While some users have reported issues with certain applications and games, some reviewers and others have given the new architecture the thumbs up... with various benchmarks and tests producing good results.  As you say, though, it is a new architecture and 'teething' problems will arise until AMD and other developers are on the same page software-wise. 

Having read so many articles on Ryzen and compatible AM4 motherboards, I don't remember where now, but I recall seeing somewhere that AMD is aware of certain issues and has revision 1.1 of Ryzen's firmware/software ready [or almost ready] for release. The article suggested that users keep checking with the AMD website for further updates and information regarding fixes.

On another note, I did read a review on ASUS'  ROG Crosshair VI Hero motherboard, the mobo I'm considering for when I can build, and I'm suitably impressed thus far.  However, that build is some way off and I'll have time to compare and assess it and other boards.  Another board that interests me is Gigabyte's GA-AX370 Gaming K7, so I'll keep an eye on both for future reference.... though the Crosshair VI Hero is my preference at this point

Yeah, I started with Gigabyte [mobos, GPUs] for my AMD machines, but went with ASUS when I bought myself an Intel i7 4970K.  However, I'd be happy with either brand with either chipset. Thing is, while I like the features and look of the ASUS ROG Crosshair Hero VI board [I already have and like the ASUS ROG Crosshair Hero V in my AMD FX8350 rig] I am also liking some of the features of the Gigabyte board as well.  Thing is, I/we need to move to a larger residence, and that takes priority over a new build, so it will give me more time to research while I again save for the components I'll eventually go with.

No, I didn't think you were "bashing on Ryzen".  People who are bashing something are usually more aggressive and have alot more negative things to say, so I took it on face value and saw that you were trying to help.  And yes, I hope that the Ryzen issues are resolved quickly so that users can get down to enjoying the full benefit of their new toys.

I have been hearing/reading about people who say AMD should not have released Ryzen until these issues were resolved, but as I said to one person, factory conditions are not always ideal for testing products intended for the real world, and that Ryzen needed to be out there [in the real world] [with multiple users using different software and hardware configurations] for some of these issues to reveal themselves.  So no, I don't agree that AMD should have delayed the release.

Just found this article....

AMD has released a tips sheet for best performance [gaming and otherwise] with AMD's Ryzen 7 processors.

Well they, not amg, but computer experts advise, that unless you just want to be new kids on the block you should wait for a year after a new technology comes out for them to get out the bugs to buy something.

I don't know who these 'experts' are, but waiting a year just isn't practical in some instances... or even possible... when looking at how Win 10 was forced down peoples throats.

As for Ryzen, the hardware is sound and the new architecture solid, it's just that revisions to the firmware/software are required to remedy unforeseen issues that were not evident in factory testing.

Thing is, I will be waiting close to a year before I [can] build a Ryzen based machine, though not because I doubt the technology, but rather that I have other priorities to consider.

well.. ms just did something silly... it won't auto-scan for update on new cpus... with the older os..

http://www.ghacks.net/2017/03/17/microsoft-blocks-updates-for-new-cpus-on-windows-7-and-8-1/

This is more of Microsoft trying to force Windows 10 down users [who clearly don't want it] throats.  This crap that older OSes 'will not' support new CPUs didn't happen when MS released XP; Vista; Windows 7 or Windows 8/8.1, so why is it suddenly so now that Windows 10 is here?  MS can try to claim security reasons but that's total bullshit and most people know it.

Hopefully AMD and Intel tell MS to go fech 'emselves and release support software for their latest CPUs for all OSes. For mine, it's the sensible and right thing to do, to provide 7th generation [and later] support to users of Win 7 and 8/8.1, thus broadening market scope for CPU and related hardware manufacturers. 

Surely there's got to be a law somewhere that prohibits one company, in this case, Microsoft, from artificially and unnecessarily inhibiting the potential sales of others: in this case; MS' partners AMD and Intel, and, subsequently, the motherboard manufacturers, etc.  Furthermore, Microsoft's stance on this reduces choice for paying customers who purchased Windows 7 and 8/8.1.  Antitrust anyone?

It was my plan to build a Ryzen 7 1800x machine based on Windows 8.1 [cos there is no way on Earth I'll pay good money for a copy of Win 10] but MS has put the karbosh on that...unless AMD tells MS to go fech 'emselves.  Sadly, I don't see AMD standing up to MS like that, nor anyone else for that matter [except for disgruntled users perhaps], meaning that nothing will change any time soon... if ever.

Microsoft wants to safe up on long term support for those older operating systems.
It is easier to fully support and concentrate on "A" OS than multiple.
For those still running elder hardware using windows 7 there is no need for that kind of support, since the hardware did not change and unless you build up a computer by yourself there wont be any issues (you just have to think about buying or upgrading to windows10), if you buy one you will get the windows10 starter/home package included with it anyways.

@starkers why would you want to have windows8.1 instead of windows10? What are the benefits?
You can still upgrade your windows8.1 to windows10 all you have to do is call the support line
Its still free. Both pretty much look the same.

 

Windows 8.1 is in mainstream support, not extended support like Win 7. Why on earth would Microsoft block updates for an OS that is in its prime (rhetorical question)? It's the latest stable OS from Microsoft. Blocking updates? Isn't that a security vulnerability?

So Linux will have better Ryzen support than Windows 8.1 and 7. Microsoft is their own worst enemy.

The harder Microsoft try to push Windows 10, the more it feels like a no go zone. Windows 10 might work, but Microsoft is the most depressing company I can think of right now. You can't trust anything they say.

Chrome OS has zero privacy, but despite that Google seems like a more straight-forward company I think. Less excuses and dumb explanations. Not that I want to advocate Google, but Microsoft is doing it wrong.

Do not see what MS is doing wrong, they were open about a lot more things than ever on windows10, in close Insider Program, surveys directed to everyone, customer feedback on several social media sites , insider forum on reddit...
Just put yourself into the situation, imagine you have to upkeep windows 7 windows 8/8.1 and then windows10.

Here is a statistic from Netmarketshare:

Desktop Operating System Market Share February, 2017 Operating System Total Market Share Windows 7 48.41% Windows 10 25.19% Windows XP 8.45% Windows 8.1 6.87% Mac OS X 10.12 2.91% Linux 2.05% Windows 8 1.65% Mac OS X 10.11 1.55% Mac OS X 10.10 1.00% Windows Vista 0.78% Windows NT 0.39% Mac OS X 10.9 0.35% Mac OS X 10.6 0.14% Mac OS X 10.8 0.11% Mac OS X 10.7 0.11% Mac OS X 10.5 0.02% Windows 2000 0.01% Windows 98 0.01% Macintosh 0.00% Mac OS X 10.4 0.00% Windows 3.1 0.00% Mac OS X (no version reported) 0.00%

Source: https://www.netmarketshare.com/operating-system-market-share.aspx?qprid=10&qpcustomd=0 

This should answer it all. If you add the percentage of windows7, 8 and 8.1 split them through the whole cake and then multiply into the several pieces, it quickly shows how marginal, the user number of the 8 series actually is.
Trend for Windows10 user base can also be viewed on the page.
Personally i dont mind that Windows8/8.1 is currently not on the list to support those new CPU´s, while on the other hand end of support for windows 8 is 9. Januar 2018.
So i guess they will eventually support it anyways, if enough people write angry posts about it on social media / forums.

https://support.microsoft.com/de-de/help/13853/windows-lifecycle-fact-sheet source: 

Sorry if there is spelling errors...
My last thoughts:
Well you should use the upgrade anyway, that just my personal opinion.

What are you, an official spokesperson for Microsoft?  No one at all serious can call what they've pulled since releasing 10 anything but underhanded.  They hid nagware, advertisements, and even full blown operating system upgrades as critical security updates.

I still have three years of security updates left on Windows 7 that I wont be using because they turned the update system into a trojan horse.  I had to spend a considerable amount of time countering and fixing their intentional screwups aimed at removing me from an operating system I bought and paid for.

You might could get away with saying we "should" upgrade, but plenty of people are running legacy software that simply doesn't work in the newest operating system.  I've got loads of shit I can't even run on 7, I still use 98SE and XP on occasion to play something really fuckin old.  Older operating systems are a necessity for many, it doesn't change just because you don't mind being forced to upgrade to 10 whether you want to or not.

With 8.1 none of that even matters, it's still supported, period.  Any bullshit they pull in opposition to that doesn't get a pass because it's easier to update one version.  If they want to get away with that crap, they should stop selling us operating systems that come with 10-15 year support cycles and tell us up front that they plan on bricking it when they release a new one.  People that bought 8 are owed those updates, they paid for them, not the version on the disk.

My problem with Windows 10 is not only related to the OS. It's related to Microsoft and can be easily explained:

Lack of trust. (And not wanting to be in a abusive relationship).

Microsoft has always been criticized. During the XP era it was mostly about money. MS was seen a greedy corporation with too much power (monopoly). There was even talk about breaking up Microsoft into smaller parts. A monopoly is a bad thing, but as long as the government keeps it in check, there can be a semblance of balance.

Microsoft during the Windows 10 era is a different beast. Money isn't prime motivator. They have made so many unpopular decisions that would never have been made if the company was focused on money.

I would say Microsoft went from a capitalist corporation to a tool for dark forces. These dark forces can be described as governments of the Western world. Notice that not a single government has raised concerns over privacy in Windows 10 (or Android for that matter).

The global surveillance state is here. Android, Chrome OS and Windows 10 are cornerstones. Not even Linux is spared and very questionable technologies have been introduced (actually forced on users).

The powers that be have spy capabilities that Stasi in East Germany could only dream of. It's not about targeted surveillance, it's about bulk surveillance.

For now it might be a fun "game" for intelligence agencies. But when you have a detailed profile of every person on Earth and currency has become all digital, then it will be easy to wipe out "the useless".

The leading banker families (who own money machine Federal Reserve) don't believe in any freedom whatsoever. Microsoft's decision regarding Ryzen is just the latest in a long string of decisions showing that the company doesn't care about freedom. On the contrary they are actively blocking updates from reaching supported versions of their OSes.

If you see Microsoft as an isolated company making bad decisions, it's bad enough. If you see Microsoft as a tool deeply connected to leading bankers and governments then the picture becomes a lot scarier.

It will be interesting to see how the trump card plays out. But Microsoft needs to save themselves. They might have near monopoly, but that doesn't guarantee survival in a changing technological landscape. Microsoft will likely never lack money (because of powerful friends), but Microsoft might run out of steam without a thriving third party eco-system.

I think this world is in a downward spiral and it's sad. Super sad in fact.

Yeah, thing is, you're asked to read out and installation code that belongs to Windows 8, so MS assumes this and gives you an activation code that will also activate Win 10, while retaining the Win 8.1 product key.  It might be free, but I have to doubt it is technically legal, given what my nephew was told.

Anyway, I don't want to move from Win 8.1 to 10 and I shan't.... a lot of unnecessary steps.  Besides, as it has been pointed out by various people, I wouldn't need to worry about not getting Windows Updates and patches via MS.  They are freely available from various software distribution sites all over the net, and I shall seek the items I actually require from one of those repositories... because I will NOT have Microsoft tell me what PC hardware I can and can't use.  If I want an AMD Ryzen 7 1800x based machine with a Windows 8.1 OS, then damn it, Microsoft, I shall have it.

Barnacules Nerdgasm telling it like it is

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u5mFI9spp10&t=631s

I'm unconvinced.

1. Tutorials on how to disable their malware after they get publicly castrated for it do not excuse the horrendous behavior.  It's just the usual response of someone that got caught.  I had to block a dozen or so updates to keep my system from either constantly telling me to upgrade to 10, or trying to do it without even asking.  I finally gave up and disabled them entirely after I had to root around in the registry to fix their hack job on the updater spinning a core at full load every time it started up.

2. Yeah, because being a virtual machine negates that whole "Microsoft fucked up my OS" problem when I have to install Windows 7 in my virtual machine to get a Windows 7 virtual machine.  I can set up a working virtual machine for 98SE or XP just fine, will I be able to do so with 7, 8, or even 10, years from now, if they're having to fight Microsoft on compatibility?  If Microsoft runs around intentionally sabotaging them to force people onto the newest OS, whether they're virtual or not isn't going to help much.

3. I kinda said I'm still on extended support.  Windows 8 isn't.  They're trying to block people from doing drivers for new hardware for an OS that still has full support, an OS still on sale.

4. Actually, I have numerous applications that have received updates over a period of 5 years, including a few from here.  It's inconsequential to the issue at hand though, when people bought Windows 7, they were entitled to the service agreement in writing at the time, and Microsoft violated that agreement when they started trying to force them off of it when Windows 10 came out.  The owners of the previous OS have likewise had their service terms violated by similar behavior, as well as the more recent attempts to block necessities like hardware support.

5. Something being "free" doesn't allow someone to force you to take it, nor does it in any way mitigate them doing so.

6. The whole point of buying a retail version of Windows 7 was so I could install it on more than one computer.  If I wanted to buy a new OS with every CPU, I'd have bought an OEM version instead.  If I had Windows 8 instead of 7, I'd be fucking pissed over their recent behavior with new chipsets they have a pre-existing agreement to support.

^^^^^^^^^^^^ What psychoak said ....