Official AMD Ryzen Reviews

Naples
[video=youtube;PN93G6Rg2ek]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PN93G6Rg2ek&t=0s[/video]
 
J2C backtracked a bit on the opinion he had on R7 during Tech Talk.

[video=youtube;8-mMBbWHrwM]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8-mMBbWHrwM[/video]
 
Fulcrum29 said:
J2C backtracked a bit on the opinion he had on R7 during Tech Talk.
Click to expand...

Another idiot tech tuber. There are very few good guys out there and those that are simply don't have the same sub numbers as they are not into hype.
 
Fulcrum29 said:
An incident that took place between 2002 and 2007 when Intel dominated the x86 processor market by 70% by implementing a rebates and rewards model to reduce consumer’s choice. A case which is continuing today in Intel’s appeal. Intel has since 2009 been ordered to stop using ‘illegal’ rebates, they have stopped, but are challenging the instruction. Intel has also won the right to have the case re-examined in late 2016 due the General Court being unable to establish whether the rebates and rewards model has indeed harmed the competition.

Nothing is concrete or proven since 2009. Dirty tricks, what dirty tricks? Innocent until proven guilty. However, AMD did take Intel to court in 2005, it was a case stating the very same reason as the EU Commission, a case which Intel settled where AMD was rewarded with $10 million US and in using Intel patents at no royalty in their own x86 processor. Note, Intel exhausted their allowable expenditure and that is how they reached a settlement in 2009.

AMD also has a rebate program... Feck, every supplier I know has a vendor relationship where rebates and rewards are actively promoted in the sales channel. Buy this, rather than that... the whole points system is silly where you are encouraged to promote one deal above the other. It is not only Intel, other companies do it as well, and it is also prevalent here in sunny SA.
Click to expand...
Did you forget a little company called Cyrix? Intel is well known for their dirty tactics. If it's not on price and rebates it's through baseless litigation. Eventually all the companies settled out of court in some way. Intel's thermal management is one such tech they got in a settlement with another company, it is not theirs. If it wasn't for this AMD would not be lagging behind Intel on the thermal front. AMD is the only company that could hold out until Intel had to relent and they settled on a sharing agreement for Intel's instruction sets and AMD x64 architecture.

If it wasn't for them we would probably have had two large companies, AMD and Cyrix, with another smaller one. AMD's x64 was vastly superior to Intel's IA64. I doubt so many hardware vendors would lie. The last time I checked a court doesn't need an admission to establish guilt. The Attorney General made an error on this one.

Colsuldel said:
Has anyone bought one yet?

Just saw a clip regarding the upcoming Naples server CPU, looks to be a 32 core 64 thread,
and gonna have 8 channel ram, not sure how they ended up with only 2 channel on Ryzen?
Click to expand...
One word, price.
 
Swa said:
Did you forget a little company called Cyrix? Intel is well known for their dirty tactics. If it's not on price and rebates it's through baseless litigation. Eventually all the companies settled out of court in some way. Intel's thermal management is one such tech they got in a settlement with another company, it is not theirs. If it wasn't for this AMD would not be lagging behind Intel on the thermal front. AMD is the only company that could hold out until Intel had to relent and they settled on a sharing agreement for Intel's instruction sets and AMD x64 architecture.

If it wasn't for them we would probably have had two large companies, AMD and Cyrix, with another smaller one. AMD's x64 was vastly superior to Intel's IA64. I doubt so many hardware vendors would lie. The last time I checked a court doesn't need an admission to establish guilt. The Attorney General made an error on this one.
Click to expand...

Sigh.

Let me sommer quote Wiki,

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyrix

Intel lost the case,

Unlike AMD, Cyrix had never manufactured or sold Intel designs under a negotiated license. Cyrix's designs were the result of meticulous in-house reverse engineering and often made significant advances in the technology while still being socket compatible with Intel's products. In Cyrix's first product, the 8087 math co-processor, Cyrix used hardware math multipliers rather than the CORDIC algorithm, which allowed the chip to be faster and more accurate than Intel's co-processor. Thus, while AMD's 386s and even 486s had some Intel-written microcode software, Cyrix's designs were completely independent. Focused on removing potential competitors, Intel spent many years in legal battles with Cyrix, consuming Cyrix financial resources, claiming that the Cyrix 486 violated Intel's patents, when in reality the design was proven independent. {Rulings from federal court in Sherman, Texas and Federal Circuit Court of Appeals in Washington DC.}

Intel lost the Cyrix case, which included multiple lawsuits in both federal and state courts in Texas. Some of the matters were settled out of court and some of the matters were settled by the Court. In the end after all appeals, the courts ruled that Cyrix had the right to produce their own x86 designs in any foundry that held an Intel license. Cyrix was found to never have infringed any patent held by Intel. Intel feared having to face the antitrust claims made by Cyrix, so Intel paid Cyrix $12 million to settle the antitrust claims right before a federal jury in Sherman, Texas was to hear and rule on the antitrust claims. As a part of the settlement of the antitrust claims against Intel, Cyrix also received a license to some of the patents that Intel had asserted that Cyrix infringed. Cyrix was free to have their products manufactured by any manufacturer that had a cross license with Intel, which included SGS Thomson, IBM and others. {Rulings from federal court in Sherman, Texas and Federal Circuit Court of Appeals in Washington DC.}
Click to expand...

Note - VIA, by the time they acquired Cyrix, used the above case to protect themselves when Intel took a legal battle to them, VIA ultimately settled, but ended up in a better position than they were in previously.

Cyrix took a legal battle to Intel and settled,

The follow-on 1997 Cyrix-Intel litigation was the reverse: instead of Intel claiming that Cyrix 486 chips violated their patents, now Cyrix claimed that Intel's Pentium Pro and Pentium II violated Cyrix patents—in particular, power management and register renaming techniques. The case was expected to drag on for years but was settled quite promptly, by another mutual cross-license agreement. Intel and Cyrix now had full and free access to each other's patents. The settlement didn't say whether the Pentium Pro violated Cyrix patents or not; it simply allows Intel to carry on making products under a license from Cyrix.
Click to expand...

Then you assume that Cyrix and AMD would had been the two larger companies, and some smaller company. You know what happened to Cyrix, right? Cyrix merged with National Semiconductor in the time they took a legal battle to Intel, they had the capital, where the Cyrix assets was later sold to VIA and then later sold to AMD in 2003.

I am not so sure about your claim on Intel’s thermal management technology never being their own, other than Intel acquiring Cyrix’s power management patent through Cyrix’s settlement. Intel had been developing these technologies since whenever, there was a good article on it dating back to 1994 where they hired more and more engineers to work on these technologies.

Look, Intel is no angel, neither is any big corporation. Yes, I generalised that. Is 'dirty-tactics' right, no, but assuming too much is wayward. Neither have I championed Intel in this thread.
 
Colsuldel said:
Has anyone bought one yet?

Just saw a clip regarding the upcoming Naples server CPU, looks to be a 32 core 64 thread,
and gonna have 8 channel ram, not sure how they ended up with only 2 channel on Ryzen?
Click to expand...

Simple - each CCX probably has its own memory controller. Remember each CCX is a cluster of 4 cores. So, Ryzen has 2 CCXs therefore 2 memory channels. Naples has 8 CCXs, hence 8 memory channels.

Plus, it needs the bandwidth. It is appropriate for a server CPU. If Ryzen did have an 8 channel memory controller, you would need to have 8 DIMM slots to use all 8 channels. There are no Ryzen boards with more than 4 channels, hence it would be impossible to make use of it.
 
Ancalagon said:
Simple - each CCX probably has its own memory controller. Remember each CCX is a cluster of 4 cores. So, Ryzen has 2 CCXs therefore 2 memory channels. Naples has 8 CCXs, hence 8 memory channels.

Plus, it needs the bandwidth. It is appropriate for a server CPU. If Ryzen did have an 8 channel memory controller, you would need to have 8 DIMM slots to use all 8 channels. There are no Ryzen boards with more than 4 channels, hence it would be impossible to make use of it.
Click to expand...

Not just that, Ryzen is aimed at consumers. Consumers don't need more than dual channel.
 
Just pulled the trigger on the R7 1700 and the Asus C6H. Wootware still waiting on the motherboard stock though.
 
Ancalagon said:
Simple - each CCX probably has its own memory controller. Remember each CCX is a cluster of 4 cores. So, Ryzen has 2 CCXs therefore 2 memory channels. Naples has 8 CCXs, hence 8 memory channels.

Plus, it needs the bandwidth. It is appropriate for a server CPU. If Ryzen did have an 8 channel memory controller, you would need to have 8 DIMM slots to use all 8 channels. There are no Ryzen boards with more than 4 channels, hence it would be impossible to make use of it.
Click to expand...

when I upgrade again in 5 years then I can have a 16 Core chip with quad channel ram..

DrJohnZoidberg said:
Just pulled the trigger on the R7 1700 and the Asus C6H. Wootware still waiting on the motherboard stock though.
Click to expand...

Congrats on your purchase, hope the board comes quick!
what RAM are you planning on using?
 
Fulcrum29 said:
Sigh.

Let me sommer quote Wiki,

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyrix

Intel lost the case,
Click to expand...
Exactly, the court found their claims to be frivolous. But not before consuming vast amounts of Cyrix's financial resources, interestingly you bold this part but completely ignore it. Many argue that it was this which ultimate led to Cyrix merging with National Semiconductor, a move which ultimately dragged the company down with it after which National passed the division off to Via.

Fulcrum29 said:
Note - VIA, by the time they acquired Cyrix, used the above case to protect themselves when Intel took a legal battle to them, VIA ultimately settled, but ended up in a better position than they were in previously.
Click to expand...
A matter of opinion. Their gain also doesn't negate the loss to Cyrix and it's a further indication of Intel's tactics.

Fulcrum29 said:
Cyrix took a legal battle to Intel and settled,



Then you assume that Cyrix and AMD would had been the two larger companies, and some smaller company. You know what happened to Cyrix, right? Cyrix merged with National Semiconductor in the time they took a legal battle to Intel, they had the capital, where the Cyrix assets was later sold to VIA and then later sold to AMD in 2003.

I am not so sure about your claim on Intel’s thermal management technology never being their own, other than Intel acquiring Cyrix’s power management patent through Cyrix’s settlement. Intel had been developing these technologies since whenever, there was a good article on it dating back to 1994 where they hired more and more engineers to work on these technologies.
Click to expand...
After being already weakened financially. The court never ruled that Intel didn't infringe Cyrix's patents and Cyrix settled the matter after running out of financial resources.

Intel hired a bunch of engineers to work on thermal management and after that was still struggling with it the same as AMD. It's only when Cyrix brought their own tech to the market that Intel managed to make some progress so I'm not so sure it is their tech. In either case their current thermal management is based largely on Cyrix patents.

Fulcrum29 said:
Look, Intel is no angel, neither is any big corporation. Yes, I generalised that. Is 'dirty-tactics' right, no, but assuming too much is wayward. Neither have I championed Intel in this thread.
Click to expand...
All I'm saying is Intel has a track record of playing dirty. The court would not have come to the same conclusion as two other independent courts without good evidence to back it up. It's not just AMD's word they are relying on here as the story is being spun.
 
Ancalagon said:
Simple - each CCX probably has its own memory controller. Remember each CCX is a cluster of 4 cores. So, Ryzen has 2 CCXs therefore 2 memory channels. Naples has 8 CCXs, hence 8 memory channels.

Plus, it needs the bandwidth. It is appropriate for a server CPU. If Ryzen did have an 8 channel memory controller, you would need to have 8 DIMM slots to use all 8 channels. There are no Ryzen boards with more than 4 channels, hence it would be impossible to make use of it.
Click to expand...
Each memory controller has two channels regardless of the amount of cores from what we know. It's simply a cost decision here. Take a look at the prices of both Intel's 2011 CPUs and MBs. More memory lanes means more traces and more traces means more layers pushing up the manufacturing price. This makes it non-worthwhile for something that would only yield a 10-20% performance increase for most situations.
 
So from what I've seen so far I take it Ryzen will excel at Boinc?

I do play games now and again but mainly the older titles and I'm not what can be considered a hardcore gamer, yet.
 
Swa said:
So from what I've seen so far I take it Ryzen will excel at Boinc?

I do play games now and again but mainly the older titles and I'm not what can be considered a hardcore gamer, yet.
Click to expand...

Ok, I had to Google what Boinc was, but yes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X