Sponsors prefer videos so there's more money in them.
Enviado desde mi HTC One mediante Tapatalk
Enviado desde mi HTC One mediante Tapatalk
They were running out of time. Deadlines were being missed and AMD desperately needed to prove it could get something out on time or only mildly late. Its credibility with investors depended more on being able to execute than whether than a DX12 benchmark played well with Nvidia.
From the chatter about the bringup of the architecture, AMD and its partners were wrestling with far more serious issues prior to launch, and triage would have focused resources on those first--assuming that some of those serious problems didn't block fully evaluating the problems found at launch.
Also, AMD's data center products with their more modest RAM speeds and need for more more full validation may also be dividing attention or using the desktop launch as part of the stress testing. These sorts of elements have a lot of tweaking that is done after the silicon is finalized, and until the platform is really up and running the bugs aren't going to have the iteration rate to shake out.
I dunno, according the following it's a 20 minute rehash of a technical misconception that was hashed over in a number of DX12 and GPU threads. The description makes me reluctant to invest the time.
Nvidia Pascal Reviews [1080ti, 1080, 1070, 1060, and 1050]
DavidGraham
Veteran
No this is pretty normal, it happens on Intel CPUs as well. AMD GPUs achieve the most gains in DX12 with medium/low settings. In Deus Ex for example, the 480 would crush the 1060 at High settings (the game's medium), but at Ultra and Very High, the gains quickly evaporates. Same thing is happening here. And in the Division as well.
https://community.amd.com/community...ew-levels-of-gameplay-with-directx-12-support
This as naive of an explanation as they come, we've discussed this before in separate threads. See here.
Last edited:
Then there's the bandwith waste. Decoding videos also takes more cpu power (on avereage, hardware acceleration sure helps the videos' case).
I'd personally be in favor of a forum policy that restricts posting video benchmarks. I confess I cant be bothered to click on > 90% of the video links here
OTOH, I've a frirend who is strongly involved into deep learning. He predicted that very soon we'll have powerful indexing features on vids (supporting e.g querries : "show me those full hd graphs again"). All this poorly presented content may come back to life then, dismiss it as we may now..
I don't rule out the possibility that there can be a benefit to video. There are concepts, presentations, or dynamic phenomena that are more effectively watched than described statically. I think some kind of convention in posting videos can be established that recognizes that there can be a higher barrier of entry to evaluating footage versus a web page, and it might help maintain context should embeds fail or the video is taken down.
For example, if there is a statement of X and video Y is cited as support of it, paraphrasing and/or providing a time stamp could be useful.
I would recommend providing some thesis statement as part of a quote or video. A contextless link and run or overly terse thesis can dampen discussion on its own, even if citing text. Similarly, not narrowing down the relevant portions of a video can be like quoting a whole document that's 90% white space and unrelated content and disabling the find text function.
Sometimes, I may also be at a location where audio or video may not be as readily perused, but that is more of a consideration of convenience than an absolute barrier.
If someday a video could be analysed and digested by an AI, there are various ways I can see it done. Some of the least complicated and fastest ways to arbitrarily "query" such a condensed version start to look like scrolling or a quick find. I might take longer to formulate a query in many cases than it would take to go to a specific section. Having an AI arrange a video into such a format also sounds suspiciously like it is actually synthesizing its way through the content and producing a concise article, which may be ways away.
For example, if there is a statement of X and video Y is cited as support of it, paraphrasing and/or providing a time stamp could be useful.
I would recommend providing some thesis statement as part of a quote or video. A contextless link and run or overly terse thesis can dampen discussion on its own, even if citing text. Similarly, not narrowing down the relevant portions of a video can be like quoting a whole document that's 90% white space and unrelated content and disabling the find text function.
Sometimes, I may also be at a location where audio or video may not be as readily perused, but that is more of a consideration of convenience than an absolute barrier.
If someday a video could be analysed and digested by an AI, there are various ways I can see it done. Some of the least complicated and fastest ways to arbitrarily "query" such a condensed version start to look like scrolling or a quick find. I might take longer to formulate a query in many cases than it would take to go to a specific section. Having an AI arrange a video into such a format also sounds suspiciously like it is actually synthesizing its way through the content and producing a concise article, which may be ways away.
Where in the case of ryzen 5 the only reviews are in video right now.
Here are some sint. and productivity test on the 1400.
Btw why the media act like this reviews weren't existing? I understand they don't want to lose relevance in their reviews but they have to inform people, its their job...
Here are some sint. and productivity test on the 1400.
Btw why the media act like this reviews weren't existing? I understand they don't want to lose relevance in their reviews but they have to inform people, its their job...
Well it was expected to happen. First review of an official page:
https://elchapuzasinformatico.com/2017/04/amd-ryzen-5-1600-review/
https://elchapuzasinformatico.com/2017/04/amd-ryzen-5-1600-review/
D
Deleted member 13524
Guest
As usual for rushed up reviews, we get trash comparisons and trash conclusions using trash data.
They claim the CPU is priced close to a Core i5. Then they compare it in games against a Core i7 6700K which is obviously priced much higher.
And then they put "performs under Intel in most games" as a con, when in reality they only tested 5 games: 3 of which are the same game tested with 2 different APIs (and where the Ryzen 5 easily matches the Core i7 when using DX12/Vulkan), another one is the 4 year-old Metro Last Light, CIV VI showing a ~6% deficit from Core i7 and Total War: Warhammer where they don't even say which API they're using.
It's a review of a cpu that is suppose to be launched next week. You don't need to read their conclusions you can think by urself.
If I were you I would be more surprised it took so long to have an official page publish a review when those cpus have being available for purchase days ago. And big websites act like they haven't discovered it yet.
I'd like a statement of amd explaining how they fucked up so much that their cpu were available to purchase weeks before it's official launch.
Either way the performance since nice and very competitive, there's no reason to buy an 6800k if those numbers get confirmed in more and better tests.
Enviado desde mi HTC One mediante Tapatalk
If I were you I would be more surprised it took so long to have an official page publish a review when those cpus have being available for purchase days ago. And big websites act like they haven't discovered it yet.
I'd like a statement of amd explaining how they fucked up so much that their cpu were available to purchase weeks before it's official launch.
Either way the performance since nice and very competitive, there's no reason to buy an 6800k if those numbers get confirmed in more and better tests.
Enviado desde mi HTC One mediante Tapatalk
If you're wondering why established sites aren't keeping track of some random site or channel's review--other than that they usually have their own reviews to work on--it's the fact that the CPU is not launched yet and is still under embargo.
Linking to somebody else evading the embargo they've agreed to is poor form, if not asking for trouble.
A few have noted that it occurred.
Also, if we're talking about a review, perhaps the Ryzen review thread is more appropriate?
A shop or distributor messed up. AMD cannot control what some random shop is doing much more than Ryzen 5 chips can teleport to warehouses and store shelves on launch day.
The supply chain appreciates having product on hand.
It'd not under embargo, the review sample that amd sent to websites are,this cpu buy legally on stores aren't you can talk and do what you want to them.
If that were true then why don't we see that more often? When was the last time you saw a piece of hw being sell weeks before it's launch. Something went very wrong and only amd know what it was.
Enviado desde mi HTC One mediante Tapatalk
If that were true then why don't we see that more often? When was the last time you saw a piece of hw being sell weeks before it's launch. Something went very wrong and only amd know what it was.
Enviado desde mi HTC One mediante Tapatalk
You asked earlier why these reviews aren't being touted by the media, because the media that mostly deal in this have their own reviews and they also mostly try to uphold some kind of professional standard if they're under an embargo.
Games sometimes sell before street date, the consoles had units out ahead of time.
I could probably track down some pre-launch tests for engineering samples or retail screwups for other hardware. At least some ES chips have been put on ebay.
There's only so much that can be done, particularly for a product priced for high volume and launch-day availability. That means way more opportunity to leak ahead of launch, and no practical or economical way to secure or air-ship large amounts of cheaper merchandise.
It's not on AMD to secure a warehouse they don't own, rob a store of its already bought hardware, or hunt down the purchasers.
It might remember that this happened later.
Similarly, the reviewers that do this must be counting on always having an embargo break, since sites that review hardware on an ongoing basis would be antagonizing the vendor they get hardware from.
To clarify, this is what I was referencing about tech sites not advertising a pre-embargo review:
The person testing the CPU they bought, so long as they haven't signed something (and it's not stolen), can do what they want.
The reviewers that try to do this professionally have already put their credibility and professionalism on the line by signing an NDA or agreeing to an embargo. Even if there's no significant legal penalty for breaking an embargo, it will inform what AMD does for samples in the future and can lead to negativity from fellow professionals.
Agreeing to an embargo, then trying to split hairs by buying hardware ahead of the date or cross-promoting the data of someone who has is unlikely to be perceived any better.
And as I noted, the main sites for this have their own work to do and have signed onto a mutual agreement about disclosure so that everyone can get an equal chance to test and put up their review in a timely fashion. Why they should encourage someone who has displayed no such consideration and who would undermine this arrangement going forward is unclear.
The person testing the CPU they bought, so long as they haven't signed something (and it's not stolen), can do what they want.
The reviewers that try to do this professionally have already put their credibility and professionalism on the line by signing an NDA or agreeing to an embargo. Even if there's no significant legal penalty for breaking an embargo, it will inform what AMD does for samples in the future and can lead to negativity from fellow professionals.
Agreeing to an embargo, then trying to split hairs by buying hardware ahead of the date or cross-promoting the data of someone who has is unlikely to be perceived any better.
And as I noted, the main sites for this have their own work to do and have signed onto a mutual agreement about disclosure so that everyone can get an equal chance to test and put up their review in a timely fashion. Why they should encourage someone who has displayed no such consideration and who would undermine this arrangement going forward is unclear.
BF1 MP:
DX12 is still unusable....But pretty good DX11 per. didn't see the whole gameplay but i didn't see any issues.
----
I still think its the journalist job to inform people about news and what is happening regardless of personal benefit/hurts it may produce.The R5 benchs are out there and act like they don't exist wont make them disappear. But that may be just me
DX12 is still unusable....But pretty good DX11 per. didn't see the whole gameplay but i didn't see any issues.
----
I still think its the journalist job to inform people about news and what is happening regardless of personal benefit/hurts it may produce.The R5 benchs are out there and act like they don't exist wont make them disappear. But that may be just me
ProspectorPete
Regular
I f-ing hate video reviews! 
Ended up ordering a 1700 + Asus C6H + Trident Z 3600Mhz C16 16gb kit (Samsung b-die), a 1080 ti should be arriving the day after I get these. It was about time I upgraded my rig (was running a 3570k + 970 + 16 gigs 2133 ddr3 mem on a Z77 board).
Last edited:
Similar threads
