It’s a pretty common thing to see with sales.
There’s a dip in the sales of most products when a new model gets launched. That’s why you see “run out” old cars just before the new models hit the floor.
Same thing is happening at the moment with RTX 30 series, the 40 series roumours are strong. So the are discounting the 30 series to get them sold before the 40 series arrives.
Same thing will happen here.
EG:
I’m in Australia and they’re going to be launching here soon.
So if there was a rumoured AMD version, why would I buy the old 11th gen intel? (I’m ignoring 12th gen because that doesn’t work properly on Win10)
When the AMD version is a couple of months away?
On the other side, if there’s no rumours of an AMD version coming soon. I’d buy the 11th gen as soon as they shipping.
(They’re late, I’ve already had to replace my old laptop because I didn’t know when they where coming to Australia. Had I known I’d have made do without a laptop at home for a few months)
That’s a different scenario. Both 30 and 40 series are from the same manufacturer. Similar to 11th gen and 12th gen from Intel (single manufacturer). The scenario of AMD CPU option is from a different manufacturer. A better comparison would be nVidia 30 series, with the introduction of say, AMD Radeon 6000 series GPU (back then).
Since it hasn’t been mentioned yet in this thread, and for the benefit of those that aren’t hip to their computer history, there’s a famous social phenomenon known as the Osborne effect, where a pre-announcement of a product leads to deferred sales. Its name comes from the historically disastrous results for Osborne Computers in the early 80s when they did this. (For those curious for more details, the Osborne Vixendproduct designer wrote a retrospective essay about it recently.)
Their pre-announcement was so famously bad that basically every tech company takes it as a given now - if you pre-announce a new product, you’re going to tank sales of existing products. I think anyone who’s been involved in consumer product launches in general can see this pattern proven over and over again, I don’t think it’s so controversial.
Now as for someone buying a competitor’s Ryzen 6000 laptop instead… I think it really depends on what they care about. Anyone who’s been betting on a Ryzen 6000U must be quite disappointed - the number of 6000U laptops available for shipping in the US atm you can count on one hand (with a bunch of fingers to spare). The number with non-soldered RAM? Zero (although you can pre-order an EliteBook Gen9 now that might get shipped in November). The number that will ever be end-user repairable or have motherboard upgrades? Definitely zero, unless Framework releases something.
With all that being said, I really don’t expect Framework to drop a Ryzen 6000 version so late in the cycle considering how poor availability has been and considering AMD still hasn’t gotten USB4 working reliably, and how core that is for Framework’s expansion card system. But I’ll be pretty disappointed if AMD and Framework can’t get things sorted for a reasonable Ryzen 7000 launch.
I’m reading that as poor execution of the pre-announcement messaging / timing / preparation…etc. i.e. Pre-announcements are not inherently bad, but are difficult to factor everything to get it right. And so they carry a high risk?
For example, some consumer products are announced 4-5 months ahead of shipment dates. And it’s a matter of managing that messaging and expectations, and fit that into the product release cycles.
The word that came up time and time again seems to be “prematurely”.
We know from many consumer product manufactures that pre-announcements do exist (months ahead), and some are even like clockwork. The art is in doing it right.
If there’s a Ryzen 7000U board, I’ll pre-order it the day it’s announced; Tiger Lake has some annoying quirks, and I’d rather not “upgrade” to Windows 11. The problem, as always for AMD, is wafer allocation. On the one hand, given their current market share, I’m sure AMD would love to nose in and get another laptop manufacturer on board. Realistically, though, unless Linus has more pull than I thought, Framework is going to be near the bottom of the list. Lenovo will get first crack, followed by ASUS, Razer, Dell, and HP, and then maybe Framework.
The efficiency gains mentioned this week’s Ryzen announcement are really exciting. Or, well, they would be if Ryzen boards were on the table for Framework. A 15W or 25W Phoenix APU would be an amazing upgrade.
Perhaps this is me reading too much into the hardware landscape, but already multiple gaming-grade handheld PCs have come out, none of which are from mainstream vendors like Dell, HP or Asus. All of these devices are being launched on Kickstarter and Indiegogo, produced by independent device vendors, yet basically all of them have managed to release one or more devices (especially Aya) that make use of some variant of AMD’s recent Zen 3 architecture and their new 660 and 680M iGPUs.
Somehow, all of these companies have access to these new AMD silicon chips, yet Framework cannot secure any batches for use in their laptops. As people have already noted, Linus Sebastian of Linus Media Group has already notified Framework that people want AMD-powered laptops and surely AMD must also be aware of this, so what is the bottleneck? Has a business arrangement not been determined or is there another problem?
It would be nice if Framework could make a statement about the situation and whether or not it is in the pipeline. Even if it’s barely in the prototyping stages, giving us some kind of information is better than being radio silent.
It’s not beyond the realms of possibility that they have an exclusivity ‘agreement’ imposed on them by Intel, who have a track record of doing such things with OEMs, thereby preventing AMD based devices from entering the mainstream market.
I’ve been very supportive of intel since the shady stuff they did many moons ago happened… many moons ago. However, if it turns out that they’ve been locking AMD out of the framework laptop, I will have a renewed scorn for them.
I doubt it. Conspiracy theorists will theorize. I don’t see any AYA handhelds using Ryzen 6000, I see Ryzen 5000 however.
Just keep in mind Occam’s Razor. There could be many complex reasons why Framework hasn’t released an AMD board…or it could be as simple as allocation. None of us will likely ever know. Given that AMD hasn’t even reached back out to Framework after Linus poked them, I would say the disinterest lies more with AMD than anything Intel could be doing.
Yeah, I saw the dev one. The biggest drawbacks to me were: subpar webcam (720p, HP? Do you think devs don’t do remote work that requires meetings?), middling screen, and the lack of the level of tinker friendliness the Framework has. It would probably be a nice little system, but ultimately not aligned with my long term desires from a $1kish laptop purchase.
I built my desktop entirely AMD, but I’m not enough of a fan to ignore the other aspects that give me control over my expensive purchase. I’ll grab the 12th gen when it ships and look forward to dropping in an AMD (or better yet, arm/riscv) mainboard when it is possible.
If the Framework didn’t exist I’d definitely go with the Dev one! Seems like a pretty cool laptop other than that like most of the laptop isn’t really repairable.
Good on HP for setting a foot forwards so the linux community can have more backing and actually be seen as a viable market!
it’s not exactly a conspiracy theory when they have a track record of doing such things and actually being punished in court multiple times for such behaviour.
It is when you lack any evidence and evidence points to the contrary. Why would Framework explicitly state they were open to the idea of multiple board partners if they were contractually obligated to not do that? AMD never responded to inquires, that isn’t Intel blocking AMD, that’s AMD not responding.
I’m not denying the past, it is well-documented. Intel is not in the market position they once were, they can ill-afford to be seen as bullying AMD, especially when AMD has quite the competitive product as evidenced by clear allocation issues.
TL;DR you have no evidence for this theory and evidence points to other issues being at fault for no AMD at present.
