Intel is Trying to Manipulate AMD Ryzen Launch

Awesome HH! Thank you!

 

Nice, they gave you the ASUS model. It's apparently random.

I hope you can reach 4.5Ghz!

 

Sweet! Keep doing these, you'll get better at it.

 

They tested it before sending. Probably even updated BIOS to newest. And since they included liquid cooling, I guess that they want HH to show how it OCes under different cooling solutions.

And I guess that CPU sent is good OCer.

 

wut.

I didn't make any crazy claims.
Altering programs with a special compiler is not what I am talking about.

I'll repeat for the 3rd time, there is no proof of such a review guideline for ryzen from intel.

Damn you are a dense :infinity:
I forget that people don't understand jokes on the internet.

Do you have proof of websites taking bribes from intel recently?

or are you just making baseless claims

Skewing graphs is hardly related to the question here.

 

Wow total scumbags! No respect at all

 

Hearken back to the original Athlon days when Intel was threatening motherboard vendors like Asus with shortages of Intel chips if and when they decided to manufacture and sell AMD Athlon products...it is right up Intel's alley. Big stink about that at the time. AMD and the public were fortunate enough that the mobo vendors thumbed their noses at Intel as they don't take kindly to threats and coercion (who would?) Still, this apparently amounts to far less than that this go around. Plus, AMD now has written agreements with Intel proscribing them from just that kind of activity. The fact that Intel has already initiated the first round of price cuts is fairly indicative of what Intel thinks, however. The other shoe will drop when the cpus ship, and we'll see if Intel will follow through with more cuts at that time.

 

The crazy claim you made is that Intel has never requested review guidelines. Skewing graphs and using specially compiled testing software (which was obviously influenced by Intel, because who else would do it?) is effectively the same thing. That's like a burglar saying "I didn't steal anything, I just displaced this object into my possession without asking!"

And as stated before, nobody is suggesting there is proof, it's just merely a justifiable possibility. But for some reason you ignore that and choose to get angry instead.

Right... whenever something doesn't go your way, it's suddenly a joke. How convenient. I'm guessing you're one of those people who pulls a "prank" that causes someone to bleed while saying "just kidding!" as though the damage doesn't matter.

Do you only remember the last couple of sentences you read at a time? Or are you just trying to distract from the fact that you're blowing this way out of proportion and can't back down?
As I had already said, if any websites are taking bribes (or as they'd put it, "sponsorships"), they're going to be under an NDA. Intel has been in trouble many times due to being anticompetitive and it isn't in their interest to get more lawsuits involved. It is not within the interest of reviewers to be a whistleblower since nowadays Intel could easily destroy their business.

Skewing graphs is very much so related, as I had already explained.

 

The thing is that the processor isn't everything. I was so going to buy Ryzen until I saw the X370 chipset specs. Intel Z270 is hands down better, for example some mobos offering 3 Ultra M.2 slots compared to 1 on X370. Or DDR4 4xxx MHz vs 2xxx MHz. And the list goes on...

The price of X370 mobos however is the same (in some cases even higher) than Z270 counterparts, even if everybody expected them to be a lot cheaper. Ryzen processors need to better than Intel by a noticeable margin in real world use if I'm going to throw all that other stuff away. Most likely I don't buy anything for a while now.

 

That's kind of you. I'll do the same. The more support AMD gets will probably be of benefit to any cpu purchasers, no matter what brand.

I hope we get to see the smoke coming out of your ears. That would look ridiculously cool!

Is there absolute proof Intel is doing something shady? NO. It is possible? YES! Plus I'd be more surprised if Intel was doing nothing shady versus doing something shady. It seems to be the nature of corporations and probably always has been.

I liked the comment about nothing out of the ordinary from Intel. That just might infer that shady practices are nothing out of the ordinary for Intel.

 

See you're going the wrong direction.

The two aren't the same.
If intel pays X company to include a special compiler and x reviewer doesn't know about it, what is the correlation of intel saying "Only test our products with these programs".

Of course neither is right but you're grasping at straws here.

What? angry?

Please lol. Why would i be angry?
Don't understand what you are getting at.

My 2c, don't try to read emotion out of text on a forum, obviously you are total failure at that process.

You pointed out your own logical fallacy though.
Anyone can make any claim because anything is a possibility.

Yeah dude you are super dense.
Maybe you should read the first post with the smiley face.

If you go to the forums, the title has no ?.
That was all the joke was yet you are still going about it even though it has zero importance.

Bold is what matters. This is exactly why the article is clickbait.
Why would intel risk an expensive law suit over that.

Times have changed. You can't avoid lawsuits from those poor practices.
Intel wouldn't risk millions over something that won't affect them at this point of time.


Btw AMD is a not white knight.
AMD has plenty of poor practices so the fanboyism is the only thing i can see why you are being very defensive.

AMD would be doing the exact same thing if intel was in debt and AMD had billions of dollars.

Company's priorities are to make money.

And this is exactly why these articles are bad.

It'll spread like wildfires and people will tell other people that Intel is a scumbag because they're manipulating ryzens launch.

If you don't see the problem there well don't even bother responding, there's no hope for you to ever understand. :infinity:

 

There are AM4 boards out there with 2x M.2 slots. If push comes to shove, why not buy something like this:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/2-Port-NGFF...915998?hash=item58e093f91e:g:DpwAAOSwqfNXop6y
According to your profile, you only have 1 GPU, 1 sound card, and a full ATX motherboard. Let's assume you also have a NIC, that's 4 expansion slots you have filled, with 3 to spare. Not only would you easily be able to get more M.2 slots, but you might be better off just getting a direct PCIe SSD anyway.
As for memory, I highly doubt either the CPUs or chipsets are limited to less than 3000MHz, but, they might use numbers lower than that for stock speeds. Intel chipsets do the same thing. Also, who needs 4000+MHz RAM? Outside of synthetic benchmarks, 3200MHz is pretty much all you'll realistically need.

Depends on your definition of "better". For example in term of IPC, you may as well stick with what you have - Ryzen isn't likely to be a whole lot better. If your i5 is handling everything you throw at it, why upgrade? I feel like most people who are buying the 8c/16t models for gaming purposes are wasting their money.

 

nothing shocking here, Im sure all the manufactures of things give reviews do this review sites. except for were is consumer reviews like from amazon/newegg/etc.

Either way I am sure intel is sweating

 

While it won't make the article any better, changing the title from a declaration, "intel IS....", to an interrogatory, "Is intel...", would at least make it more accurate.

 

@HeavyHemi
I agree.

Yes, they are the same. How exactly do you expect the reviewers to willingly decide to use these specially made benchmarks? How do you not realize the huge hole in your logic? But let's say a hardware reviewer is completely oblivious to a tampered benchmark - that doesn't change my point. Somebody is still being paid by Intel to do this. It doesn't have to be the reviewer.

Perhaps anger isn't the right word, but frustrated or irritable. Let's take a look at your symptoms:
* Is quick to anger [or in your case, deflect] during conversations - check
* Gets upset easily by mistakes, memory problems, or other difficulties - check
* Becomes upset or angered by things that seem trivial - check
* Becomes defensive or blames others when things don't go right [such as your "joke"] - check
* Snaps at others for no apparent reason [much like your original post] - check
* Is argumentative or difficult with others - check
* Provokes arguments with others - check
* Is bothered easily by others' behaviours - according to you, no
* Becomes annoyed by noise or a crowd of people - N/A
* Gets upset if rushed or if there is a change in routine - N/A
* Is often cranky or moody - seems that way so far
Plenty of things I can quote against everything checked. This went from me pointing out a technicality to you questioning my intelligence.

With all resources currently available to humanity, can you turn yourself invisible at any perceived angle? (the answer is no - therefore, an impossibility). Also, I said "justifiable possibility", meaning, no fairy tale magic, parallel universes, chaos theory, or wishful thinking.

Keep insisting - it's still not a joke. The point is, the question mark is important, because if you actually paid attention to it you would realize that your arguing is backfiring. Again, the article was questioning Intel's possible actions, it did NOT definitely claim that they are doing anything suspicious, which is what you seem to be getting all riled up about in the first place. If you read things properly, we wouldn't be here.

Expensive by who's standards? Intel could be sued hundreds of millions of dollars and it would just be a little pinch to them. Intel would rather sacrifice all that money as long as their name isn't tarnished by a company they could single-handedly buy out for the the same lump sum.

I'm not saying AMD is a white knight, nor did I imply it. This debate has nothing to do with AMD, so any basis you have of me being a fanboy is either misguided or irrelevant. But, I agree - AMD would probably do the same thing in Intel's shoes, in which case I would be siding with Intel. But seeing as you are so adamant to ignore that there is solid evidence of Intel's anti-competitiveness, that's fanboyism to a whole other level.

 

Nice "Ryzen unboxing" video from HH and really cool stuff in that wooden box from AMD

 

This could be fake. I mean the whole "intel-reach-out" thing.

If intel is not scared, then why they did this. This is a stupid thing to do, a rookie mistake. Intel is not a rookie. Wrong press.

On the other side, if intel is really scared, then they must lower most their high end cpu and motherboard chipset prizes prizes. Which they did, but with a little bit.

I am an amd fan, I am not protecting either of them. I am a consumer, who want to enjoy the competition between them. Because it is good for the business, and for the consumers.

We should wait for the first tests to emerge from the internet, not just guru3d's tests, but many tests. Also we should know this, the competition between them will benefit to us. Mostly to our budget. The true hardcore intel or amd fans will always buy their favorite brand.

Br,
Istvan

 

What intel did is not the question or the fact that they did wrong.

I said, explicitly, how does tampered benchmark programs = the same thing as Intel telling review websites what to use and not to use for comparing their products to competitors.

This is assuming the reviewer is oblivious to the fact that these benchmarks are tampered with. I do not know if they knew or not.

Intel " here x website, review our product with whatever benchmarks you want" Review website happens to use commonly used benchmarks that are modified.

X review site does not know of the several modified benchmarks.

That is not the same thing as Intel saying use this and not this or that.

They are both poor practices but saying because they modified programs 12 years ago makes it a justifiable reason to post a click bait article saying they are doing something now?

Anyways, if you're still going to say they are the same thing then we are both talking about different things.

Too many straws you're trying to grasp at.
Point is, you can't read my mood from the internet lol
Unless you are some kind of wizard, you can't.

Pretty level-headed and someone posting on the internet isn't going to make me angry, frustrated, moody or whatever else you want to tell yourself.
But here you are again making another pointless response.

Uh are you trying to be dense on purpose?

I quoted the Forum title not the article title.

You said i was blind and i told you to scroll up to see what I was looking at with a and I even showed a picture of where there is no punctuation.
You are arguing over nothing, just digging a hole getting nowhere.

Hemi already pointed out the wrong part of the title regardless.

Anyways the title has nothing to do with it, it's the whole point of the article.

Questioning the source yet making a baseless claim in the same sentence is enough reason to not post the article at all.

They would have lost more money from a lawsuit than they would in sales from Ryzen. Ryzen won't have any affect on them in the short term, it will take consecutive years of Ryzen like products for it to really matter.
Which is why the claim that theycould because of their previous track record is illogical.

I'm not ignoring or denying anything wrong intel has done.

I'm not defending anyone, I would have a similar response to any article like this regardless of who or what it was about.

So you are right, it has nothing do with intel or amd.
The problem is the article itself.

and I'm calling fanboyism due to the fact that you are defending these baseless accusations without proof. I don't care who it's about, doesn't make it right.

I'll give an example of AMDs last CPU release of BD.
Made (false) claims of how their CPU was faster(or as fast) as intel's 6 cores, they even made a video showing it off in games in comparison.

Of course after reviews showed up they revoked their previous statements and removed those videos to hide the fact of their wrong doing.

Anyways the point of that is that justifiably means we shouldn't be making false accusations of intel since they both have bad track records.


But I guess you still don't get why it's wrong so moving on.

 

Your skepticism is solid and logical and for the most part I find it agreeable. I also completely agree that it is very wise to check multiple sources; I usually check at least 3, more if the results seem inconsistent. However given Intel's history, it will be interesting to see if some "reputable" sites seem to favor one brand over the other compared to the average. That implies Intel would be the offender, but considering AMD's desperation, they could just as well pull the same thing. Even the fancy packaging of that unboxing is an easy way to give a strong first impression.

 

I'm aware, but history repeats itself. Intel didn't get their power by being generous, welcoming, and forgiving.

I can't spell it out for you any clearer - if the reviewer doesn't know the test was tampered with, Intel still influenced somebody to tamper with the test. Intel may not have told the website to use the test but the test is still chose and Intel knows it, so they're indirectly influencing the reviewers.

You are really hung up on 2005. As I stated before, many of Intel's anticompetitive practices were done after 2005. Meddling with benchmarks is just one of many things that they influenced.

If you were level-headed you would've been a lot more civilized about all of this. But on the note of pointless responses, what does that say about yourself?

I'm aware you're referring to the forum title, but the fact of the matter is the article title has the question mark and you're choosing to ignore that, because it's convenient for your own argument. You're the one getting upset over the article content, so if you considered the article's title, you should realize it is you digging yourself into the hole.

And yet, you seem to happily ignore that HH said to take the source with a grain of salt, which just makes your ranting pointless.

I agree, but note that I did not mention anything about Intel gaining sales from all of this. I've explicitly mentioned that Intel doesn't care about AMD's sales. You have a knack for ranting about things that aren't said or implied.

Yes, you are. Just in your last post, you dismissed evidence from 12 years ago. You conveniently ignored all the other recent activity I mentioned too.

You JUST said you aren't ignoring anything, and then you immediately said "baseless accusations"...
What I'm accusing Intel of is in hard facts that have already happened, even in the past few years. I am not accusing Intel of anything else, but, I am saying it isn't unrealistic for Intel to influence reviewers in some way.

Wow, backpedaling on your own statements again. You just said ""it has nothing to do with intel or amd" and "I'm not defending anyone" yet here you are ranting about something AMD did. I'm aware AMD made these false claims - it doesn't relate or contribute to this discussion, so stop changing the subject.

So by your logic, if a murderer's psychological stability cannot be questioned then a rapist's shouldn't be either? It doesn't matter who did what wrong - if both did something equally wrong, both deserve equal treatment, but, neither of them should be let free; their actions don't negate each other.
Again, nobody is making any accusations, that's all in YOUR head. The difference between Intel and AMD is Intel is the one who has repeatedly been sued for, declared as, and accused of being anticompetitive. AMD meanwhile is pretty much just known for false advertisement and mooching off others' success.

I get what's wrong, but the fact of the matter is you created a problem that doesn't exist.