• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

Official AMD Ryzen Benchmarks, Reviews, Prices, and Discussion

Page 40 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Mar 10, 2006
11,719
2,002
126
Almost?
In the case of review samples and such in this industry, it more or less amounts to that. There is rarely anything you need to sign. It's just an email saying "Hey is it cool if we give you information you can't talk about until X day at Y time?", and if you reply yes you get the information.

If you break a company's trust, you no longer get samples from anyone, so it goes against your interests to break it.
This.
 

ElFenix

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Mar 20, 2000
100,522
3,808
126
Almost?
In the case of review samples and such in this industry, it more or less amounts to that. There is rarely anything you need to sign. It's just an email saying "Hey is it cool if we give you information you can't talk about until X day at Y time?", and if you reply yes you get the information.

If you break a company's trust, you no longer get samples from anyone, so it goes against your interests to break it.
And that's still a legally enforceable promise, not a gentleman's agreement.
 

CatMerc

Golden Member
Jul 16, 2016
1,114
1,146
106
And that's still a legally enforceable promise, not a gentleman's agreement.
Somewhat. It's pretty hard to get anything in court out of this. I believe I've heard of a failed attempt, though the parties involved escape me.
 

looncraz

Senior member
Sep 12, 2011
716
1,638
136
And that's still a legally enforceable promise, not a gentleman's agreement.
Gentleman's agreements are also legally enforceable if you have evidence of the agreement.

Verbal contracts are difficult to prove, but often enough it can be done (with nothing more than a preponderance of the evidence as it is a civil matter) at that point it is considered almost like a standard breach of contract with no prescribed remedies.

An email and email response demonstrates a provable chain of agreement, but has no stronger force than a verbal agreement by default (a judge can, obviously, treat this situation exactly as an NDA, but they can choose to not do so as well).

The difference is the effort on the part of the plaintiff. A formal, signed, NDA is very difficult to challenge. An email agreement is easier to challenge, but a properly formed chain can be just as strong in the end, though there are extra steps in the process.. taking weeks to iron out. A verbal contract where rely on what the parties each believed they had as an agreement and what the judge believes.

I've had some experience with lawsuits :p
 

ElFenix

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Mar 20, 2000
100,522
3,808
126
Gentleman's agreements are also legally enforceable if you have evidence of the agreement.
the unenforceable nature of gentlemen's agreements is the essence of what makes it not a contract. Otherwise it's just a contract. And oft-times those gentlemen's agreements are illegal, such as steel price fixing and agreements between grocers not to compete in Texas (HEB had an agreement with, iirc, the weingartens not to move into Houston, and still has one with, iirc, brookshire bros in dallas).

Verbal contracts are difficult to prove, but often enough it can be done (with nothing more than a preponderance of the evidence as it is a civil matter) at that point it is considered almost like a standard breach of contract with no prescribed remedies.
You start this paragraph off with a correct statement of the law but then end with this weird stuff about "almost." A contract is a contract. Breaching an an oral contract is not "considered almost like a standard breach", it is a breach. It may have proof problems but that doesn't make it kinda like a breach, because it is a breach.
An email and email response demonstrates a provable chain of agreement, but has no stronger force than a verbal agreement by default
This is very wrong. Most courts nowadays recognize that business is done by email and formal signatures have often gone the way if the dodo. Now, you may have a "Battle of the forms" situation, but I very much doubt there is any chance of a review site sending its own competing embargo proposal.

(a judge can, obviously, treat this situation exactly as an NDA, but they can choose to not do so as well).

The difference is the effort on the part of the plaintiff. A formal, signed, NDA is very difficult to challenge. An email agreement is easier to challenge, but a properly formed chain can be just as strong in the end, though there are extra steps in the process.. taking weeks to iron out. A verbal contract where rely on what the parties each believed they had as an agreement and what the judge believes.

I've had some experience with lawsuits :p
I draft and litigate contracts for a living.
 
Last edited:

KTE

Senior member
May 26, 2016
478
130
76


Old habits die hardest, Intel back to doing what they do best.
You should think full well before re-posting some kiddy fanatics conspiracy fairy tale on here. That post and poster are plain sad.

Anyone who works in the IT field as an Architect/CTO/Director knows fully well that story is complete and utter BS, every letter of it. AKA smear campaign.

These threads have for the past week become full of random trash, little substance. No one in the decision making IT world even follows Ryzen right now.

In a mass virtualized/cloud orientated IT world, they will discuss Ryzen only once Naples is out.

Even then it will be very few, as that department is in every major company, outscourced.

There is no Evil and Good here. it is just business vs business.

And these practices are NEVER MFG<->Business. It is MFG<->OEM/ODMs.
 

KTE

Senior member
May 26, 2016
478
130
76
This is very wrong. Most courts nowadays recognize that business is done by email and formal signatures have often gone the way if the dodo. Now, you may have a "Battle of the forms" situation, but I very much doubt there is any chance of a review site sending its own competing embargo proposal.
Yup. Talking from a Fortune 50 corporate perspective -- Email nowadays is enough to accept a job and to leave a job - it acts as a formal writ and can be printed off to be used in court just the same.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Phynaz and looncraz

Doom2pro

Senior member
Apr 2, 2016
587
619
106
there's no way this administration will let Intel get away with another $1.25B fine whereas the damage caused was MUCH higher than that.
This "administration" cannot get out of it's own way, it's a disaster of epic proportions. Donald doesn't even own or use a computer outside of his own insecure android device (ironic right? Considering all the flack he gave Hillary for her private email server).

Don't get your hopes up, this is the worst time for AMD to get snarled into an Anti-Trust legal case.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Drazick

looncraz

Senior member
Sep 12, 2011
716
1,638
136
the unenforceable nature of gentlemen's agreements is the essence of what makes it not a contract. Otherwise it's just a contract. And oft-times those gentlemen's agreements are illegal, such as steel price fixing and agreements between grocers not to compete in Texas (HEB had an agreement with, iirc, the weingartens not to move into Houston, and still has one with, iirc, brookshire bros in dallas).
What one may interpret as a gentleman's agreement can become a verbal agreement if the courts become involved - though I must agree that my former equating of that with the email chain normally inherent with a review embargo is improper.

You start this paragraph off with a correct statement of the law but then end with this weird stuff about "almost." A contract is a contract. Breaching an an oral contract is not "considered almost like a standard breach", it is a breach. It may have proof problems but that doesn't make it kinda like a breach, because it is a breach.
I say "almost" because there are still a myriad of complications not present in normal breach of contract cases. The statute of fraud comes to mind in addition to aforementioned proving. Then there are all the many details that need to be worked out - basically a contract after-the-fact must be created from which breach is then argued.

This is very wrong. Most courts nowadays recognize that business is done by email and formal signatures have often gone the way if the dodo. Now, you may have a "Battle of the forms" situation, but I very much doubt there is any chance of a review site sending its own competing embargo proposal.
My statement was quite unclear as to what I meant. I was meaning to explain how the only things that typically change with an email change are the provability of terms. Sometimes the email chain may have a thorough agreement regarding remedies, venues, and so forth - I've dealt with that before for contract work - but usually the agreement is little more than

A: "You want do do this?"
B: "Sure, I'll be there by 1700, $500 sound good?"
A: "Sure, see you at 1700."

Then A challenges B on the $500 amount after the work is done and B asserts that A's statement constituted an agreement.

I draft and litigate contracts for a living.
That would explain the insistence on precision :p

It would be like you telling me how the software I wrote works internally ;-)
 

looncraz

Senior member
Sep 12, 2011
716
1,638
136
Seems very nervous. For good reason i guess.
Intel's fear is that they will have to show a public response to AMD. If they can pretend there's no threat, all is well.

I, most analysts, and certainly Intel believed AMD would not undermine the cost structure as much as they have. For $500, I will accept a LOT of teething issues from the 1800X. I was hoping to have an 8-core CPU with >= Ivy Bridge IPC I could overclock to ~4Ghz for that price from AMD... I'm getting more than that.

Investors are prone to jump ship from "safe" investments like Intel if they think it is no longer as safe - if Intel sees serious competition and is forced to respond then margin drops, profits drop, reinvestment drops, and returns drop. Investors will start selling their stock, then others will see that start happen and join in on the sell-off.

AMD has levied a potentially devastating attack on Intel - and they haven't even officially sold a Ryzen CPU yet. Rumors of Intel's aggression has caused Intel stock prices to go up - they're being rewarded for being monopolistic. They will be punished for any other action.
 

looncraz

Senior member
Sep 12, 2011
716
1,638
136
I already have all my build parts minus the CPU, MOBO and AIO Cooler... Every day feels like four days, I haven't felt like this in quite a long while.
Man, definitely going slow.

I've got my build ready - even the wires routed to where they will match up with the C6 Hero - my loop bled, tested (even nearly upside down, because I'm a maniac), experimented with lighting (my phone isn't good at picking up the impact the different colors for the LEDs have on the coolant - nor the blue UV glow from the plumbing...).

I cut the quality down on all these, but it'll give you a good idea of what I've been up to...

http://files.looncraz.net/zen/build/

Oh, and I've upgraded to Noctua 3000 RPM industrial fans for my intakes, my exhausts are Cougar... all fans are 140mm except my VRM fan. I've also installed a heatsink to the MCP35x pump and isolated it from the case better...
 

bjt2

Senior member
Sep 11, 2016
784
180
86
You should think full well before re-posting some kiddy fanatics conspiracy fairy tale on here. That post and poster are plain sad.

Anyone who works in the IT field as an Architect/CTO/Director knows fully well that story is complete and utter BS, every letter of it. AKA smear campaign.

These threads have for the past week become full of random trash, little substance. No one in the decision making IT world even follows Ryzen right now.

In a mass virtualized/cloud orientated IT world, they will discuss Ryzen only once Naples is out.

Even then it will be very few, as that department is in every major company, outscourced.

There is no Evil and Good here. it is just business vs business.

And these practices are NEVER MFG<->Business. It is MFG<->OEM/ODMs.
INTEL has had a settlement with AMD and the national authority (I quite remember a settlement also in Europe) and promised to do not repeat those actions and in return it obtained a lower punishment. But if INTEL repeats the crime, it will be punished twice.

You can't deny it, because it was punished by at lest USA and Europe. I don't remember the fees, but they were reduced because in exchange INTEL settled with AMD with more than 1 billion dollar and the relaxation of the terms on the x86 license, more notabily the obligation to own a FAB.
 

looncraz

Senior member
Sep 12, 2011
716
1,638
136
AMD sells the FX-8350 for $150. Who loses most if AMD has to sell the 1700X at $150?
I trust AMD won't be selling the FX-8350 for much longer. It should really only be a $70 CPU anyway.

However, if Intel drops prices so low that the 1700X is forced into such a bracket then anti-trust laws will absolutely be broken. I think it's pretty safe to say that Intel will keep the retail prices rather high and will work by creating huge discounts for partners... in exchange for their loyalty...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Drazick

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS