AMD Responds to Lack of Ryzen Mobile Driver Updates, Claims OEMs are the Issue

[bug]

That sure sounds like HP is... uhm, involved in the problem, yes. Have to suppose that AMD probably could have forced through a more consistent t update policy, but I doubt they're willing to fight for that when they're barely getting back in the laptop game and have to focus on wooing OEMs for more design wins. A shame, though, as it ultimately hurts everyone involved.

Yes, but this is all based on the fact that FordGT only knows about HP Envy x360...
I know laptop makers bastardize their products (part of the reason I hate laptops), but it seems far fetched to me that AMD would have put out a statement based on a single laptop model.

 

[Valantar]

Yes, but this is all based on the fact that FordGT only knows about HP Envy x360...
I know laptop makers bastardize their products (part of the reason I hate laptops), but it seems far fetched to me that AMD would have put out a statement based on a single laptop model.

Oh, that is most definitely true. BIOS whitelisting and blacklisting (implemented because of the enormous amount of clueless bumpkins who break their laptops by upgrading their wifi cards, I suppose?), nondisclosure of tweaked/modified hardware (the 10W MX150 debacle smelled of this, though no doubt Nvidia was complicit), sub-standard cooling, anchoring hinges in brittle plastic, using 6-bit+frc IPS panels in "premium" laptops, gluing in batteries,... and the list goes on.

Still, you're right that it would be a bit odd if this only applied to one model - but then again it seems the statement came as a response to some complaint gaining traction online, which might not mean that it's actually representative.

No matter the truth here, I'll be very happy to see AMD pick up the pace with APU driver updates, though I'd be even happier if they just separated the GPU drivers from this entirely and kept them aligned with dGPU drivers. How hard can it be?

 

[bug]

Oh, that is most definitely true. BIOS whitelisting and blacklisting (implemented because of the enormous amount of clueless bumpkins who break their laptops by upgrading their wifi cards, I suppose?), nondisclosure of tweaked/modified hardware (the 10W MX150 debacle smelled of this, though no doubt Nvidia was complicit), sub-standard cooling, anchoring hinges in brittle plastic, using 6-bit+frc IPS panels in "premium" laptops, gluing in batteries,... and the list goes on.

Still, you're right that it would be a bit odd if this only applied to one model - but then again it seems the statement came as a response to some complaint gaining traction online, which might not mean that it's actually representative.

No matter the truth here, I'll be very happy to see AMD pick up the pace with APU driver updates, though I'd be even happier if they just separated the GPU drivers from this entirely and kept them aligned with dGPU drivers. How hard can it be?

If what Ford alludes to was true, I would expect AMD statement to be much more concise: "Look, here are the updated drivers on our website. If you're forbidden to install those, take it up with your manufacturer." For some reason that didn't do that (despite them having released drivers more or less on a monthly basis). Something doesn't add up.

 

[FordGT90Concept]

Yes, but this is all based on the fact that FordGT only knows about HP Envy x360...
I know laptop makers bastardize their products (part of the reason I hate laptops), but it seems far fetched to me that AMD would have put out a statement based on a single laptop model.

I've seen people complain that they had a laptop for 4 months and there's no updated drivers available. AMD's cart blanch statement includes those: APU owners need to be patient (chipset and GPU driver updates need to align and AMD has to shell out money to Microsoft to WHQL it).

 

[bug]

I've seen people complain that they had a laptop for 4 months and there's no updated drivers available. AMD's cart blanch statement includes those: APU owners need to be patient (chipset and GPU driver updates need to align and AMD has to shell out money to Microsoft to WHQL it).

Well, in this case here it seems people were left without a driver update for a year or so.
If this was indeed the manufacturer's fault, I really wish AMD would fry them for that in that public statement instead of the "we're work with them to make things better". Because few things annoy me more than things getting locked up for no good reason.

 

[FordGT90Concept]

AMD didn't want to alienate partners like HP which sell a lot of AMD hardware. They likely said what needed to be said in a private conversation.

 

[bug]

AMD didn't want to alienate partners like HP which sell a lot of AMD hardware. They likely said what needed to be said in a private conversation.

It's not their only partner. And if they give in just like that, it just encourages their other partners to follow suit

 

[eidairaman1]

It's not their only partner. And if they give in just like that, it just encourages their other partners to follow suit

Dell finally became a Partner...

 

[Valantar]

It's not their only partner. And if they give in just like that, it just encourages their other partners to follow suit

On the other hand, AMD has obviously had to fight to get more Ryzen Mobile SKUs out there. Don't think they're at the point where rocking the boat is a good idea yet.

 

[bug]

On the other hand, AMD has obviously had to fight to get more Ryzen Mobile SKUs out there. Don't think they're at the point where rocking the boat is a good idea yet.

They should be, if they have the better product...

 

[FordGT90Concept]

It's a maturing product. Additionally, Intel still has the mindshare by an epic margin.

 

[Valantar]

It's a maturing product. Additionally, Intel still has the mindshare by an epic margin.

Exactly. Both with OEMs and end users; AMD have a gigantic hurdle to overcome just to show that they're an equal contender and not the "cheap and slow" alternative. Of course, not having LPDDR3/4 support doesn't help, as it limits battery life of cheaper SKUs (where OEMs make less of an effort to tune power consumption), and this is a metric that thin-and-light customers actually care about. When 9/10 laptops are Intel-based, and 6 out of those give you better battery life and equivalent CPU performance for the same price, most people will buy one of those, given that they trust the Intel brand. Gaining ground here is definitely possible for AMD, but it's an uphill battle. Personally, I'd want to see an APU in a Dell XPS 13-like chassis, including the 25W cooling of the latest generation - that would make for a really potent little laptop.

 

[ValenOne]

AMD didn't want to alienate partners like HP which sell a lot of AMD hardware. They likely said what needed to be said in a private conversation.

A12 series APU for laptops driver like 18.10.1 is available from amd's web site.

https://www.amd.com/en/support/apu/...-series-apu-for-laptops/7th-gen-a12-9730p-apu

Both A12 mobile and Ryzen mobile has GCN iGPUs. Why the inconsistency?

Yes, but this is all based on the fact that FordGT only knows about HP Envy x360...
I know laptop makers bastardize their products (part of the reason I hate laptops), but it seems far fetched to me that AMD would have put out a statement based on a single laptop model.

Find mobile Ryzen OEM supplied driver greater than version 17.7 e.g. 17.9 or 17.10

Windows update, pretty laughable

Isn't that a Microsoft product to begin with?

I update my Surface Pro 4's GPU driver from Intel's web site.

 

[medi01]

Additionally, Intel still has the mindshare by an epic margin.

Mindshare of manufacturers for sure. Finding Ryzen APU powered notebook with good screen is tricky.

 

[FordGT90Concept]

A12 series APU for laptops driver like 18.10.1 is available from amd's web site.

https://www.amd.com/en/support/apu/...-series-apu-for-laptops/7th-gen-a12-9730p-apu

Both A12 mobile and Ryzen mobile has GCN iGPUs. Why the inconsistency?

I honestly don't know. I could only speculate.

 

[bug]

A12 series APU for laptops driver like 18.10.1 is available from amd's web site.

https://www.amd.com/en/support/apu/...-series-apu-for-laptops/7th-gen-a12-9730p-apu

Both A12 mobile and Ryzen mobile has GCN iGPUs. Why the inconsistency?

I'm pretty I found there drivers for mobile Ryzen from October, too.

 

[Gasaraki]

This, with the lower battery life compared to competing Intel solutions, is the main reason I recommend against buying Ryzen laptops to my friends/family.
And that bullshit excuse is fishy, offering the generic drivers on site at least seems like a simple solution and my guess the OEMs are somehow stopping them. I mean they (AMD) do have some dumb choices but this is absurd.

OEMs are not stopping shit. OEMs don't care if there are drivers from the manufactures. Ask Dell if they care that Intel and nVidia has drivers on their websites.

I have an Intel 8th gen ULV chip, which last got a (IGP) driver update well over a year back. If Intel can't force OEM updates, what chance does AMD have?

Go to Intel's website and get the new drivers?

 

[Solaris17]

An alternative approach is what NVIDIA does. Besides the vendor-supplied drivers, they offer a generic notebook driver on their website, that is updated with every new driver release and that you are free to use, and that as far as I know, works with nearly no issues.

I literally installed 417.01 last night on my hauwei mateboox x pro and it worked just fine with the full suite. Not to mention the built in Intel drivers it switches back and fourth from, which I also install the latest official to.

I can see how this used to be a problem, particularly older vaios. I remember their suite had w/e software was needed for the chip that facilitated the onboard to third party GPU hand off. In these cases its annoying but understandable. Honestly though atleast within the last few years laptops seem to take vanilla drivers without issue.

 

[Gasaraki]

i going to jump on the AMD dick sucking train here and say that

1- It's all the OEMs fault for everything
2- AMDs drivers are perfect. You only need one release and it's done.

You forget that GCN cards are still being released. By the time the HD 7 series stops getting drivers, it will be >11 years.

To be fair, GeForce 6 series went legacy driver support in 2013 (R304), so 9 years. They released one driver (R309) in 2015 because of security vulnerabilities in R304.

GeForce 6/7 (Windows 8), 2013 (2015 security update) (7-9 years excluding security update)
GeForce 8/9/100/200/300 (Windows 10), 2016 (8-10 years)
GeForce 400/500 (Windows 10), 2018 (6-8 years)

NVIDIA does tend to support drivers longer than AMD/ATI does. I think this can be explained by ATI especially tending to create new architectures frequently where NVIDIA likes to refine. When AMD took to refining, the companies have similar driver lifecycles.

I've used ATI and NVIDIA cards since the 1990s. I've never once complained about inadequate driver support because cards 3+ years old are usually functionally obsolete.

Are you saying my GTX980 is functionally obsolete? And I was just about to give it to someone as a hand me down. I guess I should just throw it out.

 

[Valantar]

i going to jump on the AMD dick sucking train here and say that

1- It's all the OEMs fault for everything
2- AMDs drivers are perfect. You only need one release and it's done.



Are you saying my GTX980 is functionally obsolete? And I was just about to give it to someone as a hand me down. I guess I should just throw it out.

The GTX 980 was a high end card, which obviously last longer - a 960 is only really viable for esports-class games today. Still, three years for "functionally obsolete" is too short - I'd put that closer to 5-ish. I still used my HD 6950 at 2560*1440 (not ultra, obviously) when I sold it in 2015, four years in, and my Fury X is going strong after more than three. Also, in the future this is likely to stretch out as node shrinks take longer and performance increases are harder to come by.

Other than that, nobody is saying anything to the tune of the drivel you're trying to parody up top here.

 

[FordGT90Concept]

Are you saying my GTX980 is functionally obsolete? And I was just about to give it to someone as a hand me down. I guess I should just throw it out.

Nope, but it's also 4 years old so NVIDIA isn't giving it any driver priority.

The oldest card I have in daily use is an HD 5570 that's 8 years old. Works perfectly fine but I doubt it has had driver optimizations for years.

Remember, the reason why cards can be used longer is because of DirectX 10. Very little has changed in the hardware since its debut thanks to the unified shader and Display Driver Model it demanded. You can use virtually any card with Microsoft's generic video driver but performance will be terrible.

 

[lewis007]

AMD if you want a bigger presence in the laptop space, this is the wrong way to go about it!

 

[ValenOne]

I'm pretty I found there drivers for mobile Ryzen from October, too.

What version is it? Does it have native resolution lock issue (e.g. Witcher 3, Divinity Original Sin 2)?

I literally installed 417.01 last night on my hauwei mateboox x pro and it worked just fine with the full suite. Not to mention the built in Intel drivers it switches back and fourth from, which I also install the latest official to.

I can see how this used to be a problem, particularly older vaios. I remember their suite had w/e software was needed for the chip that facilitated the onboard to third party GPU hand off. In these cases its annoying but understandable. Honestly though atleast within the last few years laptops seem to take vanilla drivers without issue.

From amd.com web's drivers, I didn't have major problems with Intel IGP + AMD R9-M270(reamed from 8870M) series GPU driver updates with my old Samsung ATIV Book 8.

 

[Melvis]

Well going onto AMD's website and looking for these drivers for there laptop Ryzen APU's I cant see them? so I am guessing then that the drivers can only be gotten through the vendors website?

 

[bug]

Well going onto AMD's website and looking for these drivers for there laptop Ryzen APU's I cant see them? so I am guessing then that the drivers can only be gotten through the vendors website?

You know what? You're right. I was actually looking at desktop CPUs with Vega graphics.