- 0 Posts
- 145 Comments
What I mean by that is that they will take a huge disservice to their customers over a slight financial inconvenience (packaging and validating an existing fix for different CPU series with the same architecture).
I don’t classify fixing critical vulnerabilities from products as recent as the last decade as “goodwill”, that’s just what I’d expect to receive as a customer: a working product with no known vulnerabilities left open. I could’ve bought a Ryzen 3000 CPU (maybe as part of cheap office PCs or whatever) a few days ago, only to now know they have this severe vulnerability with the label WONTFIX on it. And even if I bought it 5 years ago: a fix exists, port it over!
I know some people say it’s not that critical of a bug because an attacker needs kernel access, but it’s a convenient part of a vulnerability chain for an attacker that once exploited is almost impossible to detect and remove.
That’s so stupid, also because they have fixes for Zen and Zen 2 based Epyc CPUs available.
Intel vs. AMD isn’t “bad guys” vs. “good guys”. Either company will take every opportunity to screw their customers over. Sure, “don’t buy Intel” holds true for 13th and 14th gen Core CPUs specifically, but other than that it’s more of a pick your poison.
BorgBase allows for append-only backups.
They “have to” push their current silicon beyond its limits just to keep up with AMD (especially X3D in gaming workloads).
They pushed too far, big time.
The only right thing to do here would be to offer a full refund of the original purchase price of the CPU and mainboard to all customers, stop selling affected models immediately and release revisions that aren’t unstable and rapidly degrading by default.
But this won’t happen of course.
I feel like most of Vivaldi’s target audience is knowledgeable enough to enable an extension that’s disabled by default. Heck, just display a notification asking whether to enable the extension when a Google Meet site is opened.
These proprietary, bundled-by-default extensions are just a taste of what a browser engine monopoly looks like. Alternative frontends to the Chromium engine don’t make a difference as these frontends will suck up whatever changes upstream. We only have 3 major/relevant engines left, Blink (Chromium), Gecko (Firefox) and WebKit (Safari, originated in Konqueror I think), with Blink being a fork of WebKit (although very diverged by now).
The web is so complex now that I don’t really see more engines becoming actually usable. Even Microsoft bailed out and eventually switched Edge over to Chromium.
Lenovo has been weird for many years now with their built-to-order configuration options. They often announce 4 to 5 display options when in reality maybe 2 or 3 are available, and some of them only in combination with some weird other configuration options. Then it also depends on country of order.
Oh yeah, looking forward to hopefully many years of platform support. They’ll obviously have to switch to different memory modules (as an example) at some point (CAMM should be next), but I hope they keep the board compatible with the case, modules, I/O and display for as long as anyhow possible.
I’m coming from a ThinkPad T490 and if that would’ve been a Framework which I could just upgrade from the i7 8565u to a Core Ultra or Ryzen 7000, I wouldn’t need/want a new notebook and could simply upgrade.
This will be my first Framework, already preordered a few weeks ago.
They finally offer a 120 Hz display, and while it has slightly rounded corners which isn’t ideal, but I’ll take the 120 Hz with VRR and higher resolution over perfect corners. They explained they had to use a panel that was already on the market because they don’t have enough volume that they can afford to order a custom display and with the Framework 13 using a 3:2 aspect ratio options were apparently very limited.
They also offer a keyboard with the Super key having a neutral label (not a Windows logo) now.
The new webcam is apparently quite a lot better, but I don’t care too much about that.
I went for the i5 125H model, I think the difference of almost 400,-€ to the i7 155H isn’t worth it for most use cases, as you only get 2 more P cores (with all other core clusters being identical, I think 4+8+2 vs. 6+8+2) and 8 instead of 7 GPU CUs. I feel the difference will be negligible for my use case as soon as it hits power/thermal limits anyway. This also seems to be the stop-gap generation of CPUs, with both AMD and Intel appearing to make noticeable steps forward in the generation.
There’s also the AMD model which is great and got most upgrades the Ultra model did (new display, webcam and keyboard options), only missing out on a slightly improved cooling system. Between the i7 and R7 I probably would’ve gone for the Ryzen 7, but I feel the i5 is the better choice compared to the Ryzen 5, primarily because the iGPU is stripped quite a bit compared to the R7. Intel is also less restrictive on which expansion slot supports what, with every port supporting full USB 4 including DisplayPort. Not a big deal as there are still enough fully-featured slots on the AMD model, but it’s a bit more convenient to just plug in any card anywhere and it works.
These are hardly surprisingly high System requirements, at least if the game looks the part. Achieving 1080p60 at medium settings on an RTX 2080, which performs pretty much on par with an even older flagship card (1080 Ti) sounds about right.
CPU requirements aren’t that out of place either, and I doubt you’ll actually need a 14900K for 60 FPS.
Today’s CPUs usually expose some USB connections directly. Ryzen 7000 desktop CPUs expose 4 USB 3.2 Gen 2 directly on their on-package I/O die for example. So if you connect your USB drives directly to the ports your mainboard connects directly to the CPU, the chipset (“southbridge”) and any third-party USB controllers are out of the equation.
This is just information, I’m not advising to use USB for fixed storage.
“ASRock” and “ASRock Rack” are two different series of motherboards.
Here’s the QVL of one of their AM5 mainboards: https://www.asrockrack.com/general/productdetail.asp?Model=B650D4U-2L2T/BCM#Memory - it doesn’t limit these modules to specific CPUs. All CPUs with ECC compatibility also support these modules on this mainboard. Some of these Rack boards are over a year old, and they always had some ECC modules on their QVL. This - again - isn’t EPYC 4004 specific, they couldn’t have validated it with EPYC 4004 CPUs a year ago. In fact, their CPU support list doesn’t even list EPYC 4004 CPUs as of today, as they haven’t released a BIOS update adding (official) compatibility in for these CPUs (it will probably be released shortly though).
ASRock Rack AM4 mainboards also officially support ECC memory. So if you wanted verified ECC support on a comparatively cheap AMD platform you could’ve always gone for one of these boards with a regular Ryzen CPU (not an APU). The boards are a bit on the expensive side but if you want official support (for whatever reason you’d need that in a homelab environment) you can get it.
The server/workstation focused ASRock Rack AM5 mainboards list plenty of ECC modules in their QVL. The “gaming-focused” ASUS B650E-E I’m using even has two ECC modules listed in its QVL.
So you could’ve already gotten verified ECC support, the fact that the same CPUs now exist with a different (EPYC) branding doesn’t change that. Finding these mainboards isn’t particularly tricky either.
PCIe is back- and forwards-compatible, so even an RTX 4090 would in theory work in a PCIe 2.0 x4 slot.
Now, PCIe 2.0 x4 is obviously really slow compared to what most current cards support (PCIe 4.0 x16), but I doubt transcoding is bandwidth sensitive on the PCIe link.
So pick pretty much any card, be wary though that some consumer-focused cards artificially limit the amount of concurrent transcoding sessions they support. Seems like Nvidia is limiting consumer cards to now 8 sessions, which is probably plenty.
Convenience. Well, nowadays that is. And I only started again after the enshittification of streaming services started. I buy all my games legally, just motion picture that I get from the seas.
As a kid/teenager it was more about the money. We cracked games to play on LAN parties without everyone having to have a (retail) copy etc.
I’m waiting to see how DeepComputing’s RISC-V mainboard for the Framework turns out. I’m aware that this is very much a development platform and far from an actual end-user product, but if the price is right, I might jump in to experiment.