AMD Unveils Ryzen Threadripper 1950X 16-Core and 1920X 12-Core Specs and Pricing (hothardware.com) 85
MojoKid writes: AMD first teased its Ryzen Threadripper series of high-end desktop (HEDT) processors back in mid-May, but is now sharing additional details on the first two products in the family. Both processors are based on the 14nm Zen core, make use of AMD's new Socket TR4 interface, support quad-channel DDR memory, and feature a total of 64 PCIe lanes. In addition, both processors will come from the factory unlocked. Ryzen Threadripper 1920X will have 12 Cores, 24 Threads, and 3.5/4.0 GHz (Base Clock/Precision Boost) clock speeds. Ryzen Threadripper 1950X will have 16 Cores, 32 Threads, and 3.4/4.0 GHz (Base Clock/Precision Boost) clock speeds. Pricing is set at $799 and $999, respectively, with availability in early August, though Dell's Alienware gaming PC division will have systems shipping with the new chip starting this month. AMD also put the new chips up against Intel's Core i7-7900X 10-core CPU in a Cinebench benchmark run in a video demo, and the 12-core Threadripper chip beats Intel's currently available Skylake-X chip handily, while the 16-core Threadripper outpaces it even further.
Phenomenal (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Don't forget - AMD motherboards tend to be significantly cheaper than Intel motherboards. Whether that holds true going forward remains to be seen. All the potential platform cost savings could be eaten up by RGB lighting.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Phenomenal (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
From the last 2 decades.
You're comparing platforms over 1 year apart in age.
A fairer comparison (but still biased to Intel due to age) would be to compare X370 boards to Z270 boards.
Try again and let me know.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Because new products tend to have higher prices because they are new. Prices drop over time.
The X370 is also the newest, top of the line chipset. (The Z270 is not a board.)
Compare apples to apples, please.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Phenomenal (Score:5, Informative)
These are more aimed at workstations than gaming. For workstations having more PCIe lanes (64, standard Ryzen has 24 and Intel's Skylake-X competition has 44) means plenty of bandwidth for multiple GPUs, RAID cards and NVMe SSDs. They have more cores than Intel's parts too, which while they have slightly lower single core performance and clock speeds will perform better overall in anything that can make use of them like video encoding, CAD/raytracing and simulations. Oh, and code compilation of course. Also handy if you have a lot of VMs.
AMD hardware tends to last longer than Intel too. By that I mean that it won't suck in 5 years time, not that Intel hardware is less reliable. 5 years down the road AMD will probably still be releasing CPUs for the socket, and supporting the old chipset reasonably well.
Re: (Score:2)
I think he meant you could update the CPU more easily, but yeah, Intel CPU are unlikely to be the thing that makes you throw out the machine either.
Much better for Linux (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Ryzen IPC is better than even Broadwell-E, which is newer than your Haswell. I probably wouldn't upgrade a Haswell i7 for gaming either, at least not until the publishers start taking advantage of the higher core counts.
Re:Too bad its 9 years behind Intel with IPC (Score:5, Informative)
How about you use a source that actually knows what they're talking about, and knows how to do reliable, repeatable testing?
Ryzen 5 1600X vs Core i5 6600K [anandtech.com]
Cost difference is negligible - a minor discount on either side will swing it. Nominal TDP is only 4W apart. And it's the high-end "ordinary consumer" part - the default recommendation for PC gaming. This is as close to an even comparison as you can get.
Across multiple graphics cards, across multiple games at different resolutions, AMD is competitive. Major wins on some games (Civilization 6), major losses on others (Rocket League), plenty of dead ties (GTA V), and a general trend of AMD doing better as resolution increases. No real oddities with uneven framerates - the 99th percentile framerate tracks the mean. AMD gets a small but consistent lead on synthetic benchmarks, and naturally scores overwhelming wins on multithreaded rendering.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
My citations are here [youtube.com] and here where the 2600k beats the newer Ryzen even further [youtube.com]?
Er what? In the 930 video, at 4:45 and 10:00: The lowest AMD was the stock Rzyen CPU R5 1500X which beat out the stock 2600K but slower than the OC 2600K. The OC 1500X beat out the OC 2600K. All other Rzyen chips handily beat out the 2600K both stock and OC versions. So when you say the 2600K beats out the Ryzen, I have to ask what are you smoking?
Re: (Score:1)
By that logic, the 2600K has better IPC than a 7700K.
http://www.gamersnexus.net/guides/2867-intel-i7-2600k-2017-benchmark-vs-7700k-1700-more/page-3
That's bad logic.
Re: (Score:2)
The i7-2600k in that article ( http://www.gamersnexus.net/gui... [gamersnexus.net] ) is quite a bit behind the new Ryzen CPUs for most tests, even though they have it running at 4.7 GHz vs. the Ryzen's 4 GHz with 2933 MHz RAM. The 2600k is only really winning for certain games.
Ryzen overclocking has improved a bit since that article was published, but you'll still be hard-pressed to get a Ryzen CPU much past 4 GHz. What does matter a lot more is running your memory at a higher speed. Since the infinity fabric interconnect
Re: (Score:2)
So what state allows marriage between man and bot? The times, they're a'changing for sure.
Re: Christmas (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Hmmm, Well when you get bored read about the ashley madison hack, and how out of their thousands of users, there were only a handful of actual, real, live women using it -- the rest were bots.
Hence the joke: The man's wife was supposedly reading ashley madison, therefore there is a very strong chance statistically speaking that the wife in this case, was a bot.
Please PM me if that explanation doesn't make sense, I know it ruins a joke having it explained to you, but you seem like you needed a helping hand
Cool (Score:2)
I've always been a fan of AMD's processors and still have used them in my Linux machine, but I had to go Intel for my gaming system for the last few upgrades. Granted I never spend this much on a CPU so I'll need to tech to "trickle down" to their budget line, but seeing a good performance option from AMD will be good again.
Laptops and servers (Score:3, Interesting)
In a dwindling X86/AMD64 PC market, laptops* is where the volume is... Yet AMD has nothing for the Laptop Market in the Zen Class Architecture.
And in servers, while there may not be as much volume, is where the cream of the profits are.
While Zen Server parts (Epyc) look good on paper, it reamis to be seen if there will be Adoption from server makers, and demand from server purcharsers...
So, no laptop parts, to early for servers, coupled with so so results for enthusiasts desktop PC (great bang for buck, but performance is more or less even depending on workload) and crap processors for enterprise desktop (corporate parts without IGP? Really? I mean, REALLY?!?!?), is to early to be happy for AMD.
I hope they do well, I really do, for this will be good for all of us (even those of us using Apple gear, therefore, tied to Intel)...
But one thing is to hope, and quite another thing is reality, and is to early to know what reality looks like.
Just my two cents.
Re:Laptops and servers (Score:5, Informative)
AMD has nothing for the Laptop Market in the Zen Class Architecture.
Coming in Q3. In other words, 2-4 months from now.
Laptops refresh twice a year, and the Ryzen launch wasn't in time for the last laptop refresh. No big deal; they're coming.
https://semiaccurate.com/2017/05/22/amd-talks-threadripper-ryzen-mobile-ryzen-pro/ [semiaccurate.com]
While Zen Server parts (Epyc) look good on paper, it reamis to be seen if there will be Adoption from server makers, and demand from server purcharsers...
Well, sure. But unless the paper is a lie, those chips will do well. They will offer much-improved price/performance compared to Intel's server chips, they offer some tasty new security features [semiaccurate.com] (like VMs running with the in-RAM data encrypted so that there's no way for one VM to spy on another's memory), and they are doing it right when Intel is jacking their server customers [semiaccurate.com] on price.
corporate parts without IGP? Really? I mean, REALLY?!?!?
Does "IGP" mean integrated graphics? AMD is all over integrated graphics, they call such products "APUs" and the mobile lineup will be pretty much all APUs. So my guess is Q3 for corporate products with APUs as well. (I hope AMD supports ECC RAM on APUs, finally.)
Re: (Score:3)
Speaking from the company's perspective and not a user perspective it's more important for AMD to compete successfully in the areas that they do compete than to provide competition in areas where they wouldn't. AMD doesn't have the least power hungry chips, the highest performing server chips or the fastest single threaded gaming chips. Very often it's the extremes that make money, the "sweet spot" processors not so much. Particularly not if you have a 800lb gorilla in the room looking to snuff out your pro
Re: Laptops and servers (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
"Too" Learn it, mmmkay?
I'll wager Quarters to Greenbacks that my 296/300 ToEFL beats the living shit out of whatever you got in your DELE ...
mmmkay? :-P :-P
Re: (Score:2)
The original criticism was about my lack of knowledge, not about my lack of care to proofread a post in a forum.
Again, english is not my native language, and I can bet my greenbacks to your quarters that my english is far better than your Spanish. And would even match you euro for euro, that my french is better than yours (or original poster's) too, warts and all.
These grammar nazis...
Re: Laptops and servers (Score:2)
MÃ Espanol es muy mierda.
Re: (Score:2)
https://www.supermicro.com/pro... [supermicro.com]
Hence the provided link via a two word google search that describes some reality.
Re: (Score:2)
In a dwindling X86/AMD64 PC market, laptops* is where the volume is... Yet AMD has nothing for the Laptop Market in the Zen Class Architecture.
And in servers, while there may not be as much volume, is where the cream of the profits are.
While Zen Server parts (Epyc) look good on paper, it reamis to be seen if there will be Adoption from server makers, and demand from server purcharsers...
So, no laptop parts, to early for servers, coupled with so so results for enthusiasts desktop PC (great bang for buck, but performance is more or less even depending on workload) and crap processors for enterprise desktop (corporate parts without IGP? Really? I mean, REALLY?!?!?), is to early to be happy for AMD.
I hope they do well, I really do, for this will be good for all of us (even those of us using Apple gear, therefore, tied to Intel)...
But one thing is to hope, and quite another thing is reality, and is to early to know what reality looks like.
Just my two cents.
Don't worry, Opterons has seen plenty of enterprise adoption among cloud providers. Google, Amazon, and Microsoft use a bunch of them on their Data Centers. If you have IAAS cloud account, chances are you are using either a Xeon E3 or an Opterons. With EPYC continues the tradition to provide more cores for the price and with performance improvement over their previous platform, I am quite confident with the outlook. In addition to that, HPE skipped on AMD on their G9 line, but will be introducing some model
Intel is fucked on all levels server / desktop / w (Score:2)
Intel is fucked on all levels server / desktop and workstation / high end gaming. By cheaper AMD systems with more pci-e lanes at all levels.
Intel kaby-lake x is an said over priced joke that costs more and does less then the same chips on the desktop.
Re: (Score:2)
The i3 7350K CPU can be overclocked to at least 5Ghz, giving fantastic single-threaded performance, comparable to an overclocked i7. Many tasks still care about single-threaded performance more than multiple cores.
the confusing sound of wet rubber boots (Score:3)
You really need to recalibrate your "is fucked" dowsing rod.
After a decade of living on cream and sunshine, summer vacation is over, and Intel will soon have to buckle down and earn good grades, obtained through long hours of hard study.
Heard on beaches the world over when governments shorten their unemployment insurance entitlement periods: "Shit! We're fucked! Now we'll all have to get real jobs."
Welcome back to how everyone else lives.
On the one hand, it will take a whi
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
In general, ARM has won the performance per watt war... for now.
Intel has been trying to fight in that war for a long time now, and they've never managed it. Even the ARM they bought was power hungry, for ARM anyway. The only guys they've ever been able to beat have been AMD, and only off and on at that.
Re: the confusing sound of wet rubber boots (Score:1)
They beat Alpha and PPC, at least in the desktop market. And Windows ran on Alpha and PPC. I ran NT 3.51 on both those archs.
Re: (Score:2)
Intel is not stupid. People get paid 200K a year to ensure they don't waste billions a year.
Intel competes AS MUCH AS the competition requires them to. They're sitting on plenty of new technology (like live-reconfigurable FPGA embedded processors they had for YEARS with the Altera acquisition).
But they're not gonna just GIVE US that technology. We have to pay for it. So while there was no AMD competition, they were fine giving us a "trickle down" / as-little-as-possible actual innovation for years. And then
Odd that Alienware is putting them in gaming rigs (Score:2)
Since gaming is not very well threaded, and in clock-limited situations these won't be any better than Ryzen. Intel still wins out for performance there, and these are expensive processors to be using in applications which won't use all the cores. Oh well, I guess some folks may just want them for bragging rights?
Re: (Score:2)
Ubuntu server with KVM virtualization (including a Win10 gaming VM) actually.
I do admit I was hoping to be a bit further away from 800 bucks on the 12 core, though. Oh well, gotta wait and see the prices in Switzerland first anyway.
Re: (Score:2)
If you stream high quality video encoded with software rather than the dedicated hardware, you need all the cores you can get. Encoding video in software still gives a much higher image quality than the hardware accelerated encoding.
Someone made a performance testing video showing Ryzen greatly outperforming an i7 when simultaneously encoding video and playing the game.
Re: (Score:2)
I agree. I use every one of my 8 cores on my AMD.
1 - Vulkan API supports ALL CORE utilization. That's the whole point of Vulkan.
2 - Hosting a VM (for all your work stuff, for example) means I can dedicate 4-6 cores and have both my systems completely independent for all practical purposes. My work SQL instance won't freeze my gaming. Working from home, that's a huge benefit for me to not need to buy two machines or to switch back-and-forth. With RAM being super cheap (32 GB for $100!) I can dedicate half to
Re: (Score:2)
Oh yeah, using multiple VMs or doing video editing are great cases for higher core count processors! I am under the impression that Alienware's target market is gaming, though, and even though newer APIs like Vulkan are making the move toward multiple cores it is still the case that today's games tend to favor higher clock speed over more cores (once you have 4 or maybe 6 cores). Have a 16 or even 12-core dedicated gaming system is a waste, you'd be better off spending the extra money on a more powerful GPU
Re: (Score:2)
Now that is a fair point, if you are using CPU based video recording / streaming while gaming. I personally prefer GPU-based streaming myself, but I have heard some folks say that CPU based can give better looking results with a sufficiently powerful system. I wonder if programs like OBS can really utilize that many cores effectively, though? If you have a 12 or 16 core processor and are playing a modern game that needs 4 cores (a good average) then you have 8-12 cores left over for CPU encoding. I have not
Re: (Score:2)
Threadripper: The instruction mutilator (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
I read it as Threa Dripper. Wasn't sure what to think or expect.
From my HPC days (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The bottleneck for most problems isn't CPU cycles/second, it's the bandwidth of getting data to/from those CPUs. Adding CPUs does nothing to improve performance unless you also give it a much wider I/O path to memory.
Threadripper parts have quite a lot of bandwidth. The pro parts ("Epyc") will have even more.
Threadripper is intended for the PC enthusiast market, not so much for data centers. Frankly I don't think that for even an enthusiast home user memory bandwidth will be a major differentiating point.
Re: (Score:3)
And naturally, right after I posted the parent, I found the cache sizes.
These are for a 16-core Threadripper 1950X:
L1 instruction cache: 32 KB x 16
L1 data cache: 64 KB x 16
L2 cache: 512 KB x 16
L3: 32 MB x 4
http://wccftech.com/amd-ryzen-threadripper-1950x-cpu-performance-benchmarks-leak/ [wccftech.com]
https://browser.primatelabs.com/v4/cpu/3324737 [primatelabs.com]
I'm not a CPU expert but it seems clear that L1 and L2 cache is per-core (makes sense) but L3 cache is shared... I'm going to guess that a group of 4 cores shares one 32 MB cache,
Does it come without a backdoor? (Score:1)