• sunzu@kbin.run
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    We are giving this failed management team billions of dollars to build “us” a fab

    🤡🤡🤡

    • jonne@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      Even worse, there were no conditions to the funding. They just wrote a check.

      • sunzu@kbin.run
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        damn… can you provide more context.

        watch end up like nation wide broadband lol

        never built and patchy bullshit we did get we get price gouged and dissed by comcast and co

        • chingadera@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          Profit over everything is involved, it will happen. Although if they kill it with the development, they will have so much more later. They just cannot do it though, short term money go brrrr.

  • gamermanh@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    After literally 14 years of avoiding AMD after getting burned twice I finally went back to team red just a week ago, for a new CPU

    so glad I picked them now lol

    • demizerone@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      In my case I upgraded from threadripper 1950x to a 14900k and the machine died after four months. Went back to threadripper 7960x like I should have. My 14th gen cpu still posts, but haven’t thrown any load at it yet. I’m hoping it can still be a streaming box…

      • gamermanh@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        1 DOA CPU that the physical store I went to purchase it at didn’t have any more of so I got a cheaper Intel CPU they DID have. Tbh that might have been the store dropping it or storing it improperly, they weren’t a very competent electronics store.

        And a Sapphire GPU that only worked with 1 very specific driver version that wasn’t even on their website anymore when I tried to install it for some reason. I eventually got it working after hours of hunting and fiddling, which was repeated when I gave the PC away to a friend’s little brother and they wiped it without checking the driver versions I left behind like I told them.

        Recently built my wife a new AMD based system because grudges have to end eventually and I think I couldn’t have picked a better time tbh

        • communism@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          Damn yeah I can definitely understand that grudge, but also yeah modern AMD products are a lot better. I recently upgraded my AM4 CPU and also to a new Radeon GPU and I think they both work really well, after previously having some issues with earlier AMD products. Especially with Linux gaming, AMD is the way to go

    • Zetta@mander.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      I switched to AMD with the Ryzen 3000 series and can’t see myself going to Intel for at least 2 or 3 more upgrades (like 10 years for me), and that’s only if they are competitive again in that amount of time.

  • TrickDacy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    Amd processors have literally always been a better value and rarely have been surpassed by much for long. The only problem they ever had was back in the day they overheated easily. But I will never ever buy an Intel processor on purpose, especially after this.

    • mox@lemmy.sdf.orgOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      The only problem they ever had was back in the day they overheated easily.

      That’s not true. It was just last year that some of the Ryzen 7000 models were burning themselves out from the insides at default settings (within AMD specs) due to excessive SoC voltage. They fixed it through new specs and working with board manufacturers to issue new BIOS, and I think they eventually gave in to pressure to cover the damaged units. I guess we’ll see if Intel ends up doing the same.

      I generally agree with your sentiment, though. :)

      I just wish both brands would chill. Pushing the hardware so hard for such slim gains is wasting power and costing customers.

      • TrickDacy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        Yeah. I just meant AMD cpus used to easily overheat if your cooling system had an issue. My ryzen 7 3700x has been freaking awesome though. Feels more solid than any PC I’ve built. And it’s fast AF. I think I saved over $150 when comparing to a similarly rated Intel CPU. And the motherboards generally seem cheaper for AMD too. I would feel ripped off with Intel even without the crashing issues

      • DefederateLemmyMl@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        That’s not true. It was just last year that some of the Ryzen 7000 models were burning themselves

        I think he was referring to “back-in-the-day” when Athlons, unlike the competing Pentium 3 and 4 CPUs of the day, didn’t have any thermal protections and would literally go up in smoke if you ran them without cooling.

        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yRn8ri9tKf8

        • mox@lemmy.sdf.orgOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          When I started using computers, I wasn’t aware of any thermal protections in popular CPUs. Do you happen to know when they first appeared in Intel chips?

          • DefederateLemmyMl@feddit.nl
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 months ago

            Pentium 2 and 3 had rudimentary protection. They would simply shutdown if they got too hot. Pentium 4 was the first one that would throttle down clock speeds.

            Anything before that didn’t have any protection as far as I’m aware.

          • frezik@midwest.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 months ago

            Not from AMD. From the autogenerated transcript (with minor edits where it messed up the names of things):

            amd’s official recommendation [f]or the cut off now is 1.3 volts but the board vendors can still technically set whatever they want so even though the [AGESA] update can lock down and start restricting the voltage the problem is Asus their 1.3 number manifests itself as something like 1.34 volts so it is still on the high side

            This was pretty much all on motherboard manufacturers, and ASUS was particularly bad (out scumbaging MSI, good job, guys).

            At the start of this Intel mess, it was thought they had a similar issue on their hands and motherboard manufactures just needed to get in line, but it ended up going a lot deeper.

            • mox@lemmy.sdf.orgOP
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              2 months ago

              That doesn’t contradict anything I wrote. Note that it says AMD’s recommended cutoff is now 1.3 volts, implying that it wasn’t before this mess began. Note also that the problem was worse on Asus boards because their components’ tolerance was a bit too loose for a target voltage this high, not because they used a voltage target beyond AMD’s specified cutoff. If the cutoff hadn’t been pushed so high for this generation in the first place, that same tolerance probably would have been okay.

              In any case, there’s no sense in bickering about it. Asus was not without blame (I was upset with them myself) but also not the only affected brand, so it’s not possible that they were the cause of the underlying problem, now is it?

              AMD and Intel have been pushing their CPUs to very high voltages and temperatures for small performance gains recently. 95°C as the new “normal” was unheard of just a few years ago. It’s no surprise that it led to damage in some cases, especially for early adopters. It’s a thin line to walk.

          • ichbinjasokreativ@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 months ago

            Then why were there essentially no blow ups from other motherboard manufacturers? Tell me if my information on this is wrong, but when there’s only one brand causing issues then they’re the ones to blame for it.

      • tal@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        Problem is that it’s getting extremely hard to get more single-threaded performance out of a chip, and this is one of the few ways to do so. And a lot of software is not going to be rewritten to use multiple cores. In some cases, it’s fundamentally impossible to parallelize a particular algorithm.

    • edgesmash@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      The only problem they ever had was back in the day they overheated easily.

      Very easily.

      In college (early aughts), I worked as tech support for fellow students. Several times I had to take the case cover off, point a desktop fan into the case, and tell the kid he needed to get thermal paste and a better cooler (services we didn’t offer).

      Also, as others have said, AMD CPUs have not always been superior to Intel in performance or even value (though AMDs have almost always been cheaper). It’s been a back-and-forth race for much of their history.

      • TrickDacy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        Yeah. I never said they were always better in performance. But I have never had an issue other than the heat problem which all but one time was fully my fault. And I don’t need a processor to perform 3% better on random tasks… which was the kind of benchmark results I would typically find when comparing similar AMD/intel processors (also in some categories amd did win). I saved probably a couple grand avoiding Intel. And as another user said, I prefer to support the underdog. The company making a great product for a lot less money. Again I say: fuck Intel.

    • Deway@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      rarely have been surpassed by much for long.

      I’ve been on team AMD for over 20 years now but that’s not true. The CoreDuo and the first couple of I CPUS were better than what AMD was offering and were for a decade. The Athlon were much better than the Pentium 3 and P4, the Ryzen are better than the current I series but the Phenom weren’t. Don’t get me wrong, I like my Phenom II X4 but it objectively wasn’t as good as Intel’s offerings back in the day.

      • deltapi@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        My i5-4690 and i7-4770 machines remain competitive to this day, even with spectre patches in place. I saw no reason to ‘upgrade’ to 6/7/8th gen CPUs.

        I’m looking for a new desktop now, but for the costs involved I might just end up parting together a HP Z6 G4 with server surplus cpu/ram. The costs of going to 11th+ desktop Intel don’t seem worth it.

        I’m going to look at the more recent AMD offerings, but I’m not sure they’ll compete with surplus server kit.

        • Deway@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          I’d say that regardless of the brand, X86 CPU don’t need to be upgraded as often as they used to. No awesome new extension like SSE or something like that, not much more powerful, power consumption not going down significantly. If you don’t care about power consumption, the server CPU will be more interesting, there’s no doubt about that.

        • frezik@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          My issue with surplus server kit at home is that it tends to idle at very high power usage compared to desktop kit. For home use that won’t be pushing high CPU utilization, the savings in cost off eBay aren’t worth much.

          This is also why you’re seeing AM5 on server motherboards. If you don’t need to have tons of PCIe lanes–and especially with PCIe 5, you probably don’t–the higher core count AM5 chips do really well for servers.

        • floofloof@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          They’re still useful, but they’re not competitive in overall performance with recent CPUs in the same category. They do still compete with some of the budget and power-efficient CPUs, but they use more power and get hotter.

          That said, those 4th gen Intel CPUs are indeed good enough for most everyday computing tasks. They won’t run Windows 11 because MS locks them out, but they will feel adequately fast unless you’re doing pretty demanding stuff.

          I still have an i5-2400, an i7-4770K and an i7-6700 for occasional or server use, and my i7-8550U laptop runs great with Linux (though it overheated with Windows).

          I buy AMD now though.

  • wirehead@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    A few years ago now I was thinking that it was about time for me to upgrade my desktop (with a case that dates back to 2000 or so, I guess they call them “sleepers” these days?) because some of my usual computer things were taking too long.

    And I realized that Intel was selling the 12th generation of the Core at that point, which means the next one was a 13th generation and I dono, I’m not superstitious but I figured if anything went wrong I’d feel pretty darn silly. So I pulled the trigger and got a 12th gen core processor and motherboard and a few other bits.

    This is quite amusing in retrospect.

    • JPAKx4@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      I recently built myself a computer, and went with AMD’s 3d cache chips and boy am I glad. I think I went 12th Gen for my brothers computer but it was mid range which hasn’t had these issues to my knowledge.

      Also yes, sleeper is the right term.

      • tal@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        I think I went 12th Gen for my brothers computer

        12th gen isn’t affected. The problem affects only the 13th and 14th gen Intel chips. If your brother has 12th gen – and you might want to confirm that – he’s okay.

        For the high-end thing, initially it was speculated that it was just the high-end chips in these generations, but it’s definitely the case that chips other than just the high-end ones have been recorded failing. It may be that the problem is worse with the high-end CPUs, but it’s known to not be restricted to them at this point.

        The bar they list in the article here is 13th and 14th gen Intel desktop CPUs over 65W TDP.

  • InAbsentia@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    Thankfully I haven’t had any issues out of my 13700k but it’s pretty shitty of Intel to not stand behind their products and do a recall.

  • ApollosArrow@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    I have an Intel Core i9-14900K 3.2 GHz 24-Core LGA 1700 Processor purchased in March. Is there any guesses for the window yet of potential affected CPUs?

  • CaptainBasculin@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    Considering AMD has also paused its release of 9th gen Ryzen just before its release date; I wonder if this issue is caused by TSMC.

  • Justin@lemmy.jlh.name
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    Intel is about to have a lot of lawsuits on their hands if this delay deny deflect strategy doesn’t work out for them. This problem has been going on for over a year and the details Intel lets slip just keep getting worse and worse. The more customers that realize they’re getting defective CPUs, the more outcry there’ll be for a recall. Intel is going to be in a lot of trouble if they wait until regulators force them to have a recall.

    Big moment of truth is next month when they have earnings and we see what the performance impact from dropping voltages will be. Hopefully it’ll just be 5% and no more CPUs die. I can’t imagine investors will be happy about the cost, though.

  • floofloof@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    Intel has not halted sales or clawed back any inventory. It will not do a recall, period.

    Buy AMD. Got it!

        • frezik@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          ARM is only more power efficient below 10 to 15 W or so. Above that, doesn’t matter much between ARM and x86.

          The real benefit is somewhat abstract. Only two companies can make x86, and only one of them knows how to do it well. ARM (and RISC V) opens up the market to more players.

          • Vik@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 months ago

            even then, strix will look to compete with apple silicon in perf/watt

      • mox@lemmy.sdf.orgOP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        RISC-V isn’t there yet, but it’s moving in the right direction. A completely open architecture is something many of us have wanted for ages. It’s worth keeping an eye on.

        • chingadera@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          I hope so, I accidentally advised a client to snatch up a snapdragon surface (because they had to have a dog shit surface) and I hadn’t realized that a lot of shit doesn’t quite work yet. Most of it does, which is awesome, but it needs to pick up the pace

        • barsoap@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          Depends on the desktop. I have a NanoPC T4, originally as a set top box (that’s what the RK3399 was designed for, has a beast of a VPU) now on light server and wlan AP duty, and it’s plenty fast enough for a browser and office. Provided you give it an SSD, that is.

          Speaking of Desktop though the graphics driver situation is atrocious. There’s been movement since I last had a monitor hooked up to it but let’s just say the linux blob that came with it could do gles2, while the android driver does vulkan. Presumably because ARM wants Rockchip to pay per fucking feature per OS for Mali drivers.

          Oh the VPU that I mentioned? As said, a beast, decodes 4k h264 at 60Hz, very good driver support, well-documented instruction set, mpv supports it out of the box, but because the Mali drivers are shit you only get an overlay, no window system integration because it can’t paint to gles2 textures. Throwback to the 90s.

          Sidenote some madlads got a dedicated GPU running on the thing. M.2 to PCIe adapter, and presumably a lot of duct tape code.

          • cmnybo@discuss.tchncs.de
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 months ago

            GPU support is a real mess. Those ARM SOCs are intended for embeded systems, not PCs. None of the manufacturers want to release an open source driver and the blobs typically don’t work with a recent kernel.

            For ARM on the desktop, I would want an ATX motherboard with a socketed 3+ GHz CPU with 8-16 cores, socketed RAM and a PCIe slot for a desktop GPU.

            Almost all Linux software will run natively on ARM if you have a working GPU. Getting windows games to run on ARM with decent performance would probably be difficult. It would probably need a CPU that’s been optimized for emulating x86 like what Apple did with theirs.

      • Dudewitbow@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        arm is very primed to take a lot of market share of server market from intel. Amazon is already very committed on making their graviton arm cpu their main cpu, which they own a huge lion share of the server market on alone.

        for consumers, arm adoption is fully reliant on the respective operating systems and compatibility to get ironed out.

        • icydefiance@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          Yeah, I manage the infrastructure for almost 150 WordPress sites, and I moved them all to ARM servers a while ago, because they’re 10% or 20% cheaper on AWS.

          Websites are rarely bottlenecked by the CPU, so that power efficiency is very significant.

          • tal@lemmy.today
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            2 months ago

            I really think that most people who think that they want ARM machines are wrong, at least given the state of things in 2024. Like, maybe you use Linux…but do you want to run x86 Windows binary-only games? Even if you can get 'em running, you’ve lost the power efficiency. What’s hardware support like? Do you want to be able to buy other components? If you like stuff like that Framework laptop, which seems popular on here, an SoC is heading in the opposite direction of that – an all-in-one, non-expandable manufacturer-specified system.

            But yours is a legit application. A non-CPU-constrained datacenter application running open-source software compiled against ARM, where someone else has validated that the hardware is all good for the OS.

            I would not go ARM for a desktop or laptop as things stand, though.

            • batshit@lemmings.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              2 months ago

              If you didn’t want to game on your laptop, would an ARM device not be better for office work? Considering they’re quiet and their battery lasts forever.

              • frezik@midwest.social
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                2 months ago

                ARM chips aren’t better at power efficiency compared to x84 above 10 or 15W or so. Apple is getting a lot out of them because TSMC 3nm; even the upcoming AMD 9000 series will only be on TSMC 4nm.

                ARM is great for having more than one competent company in the market, though.

                • batshit@lemmings.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  2 months ago

                  ARM chips aren’t better at power efficiency compared to x84 above 10 or 15W or so.

                  Do you have a source for that? It seems a bit hard to believe.

              • Nighed@sffa.community
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                2 months ago

                As long as the apps all work. So much stuff is browser based now, but something will always turns up that doesn’t work. Something like mandatory timesheet software, a bespoke tool etc.

    • grue@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      I’ve been buying AMD for – holy shit – 25 years now, and have never once regretted it. I don’t consider myself a fanboi; I just (a) prefer having the best performance-per-dollar rather than best performance outright, and (b) like rooting for the underdog.

      But if Intel keeps fucking up like this, I might have to switch on grounds of (b)!

      spoiler

      (Realistically I’d be more likely to switch to ARM or even RISCV, though. Even if Intel became an underdog, my memory of their anti-competitive and anti-consumer bad behavior remains long.)

      • Rai@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        Sorry but after the amazing Athlon x2, the core and core 2 (then i series) lines fuckin wrecked AMD for YEARS. Ryzen took the belt back but AMD was absolutely wrecked through the core and i series.

        Source: computer building company and also history

        tl:dr: AMD sucked ass for value and performance between core 2 and Ryzen, then became amazing again after Ryzen was released.

        • grue@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          AMD “bulldozer” architecture CPUs were indeed pretty bad compared to Intel Core 2, but they were also really cheap.

      • SoleInvictus@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        Same here. I hate Intel so much, I won’t even work there, despite it being my current industry and having been headhunted by their recruiter. It was so satisfying to tell them to go pound sand.

      • vxx@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        I hate the way Intel is going, but I’ve been using Intel chips for over 30 years and never had an issue.

        So your statement is kind of pointless, since it’s such a small data set, it’s irrelevant and nothing to draw any conclusion from.

      • Damage@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        I’ve been on AMD and ATi since the Athlon 64 days on the desktop.

        Laptops are always Intel, simply because that’s what I can find, even if every time I scour the market extensively.

        • Krauerking@lemy.lol
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          Honestly I was and am, an AMD fan but if you went back a few years you would not have wanted and AMD laptop. I had one and it was truly awful.

          Battery issues. Low processing power. App crashes and video playback issues. And this was on a more expensive one with a dedicated GPU…

          And then Ryzen came out. You can get AMD laptops now and I mean that like they exist, but also, as they actually are nice. (Have one)

          But in 2013 it was Intel or you were better off with nothing.

      • Final Remix@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        I’ve had nothing but issues with some computers, laptops, etc… once I discovered the common factor was Intel, I haven’t had a single problem with any of my devices since. AMD all the way for CPUs.