AMD talks Ryzen hard launch, lifespan, overclocking plans and more

[Evernessince]

Amd doesn't support cards from 2012. Nvidia does. All that matters. In fact nvidia support goes even farther back.

Wrong, AMD does support it's cards from 2012.

http://support.amd.com/en-us/download

Follow the link to the 7900 series and it will bring you to a download page for AMD's latest ReLive drivers.

I find your words incredibly funny

"Amd doesn't support cards from 2012. Nvidia does. All that matters."

In other words, "Hey guys let's ignore the real argument and try to create a scarecrow argument where all that matters is old card support". But I'm sure you don't actually think that old card support is actually all that matters, you are just grasping at straws.

 

[wiyosaya]

Ha, that's what I was thinking. Intel's R&D budget is more than the value of AMD.
The only AMD fanboys left are the die hard ones, probably attributes to why they are so annoying. No one really wants to route for anything aiming to be 2nd best. You knew that when AMD announced they were no longer competing with Intel when Roy Read was CEO that they were essentially giving up the market. You at least have to run in the race to be rooted for as an underdog.
People are impatient. If you ask me AMD shouldn't give any concrete release date other than the quarter they've already given. I would much rather they just say "hey guys their out" one day. This gives Intel zero chance to react and it also means reviews will be done compared to Intel's current pricing model.

Roy Read was a business wonk who had no idea what a CPU was nor how to pronounce the word, much less how important they are to AMD's business. Whoever hired him should be fired. Thank the great maker that they got rid of him, and hired someone with significant technical brains to take his place - Lisa Su.

I agree AMD should only release when they are ready rather than try to rush something to market just to defeat Goliath.

I'm still taking the wait and see attitude after the bullcrap and Roy Read fiascos.

 

[bandit8623]

Wrong, AMD does support it's cards from 2012.

http://support.amd.com/en-us/download

Follow the link to the 7900 series and it will bring you to a download page for AMD's latest ReLive drivers.

I find your words incredibly funny

"Amd doesn't support cards from 2012. Nvidia does. All that matters."

In other words, "Hey guys let's ignore the real argument and try to create a scarecrow argument where all that matters is old card support". But I'm sure you don't actually think that old card support is actually all that matters, you are just grasping at straws.

Calm down guy. Sorry 2011.. Doesn't change the fact that tbey don't support. I know your a fan boy its alright. Im just being honest. Not everyone can afford to buy a too end card every 5 years. Specially when the 6000 series top end cards play every game still and would do even better with support.

 

[Puiu]

Calm down guy. Sorry 2011.. Doesn't change the fact that tbey don't support. I know your a fan boy its alright. Im just being honest. Not everyone can afford to buy a too end card every 5 years. Specially when the 6000 series top end cards play every game still and would do even better with support.

Let me put it in a way you'll understand. AMD supports their cards for years longer than Nvidia. This is a very well known fact.
Your 6000 series was released in 2010 and you even got a Crimson Driver for it in 2015. This means exactly 5 years of constant driver updates that actually improved performance for it.
Nvidia "officially" dropped driver support for the 400 series (which also launched in 2010) in March 2014 and it most likely took them that long because until driver 323 they had big issues with freezing PCs (this affected the 500 series too). It took them 2 years to fix it.
At the moment the 900 series and the 1000 series are the only ones that Nvidia is still releasing relevant drivers for. And you'll never see the async driver support for the 900 series that they promised.

As a side note, you seem to be confusing the fact that nvidia didn't remove the older cards from the driver installation package with actual support for those older architectures.

 

[mbrowne5061]

It's not just about AMD here, it's about the entire supply-chain being ready together with the OEMs.

That's a line of bull if I ever heard one. This is all about AMD, they will not release until they think they are ready. It has nothing to do with the rest of the supply-chain.

You can't sell a product - even a perfect one - if you can't actually supply the product. New CPU lineup, new chipsets, and in all likelihood new socket(s) as well. There is a lot to get ready, and these aren't things companies address until the goalposts stop moving.

 

[Theinsanegamer]

Calm down guy. Sorry 2011.. Doesn't change the fact that tbey don't support. I know your a fan boy its alright. Im just being honest. Not everyone can afford to buy a too end card every 5 years. Specially when the 6000 series top end cards play every game still and would do even better with support.

Let me put it in a way you'll understand. AMD supports their cards for years longer than Nvidia. This is a very well known fact.
Your 6000 series was released in 2010 and you even got a Crimson Driver for it in 2015. This means exactly 5 years of constant driver updates that actually improved performance for it.
Nvidia "officially" dropped driver support for the 400 series (which also launched in 2010) in March 2014 and it most likely took them that long because until driver 323 they had big issues with freezing PCs (this affected the 500 series too). It took them 2 years to fix it.
At the moment the 900 series and the 1000 series are the only ones that Nvidia is still releasing relevant drivers for. And you'll never see the async driver support for the 900 series that they promised.

As a side note, you seem to be confusing the fact that nvidia didn't remove the older cards from the driver installation package with actual support for those older architectures.

let me put it in a way you'll understand-the 400 series from nvidia is still supported. Look up the latest driver for a 480, it is the same driver as the 1080. you may be of the opinion that this isnt "true" support because they are no longer optimized, but bug fixes for the 1000 series are back-ported to the 400 series. The 5000 and 6000 series from AMD are not getting bug fixes, which leads to games being playable on the 580 but not the 6970. (and if you want to talk about nvidia taking two years to fix an issue, frame times in crossfire were an issue AMD was hearing about for the better part of half a decade and completely ignored until nvidia came along and made a tool to show how bad it was).

Async is not a huge feature. Show me a game that is unplayable without it, you wont find one. It is an optional feature, and one that wasnt important when the 900 series was made.

You seem to be confusing "optimization" with "driver support"

 

[Puiu]

let me put it in a way you'll understand-the 400 series from nvidia is still supported. Look up the latest driver for a 480, it is the same driver as the 1080. you may be of the opinion that this isnt "true" support because they are no longer optimized, but bug fixes for the 1000 series are back-ported to the 400 series. The 5000 and 6000 series from AMD are not getting bug fixes, which leads to games being playable on the 580 but not the 6970. (and if you want to talk about nvidia taking two years to fix an issue, frame times in crossfire were an issue AMD was hearing about for the better part of half a decade and completely ignored until nvidia came along and made a tool to show how bad it was).

Async is not a huge feature. Show me a game that is unplayable without it, you wont find one. It is an optional feature, and one that wasnt important when the 900 series was made.

You seem to be confusing "optimization" with "driver support"

pfff hahahaha. you are so funny dude. you have no idea how drivers work across multiple architectures, how the "frame times" situation came to be (you should thank some really great 2011/2012 techreport articles not nvidia), and what I meant by not getting async support (aka the simple fact that nvidia lied or simply "forgot" about it after they launched pascal - and here you are defending this lie like it's normal).

 

[wiyosaya]

"Ryzen", that's supposed to be a hipster spelling of the deadly poison "Ricin", is it not?

I think is a play on Risen as in Risen from there sorry ashes in the hopes this time they can pull it off (which I hope it does as I need to upgrade from 2600k)

Or perhaps "Rising"?

 

[captaincranky]

Or perhaps "Rising"?

No, no, it would definitely be a contraction, (sic) "risin' "....

 

[Evernessince]

let me put it in a way you'll understand-the 400 series from nvidia is still supported. Look up the latest driver for a 480, it is the same driver as the 1080. you may be of the opinion that this isnt "true" support because they are no longer optimized, but bug fixes for the 1000 series are back-ported to the 400 series. The 5000 and 6000 series from AMD are not getting bug fixes, which leads to games being playable on the 580 but not the 6970. (and if you want to talk about nvidia taking two years to fix an issue, frame times in crossfire were an issue AMD was hearing about for the better part of half a decade and completely ignored until nvidia came along and made a tool to show how bad it was).

Async is not a huge feature. Show me a game that is unplayable without it, you wont find one. It is an optional feature, and one that wasnt important when the 900 series was made.

You seem to be confusing "optimization" with "driver support"

"Async is not a huge feature. Show me a game that is unplayable without it, you wont find one. It is an optional feature, and one that wasnt important when the 900 series was made."

This is one of those "dur-da-dur" comments because it's obvious you don't understand how things work. GPU manufacturers don't wait for game creators to implement features like Async-compute, nothing would ever get done like that. Why would game creators implement features no hardware can take advantage of? No, Hardware manufacturers have to implement the feature in the hardware and then the game devs in the software.

"let me put it in a way you'll understand-the 400 series from nvidia is still supported. Look up the latest driver for a 480, it is the same driver as the 1080. you may be of the opinion that this isnt "true" support because they are no longer optimized, but bug fixes for the 1000 series are back-ported to the 400 series."

Do you actually have any proof of the 400 series getting bugfixes / improvements? Just because the latest driver package runs on the older Nvidia cards does not mean it receives any of the benefits. FYI, their is no way in hell Nvidia are porting anything from the 1000 series back to the 400 series. The architecture is so different it would just be easier to make the improvements from scratch. But yeah, we'll continue this conversation when you can show me the patch notes of the latest Nvidia drivers showing improvements for the 400 series.

Calm down guy. Sorry 2011.. Doesn't change the fact that tbey don't support. I know your a fan boy its alright. Im just being honest. Not everyone can afford to buy a too end card every 5 years. Specially when the 6000 series top end cards play every game still and would do even better with support.

Is that you trump?

"Im just being honest."

but in your last sentence

" Sorry 2011"

You changed from 2012 to 2011 because you were wrong. At best you are willfully ignorant.

"I know your a fan boy its alright."

Classic projection

"Specially when the 6000 series top end cards play every game still and would do even better with support."

If you think so prove your point. Show me where the Nvidia 400 series cards benefits from "support".

 

[bandit8623]

"Async is not a huge feature. Show me a game that is unplayable without it, you wont find one. It is an optional feature, and one that wasnt important when the 900 series was made."

This is one of those "dur-da-dur" comments because it's obvious you don't understand how things work. GPU manufacturers don't wait for game creators to implement features like Async-compute, nothing would ever get done like that. Why would game creators implement features no hardware can take advantage of? No, Hardware manufacturers have to implement the feature in the hardware and then the game devs in the software.

"let me put it in a way you'll understand-the 400 series from nvidia is still supported. Look up the latest driver for a 480, it is the same driver as the 1080. you may be of the opinion that this isnt "true" support because they are no longer optimized, but bug fixes for the 1000 series are back-ported to the 400 series."

Do you actually have any proof of the 400 series getting bugfixes / improvements? Just because the latest driver package runs on the older Nvidia cards does not mean it receives any of the benefits. FYI, their is no way in hell Nvidia are porting anything from the 1000 series back to the 400 series. The architecture is so different it would just be easier to make the improvements from scratch. But yeah, we'll continue this conversation when you can show me the patch notes of the latest Nvidia drivers showing improvements for the 400 series.



Is that you trump?

"Im just being honest."

but in your last sentence

" Sorry 2011"

You changed from 2012 to 2011 because you were wrong. At best you are willfully ignorant.

"I know your a fan boy its alright."

Classic projection

"Specially when the 6000 series top end cards play every game still and would do even better with support."

If you think so prove your point. Show me where the Nvidia 400 series cards benefits from "support".

How is correcting something I mistaking put not honesty? I didnt lie! 1 year difference doesn't change anything. Its not supported. Again nvidia does support. The driver version is updated and new games will at least run correctly. https://www.google.com/amp/www.digi...efield1-titanfall2/amp/?client=ms-android-htc
Dl the list 400 support.

 

[TorturedChaos]

I really want to want to see AMD up their game, just to force Intel to stop resting on their laurels.

As far as graphic card argument goes, I have both Radeon and Nvidia cards. For my Linux installs Nvidia cards are much friendlier to run. Could not get Steam to run on a Radeon R9 290, but works like a champ on a GTX 970.
Also, Nvidia is more friendly to Adobe Creative Cloud support. Nvidia cards were support long before AMD, and once AMD was supported you had to have Win10 to support offloading to the graphics card. And even after Radeon cards were supported by Photoshop and Illustrator, Nvidia cards still work better. My machines with Radeon cards are much glitcher when trying to use graphic card enhancement than the machines with Nvidia cards.

Sadly, AMD seems to be betting their teeth kicked in on both the CPU and Graphics Card fronts.

 

[Evernessince]

How is correcting something I mistaking put not honesty? I didnt lie! 1 year difference doesn't change anything. Its not supported. Again nvidia does support. The driver version is updated and new games will at least run correctly. https://www.google.com/amp/www.digi...efield1-titanfall2/amp/?client=ms-android-htc
Dl the list 400 support.

The article you linked only covers the 1000 series cards but just to point it out, the minimum requirements for Titanfall 2 are a GTX 660 and that game isn't very intensive. So no, you cannot run new games correctly as you state. You can't even run them at all.

 

[Evernessince]

I really want to want to see AMD up their game, just to force Intel to stop resting on their laurels.

As far as graphic card argument goes, I have both Radeon and Nvidia cards. For my Linux installs Nvidia cards are much friendlier to run. Could not get Steam to run on a Radeon R9 290, but works like a champ on a GTX 970.
Also, Nvidia is more friendly to Adobe Creative Cloud support. Nvidia cards were support long before AMD, and once AMD was supported you had to have Win10 to support offloading to the graphics card. And even after Radeon cards were supported by Photoshop and Illustrator, Nvidia cards still work better. My machines with Radeon cards are much glitcher when trying to use graphic card enhancement than the machines with Nvidia cards.

Sadly, AMD seems to be betting their teeth kicked in on both the CPU and Graphics Card fronts.

Nvidia has had better Linux support for some time but hopefully GPUOpen changes that.

Taking one application suite and only your own personal experience and applying it to everything though, that's not at all an accurate depiction of the overall market.

"My machines with Radeon cards are much glitcher when trying to use graphic card enhancement than the machines with Nvidia cards."

This is the developer's fault. You are sitting here telling us that it is AMD's fault for Adobe's software.

 

[Steed]

So, David is going to put the beat down on Goliath..............er.............,. yet again. For the nth time.

Speaking for myself, I can't wait for the AMD guy to load one of these babies up in his slingshot, and blast Intel's CEO right between the eyes with it.

"Ryzen", that's supposed to be a hipster spelling of the deadly poison "Ricin", is it not?

I think its more supposed to be Risen, as in like Risen from the dead .... now I wonder if there will be hungry sea vultures and giant fluttering grave moths

 

[bandit8623]

The article you linked only covers the 1000 series cards but just to point it out, the minimum requirements for Titanfall 2 are a GTX 660 and that game isn't very intensive. So no, you cannot run new games correctly as you state. You can't even run them at all.

You obviously didn't open the readme and view the cards. 400 supported. Which means the drivers are affecting that card.

 

[Evernessince]

You obviously didn't open the readme and view the cards. 400 supported. Which means the drivers are affecting that card.

That's right, keep changing the subject from the one's you got wrong. First thing you said AMD didn't support their cards from 2012 and now you are avoiding the fact that you stated these drivers somehow allow 400 series Nvidia cards to play new games, even though they are far below minimum requirements.

Also this

https://www.hardwareunboxed.com/6-gen-geforce-gtx-x80-comparison-gtx-470-580-680-780-980-1080/

It's obvious that Nvidia has stopped supporting everything but maxwell and newer architectures in their latest drivers, with a massive gap in performance between the 780 and 980, much more so than what we saw when the 980 first launched. The 480 is "supported" by the driver only in interface and name only. It doesn't share anywhere near a similar architecture and thus the performance and bug fixes applied to Nvidia's latest cards and games do not apply to older Nvidia cards. Nvidia isn't known for supporting their last gen cards and you can see that when you compare the GTX 680 to the 7970. The 7970 was behind the GTX 680 performance wise at launch (it was a smaller GPU) but it has gone up in performance by more than 226% compared to the GTX 680 in modern games.

Heck, there is even an AMD FineWine Technology meme going around about how much better AMD cards age. AMD cards age better while Nvidia cards usually provide better performance at launch, this is widely observed in the PC Gaming community.

 

[Protracker]

For me I dont really care about the GPU but as I have a 2600k I really do need to upgrade my rig and as a gamer I fell if I am being forced in to getting more than 4 cores then it would stupid to not at least get a little excited for the 8 core Ryzen. I will make a decision of what I decide to buy when I know the full specs, prices (not there non retail testing chips) and have seen it bench marked externally with the latest Intel Chips. AMD are very good at the hype but I need way more information that there is atm

 

[TorturedChaos]

Nvidia has had better Linux support for some time but hopefully GPUOpen changes that.

Taking one application suite and only your own personal experience and applying it to everything though, that's not at all an accurate depiction of the overall market.

"My machines with Radeon cards are much glitcher when trying to use graphic card enhancement than the machines with Nvidia cards."

This is the developer's fault. You are sitting here telling us that it is AMD's fault for Adobe's software.

Hopefully GPUOpen helps with Linux Support.

And I will agree that I have a very small sample size. And I am sure Adobe could have worked more to optimize their software for AMD cards. (Adobe has a lot they could fix in their software, but I will save that for another time)
But I also remember reading that Nvidia and Adobe worked together to optimize Adobe's software for utilizing Nvidia graphics cards. I don't know if that was Adobe or Nvidia who instigated that, but I feel AMD could have got in on that if they wanted to.

 

[robb213]

I have to wonder what the differences will be between similar models though.

I assume that "Black Edition" will continue to be their "K" counterpart with an unlocked multiplier, but there only seems to be leaks showing that the "SR7" will have a Black Edition version. All of their other models don't seem to have one--but obviously could since we still have no solid ideas on it.


I've been without an AMD for a long time, well before Black Edition versions...so do the lower tier ones support unlocked multipliers? Is Black Edition only used in the higher tier AMD segments? This question is for current/past models.

 

[Evernessince]

Hopefully GPUOpen helps with Linux Support.

And I will agree that I have a very small sample size. And I am sure Adobe could have worked more to optimize their software for AMD cards. (Adobe has a lot they could fix in their software, but I will save that for another time)
But I also remember reading that Nvidia and Adobe worked together to optimize Adobe's software for utilizing Nvidia graphics cards. I don't know if that was Adobe or Nvidia who instigated that, but I feel AMD could have got in on that if they wanted to.

I think that may be more of a market share thing that caused Adobe to optimize for Nvidia. Of course AMD wants to be optimized for Adobe software, they are used by so many professionals. Unfortunately for AMD, before this year things were very rough. They had to sell off facilities, license their processors, and down-size just to survive. It would not surprise me if AMD didn't send engineers to adobe simply because of lack of resources. I'm sure that Nvidia sent over dozens of engineers to Adobe and that's something AMD has not been able to do. With Polaris though they have got some money in the bank. Perhaps with Zen and Vega this will be able to get everything fully operational. Maybe then they can actually release an entire lineup of new graphics cards within a reasonable amount of time, unlike what they have been doing for the last 3 generations.

 

[Evernessince]

I have to wonder what the differences will be between similar models though.

I assume that "Black Edition" will continue to be their "K" counterpart with an unlocked multiplier, but there only seems to be leaks showing that the "SR7" will have a Black Edition version. All of their other models don't seem to have one--but obviously could since we still have no solid ideas on it.


I've been without an AMD for a long time, well before Black Edition versions...so do the lower tier ones support unlocked multipliers? Is Black Edition only used in the higher tier AMD segments? This question is for current/past models.

It's been confirmed by AMD that EVERY zen chip will come with an unlocked multiplier. I'm guessing that the Black editions will have the AMD wraith cooler, which is a bit better than a 212 evo.