(Warm) AMD Ryzen ThreadRipper 1950X $879.99

I am considering purchasing this for the HTPC to use temporarily while I continue to wait for the SMP bug to be clearly fixed on the AM4 CPUs (without needing to RMA). The 11 year old core2quad system is now feeling its age even in the linux based pvr role. If I did purchase this I would move it to be a windows based workstation when I get the ryzen7 system.
 
Might just have to run to Microcenter so they'll price match, and I'll get an additional $50 off a motherboard :D
 
  • Like
Reactions: MrC4
like this
chimera996 said:
I did sign up in 2010, that was when I built my first pc. Never could afford one before that. :)
Click to expand...
Yep. People think AMD is some fight the good fight company. They would be not much different from Intel if their market share were reversed.
 
Lol, they're the last one's standing. Cyrix, IBM. My first computer was a AMD Am486DX2-80 clone. My first build was on a Cyrix 6x86 P200+. The good old days of competition. Back when you had a multitude of awesome motherboard manufacture's to support all the CPU's.
 
chimera996 said:
I did sign up in 2010, that was when I built my first pc. Never could afford one before that. :)
Click to expand...

Then you missed AMD's roller coaster history. AMD used to work as a second source supplier and actually built Intel CPU's as required for military contracts back then. I actually own an 80186 that was built by AMD. Later, AMD reverse engineered Intel CPU's and made knock offs of them. AMD's reputation was largely crap outside of their 486 DX4 100 and 133MHz processors which were low cost Pentium alternatives. It's K5 was garbage. The K6, K6-II and K6-III were decent, but hardly Intel killers. The Athlon, is where things started to turn around. AMD absolutely dominated during the Athlon 64 and Athlon X2 days. Then Intel released it's Core 2 family of processors and AMD hasn't competed at all until Ryzen showed up.

For most of the last two decades, Intel has whipped AMD's ass. It's always whipped AMD's ass financially, but not always performance wise. AMD used to be known as a knock off processor manufacturer, just like the other companies that aren't around anymore. AMD's also done stupid shit like sell off one profitable division after another to provide cash infusions to it's failing CPU business. There's more to all of it than that, but that's the good stuff you missed.

vegeta535 said:
Yep. People think AMD is some fight the good fight company. They would be not much different from Intel if their market share were reversed.
Click to expand...

This has been my point in so many Intel vs. AMD threads. People want to act like AMD is this benevolent and altruistic underdog. They are far from it. AMD charged $1,000 and matched the cost of Intel's Extreme Edition CPU's whenever they've had a performance advantage. The Athlon 64 was in general, an expensive CPU.

crazycuz20 said:
Lol, they're the last one's standing. Cyrix, IBM. My first computer was a AMD Am486DX2-80 clone. My first build was on a Cyrix 6x86 P200+. The good old days of competition. Back when you had a multitude of awesome motherboard manufacture's to support all the CPU's.
Click to expand...

Those were the days. It was nice because all the CPU's used the same motherboards. What sucked is that the motherboards all performed differently due to L2 and later L3 cache appearing on the motherboard, not the CPU. Your PCI controllers and other things were part of that as well. Your right though, AMD is the soul surviving competitor to Intel. Things would have been very different had AMD not bought out NexGen Systems and hired all those former DEC engineers responsible for the DEC Alpha. Cyrix, IBM, Centaur, IDT, and NexGen Systems all competed back then. Though NexGen Systems was the only one brave enough to use it's own motherboard's and sockets.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top