AMD Ryzen 7 5800X3D outperforms Intel Core i9-12900KS by 16% in early gaming benchmarks

Arbie

Posts: 369   +668
it's not only about providing a stable and error free experience. ... I think I clearly explained what I meant in my previous post.
Your previous post was a half-sentence slap in the face to AMD, claiming its "inability to support its chips with quality software". I repeat: explain what problems AMD's CPU software has given you - other than providing a stable and error free experience, of course.
 

meric

Posts: 364   +359
Your previous post was a half-sentence slap in the face to AMD, claiming its "inability to support its chips with quality software". I repeat: explain what problems AMD's CPU software has given you - other than providing a stable and error free experience, of course.
My remark was not specifically towards their CPUs, it's a general remark. And stability was not mentioned. I repeat what I wrote: "An on chip cache of this size opens the possibility to provide boost for so many computer tasks. I'm just not hopeful that AMD will exploit this precious resource."
They could make use of this architectural advantage in many ways. They could work with productivity software makers and provide additional acceleration in that software. This could be an image editing, media transcoding or scientific research application. Possibilities are endless. Intel CPUs provide this type of acceleration for many such software. Their quick sync is a good example which was used to exploit CPU resources.

On GPU side, AMD has nothing to counter Nvidia's CUDA which saw a wide range of support from software devs. FSR is too late and inferior to DLSS.
Their drivers are inferior to Nvidia's. I've experienced serious issues with a R9 GPU for years with no solution. It's a software issue that causes completely random (does not depend on GPU load or heat) black screen of death. I have to use a 2016 driver and underclock my GPU's memory to below 1350mhz in order to prevent it from crashing. Newer drivers don't offer the choice to underclock memory speed. Set it to 1360 mhz and it will begin crashing, tested and confirmed by myself many times. Search the net, this issue is seen even among RX 6900 cards.
 

Avro Arrow

Posts: 2,349   +2,869
TechSpot Elite
"The fight is on to be crowned the 'world's most expensive fastest gaming CPU'"
With the R7-5800X3D priced at only $449USD, the gamers who rushed in to pay $800 for the i9-12900KS are crying in their cornflakes this morning.

Wise men say only fools rush in.
 
Last edited:

Avro Arrow

Posts: 2,349   +2,869
TechSpot Elite
Well, that 3D cache has the potential to greatly increase the speed in productivity software but given AMD's inability to support its chips with quality software...
While I agree that AMD has been guilty of that in the past, I find that the Adrenalin software suite is very well laid-out and implemented. I wouldn't be too worried about such things anymore. AMD isn't the cash-strapped, almost dead company that Intel almost killed anymore.
 

Arbie

Posts: 369   +668
My remark was not specifically towards their CPUs, it's a general remark. And stability was not mentioned.
This is an article on AMD CPUs. So why - if it had nothing to do with CPUs - would you jump in to denounce AMD's supposed "inability to support its chips with quality software"? Answer: you wanted to diss AMD.
 

meric

Posts: 364   +359
This is an article on AMD CPUs. So why - if it had nothing to do with CPUs - would you jump in to denounce AMD's supposed "inability to support its chips with quality software"? Answer: you wanted to diss AMD.
did you read a word I wrote?
 

Arbie

Posts: 369   +668
did you read a word I wrote?
Yes, in your first post. Which was a gratuitous and completely unfair slap at AMD, and which would mislead new readers into avoiding not only this 5800X3D but their whole line of CPUs.

Everything afterwards was you trying to layer and mask that attack with blarney. Why don't you just fix it?
 

meric

Posts: 364   +359
Yes, in your first post. Which was a gratuitous and completely unfair slap at AMD, and which would mislead new readers into avoiding not only this 5800X3D but their whole line of CPUs.

Everything afterwards was you trying to layer and mask that attack with blarney. Why don't you just fix it?
I know what I wrote and I backed it up by explaining what I meant. 2 times. Last I checked this was a free forum and personal opinions were a right? I'm sorry but I'm not going to change or "fix" my opinion just because you find it wrong.
 

Avro Arrow

Posts: 2,349   +2,869
TechSpot Elite
it's not only about providing a stable and error free experience. Times have changed, stability is required as a bare minimum. It's also about exploiting hardware features/resources using creatively designed software for providing quality of life improvements with the user experience. An on chip cache of this size opens the possibility to provide boost for so many computer tasks. I'm just not hopeful that AMD will exploit this precious resource.
I can state the issues I've had with AMD's products (and I'm sure a lot of users even in this platform would agree) but I think I clearly explained what I meant in my previous post.
Well, this (very long-time) member of the forum doesn't agree. I'm not saying that you haven't had issues because anything is possible. All I can say is that I've owned the following CPU/APUs: Phenom II X4 940, Phenom II X4 965, A8-3500M, FX-8350, R7-1700, R5-3500U and R5-3600X. That's a pretty long time of having only AMD CPUs in both desktop and mobile devices. They've been 100% stable so the idea that AMD's chips would be something other than perfect would be a shock to me.

Even on the Radeon side, the only instability I'd ever encountered was with the RX 5700 XT and that was because of the power delivery system on the XFX RX 5700 XT Triple-Dissipation card. XFX replaced it with the THICC III model and I've had no problems whatsoever since then. As for my ATi cards, I've had two of the following (and used them in CrossfireX): HD 4870, HD 7970 and R9 Fury. Since nothing uses Crossfire anymore, I also have one RX 5700 XT and one RX 6800 XT. Other than the problem with the Triple-Dissipation XFX card, I've had no stability issues with any of them and gamed quite happily with them.

Actually, now that I think about it, there was one stability issue with a card that I ended up returning and replacing with the Gigabyte Windforce HD 7970 which was the Powercolor HD 7870 XT. It would crash as soon as Crossfire was engaged. However, that was an oddball card (that should have been called the HD 7930 because it was a very cut-down Tahiti GPU) and the only card to use the XT suffix between the X1900 XT and RX 5700 XT. To this day, I don't know why Crossfire crashed the cards because the single-card performance was flawless. I brought my PC to NCIX and he tried six cards and they all behaved the same way.

If I had encountered significant issues with AMD products, believe me, I wouldn't be defending them. To this day, I still won't buy anything from MSi because I bought a K9A2 Platinum motherboard, their flagship motherboard at the time and it failed after 16 months. Since the warranty was only 1 year, they told me to get stuffed. I replaced it with a cheap ECS Elitegroup board that still functions in my mother's computer to this day.

I'm not a fanboy, I'm a hater. :laughing:
 

meric

Posts: 364   +359
Well, this (very long-time) member of the forum doesn't agree. I'm not saying that you haven't had issues because anything is possible. All I can say is that I've owned the following CPU/APUs: Phenom II X4 940, Phenom II X4 965, A8-3500M, FX-8350, R7-1700, R5-3500U and R5-3600X. That's a pretty long time of having only AMD CPUs in both desktop and mobile devices. They've been 100% stable so the idea that AMD's chips would be something other than perfect would be a shock to me.

Even on the Radeon side, the only instability I'd ever encountered was with the RX 5700 XT and that was because of the power delivery system on the XFX RX 5700 XT Triple-Dissipation card. XFX replaced it with the THICC III model and I've had no problems whatsoever since then. As for my ATi cards, I've had two of the following (and used them in CrossfireX): HD 4870, HD 7970 and R9 Fury. Since nothing uses Crossfire anymore, I also have one RX 5700 XT and one RX 6800 XT. Other than the problem with the Triple-Dissipation XFX card, I've had no stability issues with any of them and gamed quite happily with them.

Actually, now that I think about it, there was one stability issue with a card that I ended up returning and replacing with the Gigabyte Windforce HD 7970 which was the Powercolor HD 7870 XT. It would crash as soon as Crossfire was engaged. However, that was an oddball card (that should have been called the HD 7930 because it was a very cut-down Tahiti GPU) and the only card to use the XT suffix between the X1900 XT and RX 5700 XT. To this day, I don't know why Crossfire crashed the cards because the single-card performance was flawless. I brought my PC to NCIX and he tried six cards and they all behaved the same way.

If I had encountered significant issues with AMD products, believe me, I wouldn't be defending them. To this day, I still won't buy anything from MSi because I bought a K9A2 Platinum motherboard, their flagship motherboard at the time and it failed after 16 months. Since the warranty was only 1 year, they told me to get stuffed. I replaced it with a cheap ECS Elitegroup board that still functions in my mother's computer to this day.

I'm not a fanboy, I'm a hater. :laughing:
Can you really say that AMD can compete with what Nvidia offers at software side?
 

Arbie

Posts: 369   +668
I know what I wrote and I backed it up by explaining what I meant. 2 times.
Your later blather means nothing. Your first post did and still does gratuitously and wrongly accuse AMD of being "unable to support its chips with quality software". This is an article on CPUs; and btw nobody calls GPUs 'chips'. So your target was clear - and your statement a complete falsehood. Why would you even do that to AMD? Revanchist Intel fanboy?
 
Last edited:

Avro Arrow

Posts: 2,349   +2,869
TechSpot Elite
Can you really say that AMD can compete with what Nvidia offers at software side?
No I really can't for two reasons. One is that the last nVidia card that I owned was a GeForce 8500 GT and the other is that reviewers say that nVidia's software offerings have a lot more features than can be found for Radeon cards.

However, I can say that nVidia has never come up with anything like VULKAN and I can also say that GameWorks wasn't made to make things better for anyone. It originally hampered performance on both GeForce and Radeon cards but since it hampered performance on Radeons more, nVidia decided it was still a good idea.

Whenever nVdia comes up with something, only nVidia owners benefit. However, whenever AMD comes up with something, EVERYBODY benefits. There's definitely something to be said for that because AMD supports open standards while nVidia opposes them.

However, since this is about CPUs, talking about nVidia is completely pointless because nVidia doesn't make CPUs, Intel does. Since we're on the topic of AMD vs Intel and not AMD vs. nVidia, I can say that Intel graphics drivers have been abysmal compared to both AMD and nVidia.

If nVidia has better software than AMD, that's fine. However, bringing up nVidia when the topic here is CPUs makes you look like you're grasping at straws in an attempt to make AMD look bad. The fact is that AMD itself doesn't make the software for Radeon cards, ATi Technologies does. While it is true that AMD owns ATi, the integration of the two is not anything that I would call seamless. With the exception of marketing, all Radeon decisions are made in Canada at ATi Technologies.

This is the reason that I think the removal of the ATi brand was perhaps the most hair-brained decision that AMD ever made because internally, the graphics division is still referred to as ATi and functions almost completely independently from the CPU (real AMD) side. I know that this isn't common knowledge but it's nonetheless true and I have proven it in the past.

The buyout of ATi had a significant impact on AMD as a company. Why else would a company whose colours are black and green be referred to as "Team Red" even when referring to CPUs? The answer is that ATi retained most of its power even after AMD bought it.

Look at the locations tab on amd.com and you'll see that both Canadian locations are still referred to as "ATi Technologies". Another funny thing is that the "red" in "Team Red" is "ATi Red" which was taken from the Canadian flag. True story! :laughing:
 
Last edited: