Sausagemeat
Posts: 1,597 +1,423
It baffles me that people out there are stupid enough to give AdoredTV the time of day. He is quite blatantly a massive AMD “shill”. I pity anyone who doesn’t see it.
Our take on AMD Zen 2 CPU and Navi GPU rumors
- Thread starter Scorpus
- Start date
Evernessince
Posts: 5,469 +6,158
Just like to point out, Hardware unboxed and GamersNexus have both acknowledged AdoredTV as a legitimate part of the PC HW News industry. If they were such a shill as you claim, they would have been called out a long time ago. The fact that TechSpot is responding to this rumor unlike other WCCF tech rumors and the like is because the tech community recognizes that adored's leaks are based on legitimate sources and the calls he has made to date have been accurate.
Please, point out instances where Adored has been unfair to Nvidia and overly generous to AMD.
Vulcanproject
Posts: 1,701 +3,212
I looked at some of his stuff a while ago and it was crap. First was a comparison between the RX480 and the GTX1060 from 2016, harping on about how AMD's arch would hold up way better as would soon become apparent with driver updates because of DX12 arriving and how Nvidia are just clinging on. Patently rubbish, as I pointed out to him over two years later where the GTX1060 is easily a match for the RX480 if not actually still faster according to newer tests done since. DX11 hasn't gone away and Nvidia has been stronger in it, with superior threaded drivers better with less than stellar CPU performance.
Then I moved in and saw this awful piece about how an FX8350 is now basically as good or better than a 2500k for games 5 years after launch because AMD had the sense to have more reliance on multi-threading.
It was subsequently destroyed by another site that compared them on lots of newer games where the 2500k trounced the 8350 so hard, just like it trounced it when they were both new on those old games. In actual fact tests showed the 2500k to still be a (fairly) viable gaming CPU with a modern GPU when heavily overclocked, whereas the 8350 is now trash.
After this being pointed out again on his channel he saw fit to get aggressive to posters and spewed more nonsense.
Then there has been the tests published in 2017 that skewed figures for Ryzen in 1080p games and talked much apparent doom for Intel. Only for Intel to launch the 7700k then 8700k and once again take even AMD's 8 cores to the cleaners in games the past 18 months.
I'm not a fan. At all.
Now this? Don't bother.
Last edited:
hahahanoobs
Posts: 5,226 +3,077
These AMD performance rumours are a yearly occurence, so tell me, how are they entertained at all at this point? Everyone, and I mean everyone, should be ignoring these rumours and waiting for official announcements and reviews.
Just want to jump in here and say Jim @ AdoredTV isn’t the AMD ‘shill’ some are claiming. He’s a passionate PC enthusiast who knows his stuff and while I can understand why some think he’s an AMD shill, he’s not, he just can’t stand the anti-consumer practices Intel and Nvidia have employed over the years. AMD’s not perfect but their track record is much cleaner than their competitors.
Also his information is often accurate so I feel he deserves more respect than some are giving and while we think he is wrong on this one, that’s yet to be proven.
Also his information is often accurate so I feel he deserves more respect than some are giving and while we think he is wrong on this one, that’s yet to be proven.
The whole article is damage control for Intel and Nvidia, also some of the comments. Thank you Steve for your comment above.
Manuel Diego
Posts: 101 +213
There are a number of statements in this article that don't make much sense:
"But no sane company would choose to create a product and sell it for half the price of their only other competitor." However, when AMD released Threadripper, the top dog was half the price of the Intel competitor. So these things do happen, and I don't think we have to worry about Lisa Su's sanity, so far she's delivering.
"So in our opinion it’s ridiculous to suggest AMD will release a Navi GPU at $250 that delivers performance equivalent to Nvidia’s $500 RTX 2070." Consider first that the RTX 2070 is grossly overpriced (because they can), it's a x70 series, which used to be around $250/$300. It's their pricing that doesn't make any sense; if AMD has a product able to compete on performance, and seeing how their price per core on the Ryzen lineup is way, way lower than Intel's, why wouldn't they release it at a target price of $250? Makes perfect sense in order to regain market share, which is AMD's top priority now (making the big bucks should come later, once they have regained a sensible portion of the mindshare).
"AMD literally just released the Radeon RX 590 at $280. And now we have a leak suggesting they will announce a product in a month that is twice as fast, for a lower price? That is completely ludicrous.": so they should delay it? I don't think so. Assuming they do have these cards ready, why not release them? And what's the problem with the RX 590? It does serve its purpose, it keeps AMD in the game and in the news, and it's just a die shrink: as AMD explained when releasing the Ryzen 2xxx series (which are just a die shrink of the 1xxx series), it's just a shrink, that necessitates very little work and provides tangible benefits.
As for Zen 2 and the supposed incompatibility between AMD's claims (over x1.25 performance) and the rumoured specs, I remember when they said that Ryzen was "over 40% faster than previous generation", and it turned out to be over 50%. So it's not like they haven't undersold their products' performance before. If those specs are reasonable, time will tell, but considering them ludicrous is just absurd, they are perfectly within the realm of possible.
Whereas all this is just rumours, labeling them as "ridiculous", "ludricous", "insane" and "zero sense" is, for me, quite short sighted. My 2 cents!
"But no sane company would choose to create a product and sell it for half the price of their only other competitor." However, when AMD released Threadripper, the top dog was half the price of the Intel competitor. So these things do happen, and I don't think we have to worry about Lisa Su's sanity, so far she's delivering.
"So in our opinion it’s ridiculous to suggest AMD will release a Navi GPU at $250 that delivers performance equivalent to Nvidia’s $500 RTX 2070." Consider first that the RTX 2070 is grossly overpriced (because they can), it's a x70 series, which used to be around $250/$300. It's their pricing that doesn't make any sense; if AMD has a product able to compete on performance, and seeing how their price per core on the Ryzen lineup is way, way lower than Intel's, why wouldn't they release it at a target price of $250? Makes perfect sense in order to regain market share, which is AMD's top priority now (making the big bucks should come later, once they have regained a sensible portion of the mindshare).
"AMD literally just released the Radeon RX 590 at $280. And now we have a leak suggesting they will announce a product in a month that is twice as fast, for a lower price? That is completely ludicrous.": so they should delay it? I don't think so. Assuming they do have these cards ready, why not release them? And what's the problem with the RX 590? It does serve its purpose, it keeps AMD in the game and in the news, and it's just a die shrink: as AMD explained when releasing the Ryzen 2xxx series (which are just a die shrink of the 1xxx series), it's just a shrink, that necessitates very little work and provides tangible benefits.
As for Zen 2 and the supposed incompatibility between AMD's claims (over x1.25 performance) and the rumoured specs, I remember when they said that Ryzen was "over 40% faster than previous generation", and it turned out to be over 50%. So it's not like they haven't undersold their products' performance before. If those specs are reasonable, time will tell, but considering them ludicrous is just absurd, they are perfectly within the realm of possible.
Whereas all this is just rumours, labeling them as "ridiculous", "ludricous", "insane" and "zero sense" is, for me, quite short sighted. My 2 cents!
Last edited:
Manuel Diego
Posts: 101 +213
When they released Ryzen 1xxx and Threadripper 1xxx, the top Ryzens had 8 cores, just as the lower end Threadrippers. Same could happen here: Threadrippers 3xxx would go from 16 to 32 (or maybe even 64, à la 2990WX, giving double the cores even if bandwidth starved), and their low end would intersect with Ryzen 3xxx's high end. Segmentation would be based again on chipset, memory bandwidth and PCIe lanes. Makes perfect sense, and again, it's not like they haven't done it before, with great success.
Last edited:
Manuel Diego
Posts: 101 +213
I don't think you understood what Jim was saying. He not once says that the FX8350 is better than a 2500K. On the contrary, he shows lots of results that say exactly the contrary. He wasn't saying that the FX8350 is better, just that it has aged better, than the 2500K. By however much the Intel CPU trounced the FX8350 in 2012, in 2017 that percentage was lower. So, over time, the AMD cpu lost its value more slowly than the Intel one. And that comes not from him, but from the testings conducted here at Techspot, at Anandtech and other similar sites.
Vulcanproject
Posts: 1,701 +3,212
I know what he said and I know what he claimed. His assertions relied on lots of very poor graphs and tests ran years ago, attempting to calculate performance variations and compare between them using rough percentages. Horribly flawed methodology.
He was proven wrong by another outlet who took those parts and simply ran the tests on modern games. They just killed the argument stone dead by doing the tests, rather than fiddling old numbers around.
It was in essence a pointless piece with absolute no usefulness whatsoever except positive PR for AMD's arch choices with Bulldozer. Poorly judged in light of the newer tests that were performed, and certainly reinforced my inclination to believe he has bias.
Threadripper can operate with much more GB of RAM and channels than Ryzen. If you think this way further: why intel humsters must by shiny new i9 if old Xeon available on the ebay with the same cores/threads for cheap?
Stark
Posts: 192 +174
BigBoomBoom
Posts: 100 +78
Oh sure, sounds just like Vega. Better than GTx 1080 Ti at lower price point than GTX 1080. Remembered how that went?
Point in case, no ***** company would lower price that much comparing to competitor, especially when they sell. Apple raises phone price to $1,000 now every other major phone companies have $1,000 phones. NVIDIA raises RTX 2080 Ti to $1,000, watch how AMD Navi will be $1,000 for top card.
Point in case, no ***** company would lower price that much comparing to competitor, especially when they sell. Apple raises phone price to $1,000 now every other major phone companies have $1,000 phones. NVIDIA raises RTX 2080 Ti to $1,000, watch how AMD Navi will be $1,000 for top card.
Evernessince
Posts: 5,469 +6,158
The 480 has aged better. It used to lose by 8% on average on now it beats the GTX 1060 on average. And yes, clearly it does perform better on APIs that can use Async compute like Vulkan. Just look at wolfenstein II.
"Then I moved in and saw this awful piece about how an FX8350 is now basically as good or better than a 2500k for games 5 years after launch because AMD had the sense to have more reliance on multi-threading."
How about a link? I know Adored didn't say this.
"Then there has been the tests published in 2017 that skewed figures for Ryzen in 1080p games and talked much apparent doom for Intel. Only for Intel to launch the 7700k then 8700k and once again take even AMD's 8 cores to the cleaners in games the past 18 months."
Once again, you need to provide a link for these. You are the only one making these claims, no other tech outlet has called AdoredTV out on your purportedly "skewed" tests.
Also, the 7700K was released before Ryzen so your account of the events is incorrect. I wouldn't say they smacked AMD in games either. Sure they are better gaming CPUs but they win by an amount that only eSports gamers and ultra enthusiasts would mind. The Ryzen CPUs won best overall CPU and had more CPUs on TechSpot's CPUs to buy list this year then Intel. Suffice it to say, your hyperbole is just that, a radical statement when the reality is much more grounded.
Evernessince
Posts: 5,469 +6,158
That won't happen and I'd bet you on that one. Even the top end Navi chip is fairly small, especially compared to Nvidia's chips. It's going to be much cheaper for AMD to produce and give Lisa Sue's penchant for aggressive pricing, expect AMD to come out swinging.
ever heard of xiaomi ? think of amd like xiaomi but better
BigBoomBoom
Posts: 100 +78
Except Xiaomi phones steadily increase in prices. All Chinese phone makers steadily increasing their prices, only their newer spinoff like Realme or Pocophone is back to where it was.
Latest Mi Mix 3 Special edition is $720 in China.
All Chinese flagship or flagship killers are now min $500 (apart from Pocophone) the price of flagships couple years ago.
dude ceramic ain't cheap besides the special edition is special edition. but besides that standard 6/128 is still 425$ which has better cameras than pocophone and better design for not too much. (its battery lasts longer than 6t). 425$ base price vs 1100$ base you see Q1 next year they will release a 5g 855 version I doubt. base (6/128) will be more than 550$ .so it sits at half for atleast equal performance. xiaomi is doing this for marketshare so they can sell other eco system products they have . and amd also will do it because 1) they can 2) they must for mindshare and marketshare. at this point it seems nvidia is more greedy than apple seriously.
BigBoomBoom
Posts: 100 +78
$425 Mi Mix 3? Are you dreaming? Cheapest Mi Mix 3 is around $500.
One Plus is a good example. What started at $300 is now $550 (6T). Almost doubled the price, while Samsung for example barely increased approx 30% since the time of S5 (One Plus original).
No, chinadroid is no longer cheap. Here in Australia for example, Oppo Find X is priced same as baseline Google Pixel 3, and Pixel 3 isn't a cheap phone (more expensive than Pixel 2 which is again not a cheap phone). And that is actually a good price for Oppo Find X as we got almost same price as China (after currency exchange).
Also why Chinadroid is so "cheap" is because they mostly buy other brands components. The SoC is from Qualcomm, they don't develop it. Huawei design their own SoC so look at Huawei price. Honor is their budget brand but AMD doesn't have a budget brand, they don't make both expensive brand and budget brand like smartphone companies.
Last edited:
My main problem with the rumored CPU specs is that... there's absolutely no point. Higher core counts are inevitably the future, but for the vast majority of "ordinary" consumers at this point of time, even 8c/16t is overkill. There's no point selling 6c/12t as an entry level CPU when a large number of people would be perfectly fine with 4c/8t or even 4c/4t if you just clock them high enough(which is more than plausible, if you look at the supposed base and turbo clocks of the rumored R9s). If AMD is going to release R9 SKUs to bump up the core count(and one up Intel again), they'll almost certainly be 12 cores, not 16.
AMD has proved that there's demand for 8c/16t CPUs, enough of it for Intel to follow suit and release such a CPU. You could say that there's no point, but you wouldn't buy a 4 core CPU for a high end PC now, would you?
And true, the vast majority of 'ordinary consumers' don't need this, but then, the vast majority of ordinary consumers can make do with a 5 year old Pentium, and are probably using laptops anyway. Enthusiasts and gamers, the ones buying high end desktop CPUs, aren't ordinary consumers.
So yes, 16 cores would appeal only to a subset of users, but that doesn't mean there's no point in it. And given that it would likely be implemented as two 8 core chiplets, limiting SKUs to 12 cores doesn't seem logical. People who want 12 cores will also want 16 cores.
I agree though, I find it hard to believe that 6c/12t will be the entry level.
That's actually not that unbelievable, due to the difference in manufacturing processes. The current RTX cards are on 12nm, where it's more expensive to make a GPU of that quality, due to a smaller margin for error.
I'm of course going to wait until the specs get released and benchmarks for all of them roll out before I choose which I want. Main thing I'm looking for right now is to cut down on cable management (running a very SFF build) without sacrificing too much performance. if the 2050 competitor has 8 gigs of RAM (some games I play push 6), I'll be sold.
I don't believe AMD is bringing chiplet design into desktop. One very good and one good reason why not:
1. Loss of integrated memory controller will mean huge latency penalties when using RAM.
2. Two chip solution is quite expensive for desktop even if it is $300+ part.
Chiplet design is meant only for scenarios where computing power is important and memory latency is irrelevant (=servers with very high core count).
codgerface
Posts: 44 +69
First, I give Steve and Tim credit for having the patience of a saints.
I don't think Jim is an actual shill for AMD--he's not that professional. I do think he's an aggressive* megalomaniac whose "passion" results in a negative, partisan message contrived through confirmation bias, and it is damaging to the PC hardware enthusiast community.
Perhaps it's my own personal filter and selective memory, but I feel like his influence and his followers have caused the conversation now to be so much more toxic. It’s simply, not as fun. There has always been bad blood between the confused fans of red, blue, and green, but since he really came on the scene with his "Tech Press Loses the Plot" video, the enthusiast community seems to be so much more polarized and wrapped up in this nonsense about the companies, instead of focusing on the products.
Jim is right that lawyers do be like lawyers and VPs of Marketing do be like VPs of Marketing sometimes. That's how they roll, and it removes innocence from a hobby that we adore (ha). However, those actions aren't unique to the PC hardware industry, they certainly aren’t unique to only Intel and Nvidia, and I sure as hell don’t want it to be the focus of something that is supposed to be a fun distraction.
I’m not trying to bury my head in the sand about bad business practices, I’m trying to keep this in bloody perspective. It’s like watching a pro sporting event and the difference between cheering loudly versus being an angry loudmouth that is swearing obscenities about the referees in front of the 7 yr old next to you. For example, Nvidia coming out with cards that don’t offer huge uplifts in performance for the price should result in a reaction of, “kthanks, won’t be buying that.” The same way people wouldn’t buy a lawn mower or fishing kayak that got poor reviews.
The reaction from the community regarding poor PC gaming products shouldn’t be seeing red (ha), genuinely hating company X and it’s patrons, or feeling the need to burn this mutha down with negativity in videos or comments. However, that seems to be a common theme now, and a lot of the rhetoric seems to be generated by Jim's message.
*He absolutely has posted under his videos that certain dissenting commenters should kill themselves. I saw them. They are now deleted. He has also aggressively gone after people that dare to question him. For example, his original post under Steve’s 'cherry picked Intel CPUs - tinfoil hat' video was super aggressive and tantrum-like. Also now deleted. Believe me about the deleted posts or don’t. I saw them.
Similar threads
