Инсталирайте Steam
вход
|
език
Опростен китайски (简体中文)
Традиционен китайски (繁體中文)
Японски (日本語)
Корейски (한국어)
Тайландски (ไทย)
Чешки (Čeština)
Датски (Dansk)
Немски (Deutsch)
Английски (English)
Испански — Испания (Español — España)
Испански — Латинска Америка (Español — Latinoamérica)
Гръцки (Ελληνικά)
Френски (Français)
Италиански (Italiano)
Индонезийски (Bahasa Indonesia)
Унгарски (Magyar)
Холандски (Nederlands)
Норвежки (Norsk)
Полски (Polski)
Португалски (Português)
Бразилски португалски (Português — Brasil)
Румънски (Română)
Руски (Русский)
Финландски (Suomi)
Шведски (Svenska)
Турски (Türkçe)
Виетнамски (Tiếng Việt)
Украински (Українська)
Докладване на проблем с превода
Правила и насоки за дискусии
Докладване на публикацията
Well, no. If you tell me you weren't laughing at the disaster risks, or me, or anyone with this platform I totally believe you. I'm not trying to contradict what you're saying. I will say it initially appeared that way with that first post by you or it appeared to be worded in such a way that it could easily be interpreted that way.
Well, I was never under the impression you would totally deny it ever was a risk or the incident happened. I was talking about dismissing it as "no longer an issue" with such abruptness.
Well, I mentioned you being certain on something and then being proven wrong. As far as the next step on continuing to hold your original stance, I'm not sure because I didn't call you out on it because I knew it would be a futile endeavor. It had to do with the "kernel 41" error and OP mentioned it and you said something to the effect of "if it says kernel 41 error then it is 100% hardware related" and he ended up changing some settings and was on his way and as far as I know his problem was fixed.
I can dig it up and point it out to you if you really want to see the thread/post but I'd rather not because I do know it will go nowhere since we already had a lengthy discussion on the whole "kernel 41" thing and we ended exactly where we started.
That's usually how it works. I mean if you indeed acknowledged a scenario where you saw you were totally incorrect and then proven incorrect I would think you would educate/learn from yourself and that experience and change your opinion on the matter. Usually when people are wrong and continue to be wrong they HAVEN'T seen the situation in which they were wrong to begin with or they would correct themselves in the future unless they want to continue being wrong over and over.
I mean, if you want to believe it didn't happen that's fine with me. Someone seeing a situation and denying they were wrong in it is the same exact thing as someone not seeing the situation at all to begin with as far as I'm concerned.
We had already did the back and forth on the "kernel 41" thing prior to that thread and I tried explaining, and when OP brought up "kernel 41" that time you continued talking about "hardware issues" and OP fixed his issue with some kind of configuration change or something.
Well, I'm not the one who called you out on it. I knew very well you weren't intentionally laughing at the situation as serious as I and some others may perceived which is why I didn't bother directly commenting to you on it. I knew it was me somewhat taking your comment out of context and I couldn't help it but it still kind of bothered me. I guess the same way it bothered W O K E I S M except the difference is that I knew you didn't mean it the way he said you meant it, otherwise I would have posted the same thing probably. If it was any other user on here that I didn't know as well or someone who's constantly being rude or trolling I probably would have had less respect and directly challenged them, but I know you didn't deserve that. I was just like "Illusion of Progress kind of came off a little rough with that but the post isn't meant how I'm taking it so I'll just move on and mind my business".
But when W O K E I S M kind of chimed in and then you commented in his comment, I just wanted to kind of help you understand why I think he was coming at you the way he did. I'm not him and not even 100% sure if I'm right on what he posted since I don't know what's going through his mind but really that post could have been mind I just would have said it to you more respectfully at least.
Nah, I understand I really. do. It might not even be an issue with you. Might be a problem with me because I do have problems. I laugh about "exploding cpu's" and I'm joking but in all seriousness I have a real bad history with explosions and I mean real explosions.
EDIT: BTW I did skim back towards my first responses towards you and it does seem like I was accusing you of actually getting some kind of amusement out of something in the situation but again I think it's because of the wording where you saying something about the situation amused you. So even if it does seem like there's a duality/contradiction in how I was accusing you earlier of saying what you said and now almost kind of not saying it, it's probably because I'm simply kind of moving on and forgetting about the post itself. The actual content of that post has been addressed and I'm satisfied with any kind of insight you wanted to provide for it and I was mainly at this point trying to just kind of stress to you that I'm over it and I am no longer taking it how I originally took it.
I think since I know how I think, I would have seen someone misinterpreting it just as I have and added something in so that they like me wouldn't see it as verbally abrasive for lack of better terms to describe it. But since I can't think the same weigh everybody thinks there will probably be times when someone sees what I post and after I think I worded it perfectly fine realize I should have worded it better.
Not sure if this helps at all.
I mean, you can't really say "the possibility exists for an issue and it's on you to prove it has none" because that applies to everything. We can only work with what is known. Nothing is known to be an issue until is is identified. A system is only stable until it is not. Etc., etc.
One issue did happen to be identified here, and then it was addressed, so yes, I think it's fair to say it's not an issue now?
That's not to say it's impossible to be prone to other issues, or that it never had that initial issue to begin with. But I'm not saying either or those things. Don't stretch what I'm saying into more than what it is.
I recall that thread, and yes I recall saying up front that my suspicion was if there's random restarts with no known other logs that it's almost always a hardware/electrical fault, because that's simply the truth to it. As always, exceptions do exist.
If you can link me to the thread and also point out where I said it was going to be 100% hardware issue in that particular case though, and also point out where it wasn't in the end (I actually don't remember the conclusion of that thread), then yes, I was wrong. Despite that, here's the problem.
I was never shown to be wrong and then denied it (this is the key part), and your entire accusation sort of hinges on this. I don't deny having been wrong before. I'm just in the dark as to where I've been wrong, been absolutely proven wrong, and then denied it anyway?
I mean yeah I don't mind it being shown here, but I'm wondering how far off track this is going for OP. This thread is supposed to be roasting marshmallows over a combusting AM5 isn't it?
I may be wrong here, but I got the impression my wording itself wasn't what he had an issue with.
I figured his issue was simply disagreeing with me on the facts that the issue is no longer present to the same extent it once was (AM5 SoC voltage issue) or a molehill instead of the mountain he's making of it (nVidia power connector issue).
Okay see then maybe something I said hit a little close to home, and I'm sorry for that, but those would have been things I couldn't foresee.
The part I found "amusing" was never any potential disaster risk, it was the fact that people were seeing one in places where it had been addressed or was blown out of proportion. I found that ignorance amusing because facts have existed for a long time, so there's no excuse to keep acting like it's an issue. So my "amusement" was at the ignorance, not the risk.
Yes, I probably could have avoided the misunderstanding (at least with you) by not using that one word. I'll try and keep my wording in mind (I usually do to the opposite extent; I over-complicate things to avoid possible misunderstandings).
Absolutely right, that's kind of how I know my worries were irrational. That's why I separated my two simultaneous attitudes. Logically/rationally I know you're more correct and I should feel at ease. But, still for some reason another part of me is thinking "don't trust this crap". I might as well assume the roof of my house is about to cave in and live as if the support beams are suspect to early deterioration with no reason at all to think that. Sure, it's possible what are the odds though?. How often is that a random or routine occurrence?
Here's a difference. You see it as addressed. I see it as addressed as quickly and efficiently as possible within the means and resources they're willing to provide to stop the negative blowback. So basically, I see it as damage control. Again, if my cynicism has hit objectively unhealthy levels, I understand but it is how I think and see things.
Again, I'm sure you never meant "it didn't happen" or that "it can't happen again". As far as it not being a problem anymore. I would say you are saying it's fair to say that the likelyness (is that a word?) of it happening again after it's been mitigated is so statistically low that it may as well be treated as a non-issue anymore.
So here's the actual post (not sure how this will come out since I don't think I've ever cross linked a post to another thread")....
So the main issue I'm taking with this isn't even the kernel 41 or hardware/electrical issue (even though that's what I initially brought up). I think you could easily win that argument.
I do see you stating "Bad drivers or software issues don't cause spontaneous shutdowns or restarts".
His issue was literally because of bad software. Steam was crashing his pc because it was confused on whether to use his igpu or gpu. As far as I can tell that was it. That's how I see it. Nothing more nothing less.
I'm willing to hear you out on a defense for this, maybe I'll acknowledge it but I don't see how.
The thing is back with the kernel 41 threads in my mind you were wrong and in your mind you were right. So I can't show YOU your are wrong if YOU don't acknowledge being wrong. I tried to tell you why kernel 41 wasn't necessarily hardware and you (as far as I can tell) didn't agree. And so since you don't agree you were wrong, you won't accept it as proof of you being wrong.
So fast forward to the thread I just quoted from where you CONTINUED to say it wasn't software causing kernel 41 and OP fixed it by configuring Steam differently when you said bad software doesn't cause spontaneous restarts which Steam was making happen.
lol, I don't think he cares. I'm starting to forget what this thread was about to begin with. Oh well, I don't think we're bothering anyone not much going on in here?.
I'm assuming he had a problem with your wording because he's the one who brought up you being "amused" by something of the situation. I'm going to assume if that one word wasn't used in the situation with bulging/exploding/melting/immolating cpu's at least that part of the post wouldn't be there.
You don't need to be sorry for not foreseeing things going on in my mind. Kind of hard to do. Most people don't, so you're not the only one. And you probably offend me the LEAST out of everybody I interact with on a regular basis.
Just Giving A Heads Up To Msi AM5 Users As It Was Brought To My Attn Via Steam H/O Forums :D :Oh: It Is BETA Pros And Cons With Beta Version BIO'S???
On AM5, if your system is already well with current BIOS (one beyond the whole SoC timing), the new one that just came out and improves stuff is one I'd wait on until it has progressed past beta. Sure it might be nicer, but if you're not having issues now, nor facing any risks, I'd wait.
Everything is dealt with in the manner you just listed though?
But secondly, that's the real fix for the issue in this case. The only issue was "a chip fries if a given voltage gets too high". Normally, the motherboard shouldn't give it that much. It did. The fix was to stop the motherboard from giving it the dangerous amount.
So the fix was the appropriate one? It's not some "quick and dirty non-fix". If it doesn't work (meaning the voltage is still going too high), then yes it's still there, but that would be on you to prove. As far as I know, based on information put out/lack of information to the contrary, it's been properly addressed.
I sort of gave my stance on this, though. I try not to deal in "what ifs" when it comes to factually stating the circumstances because that's an immeasurable thing.
I said it before, but we can only work with the known.
Out of curiosity, if you're this cynical about AM5, why are you giving a pass to the RTX 40 series power connector issue (you're considering an RTX 4070, last I knew)? For full disclosure, I don't have the formal opinion the latter is an issue. I'm just wondering why you see one as an issue but not the other?
What about LGA 1700 sockets bending?
What about ASUS motherboards?
What about Gigabyte motherboards back doors, and their GPUs fingers cracking?
What about MSI's certificates being stolen?
What about Samsung doing the switcheroo on SSD parts (not just Samsung, either), or cheating TV benchmarks?
What about Western Digital having consumer data taken (or let's be real, this was more big companies than not in the last many years)?
What about Seagate breaching trade embargoes and now having to pay a fine?
What about the nVidia breach?
I can keep going, but I'll stop here. And keep in mind most of this is just the last couple/few years.
I bet most people don't think of most of these (maybe never even heard of some of them?) because stuff like this isn't as rare as you might think. Issues happen. That's life. That's not to say they aren't issues. But not all of them are mountains and not all of them remain unaddressed. I'm just wondering why the AM5 one, one that was an issue yes but was addressed, and one that you were probably never at risk for despite being on AM5, is particularly one you're willing to point out.
You can link to specific posts, or just link the thread and manually type the post number. I believe the quote you're stating there was one of my initial assertions? And I believe I later admitted it was a bit strong (namely, the 100% part because of the whole "there's always exceptions")? You'll have to link to the thread so I can see how it went in order.
This whole thing hinges on "did I continue to say the cause for the OP specifically was what I claimed it was after it was stated to be something else" or was it just "I made a too strong broad assertion that i later admitted"? Big, biiig difference. Because if it's not the former... then this does not qualify for what you initially said of "making a claim, being proven undoubtedly wrong, and then continuing to arguing what was wrong".
Not guessing the right cause up front does not equal being wrong and denying it. Troubleshooting is often a process of elimination, and you have to start somewhere. Not always (maybe even rarely) is the first thing the cause. I was strong in my initial assertion, yes, but I admitted that. And yes, when the circumstances I describe in that quote are the case, that is almost always the cause (hardware as opposed to software). 100% was a strong assertion but I admitted that before the thread even had a known cause, and I don't believe I continue to deny it was the cause in OP's case specifically after the OP disclosed what changed things for them.
But I'm going on memory here, but I usually wouldn't sit there and tell someone who said "this was my fix" the response of "no it wasn't". So I'm interested in seeing if I did.
Considering you and I randomly take threads into long random discussions, always civil ones (I think) but still, that makes it hard to imagine how it's the "least bad" of those you interact with on a regular basis. And now I'm sad.
You might be right on this. Probably are. I mean the fix probably is as good as anyone can make it. I don't know if it gimped the performance in order to function correctly but that's kind of what I mean. For example if the the bios update blocked the chip or other related hardware from performing as advertised in order to operate safely.
I don't know if that's the case or not. But if it is that's what would disappoint me. But overall yeah you might be right on this. What else could they do to fix it?.
As far as the 4070 specifically, I'm not even familiar with the whole issue. I did hear something about power issues with some kind of cables/connectors with some gpu(s) but skimmed past it because I suppose it's not my problem yet. I guess that's one of the kind of bottom lines. If I didn't hear about it, I can't be that mad about it. MSI certificates yeah I think I forgot that. In that case I don't think it would unsettle me to much because it's not physically dangerous unlike a CPU bulging.
I suppose the main reason yeah I'm not mad or too focused on all the other things is a combination of "it's not my problem" or the issues relevant to me aren't physically dangerous. I suppose it's not even the problem itself at the same time. It's the fact that how the heck do you even let bulging cpu happen to begin with?.
I'm kind of getting fatigued for some reason with this part of the post and I might edit it later on to expand because you did bring up very very good points and a whole slew of them at the same time. I'll try to take time to think of a way to break this part down quickly and effectively.
Have not addressed this part yet......Will edit this post in a little bit to save my work.
I did want to rush a response to tell you this part which is don't feel sad or bad about what you said just now. I think just like I misinterpreted your post about the humor, it seems you misinterpreted mine about you.
I didn't mean you were in a group of "bad" and the coolest one in that list. I did phrase it as "you offend me the least" of everybody I interact with.
That being said I get offended by pretty much everybody at some point in time lmao. That's the messed up thing. You're just doing what everybody else does which is normal, but it's the fact that I take everybody as offensive at some point which is the huge issue. Might even be what caused this to begin with? Maybe W O K E I S M has the same problem HAHAHA.
Bottom line though for the moment I do have something to do but hoped you get this because sounds messed up you being sad over something I said.
No, lowering the voltage itself doesn't lose performance. It can, however, lower the maximum RAM frequency attainable. That's presuming things in a vacuum; in reality I don't know of (m)any who made a fuss about having a stable system at one speed but not having that same speed stable after the updated BIOS to limit voltage. That's not to say it didn't happen (to the contrary, I imagine it has in some cases), but as far as I know most people are still hitting 6,000 MHz with RAM on AM5 which I'd say is the relevant point (as above this you lose your 1:1 sync to the Infinity Fabric).
Additionally, where those cases may exist aren't "the chips not performing to spec". They still still perform exactly to spec. These XMP/Expo speeds are considered by CPUs manufacturers as above supported speeds and overclocking, largely for this very reason. Unfortunate, sure, but that's what it is. Saying the chips are now not performing to spec would just be wrong.
It's not like a Spectre/Meltdown (or the upcoming Zen Bleed) fixes which might have performance losses to mitigate them, which actually affected far more CPUs.
Strange, as the RTX 40 series power connector issue was made to be an even bigger deal than the AM5 issue.
The former was just blown out of proportion and as far I know a lot of "user error".
The latter was an issue that has since been addressed. It's not an issue now, which circles us back to my first post in this thread about people making disaster jokes about either of them.
No need; it's fine. I didn't expect an answer to all of them. The overall point was "why is one issue, which has since been addressed properly at that, being called out while these others aren't". In practice, you're right, most of those others aren't "issues" for most people that directly impact them. Nor is the AM5 one.
The people who had failures qualified for replacements.
The issue occurring (too much voltage being given) was addressed (voltage is now lower).
There's nothing else to it other than to try and say "it happened so I'm going to be outraged at it, and anyone that tries to say it's not an issue anymore, even though it's not if going by the facts, is going to get an earful because I'm going to lay it on them that they're being apologists for issues". That's... all that this thread has been since I made my statement.
No no no, I'm not sad about what you think of me. It was a bit of a joke anyway so don't worry. I was saying if what you normally deal with on the regular is a whole lot worse, I feel sad for you to be dealing with that.
You bring up a good point and I do see what you're saying and it make sense. So I'm letting a situation that "might not even be" drive an opinion of mine.
Shoot, this where I really can't continue the discussion. I'll restate that I totally ignore the specifics and numbers on hardware and stuff like that. So a lot that kind of didn't mean much to me since I don't pay attention to all that.
If you're saying nothing loses performance then I guess you might be right about that and I suppose you educated me on it.
Also I wanted to emphasize if "any" piece of hardware on the build lost performance because of the mitigation I see it as unacceptable. Not just the CPU.
Well, I suppose sure but if I don't focus and enter threads or look at videos or news that talks about that it would make sense I didn't hear much about it. I don't have time to read about every thing that went bad or had issues so I kind of ignore what doesn't pertain to me and that's probably why I paid so much attention to the AM5 thing and even MSI certificates (but I didn't really focus on that one too long).
I mean if you want to believe it's not an issue anymore it's fine. I'm not trying to force you to have the same opinion as me. I'm still considering this thing a fire hazard. I'm not safe until I disconnect it and it's AMD's fault I think this way. If they tested their stuff before they sold it I would think this is as safe as my b350 or b450 boards.
So objectively I'll even agree it's fixed but that's as far as I'll go. I think AMD deserves the jokes honestly and I don't feel sorry for them for everyone that jumped ship and went to Intel over this.
I mean I guess we can stop talking about this because I'm not trying to "give you an earful". lol, even though by the time our discussions get this long it seems a bit less pleasant than it started.
Oh cool!. Yeah, Tell me about it.
The issue was voltage to the SoC was getting too high when Expo was enabled. Combined with some motherboards being more agressive on voltage, combined with spikes, and especially combined with the more voltage sensitive X3D CPUs, this was disastrous.
This reaction to this cause and effect was to limit the SoC voltage. It stopped the cause.
That's all there is to it. It's not an opinion thing. It's just a series of facts.
The fact it is it is not an issue now. If you're on AM5, and especially if you use Expo and have an X3D CPU, ensure your BIOS is up to date, watch your SoC voltage (below ~1.3V), and that's it. If all that matches, you're not at any known risk.
Or, continue living where you simultaneously admit you don't know much about the matter but feel you have justification to make a statement one way on it. Your call.
I'm becoming a broken record here.
No, it's not AMD's fault you think or feel this way. Please, please, please don't take as personal or harsh as it may sound, but your ignorance may be why you feel that way?
What is partially AMD's fault is that the issue happened, yes. AMD, like all other entities, isn't perfect. But AMD isn't responsible for your current state of mind on where the issue stands now, because you arrived at it due to being in a self admitted (!) uninformed place.
If you just want to be upset selectively against AMD over it (or "outraged"), whatever, but then admit it so we can move on. Painting it as issue when you admit you can't determine that (and while the facts support that it is no longer a known issue) is an even worse look.
So you want it both ways?
You want to admit it's been addressed, but still you'll want to claim "I don't pay attention to any details" (this might be the root of the problem!?) but then say you have merit to claim there's risks there still?
I have no words for this.
Admitting you're only paying attention to the issue harshly because it affects something you use (sort of...) is not only admitting your lack of coverage for the rest, but it especially bad because the one issue you paid extra attention to is one you're admitting you didn't understand anyway. And you... don't see the issue with this?
In an alternate universe, you bought an LGA 1700 CPU and platform instead to replace your AM4 one, and you're probably similarly complaining "I don't blame anyone who went to AMD over this" (referring to the similar mountain made from a molehill bent CPU/socket issue at the time).
I mean, I'm very sorry if any of this sounds harsh, but like... you can't sit there and admit you aren't aware of all the details but simultaneously justify it's still an issue right now. You can't have it both ways. You can't, not without admitting you're just making up your own reality to live in.
I mean, I hear what you're saying. I'll agree it's about as factually correct as we can get. The issue seems be identified and that issue seems to be fixed. Things are only true until we know better. Sometimes software patches introduce new problems, I'm assuming you know this and it's just a point I'm trying to make again but I know this isn't software, it's hardware.
The way I see it, I don't need to know everything you know in order to be right. There are some ideas and concepts that override this solution you're explaining. It's a large part of why I don't invest my time in looking all those specifics. I find it in large part kind of pointless.
All I need to know is they "issued a fix" for it. Everything else is just elaborating on that same fact. I believe you. I know they issued a fix. I do believe for the most part it's under control.
Yeah, that's usually how our conversations go. Usually we end up right where we began.
Well, obviously AMD didn't give birth to me and affect my genetic make up or raise me so they can't be at fault for how my brain takes things.
But if you're saying they didn't trigger this mockery about their cpu's with an action on their part then you're at least partially wrong. I'm not worried about my food blowing up or melting, or my shampoo, or my hard drives or my deoderant.
They did something to start this.
Well they might not be responsible for how I think, but that is how I am. If they don't like it they should shut down their operations right now because a lot of consumers are like this. It's a a pretty simple relationship. You sell stuff that works (or at least not melt) and I'll buy it. And if one of their products screws up, yeah it will affect how I see them.
If you want to look at it mathematically and go "problem happened to somebody else therefore was zero percent an issue for me therefore I have no issue with AMD's stuff" that's fine but I don't think that way.
I don't want it both ways, I am just seeing it both ways. If I were to choose it one way I would have totally abandoned AMD for risk of my house burning down returned their junk hardware and gotten an Nvidia card for sure and always suggested Nvidia from this point forward.
I suppose I should just go that route so I'm at least consistent.
I have words, it's "we're basically going in circles and I knew this would happen". If you didn't see this happening my question is how? This is how all our long back & forths go.
I've acknowledged my "lack of coverage" in the rest if you mean the specifics. Multiple times already if I'm not mistaken. I help people on here too without shooting out numbers and hardware jargon.
I'll admit "I'm making up my own reality to live in". Kind of why I mentioned very quickly "I have problems".
You certainly need to know the facts on something in order to arrive at an opinion on it. This entire discussion is proof?
Your own conscious choice to remain uncertain about the state of things now is why you're in the spot that you're in. The facts are there; you're quite literally ignoring them and chosing uncertain in place of them. Blaming AMD because the issue happened to begin doesn't change that. It makes AMD partially responsible for the issue itself, but not your mentality. You have more control in yourself than that but you don't want to accept the responsibility.
Are you just pretending to forget that I'm not looking at this with bias because you are?
I've already declared how I've arrived at my stance. And it wasn't "it can't affect me personally so I rate the risk as nothing". I already told you that regardless of if it can affect on me, I based my stance on looking on the facts of the state of things as of right now.
And the facts are this... (someone do correct them if I have them wrong.)
Chips could be (key words) at risk because SoC voltage could get too high. That was the issue.
Voltage now shouldn't get as high on current BIOS. The risk of them frying from too much is now not there.
I can not simplify it any further.
To the contrary; you wouldn't be consistent if you did that. You would be less consistent, because you're not holding their issues against them like you are with AMD.
They usually don't though. Usually we're just having discussion and often it entails subjective things. So that's not at all "going in circles" (this is also seriously glossing over the rather routine concessions we both do...).
Let's also be clear here. When a discussion is had, and one side is putting forth the facts and the other is admitting uncertainty of the facts but wanting to remain equally right despite that, that's not "going in circles". That's "one side is very seemingly wrong but wants to pretend they're equally right by pretending is just a subjective disagreement when it's not a subjective matter but just a matter of facts". You may not have changed your stance on some things, but the discussion still went somewhere. It exposed the known reality for you, whether you choose to accept it or live in your own one of uncertainty.
But most of our other discussions aren't like this anyway. This one is different as it's actually more of a typical disagreement (but still civil, if drawn out and "boring", but hey those are the best kind?).
If that's truly so... why not get help? Serious question, by the way. I know the tone of this particular post might be a bit more aggressive than usual (and it's honestly only because you're basically straight up admitting you lack the awareness to form a stance but then still wanting to have your stance be equally right as the correct one).
I mean if the discussion is a bother, sure, let's drop it, but you sort of started it when all I did was tease the uncertainty for being wrong, so it's hard to blame me for pushing a "back and forth that doesn't get anywhere". My continued involvement was coincidentally to try and help you by informing you. I thought you'd be open to that. Seems not.
But I definitely can't help you if these are broader problems, though I sincerely wish you luck with them (and that you do seek help if you actually have them because this isn't stuff to mess around with; your mental/emotional health is important).
No. I disagree with this. We only have so much time in a day to read and take in "facts". Even if you wanted to you couldn't learn every fact there is on everything. So you need to buy a fridge, and you need it today? guess what you're not going to have the time to suck in every single fact there is on fridges so that you can arrive at an accurate opinion on which one you're going to get. You might Google some info in thirty minutes or an hour that will give you the best educated guess at which one to pick and go with that.
Fact is nobody has all the facts to what their opinions are and if they did I would bet my right arm there are more facts out there they don't know. So nobody is ever arriving at 100% completely fact checked opinion.
And so even if we were to say "well ok, you can't know everything, but you can know x, y, and z". Who's to say what x, y, and z is? You?. Who's defines the source?
Am I supposed to read the same exact web pages you did today? go through the same threads? Maybe you should learn the fact C, d, and E that I know?.
We all know what we know and we all run into different facts from different places that lead to different opinions and experiences as well as written/typed sources play very big into that.
If I sound crazy, my bad. It's probably because I might be I guess and I don't know it.
If you're telling me I have more control in myself then you obviously don't know much about psychological behavior. Also, I've tried to hint multiple times without derailing into some kind to hint that I'm not "all there" and I'm aware my perception of things might be driving my irrational conclusion if it is irrational.
I'll be honest, what's crossed my mind lately is that I think you were actually bothered by someone calling out AMD and repeatedly digging on them. I don't know if you're subconsciously going out of your way to defend them or fight for their defense of not.
I mean first off this thread was for people on AM5 we made some jokes and then you entered it (for what reason, I'm not sure except to express your amusement at the people making the jokes and some more of those "hard to digest facts" I suppose) The jokes were obviously jokes. You really think OP is actually awaiting an imminent fire coming out his pc? Obviously my pc isn't on fire. If it was you think my cooler would would maintain a stable temp if there was literally a fire going on inside my case?I unhook electronics as soon as I smell fried circuit boards or whatever.
I'm not saying you couldn't or shouldn't have entered.
I'm assuming you'll come back with "oh so you weren't serious this whole time". Just in case, no. That's not what I'm saying. I was serious about the uncertainty.
The thing is I ACCEPT THOSE FACTS. You also kind of literally made my point.
You said "Voltage shouldn't..." and the funny thing is you contradicted that in the next sentence. Shouldn't get as high as what? As high as it took for them to fry before the patch? Is that what you meant?
Because if you're saying it shouldn't get that high then you're leaving room for a chance which you spent the entire thread telling me there is no room to do because the problem was absolutely 100% factually and irrefutably gone. So you should have put "voltage won't get as high on current BIOS".
Or did you mean the temps shouldn't get high enough to work stable without frying? Because that doesn't make sense. They can get high and my cooler will keep it cool or bottom line it gets too hot and throttling or the pc shuts down?.
That's not the issue here. The issue was them frying. So if you did mean "they shouldn't get as high as they did to fry or not as high as typically people come in here like "My cpu temps are high but not melting, how do I cool it better?".
In case I am totally off on what you meant, sorry I guess I missed the point of what you were saying. Those two sentences did seem to contradict me and the use of the word "shouldn't" got me and I suppose what I didn't get was the word "high" being defined.
This is exactly what I was expecting and what continues to lead me to what I said about you simply defending AMD. To logically say "you can't bash AMD unless you bash Nvidia or every other hardware brand" means logically nobody can denounce anything. So if every brand/manufacturer has screwed up at one point or another than what are they all equal? Is it fair to say if we had included jokes on AMD/Intel/Nvidia/Gigabyte/MSI/Ccleaner/Lastpass/Microsoft/Windows/Linux/Apple/Android/Google/Ithinkyougetmypoint
then it would have been ok because we were inclusive enough to not make it appear as if AMD was being picked on?
I'll be sure to look out for you when people crack on Nvidia and don't include knocking AMD because that would be unfair.
So while I was thinking about this, I will say basically yeah in a way you are right. Everyone has screwed up at some point so whoever screwed up last and is fresher in my memory gets my attention. Pretty simple. They better hope Intel has some frying cpu problems before I upgrade next. Matter of fact I did rag on Intel A LOT when they had the bulk of those CPU exploits. I forgot the names of them but yeah, I was ragging on them and that's in large part what drove me to AMD. AMD driving me back lol.
Again, if I belong in a straightjacket for what I'm saying, I'm not sure what to do about it?
Well, I will disagree on this but might be difference of how we perceive things.
I still feel like this thread turned out pretty much exactly like all the other ones LOL. I mean I like it because I stay entertained though. I do see your points though and I don't think you understand that I see and understand your points while I feel you don't understand mine. I mean what can you do?
I've attempted and realized there is no help. A lot of help actually makes things worse (and I mean LITERALLY). I'd prefer no help sometimes, and in some cases the help causes more trouble. So sometimes looking for help means looking to make your own situation worse. I'm not looking for that anymore.
The thing is I'm not sure you want me to "be aware" of something. I think you want me to agree with you that there is no risk. I'm fully aware of what you're telling me. I'm not that off the rails.
But I think that still me sticking a "I think there might be a risk". I'll say this. That's how I feel with everything in life, not just my cpu. Paranoid = safe. I could elaborate but I'm trying to not to elaborate and that topic doesn't even belong on Steam, but I don't think I can get you to understand my stance on AMD cpu's without understanding me and I can't drop enough hints I suppose.
It doesn't bother me so much, but when you say you're getting "an earful", I mean sounds like you feel like we're picking on you.
You're informing me of stuff I already know. I know they issued patches, I know the problem has been mitigated. People get used to issues, becomes normal after a while so don't worry about it.
I'm not criticizing the being ignorant part. We're all ignorant at different things, and that's not always a problem. I'm criticizing the being ignorant part and taking issue with someone trying to inform you/correct you when you're wrong on something that you admit being ignorant on.
That's because "shouldn't" is the technically correct term for this since we're describing "intended behavior". It appeases to contrarians who might go "aha" if things later turn out to be different.
This is circling back to the "so you can't say the possibility of issues isn't there" isn't it? We went over that. In my reality, I deal with the known and the facts. "What if" scenarios become relevant if and after they are substantiated. Otherwise, we have to, what, simultaneously presume everything has every possible issue but it's just not known yet?
There was Spectre and there was Meltdown. I believe one affected both AMD and Intel and the other affected only Intel. I can't remember which was which but AMD was certainly not immune (though less affected, yes).
Oh, and guess what? Good news, everyone! It just came out that Intel's 6th through 11th generation CPUs have an exploit (being called "Downpoour"), and this on the tail of an exploit to Zen 2 (called "Zen Bleed").
Doesn't affect either of their latest stuff, but just goes to show what I said earlier. Nothing is known until it's known and sometimes this stuff comes out later. Sometimes it's sooner.
Mhm-kay, I'm staaaarting to get it. So this actually has nothing to do with this particular issue and it's a broader thing with how you view things?
If that's the case, why did you have the reaction that you did to my initial comment? Like, if you're admitting it's your own "fear the worst" mentality, then why even bother making it an issue? Especially if you're going to simultaneously bemoan a back and forth discussion?
I don't get it.
Nah, I don't feel that way, so don't worry. I mean I'm confused why you started whole discussion only to complain about a going in circles discussion... but I don't feel picked on. Definitely confused, though.
The thing is I'm not taking issue with you trying to inform me of something. If I was I would not read your posts or not respond to you. I'm interacting with you right?
I agree with most of what you're saying even.
So basically hindsight is 20/20 for you? Cool. Because it is for me too.
You're taking what I'm saying to an extreme level. Every possibility would be me saying there's a chance my cpu will start to spontaneously rgb or turn into ram or some other thing I can't even make up. Point is I don't see every possibility as happening, only it frying. And apparently it frying has been substantiated on some configs, just mitigated after the fact. The single instance is enough to raise suspicions.
I'm going to guess every time they mitigated those cpu exploits you claim "it's fixed, not a problem anymore" and assume there are no more backdoors because the facts you have are 1) they found a problem and 2) they fixed it.
You would have beem repeating this incorrectly after every exploit until the next one was found because you don't have facts on the next one found because they haven't found it yet.
If it had nothing to do with the issue, you think I was just pretending to believe AM5 cpu's were an issue?
I mean I should just say "yes, absolutely AMD did nothing wrong, I love their hardware the problem is 100% me. Nothing at all to do with AMD".
I mean yeah, forget it. You know what I was mistaken this while time. AMD cpus are perfectly safe. Zero percent chance of them frying anymore. People bringing up the topic amuse me too. I love AMD.
My initial contribution to this thread (along with the actual contribution to the original BIOS update this thread was and should have been about) was to claim how I found it amusing that people were still making disaster jokes this much later over things that isn't that level of a risk now. I didn't mention this just about AMD, either. I also gave an example with nVidia.
Your response to that was to...
1. At some moments, supposedly believe me on that claim that it's not an issue now, but simultaneously at other moments say you believe that very risked is still there? This part was confusing for me because it's sort of got to be one or the other.
2. Accuse me of making disaster jokes when... it wasn't me doing that? More the opposite? Others were doing this, which is what I was calling amusing.
3. Later complain about discussions going in circles when you initiated this discussion with me?
I'm therefore really confused with you. And I stated as much, and you don't have an answer to this other than to... simply blame me for AMD bias as to why this discussion is going? Really?
That's unbelievably disappointing. If anything, I'm the one who shouldn't have the patience for this anymore.
What kind of logic is this?
Different issues are different issues. You're trying to reason if that a given issue arises, and it gets addressed, one is not allowed to simply state that fact? Because of the possibility for other issues to exist? What...