[chrisseaton]

Why is AMD so important to you? Are there any instruction set extensions these days that are only available on AMD? I can only think of things that are the other way around - only on Intel. And if you need something niche like some SIMD extension I guess you're running a server not a laptop?

[lhl]

For me personally, my preference primarily comes down to extreme differences in low-intensity/idle power usage of Ryzen 6000 vs Intel 12th gen. There aren't true "apples to apples" (same chassis/model, but AMD vs Intel) comparisons yet, although those should be coming in the next month or so, but here's an example of how efficient the Ryzen 6000s are: https://youtu.be/3bSetglEPOY?t=170

For people that need to use their devices on the go, I think it's a no brainer to prefer a Ryzen 6000 vs Intel.

The RDNA2-based Radeon 680M iGPU also significantly outperforms the (admittedly, much improved) Intel Xe iGPUs in 3D rendering. In synthetics, the new Radeon iGPUs are going head to head with Nvidia 1650 Max-Q dGPUs. This probably doesn't much matter if you aren't doing any gaming, but if you are, it means you can play most modern titles reasonably on the road in a thin and light form factor without giving up any battery life when you aren't.

[dont__panic]

I think it goes something like this:

- no Management Engine

- chips that don't turbo boost themselves into throttling

- not supporting a company with a toxic approach to business

I believe AMD outperforms Intel when you're targeting mobile performance/battery life, rather than "moar CPU" workloads. Though that might change now that Intel is using their own approach to performance cores. Still, given the last decade of Intel development, they don't exactly have my trust that they'll execute performance cores without serious hiccups.

[fsflover]

> no Management Engine

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AMD_PSP

[gray_charger]

AMD PSP is NOT the same as Intel ME. AMD PSP is a "trusted execution environment" (the first sentence in your link). Intel's equivalent is Intel SGX. Trusted execution environments are a security feature that does not offer remote management. It's not a privacy concern like Intel ME is.

[dont__panic]

Thank you for clarifying this, all of the acronyms are difficult to reason about if you don't work with them every day.

[sascha_sl]

The PSP is a lot slimmer than Intel ME. It also doesn't randomly yank traffic for specific ports from your Ethernet.

[trinsic2]

I havent looked at the presentation yet, but are you saying the PSP, like intels ME could be doing nefarious things since its proprietary and closed? Do you have a link to information on the network capturing thing? I mean is that really a thing?

I have heard of these things before but I am not quite sure what the possibilities are. Do you have a link that can summarize what this actual means in terms of security concerns?

[sascha_sl]

CVE-2017-5689

[google234123]

How do you know there isn't an undiscovered CVE for AMD? There's probably maybe 10x more security research focused on Intel

[fsflover]

Any good link with the details?

[sascha_sl]

There was a good talk with an overview (as well as owning it) at 36c3.

https://media.ccc.de/v/36c3-10942-uncover_understand_own_-_r...

[jeffbee]

> - chips that don't turbo boost themselves into throttling

Your level of understanding about how CPUs control their frequency, voltage, and power is evidently "none". Why spread comments like this which only serve to confuse and mislead readers?

[dont__panic]

Intel configured the chips such that they turbo boost so high that they overheat and downclock themselves to compensate.

Still "no" level of understanding? If there's something incorrect about my statements, feel free to correct me -- I do want to learn more, and I'm certainly no expert in CPUs. But it's just flat out rude (and against the contributor guidelines, I believe) to comment like this. Build other people up, don't tear them down.

[jeffbee]

> Intel configured the chips such that they turbo boost so high that they overheat and downclock themselves to compensate.

Yes, this is optimal and what literally everyone wants.

An airplane takes off at full power, reaches cruising speed, and reduces power to maintain cruising speed.

A CPU uses max power until it reaches its max operating temperature, then it maintains that temperature operating at lower power.

Why does the latter offend you when it's exactly the same as the former?

> Still "no" level of understanding?

Sadly, yes.

> don't tear them down.

This conversation started with you tearing down thousands of expert electrical engineers who make Intel CPUs.

[dont__panic]

Your airplane analogy is not what Intel CPUs do in practice.

A better analogy:

An airplane takes off at full power, reaches cruising speed, but its engines have overtaxed themselves and can't maintain altitude. The place descends to a suboptimal altitude until the engines can turn back on, and raise the plane back to the altitude it's supposed to cruise at.

Your CPU explanation is technically correct:

> A CPU uses max power until it reaches its max operating temperature, then it maintains that temperature operating at lower power.

Yep, this is a very high-level explanation of what CPUs do. The trouble with Intel processors today is that they use max power for too long, and have to throttle so heavily to "maintain that temperature operating at lower power" that you can notice the latency when the CPU downclocks. An ideal operating curve wouldn't use max power for so long that it causes obvious latency issues to an end user. That's why I have Turbo Boost disabled on my laptops -- the few seconds of "max power" it yields just aren't worth the massive downclock while the CPU cools down. Better to set a more conservative power level that doesn't get in my way. This is especially noticeable if you use emulation or a beefy IDE like Android Studio that turbo boosts your computer to a high temperature in the first few seconds of use, then turns text editing and code suggestions into a sluggish slideshow for the next few minutes because the CPU has downclocked. Or maybe I'm just imagining that?

> This conversation started with you tearing down thousands of expert electrical engineers who make Intel CPUs.

Did I say anything bad about the engineers? I have lots of disparaging things to say about the way Intel works as a business, mostly based around how product and sales operate. I think the engineers at Intel do the best they can under the constraints of a poorly run company. But there's a reason engineering talent has been fleeing for the better part of a decade.

[quantumfissure]

Better power handling per performance ratio, at least when compared to previous Intel generations.

Better integrated graphics, especially with the upcoming line, if what AMD says holds true.

Non-toxic approach to business.

Dr. Lisa Su has done incredible things with that company, and I'll happily support a group that recognizes the need for experience in top tech positions vs. MBAs/Lawyers/Fund Managers/etc...

[peatmoss]

Integrated graphics is a big deal. I was talking to a friend just this morning who has been waiting to buy a Framework until there is a gaming capable option. Intel integrated graphics isn't viable, but AMD integrated graphics meet a casual gaming bar.

[sascha_sl]

> Non-toxic approach to business.

Unfortunately it seems the pendulum swings on this one at least a bit. Unless you want a flagship CPU, you'll wait a good half year to a year to get half as much choice of budget CPUs with rather extreme handicap (cache).

Also half of them are OEM only.

Try to find a good current gen CPU for a small to mid sized NAS in their lineup, it's not easy.

[kouteiheika]

> Unless you want a flagship CPU

Even if you want a flagship CPU; e.g. see the newest 5xxx series Threadrippers which were only released after a year and half and even then they are only available in overpriced e-waste systems from Lenovo where the CPU is locked down to the motherboard and won't work anywhere else.

AMD is not your friend. Just like every other huge corporation.

[mrtranscendence]

It's relative. AMD is "your friend" as long as it's on the back foot, so to speak. Their GPU pricing remains much better than Nvidia's, even with the extreme availability issues over the past two years, and some of their actions on the GPU side are more consumer-friendly (such as offering open-source Linux drivers). But when in a more favorable position with respect to their competitor their behavior can and does change.

> where the CPU is locked down to the motherboard

Don't quote me on this, but I think I heard that this wasn't on by default?

[dale_glass]

> It's relative. AMD is "your friend" as long as it's on the back foot, so to speak.

Which is why you should reward behavior and not branding. Buy because they're doing/selling the right thing now, not because you've got loyalty towards a multinational conglomerate.

One signal for instance I want to send is "I buy from whoever has good Linux support". You stop supporting it well, I look for competition.

[csdreamer7]

Yep, the 6000 series has RDNA2 graphics.

[freeopinion]

Why is Intel 12th Gen more important?

AMD is important for multiple reasons.

First, it shows that they listened to feedback. From way over here in the corner it seems like AMD has been the most requested feature for the Framework.

Second, many people perceive that AMD outperforms Intel.

Third, many people think it is extremely important to reward positive competition in the market place.

Eighth, it would truly, truly prove the upgradeability and versatility of the Framework. Then we could move on to imagining dual^H^H^H^Hquad-Arm boards and RISCV boards and other fantasies.

[dathinab]

> First, it shows that they listened to feedback. From way over here in the corner it seems like AMD has been the most requested feature for the Framework.

I would argue one of the most glaring problems with selling Framework laptops was that they where "still" on Intel 11th Gen hardware which is often perceived as "not so grate" of a choice.

I'm sure they would love to also ship AMD based mobos (and Arm too) but it needs to be profitable, i.e. the additional sales gained through also supporting AMD must outclass the higher logistic cost as well as higher development cost. This might not seem like a big deal but from the little experience I have with logistics and things like maintaining Intel and AMD BIOS support, still having pressure to also ship a faster Intel mother board etc. I highly duped this makes any sense at this point in time.

Also, yes many people perceive AMD outperforms Intel, but many also perceive the opposite! Sure competition is grate, but Framework is not yet a well established company. Lastly I don't think they need to technically prove that upgrading to AMD or ARM is possible, the problem is not technology but logistics, resources (BIOS maintenance, testing, etc), supply-chains and potentially shitty contracts and practices by Intel (and other Companies).

So IMHO they need to first establish themself well, and then branch out.

[mhitza]

Because at the moment AMD is the least scummy of the two x86 chip manufacturers. Intel as the only feasible player in town for a good segment of time, asked premium prices for meager performance increases, generation by generation.

Mainly is just out of principle and voting with my wallet.

[Teknoman117]

Exactly. If we're going to be told to vote with our wallets all the time, you better let me vote with my wallet.

I bought an ASUS ZenBook earlier this year because as much as I like Framework's product, I don't want to give Intel another dollar after they bent me over a barrel for a decade.

[Andrew_nenakhov]

I was choosing AMD even when they didn't have the better processors on the market, for this very reason.

[CoastalCoder]

> Why is AMD so important to you?

Not the GP, but here's my reason:

For dGPUs, I strongly prefer AMD over nVidia because of Linux driver support. In recent years, most laptops with an AMD dGPU have AMD CPUs.

It's possible that my calculus will change in the next few years. E.g., if any of these things come to market:

- good laptop with Intel CPU and AMD dGPU

- AMD CPU with a fast iGPU. (I know these are in the pipeline, but I'm waiting for benchmarks.)

- Intel's upcoming laptop iGPUs / dGPUs perform well and have good Linux drivers.

- nVidia's efforts to open-source parts of their Linux drivers address my personal pain points.

[xd1936]

Sure, but none of these affect the Framework Laptop. This computer does not have discrete graphics.

[capableweb]

It's simply a political/better CPU market perspective. Intel had the entire market for so long, and therefore stopped improving. They are getting some fire behind their behind-parts now, but that took a good while. I'm cheering and voting with my wallet for the underdog in the market to make the whole market more competitive. At least that's what I like to believe.

[Teknoman117]

Voting with my wallet. Intel bent everyone over a barrel for a decade and I don't want to give them another dollar if I can avoid it.

[jotm]

AMD offers higher performance, better thermals and arguably better integrated graphics for the price.

Plus they made Intel drop their prices by ~50% since launching Ryzen, for which they deserve the money :)

[Markoff]

I'd guess much better VFM.