Did you get a bunch at ~$2-4 a share when they were in serious trouble? If so, I envy you. Wish I had gotten some action on that.
Precisely. If Apple made those complaints it’s still valid even if it’s hypocritical. Why shame them into shutting up if what they’re saying is true and is objectively good for the market?That second part about Apple I'm not sure what you are getting at. Samsung using DSLR photos as examples of their phone camera? Apple & Samsung both made nonsense ads where they had someone using a camera on a phone to take a picture of the moon. I remember the Apple commercial where they had a girl with an iPhone getting a better view of the moon than another with a telescope. Total joke.
I think you're trying to fix something that ain't broken: in this forum AMD got the full treatment for their nonsensical mobile naming scheme. You're (probably) the only person in this thread who had yet to complain about it, the rest were done months ago.I think the internet as a whole is a hive mind that’s heavily tilted towards AMD as evidenced by what happened today. I’m literally the only person out of the ~10 people that commented in this thread that’s pointed out that they have a point about AMD’s mobile naming scheme being misleading (despite being a flawed messenger). I mean.. The first digit signifies the year it was “released” despite some of these SKUs containing Zen 2 chips that launched in 2019.
Core Truths 2.0 - Enhanced Super TruthsI wonder what they will then name it?
Core Truths+? Enhanced Core Truths? Core Truths-Refresh?
Hmmm... 🤔
Not offhand.Can someone cite a worse example than calling a 2/4 CPU an i7?
How much did it cost them to put together that slide deck? Money not well-spent.Wow. Just destroyed Intel. That video also had slides that I am pretty sure I did not see by the time I got around to it.
AMD shares paid for the down payment on my first home. I think I can objectively view both brands for what they are.
I think the internet as a whole is a hive mind that’s heavily tilted towards AMD as evidenced by what happened today. I’m literally the only person out of the ~10 people that commented in this thread that’s pointed out that they have a point about AMD’s mobile naming scheme being misleading (despite being a flawed messenger). I mean.. The first digit signifies the year it was “released” despite some of these SKUs containing Zen 2 chips that launched in 2019.
If Apple pointed out that the camera on the Samsung Galaxy was marketed with images captured with professional cameras - would that be valid? Or does Apple get piled on and forced to remove the marketing material because something something iPhone 15 (non-pro) is basically a refreshed iPhone 14?
More importantly, they are cheap, at least from a manufacturing PoV. They do what OEMs want for their machines.Yes the core zen architecture is older but in a 4c config they are pretty good at low wattages.
AMD's mobile CPU naming scheme is much worse than Intel's current scheme. If Intel were following AMD's scheme, they would be calling CML chips "14th gen" and calling it a day. And sure you have the architecture number included in the naming scheme for AMD, but tf are general consumers going to do with that? The reality is, most people will follow the naming scheme that they have used their entire life- look at the first couple numbers for how new and shiny it is, aka 13th gen or 12th gen, or for AMD 8000 series or 7000 series, and then the sku it is in, i7 or i5 or i3.Neither the 7320U or 7520U contain Zen 2 chips that were released in 2019.... They are new designs using DDR5 and RDNA2 on 6nm. Yes the core zen architecture is older but in a 4c config they are pretty good at low wattages. This is evidenced by the performance difference between a steam deck and the ROG ally when both running at 15W. The Rog Ally should obliterate the steam deck with its 8c 16t Zen 4 + 12CU RDNA3 GPU compared to the deck OLEDs 4c 8t Zen 2 part with 8CU RDNA2 yet it does not. Yes the Rog Ally is often faster when running at 800p but the delta is closer to 20% with plenty of cases where performance is practically the same.
Also with the naming scheme the generation of Zen is included, it is there for all to see. Sure you can have complaints that the 7330U is a faster part than the 7520U and really that sort of thing should be tidied up, ya know by making the 7520U a Ryzen 3 7420U and then the 7330U becomes a 7430U and is faster and has a bigger number.
Intel also do the exact same thing. The 13600K is RPL but the 13600 is actually ADL and you would not know at all from looking at the name or the core count. In fact you have to check the L2 cache to see it because even in Intel Ark they obfuscate the actual underlying architecture. Or what about the 13400F, some steppings are RPL and other steppings are ADL. That is clear as mud.
AMDs mobile CPU naming scheme may not be perfect but at least that info is presented to the buyer.
AMD's mobile CPU naming scheme is much worse than Intel's current scheme. If Intel were following AMD's scheme, they would be calling CML chips "14th gen" and calling it a day. And sure you have the architecture number included in the naming scheme for AMD, but tf are general consumers going to do with that? The reality is, most people will follow the naming scheme that they have used their entire life- look at the first couple numbers for how new and shiny it is, aka 13th gen or 12th gen, or for AMD 8000 series or 7000 series, and then the sku it is in, i7 or i5 or i3.
It's insanely misleading to put the year name as the leading digit for your numbering system. Intel's system might not be objectively good either, and honestly is prob more confusing than AMD's scheme, but it certainly isn't as misleading, or tbh worse, than the scheme AMD is putting out.
And honestly, I think if the biggest complaint with Intel's naming scheme that consumers are going to whine about is RPL using ADL dies, when RPL silicon itself is like a tiny improvement over ADL, it's very telling that the naming scheme isn't that big of a deal.
People dislike Intel's marketing about AMD's naming scheme because they are being hypocrites about it, not because AMD's naming scheme is actually good.
...People dislike Intel's marketing about AMD's naming scheme because they are being hypocrites about it, not because AMD's naming scheme is actually good.
Non hardware inclined people aren't knowledgeable enough to care, hardware inclined people could easily just also put in the effort to google it lmao.With AMD scheme at lesat you know if it s Zen 2, 3 or 4, for the rest you know when buying a laptop how many cores there s on the APU, that s always specified.
This is easily way less deceitful than selling modified Zen 2 products as part of a brand new generation. "Refresh" generations as a whole are just way less hurtful to a consumer as what AMD's current mobile naming scheme allows.What about intel, is their 14th gen full line up that different from the 13th..?.
No, you ll see some 14th gen that are recycled 13th gen and no way to know about it.
Don't know why people whine about this when like every major retailer who sells RPL/ADL desktop chips puts the P and E core breakdown right beside the higher core count as well.And we dont even talk of branding the half legged e cores as full cores in their marketing material, at this point that s almost a fraud.
... uh I literally said that's what people aren't saying? Did you not see the "not" infront of that statement?Show me anyone who has said the system is good.
?AMDs mobile CPU naming scheme may not be perfect but at least that info is presented to the buyer.
Non hardware inclined people aren't knowledgeable enough to care, hardware inclined people could easily just also put in the effort to google it lmao.
This is easily way less deceitful than selling modified Zen 2 products as part of a brand new generation. "Refresh" generations as a whole are just way less hurtful to a consumer as what AMD's current mobile naming scheme allows.
Don't know why people whine about this when like every major retailer who sells RPL/ADL desktop chips puts the P and E core breakdown right beside the higher core count as well.
Bestbuy:
View attachment 89986
Amazon:
View attachment 89985
Newegg:
View attachment 89987
And AMD uses -C cores mobile processors. Looks like they aren't differentiating it either though?
Anyway, if it bothers you so much that Inttel is counting... cores as cores? Then maybe you can startt a class action law suit on it. I have a 12900h, can't wait to get the money that's rightfully owed to me cuz Intel misled me, that dastardly company shakes fist into the sky
Fraud my butt lmaoo
... uh I literally said that's what people aren't saying? Did you not see the "not" infront of that statement?
And honestly, idk, if your so pressed about the way I ended my paragraph, why didn't you @Timorous and ask him "who said AMD's naming system is perfect" when he said:
?
Non hardware inclined people aren't knowledgeable enough to care, hardware inclined people could easily just also put in the effort to google it lmao.
This is easily way less deceitful than selling modified Zen 2 products as part of a brand new generation. "Refresh" generations as a whole are just way less hurtful to a consumer as what AMD's current mobile naming scheme allows.
But they dont say what is the (big) difference between P an E because as you stated :Don't know why people whine about this when like every major retailer who sells RPL/ADL desktop chips puts the P and E core breakdown right beside the higher core count as well.
Non hardware inclined people aren't knowledgeable enough to care, hardware inclined people could easily just also put in the effort to google it lmao.
And AMD uses -C cores mobile processors. Looks like they aren't differentiating it either though?
Anyway, if it bothers you so much that Inttel is counting... cores as cores? Then maybe you can startt a class action law suit on it. I have a 12900h, can't wait to get the money that's rightfully owed to me cuz Intel misled me, that dastardly company shakes fist into the sky
Fraud my butt lmaoo
?
It's almost as if they label those parts specifically as "N100" with the N literally infront of the numbers lmaoYou mean that s like selling ADL N with only e cores..?..
That's fine. But people will go "wow look at this brand new 7000 series CPU, must be great, and it's an i5 tier too wow, and it ends up being Zen 2 lolAMD often used lower perf chips for its lower segment, in this case that s not a 4000 series Zen 2 but a new design, whatever if it use a 3 years old uarch
My bad the listing isn't 12900k (8 Performance cores with AVX-512 and larger area and higher clocks + 16 E-cores with no private L2, less performance per core with greater perf/area and shares a ringbus stop).But they dont say what is the (big) difference between P an E because as you stated :
Not in the tittle, but oh wow, lets scroll down a tiny bit:As said they dont say that E cores are weaker ones,
Oh if you want to use that argument, the -C cores actually have higher perf/watt in those power levels. So why won't AMD let consumers know they stuck 4 substandard cores with 2 high perf/watt small cores in their CPUs? What frauds /sAMD c cores on the other hand have same perf as regular Zen 4 cores, they are used in MT when the chips couldnt clock at high frequencies even if these were only regular Z 4 cores.
The only thing that is telling you MTL won't "cut the mustard" is your mommy Su vigil in your bedroom 🤡 lmaoooAnyway it s curious that Intel launched this deffamation campaign while they rather should be concentrated on their soon to come new design, something telle me that it wont cut the mustard, otherwise their marketing dpt would be currently yelling from the roofs that they have some wonder on hands...
Bro what are you on lolClearly, MI300 is poor product.
LMAOOOIn next year, Gaudi 3 should be the top of AI chip or only competing product for B100.
LMAOOOOOOOPat canceled Rialto Bridge and concentrated enargy on AI chip.
LMAOOOOOOOOOOOThis is one of the win for Pat as CEO.
Clearly, MI300 is poor product.
In next year, Gaudi 3 should be the top of AI chip or only competing product for B100.
Pat canceled Rialto Bridge and concentrated enargy on AI chip.
This is one of the win for Pat as CEO.
That s only for 4C/8T SKUs, so in cheap laptops whose not that much is expected.That's fine. But people will go "wow look at this brand new 7000 series CPU, must be great, and it's an i5 tier too wow, and it ends up being Zen 2 lol
Oh if you want to use that argument, the -C cores actually have higher perf/watt in those power levels. So why won't AMD let consumers know they stuck 4 substandard cores with 2 high perf/watt small cores in their CPUs? What frauds /s
The only thing that is telling you MTL won't "cut the mustard" is your mommy Su vigil in your bedroom 🤡 lmaooo
AMD's mobile CPU naming scheme is much worse than Intel's current scheme. If Intel were following AMD's scheme, they would be calling CML chips "14th gen" and calling it a day. And sure you have the architecture number included in the naming scheme for AMD, but tf are general consumers going to do with that? The reality is, most people will follow the naming scheme that they have used their entire life- look at the first couple numbers for how new and shiny it is, aka 13th gen or 12th gen, or for AMD 8000 series or 7000 series, and then the sku it is in, i7 or i5 or i3.
It's insanely misleading to put the year name as the leading digit for your numbering system. Intel's system might not be objectively good either, and honestly is prob more confusing than AMD's scheme, but it certainly isn't as misleading, or tbh worse, than the scheme AMD is putting out.
And honestly, I think if the biggest complaint with Intel's naming scheme that consumers are going to whine about is RPL using ADL dies, when RPL silicon itself is like a tiny improvement over ADL, it's very telling that the naming scheme isn't that big of a deal.
People dislike Intel's marketing about AMD's naming scheme because they are being hypocrites about it, not because AMD's naming scheme is actually good.