With the WHEA BSODs and the Curve Optimization HW issues the Zen 3 AM4 CPUs have on top of the USB issues, Trust with the company is fading away as a stable platform. And surprise !! AMD RMA is very fast. AMD so good with Customers right right ??
Weren't you complaining about the supposed vulnerabilities released by that Israeli company with ties to Intel that tried to short stock AMD a few ago with their "ryzen fall" vulnerabilities? Which all need physical direct access?
Man, if you were an an acrobat you would be a multi gold medallist with all these hilarious super difficult somersaults.
WHEA crashes and USB issues are both fixed. It's true they both sucked bigtime for early adopters, and are indicative of poor QA from AMD, but they're fixed now, today.
I can't recall Intel ever having such problems, even back in the day when they tick/tocked every 2 years. Ryzen 5000-series CPUs were randomly crashing, ALL the time, even when idle. People had to turn off boosting entirely to stop it until AMD finally fixed the problem in January 2021. That was 3 months after release. This was a huuuuge problem.
USB issues were somewhat less common (I didn't have them myself) but they made all USB DAC audio stuttery, mouse mousement noticeably bad, etc. That wasn't fixed until the end of March 2021.
I wouldn't expect intel to have any issues since they have been releasing the same cpu just revised since about 2015. You failed to mention all the motherboard issues that reviews are now seeing with Rocket Lake. Which is a new arch and not just a new revision of skylake.....
Like I said, they didn't have problems like this back when they tick/tocked every 2 years either.
The WHEA crashes were absolutely brutal. Very difficult to diagnose because they happened at idle and the only real way to fix them was to turn off boosting and manually clock the CPU. And every time you hit the problem, your computer either bluescreened or black-screened and rebooted.
| I can't recall Intel ever having such problems, even back in the day | when they tick/tocked every 2 years. Ryzen 5000-series CPUs were randomly crashing,
I remember Intel selling me Haswell CPUs with TSX, which was later completly disabled by BIOS updates because it had hardware bugs not fixable via microcode. Intel refused my RMA requests, stating I could downgrade to an older BIOS to use TSX if I would like to. They also refused to remove the "TSX: Yes" from ask.intel.com, because technically the CPU has TSX, it is just buggy and therefore disabled via BIOS by default.
Easy decision, one company refuses to RMA and even refuses to add a note to its data sheets saying a feature advertised is unuseable because broken - while the other one releases buggy projects too, but tries to fix them and is open to RMA.
I know what thread you are referring to on overclock.net but it not something that has affected everyone as you mentioned. And it was addressed with AGESA 1.2.0.0 from what I can see.
This was the response Intel sent me, when I requested to remove "TSX: Yes" from ark.intel.com to stop misleading customers:
"We are leaving the attribute marked as TSX=Yes in ARK because the TSX-NI feature is actually still fused on in the processor. It is still a customer's decision to upgrade or not upgrade their BIOS. Upgrading would remove the feature, but not upgrading would leave the feature intact. So we figure it is still more helpful to call out in ARK those processors which have the feature fused on. Thanks for considering Intel."
Over the years, any crash and/or stability issues on my WinTel machines were always through the lens of Windows. So in retrospect, I would have an incredibly difficult time pointing the finger at the underlying Intel hardware components rather than the device drivers, OS, etc. It seems easier to isolate hardware-specific issues now that Windows is 'better' and Linux is a viable desktop OS alternative.
Guess you are too young to recall the Intel Pentium(s) errata (bugs)...;)...every CPU ever made has bugs, doesn't matter who makes it. Workarounds exist for every one, IIRC. BTW, the usual teething period for new-architecture CPUs (the time it takes for the motherboard vendors to correctly integrate AMD AGESAs into their motherboard code is usually anywhere from six months to one year.) Same exact thing is true for new architecture Intel CPUs (except they have their own name for issuing vendor bios updates, of course.) You won't have seen that sort of thing from Intel for at least the last six years because Intel hasn't shipped a brand-new ground-up architecture in all of that time (while AMD has shipped three (3) new architectures in the same period)--teething on these old Intel architectures has already been done, with one major caveat. Win10 updates still routinely include Intel-only microcode patching for security holes which is not applied to Win10 if an AMD CPU is present. I forget the last comparative count, but it is something like dozens of OS microcode patches and bios fixes for the current Intel CPU architectures compared to 2-3 for Ryzen. The amount of security patching Intel has to do is an excellent indicator of just how old the current Intel architectures actually are. And if you ever reinstall Win10 on those Intel CPUs you have to reapply all of those microcode patches through Windows update all over again.
My first computer was an Apple ][c, so I've been around awhile. I don't recall any intel CPU causing random crashes multiple times per day. Perhaps it happened, and they didn't take 3 months to fix it.
Not to imply intel CPUs are perfect, the C2000 bug in particular was deadly, but nothing like that in their core desktop and mobile offerings.
True that Intel is no saint for QA, they've had several CPU and chipset recalls where AMD hasn't (outside of GPU's and a very isolated Opteron stepping nearly 2 decades ago) though lets be honest nForce4 should have been recalled but that wasn't really on AMD.
Coincidentally nForce4's issues are relevant to one of Intel's major recalls in that they both had SATA corruption issues. Of course Intel recalled the Z68 chipset.
But overall Intel's issues are significantly more substantial than AMD's as Intel's often result in recalls where AMD's just involve pissed off OEM's and end users that eventually get a soft-patch.
I've had nForce 4 boards that were bulletproof (an affordable Epox comes to mind) and ones that were absolutely garbage (DFI Lanparty something or another with an NF4 Ultra). A lot of it came down to board designs and how far they pushed it.
Oh the promised hardware-accelerated firewall was a complete fail. Hardware bugs made it basically unfixable and unusable. Which was a shame, as when I first put together a socket 939 system it was a single core machine. Not that it mattered in the longer run as I dumped the never-quite-stable Lanparty for a cheaper Epox with a standard NF4, and later got a good deal on an FX-60 that served me well for some time.
I have a Ryzen 5900X on a Gigabyte Aorus X570 Xtreme v1.1 board since day 1 and have never had any of the random crashing you are talking about. If it was as widely of an issue as you indicated, it would of been published at all tech sites, but obviously nothing posted. USB issues not so much other then random wake up out of sleep, but AMD now has a fix for that implemented fairly quick.
Intel has had multiple issues - Multiple vulnerabilities, particularly in their CPUs, heavy power hungry issues with their 11xxx cpus, bad gpu drivers for a long time before they hired a Roja Kadori, SSD detection and crashing issues, unfixable chipset security flaw including in secondary processors such as Apples T2 security chip.....But lets keep pretending Intel has no issues.
Just gonna ignore all the Rocket Lake coverage until they push out some more firmware updates, eh? :P Also, USB issues have never been exclusive to AMD. I've had some Intel platforms over the years with similar issues. USUALLY on either platform the issues crop up with third party USB controllers / chipsets.
If AGESA update fixed the issues then why is AMD issuing RMAs without much hassle ? They have TSMC stock issues, and they fucked it up with the CCDs on the 5900X and 5950X more than the 5800X, I still see people reporting that problem and the fix was to not mess with CO ? Agesa 1.2.0.1 users mentioning the platform instability I saw another guy with 5800X with MSI X570 having a golden sample from CTR having USB 3.0 issues.
"Everything is fixed son" right ? Bullshit to peak.
Wrong, the USB FIX is 1.2.0.2. See the Anandtech article itself on that issue, where it mentions 1.2.0.2 is coming in April.
"AMD has prepared AGESA 1.2.0.2 to deploy this update, and we plan to distribute 1.2.0.2 to our motherboard partners for integration in about a week. Customers can expect downloadable BIOSes containing AGESA 1.2.0.2 to begin with beta updates in early April."
I'm not on AM4 platform, I'm planning to buy a machine and was reading on what are the things to look out. Having this fix on ASUS, I see. I'm going to wait to hear more on this once the 1.2.0.2 rolls out for all the problems associated with the Ryzen platform.
Looks like MSI, ASUS just released 1.2.0.2 BIOS update to their boards, ASUS 1.2.0.1A and this says the same thing of Fix USB connectivity issues. As for MSI, it says improved USB compatibility.
Same for me my AM4 machine can be considering production since I work from home on it. I never load beta's bioses on it. I'll leave that for other people to test.
I would feel perfectly comfortable buying Zen3 right now. The USB issue was the last major problem with the platform. As of mid-February, I was feeling pretty down on AMD, but they did fix the problems. That does not in any way excuse their poor QA allowing those bugs to slip through in the first place!
I don't get it, you're speaking from an authority of ONE, on behalf of a group of millions? So you are 1 better than a guy NOT on said board/cpu and reading forums of thousands or more maybe using the same hardware? :) Ok then.
If I read a forum where there are 1000's of owners of board X/cpu Y, I already know far more than a guy talking about his SINGLE board/cpu experience even if I don't own it. :) It is silly to think your personal experience is greater than thousands using the same combo in forums. The whole point of them is to get massive experience through others correct? Silly to act as an authority when you are a sample of ONE yourself. One guy not having issues x,y, or z, doesn't mean ALL BOARDS/CPU ARE GOOD. You seem to think your ONE experience means everyone MUST be having a jolly time too, and forget all the complaints in forums (who they?)...Uh, maybe not. To you, forums are useless? Whatever...
IE, I used to buy 20pk's of gpus as a PC biz. AS an example, take a 20pk of Matrox cards for 91TMX monitors (all cad/solidworks/ProE type crap would be used). I tested all 20 on that monitor as it pushed them to the limits. ~2 out of every pack wouldn't run without wavy screens at high refresh rates, but you'd never know it on a lower grade monitor with one card (at that time you couldn't get a 21in for less than ~$600, and the 91TXM was $1100 or so). But if you read my post in forums (posted that in actual matrox forums, not comment sections on articles), you'd know to test for that on your single card anyway. I read forums on stuff before purchasing (like the OP), just to AVOID products that have more issues than I can stomach. It's not rocket science here, more info=good, especially when done BEFORE buying. DUH. Buy first, and possibly swear later. READ forums first (ok, reviews too, but again they barely test a board/gpu etc), and avoid 95% of BS by buying the CORRECT part with the least issues. You don't find that part by listening to ONE guy in a comment section, you find that on a forum FULL of users of whatever you're eyeballing today. I'm not saying your opinion/experience doesn't count, just that you are making WAY too much out of that single data point vs. the OP who is possibly reading thousands of data points on the same hardware. Silly to blow off forums where tons of info is easily gathered on whatever you're about to buy.
I've never owned a dell, hp, etc box (apple //e was the last "PC" our family BOUGHT, instead of built). But I've troubleshot the crap out of all of them via forums much of the time and many times over the phone on a box I can't touch. So again...pfft... I used to read them for each launch just to find which boards etc to never sell myself in my biz.
Wtf are you talking about ? AMD ackowledged the stupid issues on the USB3.0 silently in a fucking subreddit after months of failures by the customers. Next the WHEA errors and crashes were also seen in subreddit and OCN both places. AMD offering RMA for the fucking latest TSMC 7N bleeding edge CPUs flatout just by showing p95 errors.
Yeah who blowed off forums ? Not everyone comes and says I have this X issue on forums, most of them go to reddit, and when I checked OCN FORUMS. People were saying USB bullshit happening,
I'm here to fucking buy Hardware for "my money" would like to research what to expect when buying and not be a blind fool taking all that AMD is da best hype nonsense. Ryzen 5000 released in OCT2020. Over 6months and still AGESA Is not rock stable. That doesn't inspire confidence at all. On top USB issues take out the RGB controller software when they are plugged to the USB header on the X570 chipset. Go to the same forums and tell what the fuck is going on rather than writing a useless essay.
As Silver5urfer said not really fixed. I did RMA my second defect 5950X because it's unstable at default settings... And I tried all BIOSes since AGESA 1.1.8.0... First CPU core #0 was unstable boosting at default settings (PBO disabled). Second CPU, already a replacement from RMA, core #5 and #12 were both unstable! All I needed to do is start a DirectX11 game and boom! Computer crash!
You would say: impossible, two problematic CPUs in a row?! Yes!
After the second CPU I found hard to believe and started suspecting other component on my machine even though it was stable before with a 3700X. I went ahead and bought a 3rd CPU, a 5800X. I am still using this 5800X on the exact same machine typing this response, exact same software/Windows install, completely stable for more than a week now since I RMAed the second defect 5950X... There's a thread on the forum about CPU failing Corecycler you can get more details there
AMD fucked up their TSMC 7N yields. They kept all the top bins to the EPYC Milan and the upcoming Threadripper, where top bins of CCDs go there. And they stamped these crappy CCDs onto the consumer mainstream market thinking yeah it will work as we advertised our performance numbers and results speak for themselves...
An $800 CPU crashing, to make it worse the RMA also crashes. Not high confidence on AMD with Zen 3 right now.
I would stick to single chiplet cpu's for now 5600X and 5800X seeing less RMA's on those models. And as business it makes sense to push the high quality chips to your enterprise customer who are playing you alot more money than consumers.
Your issue just sounds like a defective CPU. And you got two of them in a row if you can't run corecycler at default settings. AGESA updates aren't going to fix those issues you have a valid RMA.
Every company has its ups and downs, but AMD has been forthcoming and addressing the issues. When the USB issues became widely reported, AMD was actively communicating in the Reddit forums and asking for users to report it also directly to them on their website so they could get multiple cases built-up and identify the bug. They moved fairly quickly for a company of their size, and board vendors are already implementing the USB fix. There is no major issues with the Curve Optimization ( I am running a 5900X on a Gigabyte Aorus X570 Xtreme v1.1 board). One could talk about Intel, who had several security issues, and now power hungry CPUS that cannot catch up to IP performance AMD has at the moment. Point in case, every company has issues and hiccups now and then. It is how that company chooses to handle it, and I would say they have been handling everything as well as they can and been active with the community. You just need to give it a rest.
"when a processor runs code like a simple true/false branch, rather than wait for the result of that true/false check to come in from memory, it will start executing both branches at once."
I don't think any actually-used CPU does that. That is SpMT which was never implemented in practice (I think).
Instead, a CPU will predict one of the two branches and execute it. It will later revert back in case it is proven it chose the wrong path. It will never execute both paths at the same time.
If both branches were to execute, it would come at a speed penalty because the compute resources for the 2nd branch have to come from *somewhere*. You wouldn't save performance with prediction hits. Plus, in highly branching code, there would be a good many parellel executions needed.
Branch prediction misses are expensive for a reason!
You know AMD is the one who published a paper on this and is actually fixing it with haste? They handled it quite well unlike Intel where it's been flaw after flaw with lots of denial to begin.
When it is stated that setting MSR48h bit 2 or bit 7 to 1 can turn off the feature; Is the specific bit model dependant or is it both bits having the same functionality on all chips with this feature? If it's the latter, why have two switches controlling the same thing?
We’ve updated our terms. By continuing to use the site and/or by logging into your account, you agree to the Site’s updated Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
63 Comments
Back to Article
Marlin1975 - Thursday, April 8, 2021 - link
Looks like its not a big difference on or off.https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&...
shabby - Thursday, April 8, 2021 - link
0.4% slower... Amd is doomed!Silver5urfer - Thursday, April 8, 2021 - link
With the WHEA BSODs and the Curve Optimization HW issues the Zen 3 AM4 CPUs have on top of the USB issues, Trust with the company is fading away as a stable platform. And surprise !! AMD RMA is very fast. AMD so good with Customers right right ??eva02langley - Thursday, April 8, 2021 - link
Congrats to AMD, they now have 2 vulnerabilities... Intel has more than 100...TheinsanegamerN - Thursday, April 8, 2021 - link
more then 100 of which require phsyical access to the hardware, in which case you've already lost. Security 101.Spunjji - Thursday, April 8, 2021 - link
Keep on spinningtamalero - Friday, April 16, 2021 - link
Weren't you complaining about the supposed vulnerabilities released by that Israeli company with ties to Intel that tried to short stock AMD a few ago with their "ryzen fall" vulnerabilities? Which all need physical direct access?Man, if you were an an acrobat you would be a multi gold medallist with all these hilarious super difficult somersaults.
schizoide - Thursday, April 8, 2021 - link
WHEA crashes and USB issues are both fixed. It's true they both sucked bigtime for early adopters, and are indicative of poor QA from AMD, but they're fixed now, today.I'm not aware of any curve optimizer issues.
eva02langley - Thursday, April 8, 2021 - link
WHAT? Releasing a new products which is a new uarch on a present socket will incur some potential buggy experience... WOW... COLOR ME SHOCKED!!!schizoide - Thursday, April 8, 2021 - link
I can't recall Intel ever having such problems, even back in the day when they tick/tocked every 2 years. Ryzen 5000-series CPUs were randomly crashing, ALL the time, even when idle. People had to turn off boosting entirely to stop it until AMD finally fixed the problem in January 2021. That was 3 months after release. This was a huuuuge problem.USB issues were somewhat less common (I didn't have them myself) but they made all USB DAC audio stuttery, mouse mousement noticeably bad, etc. That wasn't fixed until the end of March 2021.
Makaveli - Thursday, April 8, 2021 - link
I wouldn't expect intel to have any issues since they have been releasing the same cpu just revised since about 2015. You failed to mention all the motherboard issues that reviews are now seeing with Rocket Lake. Which is a new arch and not just a new revision of skylake.....schizoide - Thursday, April 8, 2021 - link
Like I said, they didn't have problems like this back when they tick/tocked every 2 years either.The WHEA crashes were absolutely brutal. Very difficult to diagnose because they happened at idle and the only real way to fix them was to turn off boosting and manually clock the CPU. And every time you hit the problem, your computer either bluescreened or black-screened and rebooted.
ceisserer - Thursday, April 8, 2021 - link
| I can't recall Intel ever having such problems, even back in the day| when they tick/tocked every 2 years. Ryzen 5000-series CPUs were randomly crashing,
I remember Intel selling me Haswell CPUs with TSX, which was later completly disabled by BIOS updates because it had hardware bugs not fixable via microcode. Intel refused my RMA requests, stating I could downgrade to an older BIOS to use TSX if I would like to.
They also refused to remove the "TSX: Yes" from ask.intel.com, because technically the CPU has TSX, it is just buggy and therefore disabled via BIOS by default.
Easy decision, one company refuses to RMA and even refuses to add a note to its data sheets saying a feature advertised is unuseable because broken - while the other one releases buggy projects too, but tries to fix them and is open to RMA.
schizoide - Thursday, April 8, 2021 - link
Did that TSX bug cause your computer to crash 6 times per day?Makaveli - Thursday, April 8, 2021 - link
Been on x570 for about a year and a half never seen a WHEA BSOD.schizoide - Thursday, April 8, 2021 - link
It was a very common issue (threads hundreds of pages long, etc), but it certainly didn't hit everybody, otherwise AMD would have caught it in QA.Makaveli - Thursday, April 8, 2021 - link
I know what thread you are referring to on overclock.net but it not something that has affected everyone as you mentioned. And it was addressed with AGESA 1.2.0.0 from what I can see.schizoide - Thursday, April 8, 2021 - link
1.1.9.0 actually fixed it for me. But anyway yes, as I noted earlier, it's fixed now.Spunjji - Thursday, April 8, 2021 - link
He has moved the goalposts since that strident declaration, but it remains all the same.ceisserer - Thursday, April 8, 2021 - link
This was the response Intel sent me, when I requested to remove "TSX: Yes" from ark.intel.com to stop misleading customers:"We are leaving the attribute marked as TSX=Yes in ARK because the TSX-NI feature is actually still fused on in the processor. It is still a customer's decision to upgrade or not upgrade their BIOS. Upgrading would remove the feature, but not upgrading would leave the feature intact. So we figure it is still more helpful to call out in ARK those processors which have the feature fused on. Thanks for considering Intel."
casperes1996 - Tuesday, April 13, 2021 - link
That's incredibly messed up by Intelmrvco - Thursday, April 8, 2021 - link
Over the years, any crash and/or stability issues on my WinTel machines were always through the lens of Windows. So in retrospect, I would have an incredibly difficult time pointing the finger at the underlying Intel hardware components rather than the device drivers, OS, etc. It seems easier to isolate hardware-specific issues now that Windows is 'better' and Linux is a viable desktop OS alternative.WaltC - Thursday, April 8, 2021 - link
Guess you are too young to recall the Intel Pentium(s) errata (bugs)...;)...every CPU ever made has bugs, doesn't matter who makes it. Workarounds exist for every one, IIRC. BTW, the usual teething period for new-architecture CPUs (the time it takes for the motherboard vendors to correctly integrate AMD AGESAs into their motherboard code is usually anywhere from six months to one year.) Same exact thing is true for new architecture Intel CPUs (except they have their own name for issuing vendor bios updates, of course.) You won't have seen that sort of thing from Intel for at least the last six years because Intel hasn't shipped a brand-new ground-up architecture in all of that time (while AMD has shipped three (3) new architectures in the same period)--teething on these old Intel architectures has already been done, with one major caveat. Win10 updates still routinely include Intel-only microcode patching for security holes which is not applied to Win10 if an AMD CPU is present. I forget the last comparative count, but it is something like dozens of OS microcode patches and bios fixes for the current Intel CPU architectures compared to 2-3 for Ryzen. The amount of security patching Intel has to do is an excellent indicator of just how old the current Intel architectures actually are. And if you ever reinstall Win10 on those Intel CPUs you have to reapply all of those microcode patches through Windows update all over again.schizoide - Thursday, April 8, 2021 - link
My first computer was an Apple ][c, so I've been around awhile. I don't recall any intel CPU causing random crashes multiple times per day. Perhaps it happened, and they didn't take 3 months to fix it.Not to imply intel CPUs are perfect, the C2000 bug in particular was deadly, but nothing like that in their core desktop and mobile offerings.
Spunjji - Thursday, April 8, 2021 - link
First 1.13Ghz Pentium IIISmell This - Thursday, April 8, 2021 - link
I guess everyone has forgotten about the Intel Workstation OR840 motherboard
ATX - Slot 1 - i840 __ 2P with RDRAM. I still have a new one in the 'bag'
https://www.anandtech.com/show/420/3
Spunjji - Thursday, April 8, 2021 - link
"ALL the time"Nonsense. Intel shills gotta work harder since Rocket Lake exploded on the pad.
Samus - Friday, April 9, 2021 - link
True that Intel is no saint for QA, they've had several CPU and chipset recalls where AMD hasn't (outside of GPU's and a very isolated Opteron stepping nearly 2 decades ago) though lets be honest nForce4 should have been recalled but that wasn't really on AMD.Coincidentally nForce4's issues are relevant to one of Intel's major recalls in that they both had SATA corruption issues. Of course Intel recalled the Z68 chipset.
But overall Intel's issues are significantly more substantial than AMD's as Intel's often result in recalls where AMD's just involve pissed off OEM's and end users that eventually get a soft-patch.
Alexvrb - Sunday, April 11, 2021 - link
I've had nForce 4 boards that were bulletproof (an affordable Epox comes to mind) and ones that were absolutely garbage (DFI Lanparty something or another with an NF4 Ultra). A lot of it came down to board designs and how far they pushed it.Oh the promised hardware-accelerated firewall was a complete fail. Hardware bugs made it basically unfixable and unusable. Which was a shame, as when I first put together a socket 939 system it was a single core machine. Not that it mattered in the longer run as I dumped the never-quite-stable Lanparty for a cheaper Epox with a standard NF4, and later got a good deal on an FX-60 that served me well for some time.
tamalero - Friday, April 16, 2021 - link
Id rather have fixable bugs than exploits that hinder performance severely.Maverick009 - Friday, April 16, 2021 - link
I have a Ryzen 5900X on a Gigabyte Aorus X570 Xtreme v1.1 board since day 1 and have never had any of the random crashing you are talking about. If it was as widely of an issue as you indicated, it would of been published at all tech sites, but obviously nothing posted. USB issues not so much other then random wake up out of sleep, but AMD now has a fix for that implemented fairly quick.Intel has had multiple issues - Multiple vulnerabilities, particularly in their CPUs, heavy power hungry issues with their 11xxx cpus, bad gpu drivers for a long time before they hired a Roja Kadori, SSD detection and crashing issues, unfixable chipset security flaw including in secondary processors such as Apples T2 security chip.....But lets keep pretending Intel has no issues.
dotjaz - Saturday, April 17, 2021 - link
read your own comment, intel never released new uarchs on old platformsMakaveli - Thursday, April 8, 2021 - link
Never heard of CO HW issues also sounds like he just made that up.Alexvrb - Sunday, April 11, 2021 - link
Just gonna ignore all the Rocket Lake coverage until they push out some more firmware updates, eh? :P Also, USB issues have never been exclusive to AMD. I've had some Intel platforms over the years with similar issues. USUALLY on either platform the issues crop up with third party USB controllers / chipsets.Makaveli - Thursday, April 8, 2021 - link
Both of these have been addressed with AGESA updates. Time for you to get up to speed son.Silver5urfer - Thursday, April 8, 2021 - link
If AGESA update fixed the issues then why is AMD issuing RMAs without much hassle ? They have TSMC stock issues, and they fucked it up with the CCDs on the 5900X and 5950X more than the 5800X, I still see people reporting that problem and the fix was to not mess with CO ? Agesa 1.2.0.1 users mentioning the platform instability I saw another guy with 5800X with MSI X570 having a golden sample from CTR having USB 3.0 issues."Everything is fixed son" right ? Bullshit to peak.
schizoide - Thursday, April 8, 2021 - link
USB fix was 1.2.0.1A, not 1.2.0.1.Silver5urfer - Thursday, April 8, 2021 - link
Wrong, the USB FIX is 1.2.0.2. See the Anandtech article itself on that issue, where it mentions 1.2.0.2 is coming in April."AMD has prepared AGESA 1.2.0.2 to deploy this update, and we plan to distribute 1.2.0.2 to our motherboard partners for integration in about a week. Customers can expect downloadable BIOSes containing AGESA 1.2.0.2 to begin with beta updates in early April."
schizoide - Thursday, April 8, 2021 - link
You are incorrect. 1.2.0.1A also incorporates the USB fix, as a hotfix to 1.2.0.1. 1.2.0.2 will be a "real" GA release with the fix.Makaveli - Thursday, April 8, 2021 - link
lol you are basing this off an article and both schizoide and I are on AM4 platforms.Asus has the USB fix in 1.2.0.1 Patch A which has been out since last week.
Makaveli - Thursday, April 8, 2021 - link
I'm on x570 with a 5800X on AGESA 1.2.0.1 Patch A and have zero issue on my machine.No WHEA BSOD
No USB issues
No CO issue
Are you even on a AM4 platform? I'm speaking from first hand experience not something I read in a forum.
Silver5urfer - Thursday, April 8, 2021 - link
I'm not on AM4 platform, I'm planning to buy a machine and was reading on what are the things to look out. Having this fix on ASUS, I see. I'm going to wait to hear more on this once the 1.2.0.2 rolls out for all the problems associated with the Ryzen platform.Silver5urfer - Thursday, April 8, 2021 - link
Looks like MSI, ASUS just released 1.2.0.2 BIOS update to their boards, ASUS 1.2.0.1A and this says the same thing of Fix USB connectivity issues. As for MSI, it says improved USB compatibility.Makaveli - Thursday, April 8, 2021 - link
Those are Beta bios, I will stay on 1.2.0.1A until those are out of beta status.schizoide - Thursday, April 8, 2021 - link
Good call. 1.2.0.1A was originally tagged beta and I didn't upgrade until they removed that tag.Makaveli - Thursday, April 8, 2021 - link
Same for me my AM4 machine can be considering production since I work from home on it. I never load beta's bioses on it. I'll leave that for other people to test.schizoide - Thursday, April 8, 2021 - link
I would feel perfectly comfortable buying Zen3 right now. The USB issue was the last major problem with the platform. As of mid-February, I was feeling pretty down on AMD, but they did fix the problems. That does not in any way excuse their poor QA allowing those bugs to slip through in the first place!TheJian - Sunday, April 11, 2021 - link
I don't get it, you're speaking from an authority of ONE, on behalf of a group of millions? So you are 1 better than a guy NOT on said board/cpu and reading forums of thousands or more maybe using the same hardware? :) Ok then.If I read a forum where there are 1000's of owners of board X/cpu Y, I already know far more than a guy talking about his SINGLE board/cpu experience even if I don't own it. :) It is silly to think your personal experience is greater than thousands using the same combo in forums. The whole point of them is to get massive experience through others correct? Silly to act as an authority when you are a sample of ONE yourself. One guy not having issues x,y, or z, doesn't mean ALL BOARDS/CPU ARE GOOD. You seem to think your ONE experience means everyone MUST be having a jolly time too, and forget all the complaints in forums (who they?)...Uh, maybe not. To you, forums are useless? Whatever...
IE, I used to buy 20pk's of gpus as a PC biz. AS an example, take a 20pk of Matrox cards for 91TMX monitors (all cad/solidworks/ProE type crap would be used). I tested all 20 on that monitor as it pushed them to the limits. ~2 out of every pack wouldn't run without wavy screens at high refresh rates, but you'd never know it on a lower grade monitor with one card (at that time you couldn't get a 21in for less than ~$600, and the 91TXM was $1100 or so). But if you read my post in forums (posted that in actual matrox forums, not comment sections on articles), you'd know to test for that on your single card anyway. I read forums on stuff before purchasing (like the OP), just to AVOID products that have more issues than I can stomach. It's not rocket science here, more info=good, especially when done BEFORE buying. DUH. Buy first, and possibly swear later. READ forums first (ok, reviews too, but again they barely test a board/gpu etc), and avoid 95% of BS by buying the CORRECT part with the least issues. You don't find that part by listening to ONE guy in a comment section, you find that on a forum FULL of users of whatever you're eyeballing today. I'm not saying your opinion/experience doesn't count, just that you are making WAY too much out of that single data point vs. the OP who is possibly reading thousands of data points on the same hardware. Silly to blow off forums where tons of info is easily gathered on whatever you're about to buy.
I've never owned a dell, hp, etc box (apple //e was the last "PC" our family BOUGHT, instead of built). But I've troubleshot the crap out of all of them via forums much of the time and many times over the phone on a box I can't touch. So again...pfft... I used to read them for each launch just to find which boards etc to never sell myself in my biz.
Silver5urfer - Monday, April 12, 2021 - link
Wtf are you talking about ? AMD ackowledged the stupid issues on the USB3.0 silently in a fucking subreddit after months of failures by the customers. Next the WHEA errors and crashes were also seen in subreddit and OCN both places. AMD offering RMA for the fucking latest TSMC 7N bleeding edge CPUs flatout just by showing p95 errors.Yeah who blowed off forums ? Not everyone comes and says I have this X issue on forums, most of them go to reddit, and when I checked OCN FORUMS. People were saying USB bullshit happening,
I'm here to fucking buy Hardware for "my money" would like to research what to expect when buying and not be a blind fool taking all that AMD is da best hype nonsense. Ryzen 5000 released in OCT2020. Over 6months and still AGESA Is not rock stable. That doesn't inspire confidence at all. On top USB issues take out the RGB controller software when they are plugged to the USB header on the X570 chipset. Go to the same forums and tell what the fuck is going on rather than writing a useless essay.
thigobr - Thursday, April 8, 2021 - link
As Silver5urfer said not really fixed. I did RMA my second defect 5950X because it's unstable at default settings... And I tried all BIOSes since AGESA 1.1.8.0... First CPU core #0 was unstable boosting at default settings (PBO disabled). Second CPU, already a replacement from RMA, core #5 and #12 were both unstable! All I needed to do is start a DirectX11 game and boom! Computer crash!You would say: impossible, two problematic CPUs in a row?! Yes!
After the second CPU I found hard to believe and started suspecting other component on my machine even though it was stable before with a 3700X. I went ahead and bought a 3rd CPU, a 5800X. I am still using this 5800X on the exact same machine typing this response, exact same software/Windows install, completely stable for more than a week now since I RMAed the second defect 5950X...
There's a thread on the forum about CPU failing Corecycler you can get more details there
schizoide - Thursday, April 8, 2021 - link
That's a huge bummer. Since the 5800X is stable it does sound like you got two bad CPUs in a row.Silver5urfer - Thursday, April 8, 2021 - link
AMD fucked up their TSMC 7N yields. They kept all the top bins to the EPYC Milan and the upcoming Threadripper, where top bins of CCDs go there. And they stamped these crappy CCDs onto the consumer mainstream market thinking yeah it will work as we advertised our performance numbers and results speak for themselves...An $800 CPU crashing, to make it worse the RMA also crashes. Not high confidence on AMD with Zen 3 right now.
Makaveli - Thursday, April 8, 2021 - link
I would stick to single chiplet cpu's for now 5600X and 5800X seeing less RMA's on those models. And as business it makes sense to push the high quality chips to your enterprise customer who are playing you alot more money than consumers.Makaveli - Thursday, April 8, 2021 - link
Your issue just sounds like a defective CPU. And you got two of them in a row if you can't run corecycler at default settings. AGESA updates aren't going to fix those issues you have a valid RMA.Spunjji - Thursday, April 8, 2021 - link
FUDMaverick009 - Friday, April 16, 2021 - link
Every company has its ups and downs, but AMD has been forthcoming and addressing the issues. When the USB issues became widely reported, AMD was actively communicating in the Reddit forums and asking for users to report it also directly to them on their website so they could get multiple cases built-up and identify the bug. They moved fairly quickly for a company of their size, and board vendors are already implementing the USB fix. There is no major issues with the Curve Optimization ( I am running a 5900X on a Gigabyte Aorus X570 Xtreme v1.1 board). One could talk about Intel, who had several security issues, and now power hungry CPUS that cannot catch up to IP performance AMD has at the moment. Point in case, every company has issues and hiccups now and then. It is how that company chooses to handle it, and I would say they have been handling everything as well as they can and been active with the community. You just need to give it a rest.eva02langley - Thursday, April 8, 2021 - link
The fact that AMD has put any emphasis on this is making it clear that they will work on fixing this with their upcoming uarchs.Bigos - Thursday, April 8, 2021 - link
"when a processor runs code like a simple true/false branch, rather than wait for the result of that true/false check to come in from memory, it will start executing both branches at once."I don't think any actually-used CPU does that. That is SpMT which was never implemented in practice (I think).
Instead, a CPU will predict one of the two branches and execute it. It will later revert back in case it is proven it chose the wrong path. It will never execute both paths at the same time.
hansmuff - Thursday, April 8, 2021 - link
This is correct!If both branches were to execute, it would come at a speed penalty because the compute resources for the 2nd branch have to come from *somewhere*. You wouldn't save performance with prediction hits. Plus, in highly branching code, there would be a good many parellel executions needed.
Branch prediction misses are expensive for a reason!
DigitalFreak - Thursday, April 8, 2021 - link
Waiting to see if Ryan Shart or someone else at Intel has the balls to call out AMD for this, considering all the security issues Intel has had.Makaveli - Thursday, April 8, 2021 - link
For as much as a shill that Ryan Shrout is, I don't even think he is dumb enough to do that considering intel has way more of these and AMD does.RSAUser - Monday, April 12, 2021 - link
You know AMD is the one who published a paper on this and is actually fixing it with haste? They handled it quite well unlike Intel where it's been flaw after flaw with lots of denial to begin.casperes1996 - Tuesday, April 13, 2021 - link
When it is stated that setting MSR48h bit 2 or bit 7 to 1 can turn off the feature; Is the specific bit model dependant or is it both bits having the same functionality on all chips with this feature? If it's the latter, why have two switches controlling the same thing?