Endorfy Arx 700 Air chassis review
Beelink SER5 Pro (Ryzen 7 5800H) mini PC review
Crucial T700 PCIe 5.0 NVMe SSD Review - 12GB/s
Sapphire Radeon RX 7600 PULSE review
Gainward GeForce RTX 4060 Ti GHOST review
Radeon RX 7600 review
ASUS GeForce RTX 4060 Ti TUF Gaming review
MSI GeForce RTX 4060 Ti Gaming X TRIO review
GeForce RTX 4060 Ti 8GB (FE) review
Corsair 2000D RGB Airflow Mini-ITX - PC chassis review
AMD Security Announcement on Fallout, RIDL and ZombieLoad Attack
AMD today responded to yesterday's news about the new serious Intel processor vulnerabilities. In this announcement, they confirmed that their processors are not susceptible to this kind of vulnerability.
Yesterday, researchers announced three new security exploits – Fallout, Rogue In-Flight Data Load (RIDL) and “ZombieLoad Attack”. Based on our internal assessment, we believe AMD products are not impacted by these new threats.
Below is our public statement, which you’ll also find available here.
At AMD we develop our products and services with security in mind. Based on our analysis and discussions with the researchers, we believe our products are not susceptible to ‘Fallout’, ‘RIDL’ or ‘ZombieLoad Attack’ because of the hardware protection checks in our architecture. We have not been able to demonstrate these exploits on AMD products and are unaware of others having done so.
You can read up all about it in this whitepaper, titled “Speculation Behavior in AMD Micro-Architectures.”
AMD Security Vulnerability – The Day After - Seems Financially Motivated - 03/14/2018 06:20 PM
It has been a day after the news broke on the acclaimed AMD Security Vulnerabilities. In this news-item, I wanted to recap and report on the current status and overview, as well as my look on things....
AMD Security Statement from CTO and SVP Mark Papermaster - 01/12/2018 03:30 PM
AMD have updated their web page and clarified a bit more on speculative_execution vulnerabilities with some additional details on current state of affairs and AMD actions....
xrodney
Senior Member
Posts: 364
Joined: 2015-06-18
Senior Member
Posts: 364
Joined: 2015-06-18
#5670005 Posted on: 05/16/2019 06:31 PM
I don't know how many times this needs to be said.
If you're going to complain about NVIDIAs pricing, then you're complaining about MSRP. If you're going to complain about non-MSRP pricings, then you're complaining about retailers and third party manufacturers.
This is fact. If you argue this, thats a you problem.
Wheres your proof of that? The same implies same cost of R&D, so wheres your proof?
The only information i can find is up to 10 years of development/research and millions of hours of research and development.
Are you saying they all take that much? If so, nvidia must be hemmoraging money as that is not sustainable.
Sorry but if you set MSRP and then do not deliver sufficient amount of cards price goes up and its your fault, that's how market works, so fault is still on Nvidia here.
We all can see yearly info about R&D spending though none except NVIDIA itself knows exact detail. Even if you say you spent 10 years developing something it says nothing as it does not give information about time and resources spent, you pretty much could put it on paper 10 years ago and get back to it month ago with one person involved and that statement still will be true.
If you look at yearly expenses for R&D there is no sudden peak, it just grow slightly year over year as NVIDIA start investing in other areas.
If you look at architecture from Maxwell to Pascal to Volta and finally Turing, there are no major changes to GPU architecture, only Volta adding tensor cores which NVIDIA more or less reusing with small changes on Turing for RTX functions.
There was no Turing in long term plans so there is no long development its just something NVIDIA put quickly together and as Volta supports runs RTX as well as Turing, tell me where is Turing hiding your ten years of expensive development?
Its simply not there.
NVIDIA is stating 11,72 billion revenue with gross margin of 61.2% from which 6.25 billion is from gaming business and they spent only 647 million in R&D and only very small part of it is related to gaming.
So no, there was no reason to price hike Turing except increasing your already insanely high margins even more which more than deserve to be called Price gouging.
I maybe don't know exact amount NVIDIA spent on Turing but we can estimate its real costs and as well NVIDIA Financial report speaks more than clearly.
I don't know how many times this needs to be said.
If you're going to complain about NVIDIAs pricing, then you're complaining about MSRP. If you're going to complain about non-MSRP pricings, then you're complaining about retailers and third party manufacturers.
This is fact. If you argue this, thats a you problem.
Wheres your proof of that? The same implies same cost of R&D, so wheres your proof?
The only information i can find is up to 10 years of development/research and millions of hours of research and development.
Are you saying they all take that much? If so, nvidia must be hemmoraging money as that is not sustainable.
Sorry but if you set MSRP and then do not deliver sufficient amount of cards price goes up and its your fault, that's how market works, so fault is still on Nvidia here.
We all can see yearly info about R&D spending though none except NVIDIA itself knows exact detail. Even if you say you spent 10 years developing something it says nothing as it does not give information about time and resources spent, you pretty much could put it on paper 10 years ago and get back to it month ago with one person involved and that statement still will be true.
If you look at yearly expenses for R&D there is no sudden peak, it just grow slightly year over year as NVIDIA start investing in other areas.
If you look at architecture from Maxwell to Pascal to Volta and finally Turing, there are no major changes to GPU architecture, only Volta adding tensor cores which NVIDIA more or less reusing with small changes on Turing for RTX functions.
There was no Turing in long term plans so there is no long development its just something NVIDIA put quickly together and as Volta supports runs RTX as well as Turing, tell me where is Turing hiding your ten years of expensive development?
Its simply not there.
NVIDIA is stating 11,72 billion revenue with gross margin of 61.2% from which 6.25 billion is from gaming business and they spent only 647 million in R&D and only very small part of it is related to gaming.
So no, there was no reason to price hike Turing except increasing your already insanely high margins even more which more than deserve to be called Price gouging.
I maybe don't know exact amount NVIDIA spent on Turing but we can estimate its real costs and as well NVIDIA Financial report speaks more than clearly.
Aura89
Senior Member
Posts: 8408
Joined: 2008-07-31
Senior Member
Posts: 8408
Joined: 2008-07-31
#5670038 Posted on: 05/16/2019 08:06 PM
Sorry but if you set MSRP and then do not deliver sufficient amount of cards price goes up and its your fault, that's how market works, so fault is still on Nvidia here.
Again, retailers and 3rd party manufacturers issues.
Their problem, not nvidias. Nor have i seen RTX 2080 ti's stocks being low, so your idea that there's not sufficient amount of cards really has no bearing at all. Maybe where YOU live, possibly, but that's not a global issue, and has nothing to do with 3rd party manufacturers and retailers increasing the price. That is on them.
As to the rest of your post, it's pure nonsense based off literally nothing. You have zero facts in what you state, you just claim to be right, claim that nvidia had no reason to increase the price, because you as an individual want that to be true. We don't know the facts, other then what nvidia has told us. You can choose to not believe nvidia as you are doing, or you can get off your high horse and come back down to reality and understand that business' are a business to make money, and how much they decide to price products at, to make said money, is their business, not ours. We can choose to not pay it, and if that helps the future, great! but that's no guarantee.
You have zero clue as to how much R&D went into RTX features, so you have zero grounds to have your nonsense statements.
Per nvidia, the only source we have
https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/geforce/news/geforce-gtx-ray-tracing-coming-soon/
"It required millions of hours of research and development, focusing on everything from GPU hardware and software, to updated APIs and game engines, to development tools and denoisers."
And the only other information:
https://nvidianews.nvidia.com/news/10-years-in-the-making-nvidia-brings-real-time-ray-tracing-to-gamers-with-geforce-rtx
So yes, you can continue to believe that it's just something they "quickly put together" while disregarding any actual information we have to go on, continue to be a conspiracy theorist, just because you can. Because apparently, according to you, something that has been so difficult to do, real time ray tracing in games, is apparently actually extremely easy to make possible, and was "quickly put together".
Either way, this topic is offtopic for the current topic at hand, and with mentalities such as yours, i have no desire to continue this with you. You're one of those people who chooses to believe whatever they want to believe with no regards to facts or information we have and basing everything on personal experience that's not valid to anything on the topic.
Sorry but if you set MSRP and then do not deliver sufficient amount of cards price goes up and its your fault, that's how market works, so fault is still on Nvidia here.
Again, retailers and 3rd party manufacturers issues.
Their problem, not nvidias. Nor have i seen RTX 2080 ti's stocks being low, so your idea that there's not sufficient amount of cards really has no bearing at all. Maybe where YOU live, possibly, but that's not a global issue, and has nothing to do with 3rd party manufacturers and retailers increasing the price. That is on them.
As to the rest of your post, it's pure nonsense based off literally nothing. You have zero facts in what you state, you just claim to be right, claim that nvidia had no reason to increase the price, because you as an individual want that to be true. We don't know the facts, other then what nvidia has told us. You can choose to not believe nvidia as you are doing, or you can get off your high horse and come back down to reality and understand that business' are a business to make money, and how much they decide to price products at, to make said money, is their business, not ours. We can choose to not pay it, and if that helps the future, great! but that's no guarantee.
You have zero clue as to how much R&D went into RTX features, so you have zero grounds to have your nonsense statements.
Per nvidia, the only source we have
https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/geforce/news/geforce-gtx-ray-tracing-coming-soon/
"It required millions of hours of research and development, focusing on everything from GPU hardware and software, to updated APIs and game engines, to development tools and denoisers."
And the only other information:
https://nvidianews.nvidia.com/news/10-years-in-the-making-nvidia-brings-real-time-ray-tracing-to-gamers-with-geforce-rtx
So yes, you can continue to believe that it's just something they "quickly put together" while disregarding any actual information we have to go on, continue to be a conspiracy theorist, just because you can. Because apparently, according to you, something that has been so difficult to do, real time ray tracing in games, is apparently actually extremely easy to make possible, and was "quickly put together".
Either way, this topic is offtopic for the current topic at hand, and with mentalities such as yours, i have no desire to continue this with you. You're one of those people who chooses to believe whatever they want to believe with no regards to facts or information we have and basing everything on personal experience that's not valid to anything on the topic.
tsunami231
Senior Member
Posts: 13872
Joined: 2003-05-24
Senior Member
Posts: 13872
Joined: 2003-05-24
#5670044 Posted on: 05/16/2019 08:23 PM
has Intel made announcement yet about all this? or is it more head in sand? next system if make new one is gona be AMD plain and simple. and I been Intel for as long as I can remember. I getting tired of this crap. ever 6 month something it outed that will reduce performance of cpu just to plug it. and so far most of this stuff dont effect AMD ( amd using new architecture? intel using decades old architecture?) i not really sure or care majority of people probably arnt protected from initial flaws which required MS to push all the fixes threw there updates. and to this day even in windows 10 I find pending updates more then anything else.
I know my old PC my dad is using will never be plugged fully it will be lucky it partial plugged from the initial flaws. and I guarantee there are pending updates on that pc too
has Intel made announcement yet about all this? or is it more head in sand? next system if make new one is gona be AMD plain and simple. and I been Intel for as long as I can remember. I getting tired of this crap. ever 6 month something it outed that will reduce performance of cpu just to plug it. and so far most of this stuff dont effect AMD ( amd using new architecture? intel using decades old architecture?) i not really sure or care majority of people probably arnt protected from initial flaws which required MS to push all the fixes threw there updates. and to this day even in windows 10 I find pending updates more then anything else.
I know my old PC my dad is using will never be plugged fully it will be lucky it partial plugged from the initial flaws. and I guarantee there are pending updates on that pc too
ladcrooks
Senior Member
Posts: 369
Joined: 2016-12-29
Senior Member
Posts: 369
Joined: 2016-12-29
#5670179 Posted on: 05/17/2019 08:13 AM
I laughed at this - nice to be 100% , then x 3 , well your mentally a winner
With AMD you get lower per core performance, low efficiency interconnect, lower performance in games and productivity software.
I was 99.99% sure to go back to AMD after 14 years, but it's more like 300% now.
I laughed at this - nice to be 100% , then x 3 , well your mentally a winner
Go ahead, switch to AMD, when such overhyped vulnerabilities will easily be patched with microcode update, minimal performance impacts, it is good that research is being done on the matter, and i dont feel any less secure. With AMD you get lower per core performance, low efficiency interconnect, lower performance in games and productivity software. It is definitely not a reason to bash intel over this.
With AMD you get lower per core performance, low efficiency interconnect, lower performance in games and productivity software.
You made me laugh as well for the wrong reason - Amd are so, so, so, behind in what? Even if I could afford their most expensive CPU, my logic would tell me another 5 - 15 fps and in other apps in the real world, you would hardly notice. I bet most gamers are still on 1080p, why do you 180 .... fps .
Now i will add the word lower! LOWER prices
Now i will add the word lower! LOWER prices
Click here to post a comment for this news story on the message forum.
Senior Member
Posts: 8408
Joined: 2008-07-31
At RTX launch 2080ti was hard to get and real price was $1200-$1400 at same time you could get GTX 1080ti between $540-$700 so if you take higher prices there is your $700 price difference, noone cares about MSRP when price is higher due to low availability.
I don't know how many times this needs to be said.
If you're going to complain about NVIDIAs pricing, then you're complaining about MSRP. If you're going to complain about non-MSRP pricings, then you're complaining about retailers and third party manufacturers.
This is fact. If you argue this, thats a you problem.
Yes there are R&D costs, but there are here for every single chip or generation so RTX is no different from past generations.
Wheres your proof of that? The same implies same cost of R&D, so wheres your proof?
The only information i can find is up to 10 years of development/research and millions of hours of research and development.
Are you saying they all take that much? If so, nvidia must be hemmoraging money as that is not sustainable.