their CPU technology since January 2011, seems ridiculous. They don't realize that a healthy AMD is the best thing that could happen to gaming, even if they don't buy an AMD product. There hasn't been any competition in the CPU arena for far too long.
AmazingAveryAge of Conan AdvocateMemberUncommonPosts: 7,188
And since you are only interesting in gaming, why are you even bothering? These 8 cores are HEDT/Workstation products.
Thanks that is my entire point. Anyone looking to buy Ryzen and most of their time they are gaming - they shouldn't. It'll be years before we see the gaming outputs from developers that make Ryzen optimization. 300/1000 dev kits are already out there (just sent out) AMD said. Game development time can be 5 years easy.
Ryzen is NOT a gamer CPU. Ryzen mobo's aren't built for gamers who may want to take advantage of multi GPU set ups. I certainly wouldn't buy Ryzen for gaming. Why in all seriousness would you want to handicap yourself with this CPU - especially just to remain loyal to a brand that never delivers? (my opinion).
How come AMD has to be both faster ~and~ cheaper or it fails?
Why is the standard higher for them?
Because they have been failing for 5 years now and are about to go under. People want something reliable and when you been doing business with Intel for the past 5 years and they are delivering solid products. Then people tend to stick with it untill something bad happens.
And since you are only interesting in gaming, why are you even bothering? These 8 cores are HEDT/Workstation products.
Thanks that is my entire point. Anyone looking to buy Ryzen and most of their time they are gaming - they shouldn't. It'll be years before we see the gaming outputs from developers that make Ryzen optimization. 300/1000 dev kits are already out there (just sent out) AMD said. Game development time can be 5 years easy.
Ryzen is NOT a gamer CPU. Ryzen mobo's aren't built for gamers who may want to take advantage of multi GPU set ups. I certainly wouldn't buy Ryzen for gaming. Why in all seriousness would you want to handicap yourself with this CPU - especially just to remain loyal to a brand that never delivers? (my opinion).
It is AMD who claimed it was a gaming CPU. Which was bad for them because it resulted in negative feedback. Its not the publics fault for criticizing a CPU for not being what the label claimed it was going to be.
Are you onto something or just on something?
AmazingAveryAge of Conan AdvocateMemberUncommonPosts: 7,188
edited March 2017
"It's a really big day for PC gamers...." Nope it wasn't.
My livelihood is customer experience. Loyalty in it's simplest form can be broken down into 4 categories. Every customer is unique and different levers work for different folks.
Those 4 segments are:
Brand
Price/Value
Product
Service Delivery
For me AMD - Brand isn't great (cheap doesn't resonate for me with quality). I miss ATI cards. Price/Value - They are priced at the value of what they offer Product - I haven't seen anything competitively compelling for me for a long time now Service Delivery - Updates, Firmware, sales support, games support is all a bit mixed.
People may resonate with the Price/Value because it is one of the biggest factors in Loyalty but be OK with crap service delivery and average products - as an example.
Add to that there are 3 types of Loyalty -
Advocacy Loyalty - Measured through recommendation
Purchasing Loyalty - Measured through ARPU/ Revenue
Retention Loyalty - Measured through churn
With AMD, IMO, over the past few years of average products their advocates are way down. People switched for a better product despite being more expensive because people will simply pay for the things that work, that work well, are reliable and offer best in class performance.
When it comes to Ryzen and for me games that is the lens I'm looking through. They branded it wrong (like in the video) so now I have trust issues with them which is affecting all my loyalty streams. AMD doesn't have the operational agility to compete in all market segments like the leader does but they are branding as such.
How is AMD creating an emotional, trust based relationship with me to influence my future purchase with them? Knowing customers wants and needs is where things should start in the development cycle. Not with a room of boffins assuming what people want and delivering on that assumption. Ryzen is pitched wrong, came out wrong (they are saying it's for gamers). The outcome of that is I'm not seeing any brand personality or differentiation so I see them as replaceable which is going to affect the retention and purchasing loyalty.
It's really strange reading all this distortion and negativity from computer enthusiasts. Something good happens and there's all these detailed explanations for why it's awful. It's hard to believe that things have become this terrible in the computer area, but times have changed. It drains the enjoyment out of everything.
Ryzen matches Broadwell and for 45 watts less, and at half the price. That's a 33% cut in power consumption for the same or better performance with an unbeatable price. That's huge and can't be denied. This anti-Ryzen hysteria borders on lunacy.
4 core parts will run at higher clock speeds than 8 core parts. Intel's CPU's are this way, and AMD's will be the same. It's built in to the way these things work. When the 4 core AMD chips come out they are going to be great.
Things are good and getting better. New video cards are coming out soon and people will be building top tier gaming systems with all AMD parts for the first time in a decade. Good for them.
What's the point of shitting on someone else's parade?
"It's a really big day for PC gamers...." Nope it wasn't.
My livelihood is customer experience. Loyalty in it's simplest form can be broken down into 4 categories. Every customer is unique and different levers work for different folks.
Those 4 segments are:
Brand
Price/Value
Product
Service Delivery
For me AMD - Brand isn't great (cheap doesn't resonate for me with quality). I miss ATI cards. Price/Value - They are priced at the value of what they offer Product - I haven't seen anything competitively compelling for me for a long time now Service Delivery - Updates, Firmware, sales support, games support is all a bit mixed.
People may resonate with the Price/Value because it is one of the biggest factors in Loyalty but be OK with crap service delivery and average products - as an example.
Add to that there are 3 types of Loyalty -
Advocacy Loyalty - Measured through recommendation
Purchasing Loyalty - Measured through ARPU/ Revenue
Retention Loyalty - Measured through churn
With AMD, IMO, over the past few years of average products their advocates are way down. People switched for a better product despite being more expensive because people will simply pay for the things that work, that work well, are reliable and offer best in class performance.
When it comes to Ryzen and for me games that is the lens I'm looking through. They branded it wrong (like in the video) so now I have trust issues with them which is affecting all my loyalty streams. AMD doesn't have the operational agility to compete in all market segments like the leader does but they are branding as such.
How is AMD creating an emotional, trust based relationship with me to influence my future purchase with them? Knowing customers wants and needs is where things should start in the development cycle. Not with a room of boffins assuming what people want and delivering on that assumption. Ryzen is pitched wrong, came out wrong (they are saying it's for gamers). The outcome of that is I'm not seeing any brand personality or differentiation so I see them as replaceable which is going to affect the retention and purchasing loyalty.
Be an Intel ignoramus, fine with the rest of us. Built two gaming systems over the weekend with Ryzens and perform just as well as any I7 I have put together running all the new games. You can jump up and down with all your silly benchmarks, everyone knows they are useless in everyday use. I am impressed what AMD has done with the Ryzen chips. I just got an order from a small development firm for 10 1800x systems. Intel should be worried.
"It's a really big day for PC gamers...." Nope it wasn't.
My livelihood is customer experience. Loyalty in it's simplest form can be broken down into 4 categories. Every customer is unique and different levers work for different folks.
Those 4 segments are:
Brand
Price/Value
Product
Service Delivery
For me AMD - Brand isn't great (cheap doesn't resonate for me with quality). I miss ATI cards. Price/Value - They are priced at the value of what they offer Product - I haven't seen anything competitively compelling for me for a long time now Service Delivery - Updates, Firmware, sales support, games support is all a bit mixed.
People may resonate with the Price/Value because it is one of the biggest factors in Loyalty but be OK with crap service delivery and average products - as an example.
Add to that there are 3 types of Loyalty -
Advocacy Loyalty - Measured through recommendation
Purchasing Loyalty - Measured through ARPU/ Revenue
Retention Loyalty - Measured through churn
With AMD, IMO, over the past few years of average products their advocates are way down. People switched for a better product despite being more expensive because people will simply pay for the things that work, that work well, are reliable and offer best in class performance.
When it comes to Ryzen and for me games that is the lens I'm looking through. They branded it wrong (like in the video) so now I have trust issues with them which is affecting all my loyalty streams. AMD doesn't have the operational agility to compete in all market segments like the leader does but they are branding as such.
How is AMD creating an emotional, trust based relationship with me to influence my future purchase with them? Knowing customers wants and needs is where things should start in the development cycle. Not with a room of boffins assuming what people want and delivering on that assumption. Ryzen is pitched wrong, came out wrong (they are saying it's for gamers). The outcome of that is I'm not seeing any brand personality or differentiation so I see them as replaceable which is going to affect the retention and purchasing loyalty.
Honestly, it's difficult to associate AMD with poor reliability in recent years. You may be under the illusion that cheaper CPUs are cheaper quality, but evidence points to AMD CPUs and GPUs being the most reliable. Still reliability is only a 1 in 1000 occurrence with consumer electronics. I have not heard about people delidding their AMD CPUs. I have not heard about AMD GPUs memory not being cooled properly.
AmazingAveryAge of Conan AdvocateMemberUncommonPosts: 7,188
Honestly, it's difficult to associate AMD with poor reliability in recent years. You may be under the illusion that cheaper CPUs are cheaper quality, but evidence points to AMD CPUs and GPUs being the most reliable. Still reliability is only a 1 in 1000 occurrence with consumer electronics. I have not heard about people delidding their AMD CPUs. I have not heard about AMD GPUs memory not being cooled properly.
This is very true. Recommendation comes down to personal experience first, then word of mouth second. When we are talking market share and the choices people make it's really evident in the gamer segment from the Steam Survey results (sizable numbers) the choices of gamers aren't AMD products. I would counter that if reliability wasn't a concern then their numbers would be higher. But as you mentioned right reliability is a piece of the decision. The intent to purchase is based off the things I mentioned above (every will have some consideration of some points, some stronger than others like @Ozmodan is advocating based on his purchase, his reasons are different to mainstream gamers). When I talk reliability it is several ways, go-to-market and deployment of firmware updates for operational hardening.
However, SATA performance between the two platforms is another matter. Ryzen is at a distinct disadvantage compared with Intel if you are running a SATA SSD.
AMD delivers very respectable performance; however, Ryzen is crushed by Intel's vastly super random performance. As you will notice throughout, Intel has superior random performance. A good portion of the disparity between the two platforms is due to Intel's RST driver and superior chipset. Ryzen has no SATA driver, and thus suffers the consequences.
You get a poorer SATA SSD performance on Ryzen right now. Hopefully that will change or get better in the future through updates. This is what I mean about recommending. It's crippled in lots of ways from gaming to storage performance right now, and I hope that will change.
Honestly, it's difficult to associate AMD with poor reliability in recent years. You may be under the illusion that cheaper CPUs are cheaper quality, but evidence points to AMD CPUs and GPUs being the most reliable. Still reliability is only a 1 in 1000 occurrence with consumer electronics. I have not heard about people delidding their AMD CPUs. I have not heard about AMD GPUs memory not being cooled properly.
It's really strange reading all this distortion and negativity from computer enthusiasts. Something good happens and there's all these detailed explanations for why it's awful. It's hard to believe that things have become this terrible in the computer area, but times have changed. It drains the enjoyment out of everything.
Ryzen matches Broadwell and for 45 watts less, and at half the price. That's a 33% cut in power consumption for the same or better performance with an unbeatable price. That's huge and can't be denied. This anti-Ryzen hysteria borders on lunacy.
4 core parts will run at higher clock speeds than 8 core parts. Intel's CPU's are this way, and AMD's will be the same. It's built in to the way these things work. When the 4 core AMD chips come out they are going to be great.
Things are good and getting better. New video cards are coming out soon and people will be building top tier gaming systems with all AMD parts for the first time in a decade. Good for them.
What's the point of shitting on someone else's parade?
Yea I'm not sure who's right but its not just this thread who has a few negative people. Its the entire market. Considering the first minute that Ryzen was available the stock began to fall and it continues to fall every day. It did not meet someone's expectations for sure and the only thing that can save it right now is a good quarter.
It's really strange reading all this distortion and negativity from computer enthusiasts. Something good happens and there's all these detailed explanations for why it's awful. It's hard to believe that things have become this terrible in the computer area, but times have changed. It drains the enjoyment out of everything.
Ryzen matches Broadwell and for 45 watts less, and at half the price. That's a 33% cut in power consumption for the same or better performance with an unbeatable price. That's huge and can't be denied. This anti-Ryzen hysteria borders on lunacy.
4 core parts will run at higher clock speeds than 8 core parts. Intel's CPU's are this way, and AMD's will be the same. It's built in to the way these things work. When the 4 core AMD chips come out they are going to be great.
Things are good and getting better. New video cards are coming out soon and people will be building top tier gaming systems with all AMD parts for the first time in a decade. Good for them.
What's the point of shitting on someone else's parade?
Yea I'm not sure who's right but its not just this thread who has a few negative people. Its the entire market. Considering the first minute that Ryzen was available the stock began to fall and it continues to fall every day. It did not meet someone's expectations for sure and the only thing that can save it right now is a good quarter.
Intel's stock has declined along the same curve in the last week or so.. Do you get your tech insight from Breitbart or Angry Joe?
You aren't reading it correctly. And I'm not about to explain its very clear.
Not about to explain yourself because you won't or can't. I'm not a stock expert like you. Please do explain how these both haven't had declines over the last 1 - 4 weeks. I'm open to reasoning.
Ok let me explain that to you. And all the other people who think you are so insightful for pointing at wrong information. First you have to understand the situation Intel is in they have zero reasons for stock to increase. Meanwhile AMD has 100 reasons for stock to increase on March 1.
Intel market closed Feb 28 @ 36.20 You see that drop after hours and beginning march 1 because Ryzen is about to launch. Then you see it recover because someone got Ryzen early and put up benchmarks. Intel closed March 1 @ 35.91
So intel lost a whopping 30c a share in 1 day. And after March 1 you see the usual market behaviour from Intel lately. Intel's 3 month high is only 37.98 a whopping 2% change at best.
AMD Should have seen a nice spike at March 1 because Ryzen launched and investors were poised to buy. Instead this happened.
It reached high on March 1 14.96 but ended up tanking almost immediately because of reviews and now we are looking at 13.00 a share. That is a 13% decrease in under a week.
Up untill Ryzen launched there was no reason for AMD stock to go down. Right now investors are thinking that they will not hit the projected sales numbers so they are selling and being very cautious about reinvesting.
Yes if AMD hits their sales figures the stock will go back up and wont go back down again untill they see a bad quarter. As of right now the stock will hit a low somewhere maybe 11-12$ As of right now there is no reason for the stock to go back up. Sorry but thats just how the world works.
I'm going to have to build a new gaming rig in the near future, and knowing where the Intel/AMD war sits is invaluable, right now.
Anything you think I should hold out for? I'm planning to be under a $600 budget for MB/CPU/DIMM when I decide to pull the trigger. I've got an R290 GPU that's still got some use left in it, but will probably replace it within the year.
There are 2 things we know for certain about Vega. It will be over 11 tflops. It will run at least 8 gigs of HBM2. There is no magic here. It will definitely perform better than a 1080. Half a year post 1080 anyone would hope for the same. In half a year a lot happens with computer hardware. It's never been a question of if AMDs top end chip will outperform the 1080, it's always been about how much. That and you have to factor in how the cards will age. AMDs for the last 9 years have aged better than nVidia.
I am also of the camp, what were you guys expecting Ryzen 7s to do? Why are you comparing a 4ghz 8/16 chip to a 4.7 ghz 4/8 chip like its an apples to apples comparison? The benchmarks showed quite clearly it trades blows with it's intended competition the Core i7 6800k another 8/16 chip. Everything else is superfluous. Is it the best for gaming? Of course not. It plays games sufficiently enough, but at the end of the day it doesn't matter. It meets the minimums needed to play every game under the sun at sufficient frame rates. If your goal is to play games, then you are wasting money to get the Core i7 instead of the CPU that will meet the minimum threshold for the next several years. What matters is that the Core i7 7700k gets DESTROYED in rendering, running filters, and compressing packages. It matters because that is the intended consumer of this CPU, as it is with the Core i7 6800k. It's like you expected AMD to perform a miracle and do something Intel cannot do. Get a high clocked 8/16 core chip at 95w with 14nm process. That's just impossible and I am not sure you guys get that.
So VEGA 10 (single GPU) needs to come before June, then later in 2017 VEGA 10x2 and then VEGA 20 more than 18 months from now and that has to be a paper launch with GloFo 7nm FinFET will not ready until 2019. I'm concerned with the Doom demo shown around the as the screen tears were horrendous.
AMD is like 8+ months late with a GTX 1080/1070 competitor which we now know is VEGA 10 hopefully before June. It needs to be at least 10% faster and cheaper if not its going to be another fail for them.
Got a feeling the 1080TI is going to mop up VEGA 10 with no issues at all.
We already know the VOLTA flagship card will be capable of 10 TFLOPS (FB64), 20 TFLOPS (FB32) 40 TFLOPS (FB16) equipped with 32GB HBM2 and PCI-Express 4.0 (thanks IBM) and landing in Q2 2018. This is what the VEGA refresh cards will aim to compete with.
"We already know" isn't really a very useful phrase for dealing with parts that you expect to be more than a year away. Maybe try "the vendor hopes that". Remember the 750 MHz, 175 W, fully functional GF100 card that Nvidia promised? Once you bring new process nodes and new memory standards into play, you're relying on things outside of the vendor's control.
And it's way, way too early to declare that some far future GPU will have a paper launch. Once you're talking multiple years away, that's plenty of time for it to be canceled, massively overhauled, delayed until there is sufficient inventory for a hard launch, be for a different market entirely and never sold in consumer cards, or even to never have existed in the first place and only have ever been the result of scurrilous rumors.
Not about to explain yourself because you won't or can't. I'm not a stock expert like you. Please do explain how these both haven't had declines over the last 1 - 4 weeks. I'm open to reasoning.
Ok let me explain that to you. And all the other people who think you are so insightful for pointing at wrong information. First you have to understand the situation Intel is in they have zero reasons for stock to increase. Meanwhile AMD has 100 reasons for stock to increase on March 1.
Intel market closed Feb 28 @ 36.20 You see that drop after hours and beginning march 1 because Ryzen is about to launch. Then you see it recover because someone got Ryzen early and put up benchmarks. Intel closed March 1 @ 35.91
So intel lost a whopping 30c a share in 1 day. And after March 1 you see the usual market behaviour from Intel lately. Intel's 3 month high is only 37.98 a whopping 2% change at best.
AMD Should have seen a nice spike at March 1 because Ryzen launched and investors were poised to buy. Instead this happened.
It reached high on March 1 14.96 but ended up tanking almost immediately because of reviews and now we are looking at 13.00 a share. That is a 13% decrease in under a week.
Up untill Ryzen launched there was no reason for AMD stock to go down. Right now investors are thinking that they will not hit the projected sales numbers so they are selling and being very cautious about reinvesting.
Yes if AMD hits their sales figures the stock will go back up and wont go back down again untill they see a bad quarter. As of right now the stock will hit a low somewhere maybe 11-12$ As of right now there is no reason for the stock to go back up. Sorry but thats just how the world works.
Expectations of future stock movement are priced in. If everyone knows that a stock is going to be worth twice as much tomorrow as it's selling for at the moment, then the price will double today, and likely stay about even tomorrow from that new, higher plateau.
For AMD's longer term stock price, the most important thing about Zen cores is how much power Zen cores burn at lower clock speeds and voltages. How high they can overclock is pretty much an inconsequential blip by comparison.
I'm going to have to build a new gaming rig in the near future, and knowing where the Intel/AMD war sits is invaluable, right now.
Anything you think I should hold out for? I'm planning to be under a $600 budget for MB/CPU/DIMM when I decide to pull the trigger. I've got an R290 GPU that's still got some use left in it, but will probably replace it within the year.
If it's purely for gaming, or perhaps gaming and some other things like web browsing that don't push the computer hard, then if a Core i7-7700K fits your budget, I don't see a better gaming CPU showing up anytime soon. If that doesn't fit, then a Core i5-7600K probably does. If you're inclined to overclock, I don't see Ryzen being competitive with an overclocked Core i5-7600K except in cases where you could have used more than four cores.
If a Core i5-7600K doesn't fit your budget, or if you want to stay at stock speeds, then the rumored Ryzen quad cores might be a compelling product on a smaller budget. No clue when they'll launch, though, as AMD might plausibly not have the foundry capacity to produce as many chips as they'd like. AMD isn't going to gratuitously cut down Ryzen chips further than they have to until they can produce more of the top bin than they can sell, so it could plausibly be a while before Ryzen salvage parts show up. Or they might launch next week, for all I know.
This just in. The 1700x and 1700 are doing much better then first samples were showing. Right now the 1700x is comparable to the i7 6850k thats $400 vs $576
The 1700 is sort of in a spot all alone with no intel chips to compare it with.
This just in. The 1700x and 1700 are doing much better then first samples were showing. Right now the 1700x is comparable to the i7 6850k thats $400 vs $576
The 1700 is sort of in a spot all alone with no intel chips to compare it with.
This is looking very promising for them.
But you promised me that Ryzen was going to drive AMD into bankruptcy!
The rumored 6-core and especially 4-core parts are more interesting for gaming, however. It's hard to justify a $500 Ryzen 7 1800X for gaming over a $330 Core i7-7700K. But if reducing the core count means the Ryzen part is $200, or even $150, that can look a whole lot more interesting, as a low clocked Core i5 isn't nearly as fast as a high clocked Core i7. Ryzen has a chance at beating the Intel parts in those price ranges outright.
You can expect similar performance for both AMD's and Intel's $310-340 price range, with the Ryzen chip shining in multi-threaded applications. The Ryzen also consumes less energy at these performance levels than the i7-7700K, being a 68 Watt CPU compared to the 95 Watts of the i7-7700K. This difference means lower temps, and more OC potential for the 1700.
Comparing the 1800X to i7-7700K is just silly. The 1800X will outperform the i7-7700K in almost every instance, save for the rare single-threaded applications that are becoming increasingly less common.
The Ryzen 1800x is comparable to the i7 5960x. Which is good because that is 824$ processor.
The 1700 and 1700x don't have enough samples to get a proper conclusion yet. But it appears they aren't going to hit their mark and will end up losing on these two chips.
That looks like someone hoping for more samples to get a proper conclusion to me. You can bet your ass that once the word gets out these chips performed as intended the stock will go up and AMD will make their money.
Another thing to consider is that x86 CPUs tend to have very high profit margins. Internet estimates of the die size for Ryzen generally put it around 200 mm^2. That's smaller than Polaris 10 and on the same process node. In other words, it's likely that making a Ryzen die costs less than making a Polaris 10 die.
Meanwhile, in addition to that Polaris 10 die, to make a completed Radeon RX 480, you have to buy some GDDR5 memory, a PCB, some VRMs, some monitor ports, a great big heatsink, and a number of other things. Some of the components are 10 cents here and 30 cents there, but those add up, and the GDDR5 memory in particular costs a lot more than that. And then you also have to go through a board partner, which means an extra middleman taking their markup before the cards show up at retail.
And even with all of that, you can get a Radeon RX 480 for well under $200, and AMD is making decent money on every unit sold. So how much does AMD make on a Ryzen 7 1700 for $330? A lot--and a lot more than they were making selling larger Kaveri dies (albeit on an older, cheaper process node) for $100.
Now, you might ask, how is this even possible? Wouldn't that mean Intel makes a lot of money on their CPUs, too? Well, have you seen their financial statements? In the last half of last year, Intel was making more than $1 billion in profit per month. That's profit, not just revenue, and per month. I'm not predicting that AMD will have numbers like that anytime soon, or ever for that matter, but there's a ton of money to be had if they're decently competitive.
Comments
But I do take issue with people slinging mud just for the sake of having a good time, or because they think it makes them in with the cool kids.
Ryzen is a darn good CPU, and an impressive comeback from AMD. It's not for gamers though, at least not these 8 cores, any more than Intel's 8 cores are for gamers. And that's ok.
But for people to sit here and badmouth it, when Intel hasn't had a meaningful advance in their CPU technology since January 2011, seems ridiculous. They don't realize that a healthy AMD is the best thing that could happen to gaming, even if they don't buy an AMD product. There hasn't been any competition in the CPU arena for far too long.
Ryzen is NOT a gamer CPU. Ryzen mobo's aren't built for gamers who may want to take advantage of multi GPU set ups. I certainly wouldn't buy Ryzen for gaming. Why in all seriousness would you want to handicap yourself with this CPU - especially just to remain loyal to a brand that never delivers? (my opinion).
"It's a really big day for PC gamers...." Nope it wasn't.
My livelihood is customer experience. Loyalty in it's simplest form can be broken down into 4 categories. Every customer is unique and different levers work for different folks.
Those 4 segments are:
- Brand
- Price/Value
- Product
- Service Delivery
For me AMD -Brand isn't great (cheap doesn't resonate for me with quality). I miss ATI cards.
Price/Value - They are priced at the value of what they offer
Product - I haven't seen anything competitively compelling for me for a long time now
Service Delivery - Updates, Firmware, sales support, games support is all a bit mixed.
People may resonate with the Price/Value because it is one of the biggest factors in Loyalty but be OK with crap service delivery and average products - as an example.
Add to that there are 3 types of Loyalty -
- Advocacy Loyalty - Measured through recommendation
- Purchasing Loyalty - Measured through ARPU/ Revenue
- Retention Loyalty - Measured through churn
With AMD, IMO, over the past few years of average products their advocates are way down. People switched for a better product despite being more expensive because people will simply pay for the things that work, that work well, are reliable and offer best in class performance.When it comes to Ryzen and for me games that is the lens I'm looking through. They branded it wrong (like in the video) so now I have trust issues with them which is affecting all my loyalty streams. AMD doesn't have the operational agility to compete in all market segments like the leader does but they are branding as such.
How is AMD creating an emotional, trust based relationship with me to influence my future purchase with them? Knowing customers wants and needs is where things should start in the development cycle. Not with a room of boffins assuming what people want and delivering on that assumption. Ryzen is pitched wrong, came out wrong (they are saying it's for gamers). The outcome of that is I'm not seeing any brand personality or differentiation so I see them as replaceable which is going to affect the retention and purchasing loyalty.
Ryzen matches Broadwell and for 45 watts less, and at half the price. That's a 33% cut in power consumption for the same or better performance with an unbeatable price. That's huge and can't be denied. This anti-Ryzen hysteria borders on lunacy.
4 core parts will run at higher clock speeds than 8 core parts. Intel's CPU's are this way, and AMD's will be the same. It's built in to the way these things work. When the 4 core AMD chips come out they are going to be great.
Things are good and getting better. New video cards are coming out soon and people will be building top tier gaming systems with all AMD parts for the first time in a decade. Good for them.
What's the point of shitting on someone else's parade?
Jesus H. Christ.
I have not heard about people delidding their AMD CPUs. I have not heard about AMD GPUs memory not being cooled properly.
Case in point: http://www.tweaktown.com/articles/8073/amd-ryzen-ssd-storage-performance-preview/index4.html
However, SATA performance between the two platforms is another matter. Ryzen is at a distinct disadvantage compared with Intel if you are running a SATA SSD.
You get a poorer SATA SSD performance on Ryzen right now. Hopefully that will change or get better in the future through updates. This is what I mean about recommending. It's crippled in lots of ways from gaming to storage performance right now, and I hope that will change.
Number of Replies to this Ryzen thread: 130 including this one as of right now, with at least 4 other threads discussing the same topic
Number of Replies to the 1080Ti thread: 11, with one other related thread (who cares, with 30 replies that devolved into a grease fire)
Now, it is apples and oranges, but which one is generating more buzz right now?
Intel market closed Feb 28 @ 36.20
You see that drop after hours and beginning march 1 because Ryzen is about to launch.
Then you see it recover because someone got Ryzen early and put up benchmarks.
Intel closed March 1 @ 35.91
So intel lost a whopping 30c a share in 1 day.
And after March 1 you see the usual market behaviour from Intel lately.
Intel's 3 month high is only 37.98 a whopping 2% change at best.
AMD Should have seen a nice spike at March 1 because Ryzen launched and investors were poised to buy. Instead this happened.
It reached high on March 1 14.96 but ended up tanking almost immediately because of reviews and now we are looking at 13.00 a share. That is a 13% decrease in under a week.
Up untill Ryzen launched there was no reason for AMD stock to go down. Right now investors are thinking that they will not hit the projected sales numbers so they are selling and being very cautious about reinvesting.
Yes if AMD hits their sales figures the stock will go back up and wont go back down again untill they see a bad quarter. As of right now the stock will hit a low somewhere maybe 11-12$ As of right now there is no reason for the stock to go back up. Sorry but thats just how the world works.
I'm going to have to build a new gaming rig in the near future, and knowing where the Intel/AMD war sits is invaluable, right now.
Anything you think I should hold out for? I'm planning to be under a $600 budget for MB/CPU/DIMM when I decide to pull the trigger. I've got an R290 GPU that's still got some use left in it, but will probably replace it within the year.
And it's way, way too early to declare that some far future GPU will have a paper launch. Once you're talking multiple years away, that's plenty of time for it to be canceled, massively overhauled, delayed until there is sufficient inventory for a hard launch, be for a different market entirely and never sold in consumer cards, or even to never have existed in the first place and only have ever been the result of scurrilous rumors.
For AMD's longer term stock price, the most important thing about Zen cores is how much power Zen cores burn at lower clock speeds and voltages. How high they can overclock is pretty much an inconsequential blip by comparison.
If a Core i5-7600K doesn't fit your budget, or if you want to stay at stock speeds, then the rumored Ryzen quad cores might be a compelling product on a smaller budget. No clue when they'll launch, though, as AMD might plausibly not have the foundry capacity to produce as many chips as they'd like. AMD isn't going to gratuitously cut down Ryzen chips further than they have to until they can produce more of the top bin than they can sell, so it could plausibly be a while before Ryzen salvage parts show up. Or they might launch next week, for all I know.
The 1700 is sort of in a spot all alone with no intel chips to compare it with.
This is looking very promising for them.
Meanwhile, in addition to that Polaris 10 die, to make a completed Radeon RX 480, you have to buy some GDDR5 memory, a PCB, some VRMs, some monitor ports, a great big heatsink, and a number of other things. Some of the components are 10 cents here and 30 cents there, but those add up, and the GDDR5 memory in particular costs a lot more than that. And then you also have to go through a board partner, which means an extra middleman taking their markup before the cards show up at retail.
And even with all of that, you can get a Radeon RX 480 for well under $200, and AMD is making decent money on every unit sold. So how much does AMD make on a Ryzen 7 1700 for $330? A lot--and a lot more than they were making selling larger Kaveri dies (albeit on an older, cheaper process node) for $100.
Now, you might ask, how is this even possible? Wouldn't that mean Intel makes a lot of money on their CPUs, too? Well, have you seen their financial statements? In the last half of last year, Intel was making more than $1 billion in profit per month. That's profit, not just revenue, and per month. I'm not predicting that AMD will have numbers like that anytime soon, or ever for that matter, but there's a ton of money to be had if they're decently competitive.