Generally an approach of making global decisions based on a single specific local factor or some single particular case is not quite correct...
A wide range of statistical data of many aspects has to be gathered, analyzed and inspected in a proper way in order to make such decisions.
There could be countless of possible reasons of the problems you may encounter working with the PC, blaming a developer of CPU or GPU of that PC in these problems without proper investigation won't help us to find the truth.
I'm going to write a bit more here because anyway this topic finally should go to some flood forum's section...
Just an example i faced with recently - several PCs i do admin begin to have mouse/keyboard stuttering issues right after video cards upgrade.
My first assumptions - GPU drivers issue, GPU/CPU/chipset design flaws (that take effect in specific conditions) - finally appeared to be incorrect.
Final result of investigation was - motherboard hardware issues (bad PCB/schematics design) triggered by the new video card EMI.
To figure out whether it's a video card EMI compatibility problem, we also have tested several other video cards of the same or higher power consumption that also emit such EMI that by the way is able even to disrupt Wi-Fi connections in 1 meter radius (including very old GPUs, such as HD 5850, and also Nvidia GPUs) - issue reproduced almost with all of these tested GPUs. Some information from motherboard developer also suggested these motherboards have this kind of hardware issue.
Finally, since the moment a workaround has been applied, all affected PCs are working flawlessly, so far. One of them is my home PC i am currently writing from.
Well, that's one point.
Another point is that an entire IT technology for the masses and the way it is being developed nowadays, especially x86 platform, currently is in serious crisis... As every crisis, this one results in a lot of problems, one of such problems is that consumers begin to face/experience more and more design flaws/failures that appear in specific conditions.
Things become complicated too much, therefore more tests and more complicated test cases are required in order to ensure no issues take place prior to launch a production stages. But practically it appears to be impossible to accomplish, as the market conditions and the way companies do business nowadays require things to be done ASAP. This all means more and more efforts are required to maintain the quality of the final product at least at the same level it was before. But there's nowhere and no way for more efforts to come from (unless development process has introduced something seriously/revolutionary changing it, such as intellectual power of AI, and so on), since human intellectual abilities remain the same where they were many thousands years ago, as natural evolution is proceeding very slowly they aren't able to keep up the high-tech changes so quickly, where the progress rate doubles complexity within 1-2 years.
As a result, quality degradation is inevitable, and we have no choice but to learn to deal with it. Until something revolutionary comes that fixes this entire crisis.
So, now, if we install a new hardware and/or software and it doesn't work, or doesn't work the way it should, it is normal nowadays. And it's most likely not the problem of some particular company producing that piece of hardware/software, but a global problem.
There's no company producing ideal products, all of them have problems. Thinking that products of some another company would help to get rid of all the problems is also not quite correct...
I believe, everybody who had in their business at least hundred of machines based on any Intel platform starting from Core/Core2 (with their notorious memory controllers, EIST and RDTSC problems and so on) till the modern ones know the way they are able to turn every day of your tech support into a nightmare. It's not that Intel goes bad, it's the way things normally are being done nowadays.
Exactly the same works for AMD, as well as for any other company working in consumer IT industry.
Running away from Intel to AMD or vice versa won't make your life easier, that's proven fact.
Well, these were 2 points explaining why we can't and shouldn't blame developers/vendors for.
Now, let's take a look from another side and figure out why we can and probably should blame them for...
It's not the secret a lot of people do like AMD's strategy of intersocket compatibility, that was really great thing about AMD. I know some who recently bought a modern AMD based PC having in thoughts they probably will have an opportunity to install a further "AM5" processors in their X570 AM4 motherboards.
Apparently, they got upset then by the news that AMD leaves their intersocket compatibility strategy and introduces completely another socket type. Which means there will no longer be any Socket AM5 nor any further AM4 compatible processors that would support both DDR4 and DDR5 memory types. Though, here we have some hopes AMD at least won't introduce several incompatible CPU generations within the same Socket/Memory type (the way that Intel does, switching sockets with no any actual need on a yearly basis as a modern fashion trends).
Alright, let's say we do understand why is this necessary to introduce more advanced type of socket. Let's imagine, it's actually being done due to limitations older socket type has that prevent to use more pins count, make CPU production cycle more complicated and CPU itself less protected to mechanical impacts. Perhaps, somebody will still blame AMD for this, but here and now we won't.
Let's finally turn to this subject's title. Thing #1 many now blame AMD for - new GPU series with downgraded PCIe ports. What on the earth ever is the reason to downgrade a PCIe port (as for RX 6600 XT mentioned in title) for the middle/low GPU segments? Personally i still have no exact answer to that question, but some suppositions...
Obviously, people that buy middle/low segment GPU most likely have either old or middle/low chipset based motherboard that most likely doesn't have PCIe version 4.0 support. People that are lack of budgets normally buy middle/low video card with middle/low motherboard, not top class motherboard, that was always normal practice. Because of the changes AMD has introduced PCIe port becomes a serious 'bottleneck' in that case, that makes user either to upgrade their motherboards to more expensive one that has PCIe version 4.0 support, or to buy more expensive GPU, such as RX 6700 at least that has non-downgraded PCIe port. This is simple ever logic, and i won't believe responsible for this decision people in AMD didn't understand it clear enough.
As far as i remember for the past 25 years, usually people were blaming Intel in making money in an unfair way, which though didn't make any effect as Intel proceeds doing that with even greater enthusiasm.
This, however, never took place in case of AMD. This company actively supported an open source communities, introduced an open APIs, stood against of monopoly in IT industry, against proprietary things where they rather slow down the progress than accelerate it, where proprietarity itself makes the platform to lose competitiveness (as we now observe in case of entire x86).
But recently, we notice such blames begin to turn towards AMD as well. Yes, we did accept a closed blobs in the firmwares, an equivalents of Intel ME and so on 'darkside' things (can understand why is this necessary), but unfortunately things keep going further that way... And nobody knows how far this may lead to. That's where we really should begin to worry right now. Because obviously it is the change into the wrong direction (We do remember the AMD logo meaning, but does AMD? - That is the question). And because there is nothing to "stick" or switch to since competitors aren't better in this regard at all.
Here, coming to this subject's title i can finally tell: for the past 30 years of using AMD devices (from their great K5/K6 processors), downgraded PCIe ports for the middle/low GPU segments is the first thing i begin to criticize AMD for and will proceed doing that until they refuse this sort of practice in their further products or explain exact reason why this was really necessary that much.
And finally, if you come to criticize, then try to do this seriously, in a rational, logical and constructive way, providing arguments and proper evidence. Not just something "stick to" "because i think so" "no matter what".
