Are OEM's Giving AMD a bad name?


Recommended Posts

I know AMD makes some really solid CPU's that work really well, but i've seen so many computers come into my office that have low end AMD CPU's and they run like frozen dog pee. Even the customer comments that his computer is slow and sometimes slower than his old computer.

 

It's to the point, I just recommend everyone get either an i3 or i5 because I know the computer will run good.

 

What are your thoughts?

 

I think they need a better naming scheme. Like the Intel

  • Like 2
Link to comment
https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/1210705-are-oems-giving-amd-a-bad-name/
Share on other sites

I recommend people to buy what performs best within their budget range...

 

It is hard to blanket recommend Intel or AMD as there are a lot of additional factors at play outside of the CPU alone... Are you going with the lowest possible quality board, for instance?

 

And i3 isn't comparable to the lowest end segment from AMD...

  • Like 1

I recommend people to buy what performs best within their budget range...

 

It is hard to blanket recommend Intel or AMD as there are a lot of additional factors at play outside of the CPU alone... Are you going with the lowest possible quality board, for instance?

 

And i3 isn't comparable to the lowest end segment from AMD...

 

Correct. But that's also why It doesn't run like ass.

Depends how low end, as there are many more AMDs in that budget space than Celerons from Intel when you walk into an average box store.

 

AMD still owns the entry desktop gaming segment, alas few of those cheap procs make it into vendor PCs and they end up with ###### A or E series ones typical in entry laptops.  The knock on AMD is on the upper end of the scale.

It all depends on the user behind the computer.

 

My wife for example is a complete zero when it comes to anything that has to do with a PC. So I could buy her the most basic/cheapest AMD build and that would completely satisfy her needs. Same for my mother and probably a few millions others exactly like her. Heck! I could even dust off an old Pentium 2 with XP and she wouldn't  even notice!

 

In the end, she doesn't really care as long has she can check the internet, email and play Bejeweled.

Only once have I recommended somebody a laptop with an AMD APU (A6 I think), and it ran like absolute crap which blew my mind because it's a quad core and looked great on paper.  Needless to say, I now recommend an i3 at very least.  Plenty of options out there for $350 and up.

I am gonna say its not the cpu or motherboard but all the other junk they have installed on the computer, or they have failing HW components. For the most part the difference between AMD and Intel as for as performance goes there isn't going to be a drastic enough different where the average computer user is going to be able to tell. Its when you are geeks like us who do gaming, video editing and other cpu/gpu intense things that this begins to make a difference. So for now I am going to say its other factors you might want to look at instead.

I am gonna say its not the cpu or motherboard but all the other junk they have installed on the computer, or they have failing HW components. For the most part the difference between AMD and Intel as for as performance goes there isn't going to be a drastic enough different where the average computer user is going to be able to tell. Its when you are geeks like us who do gaming, video editing and other cpu/gpu intense things that this begins to make a difference. So for now I am going to say its other factors you might want to look at instead.

 

Before I made this thread I had a gateway computer in my office it had a

 

E1-1500 CPU

8GB of ram

Windows 8.1

hardly any crapware

500GB 7200RPM drive.

 

Ran like complete dog ####.

 

At one point in time I said out loud "OH COME ON!!!!!"

 

Then again every computer I own does have an SSD, so maybe that's why it feels slow. But i've also worked on  customers i3's and they feel much better!

I don't think the issue is the CPUs, in general. But the stuff that OEMs put software-side. That, coupled with the cheapest-of-cheapest non-CPU hardware parts in order to build those low-end machines.

 

Before getting my pure (no-OS or bloatware) ASUS-G750JX laptop, I tried to use a Samsung ATIV Book 9 or whatever it was called. It had a high-end AMD GPU and a high-end i5 CPU, yet it run slower than a dead turtle. The first day, every reboot was followed with about a dozen minutes of the machine doing something "magical" in the background thanks to all the crapware that Samsung have put in it. Had enough after a few days and I replaced that piece of crap with G750JX.

I find usually it's the ####, worst of the budget single-platter OEM range HDD (usually Seagate or OEM Blue WD) that causes most of the slow downs or whatever the OEM decided to standardise on driver wise.

 

I've got two Seagate 250GB Barracuda's on my shelf that are from supposedly the same range, specifications etc. One is half the physical depth of the other (single platter) and runs like crap by comparison. One came in a HP OEM, the other came via dabs.

 

If they have 8GB, do them a favour and turn off the page file. At least the potential BSOD has some haptic feedback.

Only once have I recommended somebody a laptop with an AMD APU (A6 I think), and it ran like absolute crap which blew my mind because it's a quad core and looked great on paper.  Needless to say, I now recommend an i3 at very least.  Plenty of options out there for $350 and up.

i3 or AMD apu if the laptop is comming with a 5400 rpm hd it will run like crap.

Often when a laptop runs like crap the 5400 rpm hd is to blame.

I do agree with your original point, AMD needs better branding on their 'usable' baseline as Intel has done with the i's.  They should subdivide their 'A' series.  The low clock (MHz still matters) on many of those multi-core chips doesn't help either, so if you are going AMD, I would say an A6 is the minimum for comparison with an i3.

 

Of course it matters how low end, as those are CPUs that can only reasonably power a much simpler device.

My AMD (A6 Quad Core AMD A6-3620 2.20ghz Quad Core) Desktop doesn't run too badly, not all that fast as I would've expected, but at the time (June 2012) all I could afford to upgrade from AMD Athlon 64 3500+ Single Core Processor, If I had the money i'd so give this one to Mom, and go for an I3 or I5 with Nvidia graphics probably for myself, but don't have the money now. 

Before I made this thread I had a gateway computer in my office it had a

 

E1-1500 CPU

8GB of ram

Windows 8.1

hardly any crapware

500GB 7200RPM drive.

 

Ran like complete dog ####.

 

At one point in time I said out loud "OH COME ON!!!!!"

 

Then again every computer I own does have an SSD, so maybe that's why it feels slow. But i've also worked on  customers i3's and they feel much better!

I am still going to say its something on the software. It could easily be filesystem issues, or failing Hardware. No reason that shouldn't run decent on a clean install of Windows.

I do agree with your original point, AMD needs better branding on their 'usable' baseline as Intel has done with the i's.  They should subdivide their 'A' series.  The low clock (MHz still matters) on many of those multi-core chips doesn't help either, so if you are going AMD, I would say an A6 is the minimum for comparison with an i3.

 

I think they should leave Single Letter CPU names to the best, and then go with Single names for the Slowest

 

Much Like Intel has done

 

i3 - i5 - i7 for the Good stuff

Celeron for the slower stuff

Atom for the slowest.

 

Then like we do with intel we just tell customers to go with the i-series ... i3 or i5

  • Like 2

While at this moment in time Intel CPU's are generally a bit better AMD's budget line CPU's should still be more than powerful enough to meet people's basic needs so if their machines are sluggish there must be additional factors at play.

Mine isn't too sluggish, but I may tune it up some soon, remove Games/programs don't use, clean up hard drive space, temp files, and Dust clean out  Overall pretty happy with my AMD System, despite isn't the fastest system around, but meets my needs currently

 

 

Though i'll admit I've been using AMD based Computers since 2003, AMD Duron, AMD Athlon--Got a bad virus (boot sector in 2005, plus PCI Slot fan caught fire, so Shop did a free  Sempron based build at the time, so I had no choice but to take it then.

 Athlon 64, and Now AMD A6 Quad Core A6-3620, Future not sure what as yet, but if I ever come across money or save some, might go back to my first Intel based system in years, Perhaps 6 core by the time I can afford a newer one lol.   

Edited by bikeman25

I am still going to say its something on the software. It could easily be filesystem issues, or failing Hardware. No reason that shouldn't run decent on a clean install of Windows.

That's also what I thought until I reinstalled Windows 8 on one of these things (AMD E1) and with a clean install with up-to-date drivers, it was barely usable for browsing the internet. 100% CPU, capped by the current running app, no background processes eating resources or whatnot. Forget about watching a high-res video on Youtube. They're just dreadfully slow.

The newer AM1 series APU's actually look relatively reasonable for what they cost, but yeah unless all you're doing is basic browsing and document editing I'd advise steering away from low end E series and atom style CPU's. They were never designed with more demanding operations in mind, and unfortunately OEM's are known to use crap parts to bolster profits in lower end products.

That's also what I thought until I reinstalled Windows 8 on one of these things (AMD E1) and with a clean install with up-to-date drivers, it was barely usable for browsing the internet. 100% CPU, capped by the current running app, no background processes eating resources or whatnot. Forget about watching a high-res video on Youtube. They're just dreadfully slow.

What about the hardware? This could easily be a failing drive that can make a system super slow. I have never had a bad experience with AMD. Not saying I am a fan boy but generally its something else. If the processors defective that could be an issue too.

What about the hardware? This could easily be a failing drive that can make a system super slow. I have never had a bad experience with AMD. Not saying I am a fan boy but generally its something else. If the processors defective that could be an issue too.

 

Is it just coincidence that every cheap AMD system runs like ###### (Actually ###### runs pretty quick I would guess... How about runs like frozen snot!)? Or do they all have failing hardware?

 

The system I was working on today got easily maxed out at 100%

  • Like 1

What about the hardware? This could easily be a failing drive that can make a system super slow. I have never had a bad experience with AMD. Not saying I am a fan boy but generally its something else. If the processors defective that could be an issue too.

Did you try one of these E1 laptops? If you look around you'll see many users reporting the same experience. 

 

As far as I can tell, there's no sign of a failing hard drive, just high CPU usage and slow response. It's not overheating either. 

 

For the record I also have an A10-based system in my living room and it's decently fast, but these E1-E2 CPUs are in another class entirely.

Only once have I recommended somebody a laptop with an AMD APU (A6 I think), and it ran like absolute crap which blew my mind because it's a quad core and looked great on paper.  Needless to say, I now recommend an i3 at very least.  Plenty of options out there for $350 and up.

I recently recommended my brother a laptop with an AMD APU (machine was ~450 dollars, with a 2.5ghz AMD A10-5757M/Radeon HD 8650G and 6 gigs of ram). He wanted a laptop that could do some gaming but had a tight budget, and this was about that best I was able to find, since intel graphics isn't a good option for gaming, and with his old machine which had both intel and dedicated graphics, he had nothing but problems with the hybrid graphics, so an AMD apu seemed like a good choice. I was surprised with how well it performed, he's been playing civ5 and DOTA 2 on it with no issues. Pretty good bang/buck IMO...

 

His previous laptop was an HP with an intel i3 , 4gb ram, and a dedicated mobility 5750 with 1gbvram, and the APU actually performs better. (and the old laptop had severe overheating and battery life issues, the APU runs much cooler and he's had no issues with it so far).

 

This is the first time I've even used a laptop with an amd apu, and so far it doesn't seem so bad to me, especially for the price.

 

If you make sure to get one of the better APU's (A10), performance should be fine.

 

 

BTW, afaik the A6 series is only 2 or 3 core, not quad core. the A10 series is quad core.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • I will keep my current devices for several years... no planning in upgrading until these devices stop working. Too pricey.
    • Apple raises MacBook and iPad prices as memory costs surge by Karthik Mudaliar Apple has raised the U.S. prices of several MacBook and iPad models, including the MacBook Neo, which it launched for $599 less than four months ago. The company’s cheapest laptop now starts at $699, while some MacBook Pro configurations have increased by $300. The changes affect the MacBook Neo, MacBook Air, MacBook Pro, iPad Air, and iPad Pro. Apple has not changed the hardware or storage included with these models, so customers are simply paying more for the same configurations. Here is how the new US pricing compares with the previous starting prices: Product Previous price New price Increase MacBook Neo $599 $699 $100 13-inch MacBook Air, 512GB $1,099 $1,299 $200 14-inch MacBook Pro, 1TB $1,699 $1,999 $300 16-inch MacBook Pro $2,699 $2,999 $300 11-inch iPad Air, 128GB $599 $749 $150 13-inch iPad Air, 128GB $799 $949 $150 11-inch iPad Pro, 256GB $999 $1,199 $200 13-inch iPad Pro, 256GB $1,299 $1,499 $200 The updated prices are already appearing on Apple’s U.S. online store. The MacBook Neo increase will probably attract the most attention. Apple introduced the laptop in March for $599, pitching it as a more affordable Mac for students and buyers considering Windows laptops or Chromebooks. It uses an A18 Pro processor and originally undercut Dell’s new $699 XPS 13 by $100. Following the increase, the two laptops now have the same starting price. The M5 MacBook Air has also lost the price Apple promoted when it launched in March. The 13-inch model arrived with 512GB of storage for $1,099, while Apple’s store now lists the MacBook Air range as starting at $1,299. The 14-inch MacBook Pro with an M5 chip and 1TB of storage has gone from $1,699 to $1,999. Apple has made similar changes to its iPads. The recently released M4 iPad Air, which launched at the same $599 starting price as its predecessor, now starts at $749 for the 11-inch version. The 13-inch version has risen from $799 to $949. The iPad Pro increases are larger in dollar terms. Apple’s 11-inch M5 iPad Pro now starts at $1,199, up from $999, while the 13-inch version has moved from $1,299 to $1,499. Both base models still include 256GB of storage. Apple blamed the increases on the rapidly rising cost of DRAM and NAND flash, which provide system memory and device storage. The company told Reuters that it had tried to shield customers from the increases but could no longer absorb them. “We have never seen a component price increase this much, this quickly,” Apple said. Tim Cook had already warned that price increases were coming. Cook said Apple’s existing component inventory had softened the immediate impact, but that higher memory costs would increasingly affect the company after the June quarter. Much of the pressure comes from the construction of AI data centers. Memory manufacturers are directing more production toward high-margin server products, leaving PC, tablet, and smartphone makers competing for the remaining supply. Apple has not said whether the new prices are temporary or whether further increases are planned. For now, the changes show that even Apple’s purchasing power has not been enough to keep the AI-driven memory shortage away from consumer devices.
    • Ventoy 1.1.16 is out.
    • This is a none story - these low volume Chinese models will always get new experimental features first because Apple and Samsung can't produce them in huge volume to meet demand.
    • Nvidia GeForce NOW gains support for Dark Scrolls, Empulse, and more by Pulasthi Ariyasinghe The final update of June for Nvidia's cloud gaming service GeForce NOW is now available, and it is touting support for six more games. The company is also drawing subscriber attention towards the summer sales kicking off across stores, so they can stock up on more cloud-supported titles. Of course, the Steam Summer Sale is the biggest promotion, which is kicking off later today. "Supported Steam games can be streamed across devices with GeForce NOW, making it easy to buy a game once, keep progress synced and pick up where the gameplay left off on PCs, Macs, handheld devices, phones, TVs and more," says the company. "In other words, the Steam Summer Sale brings the deals; GeForce NOW adds the flexibility." Don't forget that the GeForce NOW summer sale is still active as well. This limited-time offer drops the 12-month Performance membership from $99.99 to $64.99, saving members $35. At the same time, the 12-month Ultimate membership is currently going for $129.99, dropping the price by $70 from the original $199.99. Here are the games joining GeForce NOW's supported list this week: Dark Scrolls (New release on Steam, available June 22) SAND: Raiders of Sophie (New release on Steam, available June 22) Deer & Boy (New release on Steam, available June 23) EMPULSE (New release on Steam, available June 24) The Adventures of Elliot: The Millennium Tales (Steam) FATAL FURY: City of the Wolves (Steam) With the June expansions coming to an end, Nvidia should be announcing its July GeForce NOW plans next week. Keep in mind that, unlike subscription services like Game Pass or EA Play, a copy of a game must be owned by the GeForce NOW member (or at least have a license via PC Game Pass) to start playing via Nvidia's cloud servers. There is also a limit to how many hours subscribers can use the service per month.
  • Recent Achievements

    • First Post
      kinowa earned a badge
      First Post
    • Rookie
      krychek57 went up a rank
      Rookie
    • Grand Master
      Jaybonaut went up a rank
      Grand Master
    • One Year In
      Philsl earned a badge
      One Year In
    • Dedicated
      Scoobystu earned a badge
      Dedicated
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      463
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      171
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      134
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      77
    5. 5
      Xenon
      77
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!