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

    • And the fact that the majority of people from Poland are white European Christians while the people you are complaining about in post after post are not is just a coincidence... Every sentence in your post I am replying to is racist nonsense. None of it is actually based on any facts whatsoever. They are seeking a better life too. They are working and contributing to the economy too, as you even admit. They get the same benefits your partner did AND that YOU are eligible for as well. That is the definition of a society where everyone is given a chance, treated equally and fairly, and is judged by the content of their character, not their different skin color or which version of ignorant superstitious nonsense their parents lied about as children. Racists said the same things about the Irish and Jews and Poles (like your partner) and...every other immigrant movement over the centuries. What's your family's heritage, by the way? Were your ancestors lied about with racist fearmongering crapola by self-entitled locals the same way as you are now? If someone like that said the same things about all people from Poland, like your partner, would they be right? Or would you want them to judge your partner based on who they actually were, not where they just happened to come from?
    • Again, this is an irrelevant attempt to attack the messenger. The truth does not require any justification.
    • Removed the blue and underline as you did not post a link. This would also  be considered spamming.
    • Why it's almost impossible to produce a smartphone in the United States by Hamid Ganji If you look at the back of some Apple products, you can see the famous phrase “Designed by Apple in California, Assembled in China.” This phrase appears on products from one of the largest smartphone brands in the United States. These products are designed in the U.S., but their manufacturing takes place in China, India, Vietnam, or even Brazil. But why can’t Apple, as one of the largest American tech companies, produce its iPhones on U.S. soil? The idea for this topic came to me after the Trump Foundation launched a smartphone called the T1 and claimed that it was designed and built with American values in mind. However, this claim did not last long, as it was revealed that Trump’s phone was actually a rebranded HTC U24 Pro, with only a gold case and minor internal component changes. You see? Even a phone that is supposed to represent American values is manufactured in China. With a gross domestic product (GDP) exceeding $32 trillion, the United States is currently the world’s largest economy, while China ranks second with around $20 trillion. On the other hand, the United States is by a wide margin the global leader in various technological fields, and American companies spend hundreds of billions of dollars annually on research and development. From Apple and Google to Microsoft, Lockheed Martin, Boeing, and others, American tech and industrial giants lead their foreign competitors in many sectors. The United States also has no shortage of smartphone brands. Apple, Google, and Motorola are among the major brands in the smartphone market, collectively holding a significant share. However, the vast majority of their products are manufactured outside the United States. So why is it that the world’s largest economy, home to the most advanced technology companies and industrial powers, cannot produce a smartphone on its own soil? Let’s explore this question together. Even threats to impose tariffs won’t work After Trump entered the White House as the 47th President of the United States, his administration adopted strict tariff policies. One of these policies was the imposition of a 25% tariff on smartphones manufactured outside the United States. Trump said he “had a little problem” with Apple CEO Tim Cook over producing smartphones outside the U.S. So he thought that threatening a 25% tax on imported phones might force Apple to bring manufacturing back to the United States. “I have long ago informed Tim Cook of Apple that I expect their iPhones that will be sold in the United States of America will be manufactured and built in the United States, not India, or anyplace else,” Trump wrote on Truth Social. Image via The White House Although Apple currently manufactures some of the iPhone’s chips in the United States with TSMC's help, it still shows no willingness to shift full iPhone production to the country. At the time, renowned Apple supply chain analyst Ming-Chi Kuo wrote on X, “In terms of profitability, it’s way better for Apple to take the hit of a 25% tariff on iPhones sold in the US market than to move iPhone assembly lines back to the US.” However, manufacturing a smartphone in the United States is not as easy as it might seem, and many technical and economic barriers are involved. The lack of necessary manufacturing hubs There is a clear reason why many companies prefer to manufacture their products in China. China has established itself as the main global manufacturing hub for international companies, and over the past few decades, large contract manufacturers have emerged there, allowing companies like Apple to outsource production. One such example is Foxconn, which also manufactures some Apple products in India. Building the infrastructure required to produce smartphones in the United States would require tens of billions of dollars in new investment. Factories would need to be built, essential manufacturing equipment would have to be installed, and, most importantly, a skilled workforce capable of operating these systems would need to be recruited and trained. The United States currently lacks the core infrastructure needed to manufacture smartphones, and for this reason, many companies prefer to outsource production to Chinese contractors rather than spend tens of billions of dollars to build that infrastructure, which is significantly more economically efficient. Additionally, building such infrastructure in the United States could take up to a decade, ultimately leading to a significant increase in the product's final price for consumers. Shortage of trained labor in the U.S. compared to China Decades of serving as a global manufacturing hub have allowed China to build a massive talent pool in the production sector that is almost unmatched worldwide. Today, if a company chooses to manufacture its products in China, it can be confident that the workers involved in production have years of experience in their respective roles and are capable of producing high-quality goods with minimal errors. Even if we assume that tens of billions of dollars were invested in building smartphone manufacturing infrastructure in the United States, finding skilled workers would remain highly challenging. Apple CEO Tim Cook visiting the iPhone 6 assembly line in China in 2014. Image: Tim Cook on X In a 2015 interview on CBS’s 60 Minutes, Tim Cook said the main reason Apple isn’t producing in the US is a lack of skills. "China put an enormous focus on manufacturing, in what you and I would call vocational kind of skills. The US over time began to stop having as many vocational kinds of skills. I mean you could take every tool and die maker in the United States and probably put them in the room that we're currently sitting in. In China you would have to have multiple football fields,” Cook said. Also, in 2017, at the Fortune Global Forum in Guangzhou, Cook once again emphasized the importance of highly skilled Chinese workers. “China has moved into very advanced manufacturing, so you find in China the intersection of craftsman kind of skill, and sophisticated robotics and the computer science world. That intersection, which is very rare to find anywhere, that kind of skill, is very important to our business because of the precision and quality level that we like. The thing that most people focus on if they’re a foreigner coming to China is the size of the market, and obviously, it’s the biggest market in the world in so many areas. But for us, the number one attraction is the quality of the people,” Apple CEO said. Higher labor costs in the United States Producing almost any product in the United States is more expensive than in many other countries, and one of the main reasons is the higher cost of labor in the U.S. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, median weekly earnings of full-time workers in the United States were $1,235 in the first quarter of 2026. Meanwhile, the average annual salary in China's private sector in 2025 was RMB 71,590 (US$9,961). In many parts of the world, the weekly wage of an American worker is equivalent to several months of income. Another important factor to consider is that in the United States, the workforce capable of working on a smartphone assembly line is highly specialized and therefore commands higher-than-average wages. According to an estimate by Bank of America, producing an iPhone in the U.S. is technically possible, but “iPhone cost can increase 25% purely on higher labor cost in the U.S.” However, this 25% increase applies only if final assembly is performed in the United States while components are still sourced from China or elsewhere. In this case, the price of a base iPhone would rise from $799 to around $1,000. But in another scenario, if Apple were to produce the required components for the iPhone within the United States, production costs could increase by more than 90%. Trump’s dream for a “Made in the USA” iPhone might never come true In a free-market capitalist economy, one of the primary responsibilities of any CEO is to maximize profit. Using Apple as an example, Tim Cook’s role is to maximize the company’s profits so that it can fund research and development for new products and invest in areas such as artificial intelligence, while also keeping shareholders satisfied. Therefore, it is entirely understandable that Apple would choose not to bring its manufacturing back to the United States and instead keep production in countries where labor is cheaper, and products can be manufactured at a lower cost, thereby maximizing its profit margins. What is your opinion about manufacturing smartphones in the United States? If you are an American citizen, would you be willing to pay hundreds of dollars more for a smartphone made domestically in the USA? Let us know in the comments.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Conversation Starter
      jessse3334 earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • Reacting Well
      JuvenileDelinquent earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • One Month Later
      Excellence2025 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      Excellence2025 earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      flexorcist earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      506
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      196
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      153
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      72
    5. 5
      FloatingFatMan
      65
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!