derFunkenstein wrote:This, so much. I don't understand why anyone thought it was a good idea to do the first one. And once someone did one, I don't know why anybody thought "You know what we need? More of these." There are greater wastes of bandwidth on the internet, but not many. I guess there's an audience, but I don't comprehend what they get out of that "use" of their time.Frankly it's silly. I don't care what it looks like.
chuckula wrote:Perhaps slightly more seriously while it's great that TR got review samples, the rumors are that basically everybody got their samples at the last minute with a pretty short time window in which to complete the reviews. If TR has to delay another review because of insufficient time then I'm not blaming them but it is a bad situation.
derFunkenstein wrote:Probably better off switching gears and getting Vega done and up on Monday, and finish a little later in the week. The reason for the late Threadripper review is public knowledge and thoroughly AMD's fault already. If AMD wanted high-quality prose posted on time they should have sent Jeff his samples same time as all the YooToobas.
Also, $300-500 graphics cards are WAY more interesting to me than $600+ CPUs and $300+ motherboards.
Jeff Kampman wrote:It will be interesting to see if the ThreadRipper platform is in any way a better host for the Vega GPU's.I'm not going to jinx myself but graphics cards are much more straightforward to test than CPUs. We've automated a lot of the back-breaking data digestion work that we used to have to worry about, so getting graphs and supporting material is a lot faster and easier than it used to be. I expect to have testing data all done by the end of today and write all day tomorrow.
Yes, we are on a tight schedule, but I'm not going to let that stop me from producing as thorough a piece as possible.