729
Remember: the SUX 3141 Ti is 60% slower than the SUX 3141 Xt. because it's 5 years older and has no components in common.
(lemmy.world)
this post was submitted on 01 Dec 2024
729 points (98.7% liked)
memes
10701 readers
2801 users here now
Community rules
1. Be civil
No trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour
2. No politics
This is non-politics community. For political memes please go to !politicalmemes@lemmy.world
3. No recent reposts
Check for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month
4. No bots
No bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins
5. No Spam/Ads
No advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live.
Sister communities
- !tenforward@lemmy.world : Star Trek memes, chat and shitposts
- !lemmyshitpost@lemmy.world : Lemmy Shitposts, anything and everything goes.
- !linuxmemes@lemmy.world : Linux themed memes
- !comicstrips@lemmy.world : for those who love comic stories.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Just buy AMD ๐
Honestly my preferred manufacturer since I started putting together my own machines.
Make sure to get your 5900x3d with your 7900XTX. Note that one is a CPU and the other is a GPU. For extra fun, their numbers should eventually overlap given their respective incrementation schemes. The 5900x3d is the successor to the 5900xd, which is a major step down in performance even though it has more cores.
I'm gonna give this award to Intel, which has increased the numbers on their CPU line by 1000 every generation since before the 2008 housing crash.
It's so annoying when you buy a GPU instead of a CPU.
Or when you buy a GPU inside of your CPU.
They already do overlap, 7000 series CPUs have been out for a while. As have the 5000 series GPUs.
...don't worry, I'm sure Intel won't change things up on us... right? (Just pretend the last year of Intel CPUs didn't happen)
I assume you haven't seen the latest series of processors from Intel...
You still need to understand their naming convention if you plan on comparing hardware.
Is it not still "higher better" at AMD? With the obvious X or "m", but usually price reflects the specs when the numbers are the same.
The only thing you should realistic understand from the naming conventions is relative generations and which bracket of price/performance the part targets. Assuming more than that is just a mistake.
Just ordered another CPU from them. Downside is that there isn't any modern AMD desktop platform that works with coreboot, which seems to be the only workable way to deactivate the Management Engine/Platform Security Processor after boot.
Was really considering to swap to Intel for that, but got a good deal on a Ryzen 9 that fits in my socket, so...
Is there anything from the last 10 years that runs coreboot?
Yeah, actually.
They want you to fork over some cash for the most current binaries, though.
You can of course just build it from source.
The most current AMD Boards that are supported are FM2+. I actually have an FM2+ processor flying around somewhere, an Athlon II X4 860K, but that thing uses a lot of power for not very much performance.
Oh is this a different project to libreboot?
Yeah, it's a different coreboot fork. They seem to be kinda focused on selling their implementation to corporate users, but if that finances open source development, I'm not gonna complain.
You are mixing coreboot up with libreboot
Also libreboot now ships some proprietary firmware so it is more compatible then it used to be.
AMD is one of the worst with naming
Explain yourself.
Explain how AMD naming works. I'm so confused as it is pretty hard to understand plus they randomly will violate there own conventions.
They had at least two or three halfway sensible naming schemes, which they then proceeded to abandon after like one generation.
I fault marketing department at the chipmakers that are trying to somehow justify their existence.