AMD making a fool of Threadripper customers - AGAIN?

111alan

Active Member
Mar 11, 2019
208
47
28
Haerbing Institution of Technology
right, ok.

How are x399 and trx40 platforms designed to be obsolete from the get go?

EDIT:
My viewpoint:

You: Throws around accusations, opinions theories and "facts" or "proof".

Others and me: Something is fishy here, are you sure about that?

You: YES, more proof and pointed out what they didn't see or got wrong.

Others like me: Some things are still fishy and that (something) seems close to what you accuse someone of.
Whats with X y and Z? Why did you Benchmark B with C settings?
Questions ...

You: Here is more "proof" on something (un? tangentially?) related that shows i'm right.

Others: this is getting out of hand and off topic.
You are "proving" INTELs innocence in a AMD Bashing thread and it derailed there from you accusing AMD of all things bad under sun.
That has a certain taste to it.

To be fair, i'm not sure if i'm to stupid to understand some of your answers but i am at least left with the impression that there are questions left you have never responded on directly.
The primary one that i started with in this thread is the one above the edit.
I'm not sure if that is due to the "keeping face" cultural thing or if i just missed it.
If it is the latter, well, please repeat it again and sorry for the inconvenience.
Whats with X y and Z? Why did you Benchmark B with C settings?
All of them are explained, and I didn't see any following questions.

You are "proving" INTELs innocence in a AMD Bashing thread and it derailed there from you accusing AMD of all things bad under sun.
First, did you have any doubt that what I said they did actually happen?
Y - Just look at those proofs again and tell me if there is anything more needed.
N - Then did Intel side did the same thing, which is spreading a lot of biased/false/misleading info which can't be replicated in any experiment, and personal-attacking everyone who disagrees? Or other things that have similar social effects?

Y - Kindly point that out please.
N - That's what I saw for now.

i am at least left with the impression that there are questions left you have never responded on directly.
Think I've answered everything, directly, in that list. Anything else needs extra explanation?

I'm not sure if that is due to the "keeping face" cultural thing or if i just missed it.
I never talked about faces actually. What I'm against is somebody took what technically can't be said correct, and accuse people of "cherry picking" and "misleading" even "bribed", while cherry picking and misleading things all the time.

And even worse, he thinks proofs are not needed when accusing others.

From the start I never said something like intel destroy amd in every situation, like at all. All I criticize is their behavior, and I, like many others, are extremely unsatisfied with the unnecessary, escalating conflict and rumors what amd or its fans have created in the community. I hate it when people just think, oh you talk bad about AMD, so you are an intel fan.
 
Last edited:

ReturnedSword

Active Member
Jun 15, 2018
448
147
43
Santa Monica, CA
What separates subjective opinion from objective fact is that the finding results can be replicated and stand up to critical analysis by others. If someone finds themselves defending their view more and more, by throwing out more subjective views, then it probably lends credence to that view being an opinion and not a fact.

This is basic scientific method and reasoning. Even the ancient scientists understood this. They understood it in Europe and the Muslim world. Certainly the ancient Chinese scientists and philosophers understood it as well, considering in ancient times China had contributed immensely to scientific knowledge instead of folk belief (opinions).

If someone needs to constantly go back to find “more evidence” then that’s a big sign that their original argument wasn’t a fact or at least well constructed to begin with. Let’s not confuse speculation and opinions with facts.

It is very bad form in a debate to create the debate, then become shocked when others don't agree with you (after all it's a debate -- the very definition), and attack others' questions or when they point out what was clarified is actually not really a fact. I suppose those who shout the "loudest" may eventually "win," if only in their own minds.
 

111alan

Active Member
Mar 11, 2019
208
47
28
Haerbing Institution of Technology
What separates subjective opinion from objective fact is that the finding results can be replicated and stand up to critical analysis by others. If someone finds themselves defending their view more and more, by throwing out more subjective views, then it probably lends credence to that view being an opinion and not a fact.

This is basic scientific method and reasoning. Even the ancient scientists understood this. They understood it in Europe and the Muslim world. Certainly the ancient Chinese scientists and philosophers understood it as well, considering in ancient times China had contributed immensely to scientific knowledge instead of folk belief (opinions).

If someone needs to constantly go back to find “more evidence” then that’s a big sign that their original argument wasn’t a fact or at least well constructed to begin with. Let’s not confuse speculation and opinions with facts.

It is very bad form in a debate to create the debate, then become shocked when others don't agree with you (after all it's a debate -- the very definition), and attack others' questions or when they point out what was clarified is actually not really a fact. I suppose those who shout the "loudest" may eventually "win," if only in their own minds.
What separates subjective opinion from objective fact is that the finding results can be replicated and stand up to critical analysis by others. If someone finds themselves defending their view more and more, by throwing out more subjective views, then it probably lends credence to that view being an opinion and not a fact.
What I was trying to add, is rather either point out what others didn't see, or what they saw the wrong way, than adding something (except the the paid speech control part, which can only be proved with trial-like method, it can't be proved with absolute proof like what we do in mathematics). I just feel that they didn't understand something, and I don't know what these are. I can only answer the questions they asked.

Besides, I think every proof I provided was objective (They all actually happened, or tested and replicatable). If people want to say there's something wrong with the reasoning part, they should be providing other possible ways of reasoning, derived from both my proofs and their own proofs if there are any. Innocent until proven guilty.
 
Last edited:

gsrcrxsi

Active Member
Dec 12, 2018
183
54
28
Then did Intel side did the same thing, which is spreading a lot of biased/false/misleading info which can't be replicated in any experiment, and personal-attacking everyone who disagrees? Or other things that have similar social effects?
as far as i can tell, you never ""proved" this. it's just hyperbole based on the personal OPINIONS and actions of members of some random chinese forum. that is NOT proof in any way that AMD as a company sponsored or endorsed those actions.

unless you can provide verifiable quotes from AMD personnel and/or records of payments to specific individuals in exchange for spreading "false info" and "personal-attacking everyone who disagrees", then you have not proved anything and just are spreading your own false info and biases.
 

111alan

Active Member
Mar 11, 2019
208
47
28
Haerbing Institution of Technology
as far as i can tell, you never ""proved" this. it's just hyperbole based on the personal OPINIONS and actions of members of some random chinese forum. that is NOT proof in any way that AMD as a company sponsored or endorsed those actions.

unless you can provide verifiable quotes from AMD personnel and/or records of payments to specific individuals in exchange for spreading "false info" and "personal-attacking everyone who disagrees", then you have not proved anything and just are spreading your own false info and biases.
records of payments to specific individuals in exchange for spreading "false info" and "personal-attacking everyone who disagrees"
Think they will just upload these on the internet to be found? If not, is providing other kind of proof false and biased?

That forum has confirmed history of doing paid speech control, and they're behaving just like before now, with a lot of symbols that's suggesting it's a planned process and more than just fandom. Isn't it enough to claim that they're at least very likely to be doing these things for amd now?

I know and have admitted that this isn't a 100% mathematical rigorous proof. But judging by their actions and effects, and how they do things in the past, it doesn't seem that I have been intentionally misleading anyone.

"false info" and "personal-attacking everyone who disagrees" are the facts. They can be found in any of my provided posts, and they're actually everywhere on the internet.

Oh by the way may I say it again that Chiphell and NGA are actually the only forum here available for anyone better than noobs. They're both doing speech control to anything that isn't pro-AMD on the administration level means that, nobody can safely talk about CPUs in public now. Sometimes it happens even when you didn't mean that.
 
Last edited:

gsrcrxsi

Active Member
Dec 12, 2018
183
54
28
you're right, AMD wouldnt post that (if it existed). which is exactly why you have zero proof of anything you are claiming. but you dont even have any solid second hand evidence. or even hearsay. you just have your own hyperbolic assumptions that are pushing the boundaries of conspiracy theory.

the actions of normal people on some random forum supporting AMD, does NOT mean they are paid by AMD. you also say there is a "history of paid speech control" but that also hasnt been proven by you at all. you just keep saying it. saying it doesnt make it true.

again. you have provided zero proof that AMD is behind any of this. its all circumstantial at best.
 

Wasmachineman_NL

Dell Precisions FTW!
Aug 7, 2019
1,133
374
83
you're right, AMD wouldnt post that (if it existed). which is exactly why you have zero proof of anything you are claiming. but you dont even have any solid second hand evidence. or even hearsay. you just have your own hyperbolic assumptions that are pushing the boundaries of conspiracy theory.

the actions of normal people on some random forum supporting AMD, does NOT mean they are paid by AMD. you also say there is a "history of paid speech control" but that also hasnt been proven by you at all. you just keep saying it. saying it doesnt make it true.

again. you have provided zero proof that AMD is behind any of this. its all circumstantial at best.
Paid shills are a real thing though and I wouldn't count out that large companies use them. (note that I didn't mention AMD or Intel)
 

gsrcrxsi

Active Member
Dec 12, 2018
183
54
28
extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. there has been no proof. not even ordinary proof. just a lot of conspiracy theory.

uh oh. i guess that makes me a paid shill now. i disagreed with someone who tries to claim that everyone that disagrees with him is a paid AMD shill.

AMD, if you're reading this, I'd like to collect my payment now.
 

RageBone

Active Member
Jul 11, 2017
548
138
43
Excuse me, you said:

For the desktop/WS version, let's see, x399, trx40, WRX80 are all especially made not to support the next batch of CPUs(Zen1, Zen2-X, Zen2-WX).
Which i interpret as the my question.
But please elaborate how those platforms are especially made not to support the next batch of CPUs?
 

111alan

Active Member
Mar 11, 2019
208
47
28
Haerbing Institution of Technology
Excuse me, you said:



Which i interpret as the my question.
But please elaborate how those platforms are especially made not to support the next batch of CPUs?
I'm stating the facts, because, well, they actually do not support the next gen.

The only thing you can argue about is 2990WX, which is, like 1950X, also the desktop version of Naples. It's the same gen or at most 1.5gen.

And with no doubt, if they want, they can have a board that supported everything. EPYC is designed to be an SOC anyway.
 
Last edited:

111alan

Active Member
Mar 11, 2019
208
47
28
Haerbing Institution of Technology
extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. there has been no proof. not even ordinary proof. just a lot of conspiracy theory.

uh oh. i guess that makes me a paid shill now. i disagreed with someone who tries to claim that everyone that disagrees with him is a paid AMD shill.

AMD, if you're reading this, I'd like to collect my payment now.
If you think that these have nothing to do with proofs, I can't force you to.
There are also a lot of evidences indicating AMD paying independent reviewers and commenters for its reputation campaign.
From the first reply I made. I think I've talked enough about that. I'm not even saying that AMD is 100% paying. It's just extremely likely.

And in case you didnt see.
Oh by the way may I say it again that Chiphell and NGA are actually the only forum here available for anyone better than noobs. They're both doing speech control to anything that isn't pro-AMD on the administration level means that, nobody can safely talk about CPUs in public now. Sometimes it happens even when you didn't mean that.
 

gsrcrxsi

Active Member
Dec 12, 2018
183
54
28
I'm stating the facts, because, well, they actually did not support the next gen.

The only thing you can argue about is 2990WX, which is, like 1950X, also the desktop version of Naples,
just because they didnt support the next gen when the next gen came out, doesn't mean they were INTENDED AT INCEPTION to not support the next gen. do you know what the word premeditated means?

theres a big difference between execs saying "lets make this 1st gen product, and make sure we prevent it from working with 2nd gen"
and
"lets make this product" then later wanting to add some feature which ends up making it incompatible with previous gen.

this is the underlying flaw with most of you logic and "proofs". you're trying to take future events and retroactively put them as the reason for past events, which is not necessarily the case, and you can't use that as a proof in and of itself.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RageBone

111alan

Active Member
Mar 11, 2019
208
47
28
Haerbing Institution of Technology
just because they didnt support the next gen when the next gen came out, doesn't mean they were INTENDED AT INCEPTION to not support the next gen. do you know what the word premeditated means?

theres a big difference between execs saying "lets make this 1st gen product, and make sure we prevent it from working with 2nd gen"
and
"lets make this product" then later wanting to add some feature which ends up making it incompatible with previous gen.

this is the underlying flaw with most of you logic and "proofs". you're trying to take future events and retroactively put them as the reason for past events, which is not necessarily the case, and you can't use that as a proof in and of itself.
Think I used the wrong word here. It should be "designated". I mean they intentionally blocked the upgradability. Sorry for the confusion.
 

111alan

Active Member
Mar 11, 2019
208
47
28
Haerbing Institution of Technology
People just got so excited when they see someone talked about something bad around AMD, and then all suddenly disappeared when they realized that it's actually due to misunderstanding and exaggeration.
I felt a great disturbance in the Force, as if millions of voices suddenly cried out in terror and were suddenly silenced.
 

ReturnedSword

Active Member
Jun 15, 2018
448
147
43
Santa Monica, CA
Most people on this forum actually use mostly Intel products, including me.

@111alan The reason people stopped responding is because this thread has gone on for 7 pages and 6.5 pages of it was pointless. Come on, your other posts and participation are pretty good. If you intend to provoke a war as you described in CH and I know happens on CH, just say it. Are you sure this is the hill you want to die on?
 

Wasmachineman_NL

Dell Precisions FTW!
Aug 7, 2019
1,133
374
83
People just got so excited when they see someone talked about something bad around AMD, and then all suddenly disappeared when they realized that it's actually due to misunderstanding and exaggeration.
Bashing companies is good for clicks though *cough* MLiD (rightfully) slamming Nvidia for their anti-competitve bullshit tactics *cough*