[echoangle]

> First gen Ryzen was mediocre. Second gen was where the performance came.

Are you sure? I just looked at Ryzen 5 1600 vs 2600 benchmarks and the difference is around 5%. And I also remember the hype when the first generation was released. I think Ryzen gen 1 was by far the largest step.

[Joel_Mckay]

Modern chip model numbers are just branding, and one must look at the benchmarks if you want value:

https://www.cpubenchmark.net/high_end_cpus.html

Yes, it is deceptive and annoying shenanigans for retail products =3

[tedunangst]

Zen 2 is Ryzen 3000.

[Dylan16807]

Becoming mediocre by Intel's standard was a huge step at the time. So both of you can be right.

[ahartmetz]

Almost on par with Intel in single core but twice the amount of cores. A big deal if you had a use for all these cores - I did, compiling C++ code.

[Sparkyte]

Both of you forget that for the longest time Intel consumer chips excluded virtualization and other features until Ryzen 1st generation had it available. Like AVX-512 for example. 1st generation was a huge win in functionality for consumers even if it didn't hit the same performance of Intel. AVX-512 wasn't support on first gen, but there were other features I forget now but it was also a reason I had stuck to AMD.