AMD discusses Precision Boost Overdrive on Ryzen 3000 CPUs

[kalniel]

My mistake, i missed the "means" part, that's rather misleading isn't it.

I can see where the marketing is coming from, Ryzen 3 has more cores, it has more cache, therefor more cores means more cache, they're committing a correlative fallacy but i suspect people who know there's different levels of cache aren't really their target audience.

I could forgive them a minor fallacy like that, but when they use that to reach a conclusion about better gaming (fps, latency, smoother) then I can't - because the logic can just be turned back on them: There isn't more cache because of more cores, therefore we shouldn't expect better gaming from the new chips?

[Corky34]

The things is none of those things alone are untrue, assuming Ryzen 3 doesn't end up being worse than Ryzen 2. I struggle to make sense of marketing at the best of times though, like the reason they came up with "game" cache", so I'm only really guessing at why they use those claims.

[kalniel]

The things is none of those things alone are untrue, assuming Ryzen 3 doesn't end up being worse than Ryzen 2. I struggle to make sense of marketing at the best of times though, like the reason they came up with "game" cache", so I'm only really guessing at why they use those claims.

*shrug*

I just don't get why AMD would need to be misleading, it makes me less likely to believe anything else they say.

[Corky34]

I think, going on this YouTube Q&A PCWorld did a few days ago with Scott Herkelman and Robert Hallock, that that video is more aimed at people who don't understand microarchitecture, L3 cache, or even that AMD still make CPUs (51:15).