• Log In
  • Register

Long post about AMD, Intel, nVidia, and PCs. [Read Me]

Forum Search


  • Be respectful to others
  • No spam
  • No NSFW content
  • No piracy or key resellers
  • No link shorteners
  • Offensive content will be removed


LeviAMD 4 days ago

Okay. One. I know we're constantly coming out with new tech, butttttt....games are pretty much maxed out. There's no point on building a pc thats more expensive just to get like 210 fps instead of 200. PCs are maxing out, as I see it. At least for gaming. Rendering and editing and work are still okay for a while.

Two. Hopefully amd won't go bad. Like anti consumer bad like Intel/nVidia almost. Lisa Su seems cool. Huang went nuts. Also, the "It just works," meme has become big and Huang isn't looking too good. and your right.Also btw, Lisa Su and jensen are cousins or something of the like. Also, I'm tired tired of the AMD negativity, everyone is so convinced that the Ryzen 3000 series is gonna be trash and AMD is bad and Radeon VII is trash and pointless., same with Navi. I've heard this a lot. :P I'm a firm believer (Not a fanboy though. Almost kinda maybe XD) in AMD. We'll see. AMD delivered with first and second gen. They chances are will do so also with third gen ryzen. And I KNOW that AMD's GPUs aren't on par with nvidia. But they're better than intel's non existent ones, and they're still great budget/mid range/ high end (vega 64/radeon vii) option, and firepro isn't bad either.

Three. Intel is becoming a bit anti consumer, and their prices are rising a bit. Also that whole Intel CPU shortage thing. And plus. Intel still has no answer for Ryzen. Ryzen is much cheaper for around the same or better performance overall. Intel is more expensive. By a lottttt. So yeah Intel still has no answer and aren't lowering their prices.

Just my two cents. Being thirteen, I'm surprised writing this post held my attention long enough for me to make it this long. Anyway. Any thoughts?

Comments Sorted by:

tomtomj2 9 Builds 5 points 4 days ago

Business as usual.

AMD and Intel always swap spots every couple of years as one falls behind and then pick up pace again. Right now AMD is on top and Intel is lagging behind. Before Ryzen it was the other way around.

Nvidia, well they have no top end competition atm and AMD cant seems to catch up although with Radeon VII that might change. We have to remember the profitability of these super high end cards is slim and AMD was even running at a loss on Vega because it was so expensive to make.

Fanboys exist for everything. PC Building, Console, Gamer and Car Communities are some of the most toxic ones Ive seen so far. But for every fanboy shitlord you encounter there many more that live everything about what the community is based around. Best to just ignore them as they're toxic and trolls anyway.

LeviAMD submitter 1 Build 2 points 4 days ago

Before ryzen, amd was looking like it might go under, the only thing keeping it up was radeon. They kinda brought it upon themself with FX tho. I'm exited for Radeon VII. But yeah fanboys suck

tomtomj2 9 Builds 2 points 4 days ago

They kinda brought it upon themself with FX tho.

You see the thing is AMD went the “more cores” route and lost at first, however now look at the market. Many mainstream CPUs have double the cores they did then 2-3 years ago. FX was technically “ahead of its time” and fell behind because it wasn’t what the market was ready for. Comes Ryzen and they’ve finally set the standard. Now software is becoming more core friendly and dependent as well as the market moves toward higher core count mainstream CPUs.

LeviAMD submitter 1 Build 2 points 4 days ago

Okay, that makes sense. More people are switching to ryzen than going with intel nowadays it looks like :D

ZFGeek 2 points 4 days ago

I don't think so on the whole thing about gaming being maxed out. Yes, the best GPUs out there can play esports titles at 1080p at 200fps. Sometimes making something better doesn't mean getting 10 more fps. Some of the advances that are being made are for how the games look. They can play games at higher refresh rates and higher resolutions. They can render more detail at one time. All the while keeping the optimal 60 fps. Game improvements are no longer about fps, they have moved on to detail and looks.

The only reason PCs for gaming are maxing out is because developers refuse to adopt the tech out there to their games. Like, for ecample, if games would use more cores instead of the first two or three, or if more games would support multi-GPU setups (like sli). It is not much of a component limitation as it is developers limiting hardware.

I totally agree woth you on the AMD front. Intel just hasn't answered back to Ryzen, and I don't think they will. They know that people will buy.their processors because those prices are what people have come to expect. Even if Ryzen can match the performance, there will always be people who will buy Intel no matter what, expensive or not.

Oh, and I'm 15, so I understand that whole thing at the end there you wrote! ;)

LeviAMD submitter 1 Build 2 points 4 days ago

Yeah but most top of the line games look about as realistic as they're gonna get. YES THANK YOU! SOMEONE AGREES WITH ME ON SOMETHING! Some people yeah, even if intel is awful and proven trash (which ik they're not) they'll buy em anyway cause they always have, always will and are fanboys

Gilroar 1 Build 2 points 4 days ago

For 1. The difference is not as much seen on the higher and middle range products, the lower end products however have seen massive improvement.

And 2. Well this is going to be long.

Although everyone is upset at the Freesync statement they need to remember Freesync is an open standard that has No standards on panel quality for things like brightness, response time, or dynamic range unless the manufacturer chooses to comply with LFRC which only applies to dynamic range.

So if you compare two identical monitors they both look good, but if you just grab the cheapest Freesync and compare it to a similar G-sync you start finding things are not always as nice on the cheaper side.

There really isn't much negativity about 3000 series itself, the Rumors on the other hand there is a ton which has been proven well founded.

AMD has not finalized clock speeds so those are all wrong.

AMD has stated that they are not adding integrated graphics to Ryzen outside of the APU which will once again be the same as mobile products so that rumor is wrong as well.

The massive IPC gains have already been killed off by AMD during EPYC's launch but people are not letting that die.

The only thing the rumors may have right is core count and that is still unconfirmed whether they will or will not go larger then a single chiplet.

With VII AMD outright lied on stage stating it was built from the ground up around gaming when it is a repurposed data center accelerator they launched last year. So ya there may be some negativity there but fairly well justified after pulling the same thing with Vega when that launched.

Navi is still MIA but giving they already confirmed it is only a Polaris replacement and now probably not even launching this year as AMD is "Refreshing the line-up" so it's nothing to get excited about.

As for 3. Intel can't make enough CPU, AMD has to keep lowering prices to sell CPU.

It's been this way for decades and business as usual.

LeviAMD submitter 1 Build 2 points 4 days ago

Ryzen 3 is great and cheaper than intel for entry, 5 is cheaper than intel for mid ahem 9600k costs 110 more Ryzen 7 is actually great for the price. eight core. 1800X is super overpriced tho. Dunno the deal with that one.

LeviAMD submitter 1 Build 2 points 4 days ago

People are liking EPYC as well, it seems cool. Also, threadripper is being picked a lot over i9 for what i see, its less expensive with equal performance pretty much

tomtomj2 9 Builds 4 points 4 days ago


You know there's an edit button right... lol

LeviAMD submitter 1 Build 1 point 3 days ago

Yeah, why?

tragiktimes101 1 Build 2 points 3 days ago

Because it's spam, and I take a drink for every multiple comment to soothe my infuriation. Do you really want me to die of alcohol poisoning?!

vagabond139 5 Builds 2 points 2 days ago

I'm surprised with a certain member you blood hasn't been entirely replaced with alcohol yet.

PrivatePengu 1 point 3 days ago

No, of course not.

PrivatePengu 1 point 3 days ago

But, I mean, I can't stop you...

LeviAMD submitter 1 Build 1 point 4 days ago

More people are switching to Ryzen tho. But okay, you're right on some stuff. There is a chip shortage tho

LeviAMD submitter 1 Build 1 point 4 days ago

Lol somehow you manage to disagree with me XD

I am excited for Radeon VII tho, glad to see titan/2080TI has some competiton, even if it's not much. AMD just has low prices, They dont need to lower any extra. Theyre already low enough and a ton of people are already buying ryZeN.

Gilroar 1 Build 1 point 4 days ago

I am excited for Radeon VII tho, glad to see titan/2080TI has some competiton

They still don't have competition even AMD pushes VII as a 2080 competitor in best case scenario.

As for lowering the price they are already at best not making anything off of the GPU giving how much the higher speed HBM2 costs and they are unable to assemble the cores through the normal supply lines so it is contracted out.

Look up benchmarks for the CPU though AMD and Intel don't compete as much as they compliment each other. Where AMD is strong in some areas you can find others that Intel pulls ahead.

There is no better choice outside of specific uses.

When you see lower price on equivelent models it is normally offset by lower overall performance for the most common uses, R3 versus I3 for example lower performance offset by lower price since the R3 is unable to realistically benefit from its better IGPU giving how poorly it performs.

Ryzens biggest failing is a lack of software optimization because they built without consideration for what was being run on the CPU again. It currently has the highest possible IPC of any chip but is unable to leverage the extra instructions in the clock cycles in current mainstream software.

LeviAMD submitter 1 Build 1 point 3 days ago

They will make more lowering the price because more people will buy it as opposed to no one buying at a high price. R3 is better , almost all i3a are dual cores, and R3 are quad and 2200g has vega

Gilroar 1 Build 1 point 3 days ago

They will make more lowering the price because more people will buy it as opposed to no one buying at a high price.

That isn't how it works.

If you sell something for less then it costs you to make then you are paying people to take it away. You only make money by lowering price If at that lowered price everyone involved is still making a profit.

So the Board Partners assembling the cards have to get paid to manufacture the cards as AMD sold off that wing of the business or there is no cards.

Retailers will not give something away for free so they have to make a profit or it isn't worth the space on their shelves.

AMD needs to show a profit on these as RTG has been tanking profit wise for awhile and if they don't make money there is no money to develop newer products.

CPU side of things is the same.

AMD buys cores from TSMC or GlobalFoundries of AMD's design, then pays to have those cut into the chips and assembled before shipping.

They pay ASMEDIA for chipsets to sell to motherboard partners.

AMD is Fabless they own no production capacity themselves and have to pay others for manufacturing everything.

Lowering prices hurts AMD more then anyone else.

If Retailers are not going to make anything they will not order product.

If Manufacturers are not going to make anything they simply will find another job to run until AMD can afford to pay them.

Things like Bundled Games and Mail In Rebates all come out of AMD's profits as well since those are funded by AMD.

R3 is better , almost all i3a are dual cores,

I3 are quad cores and have been for awhile, the last dual core I3 came out before Ryzen first generation launched.

and 2200g has vega

It is better then something worse but that doesn't necessarily make it something good just not as bad.

Both can handle video playback and basic tasks up to 4k, but anything demanding and neither get very far at all.

LeviAMD submitter 1 Build 2 points 3 days ago

Yeah but are you really expecting integrated gpu to do really demanding stuff? Also i see your point with amd. But it's still cool that they're cheap. Also the only quad core i3s are 8100 and 8350k. All the others are dual core or dual core hyper threaded.

LeviAMD submitter 1 Build 1 point 4 days ago

AMD GPUs are pretty much low end king