Ryzen changes their sockets less often too. I went from a 2600 to a 3700x to a 5800x with the same motherboard. Unless Intel really steps up their game I don't see any reason to switch back.
this post was submitted on 24 Jul 2024
526 points (98.0% liked)
Technology
57904 readers
4399 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
No, or very few, locks in too. Like overclock or have virtualization.
I just went full AMD when I realised their Open Source effort to market share ratio (alright, there is no metric for OS effort, I just do it by the feels) is way ahead of Intel.
A RISK-V based system is probably what comes over that.
I bought a Framework 16 laptop partially because they officially support Linux and there's AMD employees on their forum tracking and fixing bugs.
AMD have come a long way since the fglrx days (their old buggy proprietary graphics driver). They've really embraced Linux, and an AMD CPU + AMD GPU would be my first choice for a Linux system. Their newer onboard graphics is pretty good too.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Excellent point!
I have been rocking and since the first Aylin series, simply because I think Intel deserves and requires a competitor. The fact that the new (and last few) amd units are good value for money helps a lot!
AMD for platform, Intel for NIC (and optane SSD)
Best combo IMO.
Intel fumbled hard with some of their recent NICs including the I225-V,[1][2] which took them multiple hardware revisions in addition to software updates to fix.
AMD also had to be dragged kicking and screaming to support earlier AM4 motherboard buyers to upgrade to Ryzen 5000 chips,[3][4] and basically lied to buyers about support for sTRX4, requiring an upgrade from the earlier TR4 to support third-gen Threadripper but at least committing to "long-term" longevity in return.[5][6] They then turned around and released no new CPUs for the ~~chipset~~ platform, leaving people stranded on it despite the earlier promises.[7]
I know it's appealing to blindly trust one company's products (or specific lineup of products) because it simplifies buying decisions, but no company or person is infallible (and companies in particular are generally going to profit-max even at your expense). Blindly trusting one unfortunately does not reliably lead to good outcomes for end-users.
edit: "chipset" (incorrectly implying TRX40) changed to "platform" (correctly implying sTRX4); added explicit mention of "AM4" in the context of the early motherboard buyers.
Yes, never buy a product based on the company making it, buy based on reviews. I picked up the Ryzen 1700 because it had really good price to performance, and while I was frustrated when they tried to prevent my X370 from upgrading, my vendor (ASRock) was one of the first to support it when AMD relented. If AMD blocked my upgrade, I probably would've gone with Intel because they were a little cheaper and lower power at the time, but I ended up upgrading to a 5000 series CPU instead.
So all things being equal, ASRock and AMD is my preference, but I'm not loyal to either (my wife has a Gigabyte board due to cost and features, and my old NAS used Gigabyte as well). Just like in stocks, past performance is no guarantee of future results, but it is a useful indicator when everything else is equal.
I only used ax200 and it worked much better than the integrated realtek solution using the same antennas. Driver support was the main difference, I believe.
I used to think so too, but I've got an Intel box where I have to turn hardware offload off in order to not have networking 'crashes' (complete with kernel dump data) that take out my networking for 5-15sec. Chip is i218-LM r05.
I've never had an issue with my i210 and x550 chips, but this 218 is super frustrating.
I had to put my Intel NIC in a 1gb duplex due to it crashing at anything higher :)
load more comments
(1 replies)
I'm waiting till I see a good price on a 5900x/5950x for the rig I recently built with 5800x, the 5800x rips though I will keep it and do another build with it.
Sounds like a nice build, what GPU do you have with it? I'm running an RTX 4070ti. People seemed mad at it when it released but I got mine $15 under MSRP on the day it released (plus tax exempt because it's my main video editing PC for my nonprofit).
A couple years later I'm still loving it for 1440p 144fps gaming, I run most games on ultra. It seems a good match for the 5800x, sometimes I bottleneck on GPU, sometimes CPU but most of the time neither.
load more comments
(1 replies)
I've got a 5000 series CPU running happily on a first gen Ryzen board. Started with a 1600 and now I have a 5600G. Hybrid graphics setup and all. First gen Ryzen was junk compared to my current CPU, it's kinda crazy.
if Bartlett Lake rumor ends up being true, ironically LGA 1700 had a much longer lifespan than intel would typically have (it would introduce a 4th series to LGA 1700), which would technically put it in a similarish boat to AM5 generation wise in count. (Zen, Zen+, Zen 2, Zen 3 vs Alder lake, Raptor Lake, Raptor Lake+, Bartlett Lake)
the only problem for intell of course is the middle generations top end is basically now unusable
I went from 1700 to 5600 on the same motherboard, and I can still upgrade to an X3D chip if I want to. That's like 6 years of CPUs on one motherboard.
And the new socket seems to offer something similar.
load more comments
(9 replies)
50%?
HOLY FUCKING SHIT
These are absolutely disastrous numbers. This is worse than I would expect from illegally sources parts.
Better off buying from Temu at that failure rate.
This is probably a worse rate than all those motherboards years ago with the fucked up capacitors.
We had fucking stacks of them.
Why are grey market CPU parts more prone to failure? For GPUs I can understand due to possible mining usage, but CPUs too?
Grey market chips usually include chips that failed quality assurance to prop up numbers.
Most CPUs I've found in these Chinese sites claim they're used parts, probably from old servers from Chinese companies, which explains the amount of Xeons being offered. But if the part comes in the original box, why would Intel/AMD create an official package for these failed QA parts?
Counterfeit packaging seems easy enough to produce.
Especially if the original CPUs are being packaged up in China. The people selling used / counterfeit processors could just go to the same source and get the same boxes.
If they're swiping failed QA chips, it's easy to swipe a couple boxes at the same time.
I'm ready for the eBay batch purchase.....batch of 10 please!
I'm curious about the timeframe for failures though. Like, if these machines are being used for feature film VFX, I wouldn't be surprised if the CPU is running at near 100%, 24/7 for months on end. If it fails after 6 months under those conditions, a typical home user might be able to go years without an issue. Of course, there would probably be unlucky people who have problems long before that.
It's also interesting that we're not hearing anything from Amazon, Google or Microsoft. They use Intel-based servers and they also push them hard. Are they not seeing these problems, or are they just not talking about them? If they're not seeing them, is it safe to push the affected Intel CPUs hard as long as you avoid very specific code / algorithms?
The news is about Core i9 CPUs, which are the enthusiast / possibly workstation offering by Intel with high single core clock speeds. Amazon, Google and Microsoft use server CPUs which usually don't feature such high speeds, but rather focus on more cores and more possible RAM.
However, if a vendor sells a product with the main feature of high clock speeds and the product fails when I'm using that exact feature for prolonged periods of time, I'd say it's faulty.
load more comments
(1 replies)
And so, the tables turn once again in the three and half decade AMD/Intel war. This is going to go on until I die, isn't it?
Hopefully.
Unless Intel can fix their production quality, no, you will most likely see Intel purchased by Broadcom or Amazon.
Intel has deep production cycle problems, a QA crisis unfolding, and billions tied up in a new chip factory in Ohio and a remodel of its Arizona plant. There isn't much that they can do to change what the next 2 years brings because that was locked in years ago. And those decisions are killing Intel.
Keep in mind, Intel decided they are getting into GPUs too and those have to survive this quality crisis too. Most of what Intel does is no longer the best and, frankly, probably not second best anymore. It is very difficult to see a path out of this for them short of a few billion to float them through this period.
USG will prop up Intel come hell or high water.
they do have plenty on cash to go around, and the issue in question concerns only a few products of the enthusiast market, which us only a fraction of their revenue. Most of their volume is in laptop chips, and highest margins probably in datacenter sector. Intel is not going anywhere don't you worry
load more comments
(1 replies)
IMHO, the real story is Intel and TSMC.
Whats the story for those out of the loop?
Friendship ended with Intel. Now AMD is my best friend.
Ough! Thats future sales of Intel CPUs going down the drain.
Never thought I see the day where AMD is praised for their single threaded performance.
Bruh this is as bad of a failure rate like the time Nvidia screwed up their chips and both Xbox 360 and Playstation 3 were having insane chip failures.
Is it just the UE Oodle compression that is exposing the flaws or are non-gaming workloads affected?
Anything that pushes the CPUs significantly can cause instability in affected parts. I think there are at least two separate issues Intel is facing:
- Voltage irregularities causing instability. These could potentially be fixed by the microcode update Intel will be shipping in mid-August.
- Oxidation of CPU vias. This issue cannot be fixed by any update, any affected part has corrosion inside the CPU die and only replacement would resolve the issue.
Intel's messaging around this problem has been very slanted towards talking as little as possible about the oxidation issue. Their initial Intel community post was very carefully worded to make it sound like voltage irregularity was the root cause, but careful reading of their statement reveals that it could be interpreted as only saying that instability is a root cause. They buried the admission that there is an oxidation issue in a Reddit comment, of all things. All they've said about oxidation is that the issue was resolved at the chip fab some time in 2023, and they've claimed it only affected 13th gen parts. There's no word on which parts number, date ranges, processor code ranges etc. are affected. It seems pretty clear that they wanted the press talking about the microcode update and not the chips that will have the be RMA'd.
That’s a very high failure rate and this could hurt Intel long term.
view more: next ›