Cài đặt Steam
Đăng nhập
|
Ngôn ngữ
简体中文 (Hán giản thể)
繁體中文 (Hán phồn thể)
日本語 (Nhật)
한국어 (Hàn Quốc)
ไทย (Thái)
Български (Bungari)
Čeština (CH Séc)
Dansk (Đan Mạch)
Deutsch (Đức)
English (Anh)
Español - España (Tây Ban Nha - TBN)
Español - Latinoamérica (Tây Ban Nha cho Mỹ Latin)
Ελληνικά (Hy Lạp)
Français (Pháp)
Italiano (Ý)
Bahasa Indonesia (tiếng Indonesia)
Magyar (Hungary)
Nederlands (Hà Lan)
Norsk (Na Uy)
Polski (Ba Lan)
Português (Tiếng Bồ Đào Nha - BĐN)
Português - Brasil (Bồ Đào Nha - Brazil)
Română (Rumani)
Русский (Nga)
Suomi (Phần Lan)
Svenska (Thụy Điển)
Türkçe (Thổ Nhĩ Kỳ)
Українська (Ukraine)
Báo cáo lỗi dịch thuật
Quy định & Hướng dẫn thảo luận
Báo cáo bài viết này
Got a 7900 and so far no fire that I can see. If my cpu is on fire it's still performing great and my cooler is damn good because my temps are all right.
Yes, the newer AGESA on AM5 allows a much higher range of memory frequency to be obtained since certain timings that couldn't go looser, now can.
Keep in mind you won't gain much for gaming (you might even lose a hair) if you go above a certain point (I think this is... ~6,000 Mhz on Zen 4?) as it enters that "performance hole" on Ryzen where you're running faster memory than the Infinity Fabric can sync to at 1:1 (this is similarly why going above ~3733 MHz on Zen 2/3 can lose you performance until you get well into the 4,000 MHz range).
So there's not much of a point to this for gaming, but the extra bandwidth might be nice for some power uses/productivity.
Yes we are. Another stupid design oversight that quietly got fixed after hiding behind gamers Nexus. Also easy for you to say if you don't own a 4090.
Sorry if I don't limit my knowledge to anecdote. Sorry I don't alter my knowledge to accommodate outrage.
I'm not making a statement that certain things don't deserve scrutiny either, so you can stop pretending to insert that into what I said.
These things were shown to be addressed (AM5 SoC voltage, I sort of made a thread covering it too...) or that were a mountain made out of a mole hill (new GPU power connectors) so it really just comes off as either being ignorant or letting your outrage fuel you to keep badgering on about them.
I don't think he actually meant in a literal way that "if you don't own the chipset = you shouldn't comment on it".
I think simply the fact that a person from the outside looking in would find the situation at all humerous. It would almost sound like not being in the situation affords you the right to laugh at it.
I'll pause here and let you know that I'm not personally angry at you for what you said, but I do find it at some level a bit tone deaf. To be fair I'm like that a whole lot of times, so if you want to point it out I do fully agree. I'm just trying to explain what I saw you do from where I sit.
So to continue...I'm constantly laughing and joking about the situation and I'm simply joking is only half of it. I laugh at it because I do have a warped sense of humor, but in reality I do actually feel like there is a chance of disaster every moment this thing is on. I try not to focus on that though.
And honestly, to say it's mitigated sounds irrational when before it was released the situation wasn't supposed to exist to begin with. So if we can't trust their initial release of the AM5 platform (sure it might be commonly referred to as a 7800x3d/ASUS exclusive problem), then realistically what makes anyone think we can fully trust their correction/mitigation of the problem that wasn't supposed to be here to start with?.
So, I don't think my life is at high risk here with this chipset but I do think it is at risk unfortunately. Sure people could blame me for not returning it if they want. Still that's on my end, and if you did think I was serious about this thing burning my house down (which to an extent I am) and found THAT humerous, it says something about your take on the situation.
I say the situation because from what I can tell about you, you seem like a very respectful and considerate person so I don't think the posts in this thread have any kind of reflection on your overall demeanor. I just think maybe you haven't considered as much as you should, the effect this incident has had on the people who purchased it and I'll even take some blame for not being as forthcoming with just how bothered I am by this.
I do think I mentioned a while back that after this happened I was kind of hesitant to stick with anything from AMD and that idea still lingers within me but mostly for CPU/Chipset hardware.
I'm sure you'll defend your take, and I'll respect it because I'm sure whatever you post you wholeheartedly believe to be true and I don't think you're trying to offend anyone and in the situation you do it would be debatable.
So, I'm not sure if you kind of just followed along with OP and me almost having total fun with the situation, but it isn't really like that.
That's how I interpret the situation anyways. Maybe it's even because the mood I was in when I read your post, but I did kind of agree with what W O K E I S M said and that was my main reaction.
I'll get over it and it isn't that serious. I should probably already be at peace with this platform already which I'm getting there. It's definitely going to take longer than it has been to gain my complete trust in it. I haven't even ran CPU stress tests yet with this thing, but It'd probably be allright.
From what I remember hearing it was pretty much exclusively 7800x3d/ASUS and I guess that EXPO configuration that it supposedly happened to.
Sounds right
...and it certainly seems to imply that me having versus not having it is a factor.
What's "stupid" (nice word...) is thinking anecdotal evidence has more weight than facts and reason. Anecdote and experience is nice, but it becomes a problem when you use it as a necessity and excuse to hinge any theory onto, even to the point of ignoring facts.
That's latter part is precisely what I'm saying.
I don't care about jokes. Go ahead and make them. Do what you've got to do to deal with things.
I'm just trying to inform people who seemingly believe (and in your case, are admitting to believe) that there's an inherent risk to AM5 or that it's still an issue.
It's neither.
Anything with too much voltage fries, and the issue of things being given too much voltage in this case was identified and addressed.
Is your BIOS updated? Is your SoC voltage staying lower than 1.3V? Yes? Then guess what!? You have no extra known risk of it "disaster" than any other random thing. So saying it's a risk here specifically seems ignorant.
This is a bit ironic.
Is it not the opposite of irrational to just look at a situation where an issue was identified, and then addressed, and plainly state that as the current state of things?
What seems irrational to me is ignoring the current reality because the issue existed to begin with.
I say again, I'm not sorry I didn't let outrage take over my reasoning (er... usually, haha).
I don't know; I'm not here to tell you what you should or shouldn't accept. That's up to you. I will say this, though. By your own reasoning, the stuff on your trust list should be really small right now then if you're going to follow a path where a mistake ends chances.
People make mistakes. And here's a very important lesson I learned long ago about that.
You judge people not on the mistakes they make, but on how they handle them.
You're going to simultaneously admit it's not like me to be like that, but then say it speaks to who I am to be stating what I am? Maybe consider reevaluating things then?
There's two things in particular that need touched upon.
You think the issue objectively still exists and that a "disaster" risk is inherently there.
You think I find it humorous.
Neither are true.
In other words, Occam's razor and all that, meaning perhaps consider that I'm downplaying it for the simple reason that I don't see it as the risk you presume it is, and not because I find danger humorous?
If every AM5 device was a ticking fire risk, do you think I'd be laughing at it!? I assure you I certainly wouldn't be. Instead I'd be appalled and refusing to recommend any AM5 option.
I get what you're saying. I know the text basically says "if you don't have it, you shouldn't be talking about it" or something to that effect but I don't think it's that cut and dry. I mean if that was the case pretty much none of us on here would be talking about anything because almost everybody here talks about and gives opinions on things they've never actually used and I don't remember him or anyone consistently pressing some rule where if you don't own a product you're not allowed to speak on it's behalf at all.
I agree he could have been a bit more respectful in his post in case you think I'm ignoring that part.
Well, I might not have worded it right but I do believe that and at the same time don't, if that makes any sense which it probably doesn't. It's like the rational side of me is saying "there's no problem" but my instinct/gut/intuition is telling me "be cautious".
I hear you. I'm sure AMD had the same confidence when they released the boards and even right now. I've seen you be 100% confident in things before and still be proven incorrect before, but I doubt you'd accept me telling you, your certainty on this shouldn't be. Everything looks good on paper, even though I'm sure what you are saying does make sense.
I'm sure AMD wishes things were that simple. "sorry, we sold you cpu's that almost caught fire there guys, totally fixed now let's move on to the new stuff we got coming out!".
I don't forget things this easy. I know you aren't forgetting, but sure seems like you're basically fine with throwing the whole incident into the history books and archiving it away somewhere. I won't be that way until three to five years from now. I suppose I'm just a different type of customer.
"those who forget history are doomed to repeat it" or something like that is an expression I take very seriously. That's proverb to me. Meanwhile I see some people (not you specifically) that almost have an opposite belief where history is almost not even worth talking about anymore. I hope you don't take this too literally. If I did mean it literally, we wouldn't be talking about a lot of things on here.
Well you guessed right in that my options as far as products to choose from are pretty limited right now because bad experiences chase me somewhere else and at this point I'm basically like spinning in a circle with nowhere else to go, trying to pick a direction lol. I'm not this extreme, but I do have a hard time because of my distrust.
I agree people make mistakes, but this isn't one person that did this. This is a whole system of people working together to get something done and there's supposed to be some kind of checks and balances to make sure stuff like this doesn't happen. Especially something as serious as a bulging CPU.
You and AMD might tell me "you never had to worry about that", and that isn't right. Imagine someone literally trying to get over an actual house fire that destroyed everything they have, and then going through this and people who have never been in such a situation telling them to calm down and relax. For the record, I've never had my house burn down *knock on wood.
I don't get the part about "stating what I am?"
Well at least that's clarified. I mean in your post where you said "People still acting like there's a fire risk amuse me", I think it can easily be read as "someone who thinks a disaster situation is inherent amuses me" which I think is what started all of this.
That makes sense and that's pretty much what I implied. You're not worried because you don't have this hardware. Would you be worried even if you did have this hardware? I don't know. Maybe not. Probably not I suppose since you trust AMD this much. I still think with the way you worded it it does read as you being amused "by the people" and so in connection "the people" you'd be amused by are people in a serious state of worry.
I already said I don't think you're the kind of person to laugh at someone elses' misfortune, but I do think you had somewhat poor choice in wording for that piece of your post.
Yeah, I know. I suppose basically I saw your post as a "someone laughing at me not with me" kind of thing.
So, no big deal. In the end I do get what you're saying and I get how you see things. But, I still see it the same way I see it.
No, I was laughing at disaster risks. The entire difference at play here is that I don't see the same disaster risks you do. So you're trying to say that by laughing, I'm laughing at disaster risks, and it doesn't work that way. That's inserting a motive onto me that isn't there and it is extremely dishonest.
No, my aversion to the "risk" isn't because I'm not using the hardware it can apply to., I've cleared this up so you should no longer have any confusion about it. I stated that I go on facts and not anecdote or sensationalized outrage.
I also stated that saying it should not be an issue now is not the same thing as denying it ever was.
I will reply to this statement to ask something of it, and these two "explaining poor wording" choices, though.
Out of curiosity, where have I been absolutely confident, proven wrong, and then continued to believe I was correct in my original stance?
I would certainly accept you showing me where I did that if you can indeed do that. I am not afraid to admit if I was "wrong". I've done it before, and I'll do it again, haha.
But I don't recall any particular scenario where I was absolutely certain I was correct, undeniably proven wrong, and then continued to just say I was right? And I say that because if I was undeniably proven wrong, my response to such a situation wouldn't be to deny it.
So perhaps either it didn't happen, or at least I wasn't undeniably proven wrong but you think I was because you disagreed with me to begin with? If you want to show me an example or where you saw this, I can give you my input on it. Otherwise I can't.
Okay, this one I worded really oddly. I had to read it twice to get it and I only got it because I know what i was trying to say instead.
"Stating what I am" meant "stating what I have in this thread" in that instance.
I was basically asking why, if you admitted you had the opinion that "it isn't like her to be like this", then why were you going against that judgment and presuming I found a disaster risk humorous? Again, if you knew it "wasn't like me"?
I apologize if that wording seemed "tone deaf" or whatever.
As I explained though, it might seem like it more because you're ascribing meaning to it that wasn't intended on my behalf. I perhaps could have worded it better, though?
I wasn't laughing at anyone who might be in a state of risk, of course. I just found it "amusing" that people who apparently didn't understand the facts were still painting the situation as a mountain of risk, when there's no excuse for that because the facts are known.