As part of the AMD fall workstation line up the company is making a number of announcements. We are focusing on two. The first is the AMD Ryzen 9 16-core launch. The Second is the 3rd generation AMD Ryzen Threadripper launch. AMD has a few more announcements, but we wanted to focus on those two that are most relevant to our readers.
AMD Ryzen 9 3950X Launch
After months of waiting, we finally see the AMD Ryzen 9 3950X gets a 2019-11-25 release date. AMD does not quite match the 5.0GHz speeds that Intel is hitting on some of its parts, but it is also delivering huge caches and 16 cores and 32 threads to the market. As we have seen with some of the EPYC chips, big caches can be very beneficial.
Here is a new feature that AMD is announcing with the new chips called eco-mode. With eco mode, you can lower TDP from 105W to 65W and take a performance hit. Still, that also means that AMD is producing a 16 core and 32 thread chip with PCIe Gen4 at 65W levels which we think our readers may be interested in. If you have a dual Intel Xeon E5-2670 V1 system still, this should translate into more performance at a lower operating cost.
On the subject of cost, the AMD slide that shows their stack is a bit misleading. The information around the New Intel Core i9 Platform Improvements and Dramatically Lower Costs is readily available. We know that Intel will replace the $1,199 Core i9-9920X 12-core CPU with a 18-core $979 Core i9-10980XE.
At $749, the big question is how many PCIe devices does one have, and how much RAM is required. If one needs more lanes for more devices, the Intel LGA2066 platform is a good choice. If one needs fewer PCIe Gen4 lanes, AMD may be better. One can also get the Core i9-10940X at $784 for 14 cores and still get a bigger platform.
3rd Gen AMD Ryzen Threadripper Details
Perhaps the star of the show for AMD is its new Threadrippers. With the lower-end socket part moving up to 16 cores, or the same amount of cores at the original Threadripper CPUs, the new parts have even more. There is an AMD Ryzen Threadripper 3970X at $1999 with 32 cores and 64 threads that also sports 144MB of cache. At 24 cores the Threadripper 3960X comes in at $1399. There is a 4MB cache difference. AMD did not specify, but that works out to 0.5MB per core so we think AMD is combining L2 and L3 cache here which causes that delta.
A major point here is that your old X399 platforms are not going to be compatible with the new chips. The new AMD TRX40 platform using sTRX4 is required to utilize the new chips and that has a great impact.
AMD now has 48x PCIe Gen4 lanes plus 8x to the chipset. The chipset with 8x PCIe Gen4 lanes is a new innovation as it provides more backhaul bandwidth. AMD says that doubling the link width to x8 and doubling the data rate with Gen4 means that it has 4x the chipset to CPU bandwidth of the previous version. Platform designers get the ability to pick how eight PCIe Gen4/ SATA high-speed I/O lanes are provisioned as well. We hope most opt to use them as PCIe Gen4 or NVMe lanes instead of as SATA.
Threadripper is still limited to quad-channel memory but this is now DDR4-3200. With the new I/O die design, we should see a much better NUMA configuration than we did with the AMD Ryzen Threadripper 2990WX. STH asked if this was an EPYC 7002 series derived I/O die but we were told that it is a distinct I/O die but are awaiting a follow-up.
AMD said to expect 280W TDP being hit for these parts, or the same as the water-cooling only AMD EPYC 7H12 64-core HPC chip. One gets more cores than the Intel Xeon W-3275 and more PCIe bandwidth but loses memory channels with Threadripper.
As a piece of pure speculation here, AMD could, in theory, produce 48-core and 64-core workstation parts if it has the EPYC style packaging and 280W support. Then again, AMD may not have the die supply to offer that kind of part.
Final Words
Intel has done a great job of offering a competitive response with the new LGA2066 Core i9 models. The fact that AMD is pushing ahead to higher price points means that the company is starting to extract more premiums for features like more cores and PCIe Gen4 support.
AMD is heavily relying upon Cinebench R20 in their press decks. That is architecturally something that runs very well on AMD to the point that STH set a World Record over the summer using AMD chips as a fun exercise. We are omitting those results here since they tell an overly optimistic story for AMD performance.
The fall CPU launch cycle is showing increased competition which is good to spur innovation in the industry.
Interesting launch. A couple of things I must pen out on this launch… First off, as the owner of several X399 rigs, I am very disappointed that I have no upgrade options. I will remember this in the years ahead when I make purchase decisions. Second off, at these price points, I wouldn’t have upgraded anyway. Now to the meat of things :
> PCIE 4.0 is for all intents purposes not a big seller for me to upgrade. PCIE 3.0 x16 is hardly being maxed out by any peripheral as it is. So, bandwidth isn’t a draw for me on PCIE 4.0. Latency is the bigger issue and it remains unimpacted to any notable degree.
> PCIE 4.0 NVME…. again, a tbd “real-world performance device. A non-selling point.
So, PCIE 4.0 is quasi-negative. I have to pay more for something I have no big use for, I also have to suffer another point of failure on the chipset fan, have a louder overall build and now have a multiple roll-on effect for the TDP of the CPU and the VRM cooling.
Negative
> PCIE slots… Given the new power consumption of PCIE 4.0 and a number of add-ons that have no big importance, the vrm stack cooling/config now start to infringe on an already crowded motherboard whereby I am seeing goofy layouts of 4 slot mobos, a reduction of PCIE slots from 4 to 3 + a reduction in nvme slots and a whole host of things that make no sense. I don’t see an entry processor price point that is double what I am accustomed to as a draw when you start cutting down on I/O (The biggest sell of the threadripper platform).
> ATX/E-ATX : Is obviously becoming too small for HEDT computing. Whose going to be the first company to make bigger boards and give things the proper room they deserve so the processor can be fully utilized?
> EPYC vs Threadripper : What’s the point of threadripper at these price points? EYPC makes tons more sense here. The pricing is almost the same. For higher clocks on threadripper, you get 1/4 the RAM size capability (a paltry 256GB vs 1TB/2TB (1/8th). You get almost double the heat/tdp. You get almost 1/2 the PCIE lanes…
And at the same price? Yeah, given the X399 snub, I’m done with Threadripper. Also, AMD has opened the door back up to intel atm right when they were likely at the avalanche point of their products.
> Motherboard price.. X399 was $300. Now we can expect $400 minimum w/ more realistic pricing @ $500/$600? That’s the price of an EPYC board.
So, there is absolutely no reason I’d touch this new platform : TRX40. It’s price point makes no sense. And you can 100% forget about whatever TRX80 is going to be : An even more expensive but gimped EPYC platform? Get out of town.
3950x basic ryzen makes the most sense here if you are not targeting I/O.
EPYC makes the most sense if you are targeting I/O and need a power house computer.
Threadripper meanwhile has gone even more niche. It’s going to need a new set of buyers because I highly doubt it will get existing owners of X399 off the couch.
Bravo I guess.. AMD better make it a point to define why exactly they carved what essentially is an EPYC processor into so many similar priced segments with the same price points but less offerings.
Ryzen has served its purpose for my needs from 2017 until 2020. In 2020/2021, I’m eager to see what intel comes out with but it is unlikely I am touching either’s products until 2022.
Like Johny above I am also very disappointed for the lack of back compat. I am certain it could have been achieved. If they could do it for Ryzen and Epyc, why not for TR? Sure, the new platform is much more future safe, but I never expected to have PCIe 4 on old boards. The x8 chipset connection could also be achieved on new boards with back-compat CPUs.
My trusty TR1920X will last me at least for a couple more years and then I could probably upgrade to 2950X on the cheap (I hope!). But I’m still very disappointed. It took so little for AMD to turn into what we disliked the most in Intel during the last 10 years.
Plus, since it’s a new platform, they could have moved to 96 or 128 PCIe lanes and really leave Intel in the dust in the HEDT space without even needing a chipset – Epyc style. Now it’s just an obvious money grab.
OTOH, I’m sure they will be awesome processors…
@Nikolay : Exactly. A very short sighted move for having carved out a new and exciting market segment only to tank it with a confused money grab. Intel with their new price cuts and delayed product launch are likely going to go for AMD’s jugular here. While these two battle it out, I will be on the sidelines for some years until the dust settles. I have multiple X399 rigs that are doing their jobs just fine even w/ the NUMA “issue”. AMD’s new platform is quite exciting on design but there’s DDR5 around the corner and PCIE 5.0. AMD indicated they will be taping out their next gen processor in 2020. So, I’m to be a fool and jump on the last gasp of this current run at a ridiculous premium that has no upgrade path from my current hardware? Get out of here. I am sure the same is true for many people with existing rigs. And when it comes to certified professional workstations, Intel still holds the crown. Threadripper while attractive still has the ‘enthusiast’ monicker surrounding it. So, I doubt it has penetrated deeply. The back-end server momentum is clearly towards EPYC and for good reason given its hefty offering. Ryzen AM4 is very attractive all the way up o 16 core at reasonable price points. However, AMD just puked on thread-ripper with this launch. The board offerings/configuration are so confusing I don’t even know where to start. That chipset fan is a death-knell to reliability. 10GB consumer ethernet is a gimmick… Any professional dipping into this market who needs above the standard 1GBE is far better served dropping a mellanox nic in with 5x the bandwidth. Wifi is not a selling point. Exotic flavors of USB no devices exist for is not a sell. Nothin coming off the new chipset is a selling point. People need : More NVME and that’s about it. SATA port offerings are already sufficient. Lastly, that 280W stock TDP is insane. I already don’t run my thread-ripper rigs full time for this very reason. And then you open your eyes and realize : Wait a minute .. 3950x (Ryzen AM4) now supports 32GB dimms. So, AM4 now supports 128GB of ram like threadripper did. No NUMA + tons more cache .. for $700 and it can drop in to my existing boards? Why on earth would I touch threadripper? I’d be better served buying a 3950x drop-in to get a better 16core above my current 1950x .. toss some mellanox nics in both rigs direct connect and use the 1950x threadripper as my PCIE slot slave for GPUs. Boom, I’m at 32 cores for $700… vs $2000 for a a single gimped threadripper new gen processor + $500/$600 for a mobo.
I get that AMD makes money either way, but good gracious.. Way to kill a platform before it even matured. 24 cores @ 280W is absurd. 32 cores @ 280W is more sensible. 64cores @ 280W sensible but underfed and now you’re into a whole new premium price point w/ TRX80? LOL, just buy an epic.
24 cores makes zero sense @$1,500
32 cores makes zero sense @$2,000
— Above that go EYPC for sure, its not a workstation you’re after nore clock speeds.
@Nikolay : “Plus, since it’s a new platform, they could have moved to 96 or 128 PCIe lanes ”
Too bad you can’t make any practical use of that on a bozo sized ATX board or even E-ATX.
We have a bold new processor with tons of I/O that seems illogically limited by an archaic board standard that it can’t fit on. There’s only so much longer this ‘youtube eceleb’ economy is going to last. So, I have no clue what is being referred to by ‘content creators’.
Intel has an open door to crush AMD here. Ryzen/EPYC are well formed but Intel can carve AMD out of HEDT if it prices itself correctly.
3950x $750 vs. 10980xe $1000
3960x $1400 vs. W-3265 $3350
3970x $2000 vs. W-3275 $4450
Not as cheap as they used to be but still pretty good.
Misha: Your comparison is near invalid. Enthusiast vs proper workstation chips that’s only a step down from server grade?
Intel’s HEDT platform is very competitive this time around, especially with software optimisations, which means that 10920X could end up out-performing 3950X in some programs. They are refusing to compete on core count, and are instead banking on outselling CPUs at a lower and frankly, more reasonable price bracket.
Johnny: I think you should wait until more threadripper 3000 boards/reviews come out..ie. Tyan and Supermicro.
Epyc is a great system and I will be getting one as a server system for use as a production linux box. But I do see the value getting a 64-core windows dev box that needs as high a clock speed as possible with much cheaper ram than ECC DIMM. If money is no object then get an Epyc system but there are an awful lot of people who will buy a threadripper over an Epyc system( …diy builders like me)!!
AMD only committed to platform longevity for AM4, and it is still down to the mobo vendors to provide it. Whining about stuff then never promised surely makes you look like you are shilling for a particular competitor of AMD, which recently resorted to a slew of fishy means to stay relevant…
Pricing is by no means cheap, but this is not inferior performance “underdog AMD”, it now has a superior product in pretty much every aspect. The overall cost increase compared with the previous gen TR parts will most likely be lower than the performance gain, and is totally justifiable. 4x 7nm dies + the IO die cost significantly more than the previous models’ 4x 12nm dies, so AMD may even be reducing its margins on this generation.
Is it more expensive than previous generation? Yes, clearly. But does it constitute a lower overall product value? It doesn’t like like it does. Does Intel offer something with better performance and feature set at the same price point? I don’t think so.
Remember that pricing is always subject to change, but for the time being, AMD’s direct competition in this price segment is the 2100$ ECC memory support lacking, IO constrained, merely 18 core 9980XE. And yes, Intel is cutting HEDT pricing in half with next gen products, and AMD will probably eventually lower the 24 and 32 core parts to 1000$ and 1500$ respectively, but until then I don’t see a reason why AMD should not get that extra income it so desperately needs to continue its innovation march.
Remember those 10 years of literally NO competition, with the mainstream being stuck at 4 cores, where Intel charged 1800$ for an 8 core chip, all because of the latter’s anti-competitive practices deprived AMD from the funds to develop a competitive product? You want things to go back to that? If not, then why do you expect that AMD still has to settle for scraps, now that the advantage is in their hands?
Last but not least, if one truly NEEDS a 32 core part, then surely, that person is doing advanced work with it that pays really well, and will pay for the 2000$ CPU in no time.
No? You want it for vanity, bragging rights, or because it is “cool” to own overspec’d hardware you can’t make proper use of? Then you are probably better off with Intel, because “brand”… Or maybe look into other, more meaningful and productive ways to cultivate self-worth.
Also, do not forget that AMD is not an altruistic charity, it is a money making company. Like every company, they do whatever they can to leverage their position.
Again, everyone who actually needs a 2000$ CPU will have no problem affording it. You are literally complaining about the best product value this segment has seen in all of human history, because you are poor or feel entitled to free stuff. Sorry but this is silly.
AMD increased the value of what you get for 2000$ by more than 3 times in just 3 years, which is nothing short of amazing, so yes, they are entitled to the premium you are complaining over. Yet if you still feel like this is shameless money-grabbing, you can always go for a more noble, generous and altruistic CPU vendor like Intel… Oh wait… Never mind.
@DGO : If you’re referring to my commentary please state so and don’t beat around the bush. I can’t be shilling for intel because I dont own any of their hardware. I only have ryzen/threadripper builds under my watch. I expected (fully reasoned) to have an upgrade path for 3 generations like Ryzen. I didn’t get that with thread-ripper and this new release literally appears to be a one-off run itself as the upcoming nextgen is definitely not backward compatible. The prices and offerings are also off. If a person really had a need for 16/24/32 cores, they’d already have a threeadripper or EPYC. They wont’ suddenly just have discovered they need it. Threadripper has been out since 2017. So, no.. AMD wont be getting my money nor will i be upgrading. Intel won’t either. I’ll see both of them in 2022. Good luck attracting new customers to this price segment. Also, if you haven’t noticed, most threadripper owners feel that way. Nice try trying to sideline straight forward and truthful commentary with completely unfounded rhetoric about Intel shilling.
$1400 entrypoint + $500/$600 motherboard. Give me a break. That’s intel pricing and i fully expect intel to come directly back at them. They both can fight it out. In 2022, hopefully they’ve BOTH figured out how to get to more reasonable pricing. In the meantime, I got all the cores I need. Don’t even get me started on the swaths of used EPYCs/TR and hw that’s about to hit the market w/ Rome/TR launch.. I might buy a used EPYC data center rig for 1/2 the price and finally get a proper non-gimped TR. Your commentary has no basis of approach to what I stated as it literally has little to do w/ Intel and everything to do w/ how AMD has handled their own product line. No one ‘really’ needs any of these cores to get work done. Some just desire to get it done a little faster and don’t mind the extra $$$ when its reasonable which for many TR no longer is.
Well, there is quite some frustration in comments here about new AMD offerings. Yes, I agree, older TR may be cheaper, especially those in 19xx line. On the other hand if I compare 3950x and old 1950 I can’t fiend a reason to buy into old TR due to way much bigger TDP and less CPU power. Let’s not forget that older TRs were behind Intel with IPC while new Ryzen/TR is in front of them.
W.r.t. Epyc and TR not competing with it. I can’t agree. I still think that TR may be the best machine for developer doing huge compiles/recompiles/linking and that’s something man does not need that much RAM but appreciate as high as possible clock. Sure, ryzen 3950x may fills a bit of this, but some may appreciate even a little bit more power.
It’ll be really interesting if TRX80/WRX80 really brings 8 channel RAM or not or if WRX80 brings support for (L)RDIMMs. Certainly looking forward how AMD plays in this field.
@Johny – “that chipset fan is a death-knell to reliability” that over-dramatizing piece of FUD qualifies you for a shill in the best case scenario. I won’t go into details on the worst case.
It doesn’t spin most of the time, there are system warnings for when it malfunctions and the hardware beneath it is perfectly capable of thermal throttling to avoid permanent damage.
More defensive empty claims add nothing when you are already figured out. Sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but ultimately, it is for your good.
More brilliant fanboish conclusions:
”
24 cores makes zero sense @$1,500
32 cores makes zero sense @$2,000
”
Maybe you can’t make any sense of it, as I mentioned, those products offer unprecedented performance at a price point that has seen products selling for over a decade. Not good enough for you? Maybe you are not good enough for it, just a thought.
“I can’t be shilling for intel because I dont own any of their hardware”
That’s what every other shill is saying. You gave it your best tho, that much I am sure of.
now when they say ‘4.7 GHz Boost’….do they really mean 4.5 GHz single core? 🙂
@DGO:
The pricing comes at a bad time for AMD. HEDT is already a small market, and with the announcement of heavy price drops from Intel, a $200 hike on the top CPU combined with motherboard premium does not bode well for AMD, especially since many professional software are heavily Intel optimised and runs better even on lesser chips.
Having made its name for releasing good CPUs at a reasonable price, a venture into the top end may prove disastrous if they do not perform substantially better (I have no reasons to believe that they won’t), especially at a time where Intel has essentially undercut AMD’s pricing segments.
Regarding your view on AMD: They are definitely not atruistic. They are also there to make money. I support AMD because of fair competiton, and similarly, if Intel was placed into such a state, I would support Intel too. However, my personal liking of AMD does not infringe upon that fact that by raising prices at a time when Intel is undercutting with their HEDT could be a bad idea. Perhaps AMD could release a lower end chipset with conventional PCIe 3 support?
@Jeff
Dream on.
@Jeff I still don’t see how paying 10% more for 30+% better performance over last year’s product is a bad deal. Seems like a case of lingering unrealistic expectations that AMD should be giving those away at the same old 30% margin while intel was selling at 60% for over a decade. R&D cost for 7nm is like 4 times higher compared with 14/12nm.
At any rate, I don’t expect AMD is overly eager to sell those dies as TRs when they sell like hotcakes in higher margin Epyc parts. Yet nobody complains about those. The cheapest Rome 32 core CPU is 2200$ and it is a good 30% slower than the TR, so again, that’s a good deal if the extra performance is worth the lower maximum RAM capacity.
Seems like a case of lingering and no longer realistic expectations. Get with the times. It is a top notch product at an entirely reasonable price for what you get in return. Intel is only slashing pricing in half because their pricing was straight out insane for over a decade now to begin with, and even at 50% I can’t say I am particularly enticed, or at all TBH. And unlike some of the “puritans” around here, I have no problem admitting I’ve been buying many Intel high end chips from 2006 to 2016, reluctantly I might add, for the simple reason AMD had nothing in the high performance segment for over 10 years. And it always felt like extortion. Those TR3 parts, at the announced prices, they don’t feel like extortion, they feel like a breath of fresh air after being stuck for 10 years in Intel’s dusty old monopoly basement.
@DGO : So, after being called out directly for your nonsensical and unfounded reply, you circle back to a comment I made about the chipset fan amidst of sea of commentary you obviously can’t even begin to approach? Give me a break. Do you actually own any threadripper rigs or are you here to detract from any current users who are voicing obvious negative sentiments against a mis-priced launch that isn’t backwards compatible with a HEDT platform AMD just killed in 2 years because they desired to gimp EPYC processors to a point that they had no upgrade path with a one-off unique socket. Even now, they have segmented it again into two unique ONE OF sockets that likely have no viability beyond one release. I bought into a ‘platform’, not an experiment.. Something a company shouldn’t due at the ‘workstation’ level. As for the chipset fan, where is it on EPYC enterprise boards? Point it out to me in case I’ve missed it. Also, have you even looked at the new TR boards? There’s fans from some manuf even on the VRMs. Why? For a nonsensical PCIE 4.0 that has no apparent use. Why is the new TR not backwards compatible? Because of PCIE 4.0? Why is EPYC Rome backwards compatible ?
> Fanboi
For amd? That’s the only hardware I have. The ‘lower’ core count TR did sell as 16 cores was the top of the line until Gen 2 TR.
> those products offer unprecedented performance at a price point
Yeah, EPYC ROME sells for the same price point.
https://www.newegg.com/p/N82E16819113591
$1,466.99
vs
$1,400 for a gimped version on TR.
If I had a need for a 24 core, there’s no way i’m paying the same price for 1/2 and 1/4th the features on threadripper.
+ 100W more on TDP for inefficient clocks
Oh and the old 24 core TR sells for $999 now. You’re definitely not getting 50% more performance for 50% more cost by buying the new processor. I’m not replying to you any further because you’re the obvious shill/fanboi here dolling out praise and excuse for a launch that doesn’t deserve it.
@DGO
> I still don’t see how paying 10% more for 30+% better performance over last year’s product is a bad deal.
Because I bought last year’s product because I had a need that has been satisfied. This years product is more than 50% more because last years product’s price just got cut in half due to AMD obsoleting it. So, why on earth would I upgrade 1 year after investing in a platform? Why would anyone? for @best 30% more performance. +you’re going to be paying even more for that motherboard.
> At any rate, I don’t expect AMD is overly eager to sell those dies as TRs when they sell like hotcakes in higher margin Epyc parts. Yet nobody complains about those. The cheapest Rome 32 core CPU is 2200$ and it is a good 30% slower than the TR, so again, that’s a good deal if the extra performance is worth the lower maximum RAM capacity.
https://www.newegg.com/p/N82E16819113591
Rome 24 core is the same price as the TR 24 core. It runs in an efficient clock range that reduces power consumption by a 50%. At that core count, power consumption is actually important. At 24 cores, ram is actually quite important for performance not cpu clocks. You can’t compute anything when you’re cores are waiting on data retrieval from ram.
> Get with the times, I just now came around to leaving intel for AMDs platform
Congratulations. Others have already done so years ago fanboi.
Now it is clear why you’re the shill, as you don’t actually own any AMD hardware and have rose tinted glasses about the migration from intel to AMD. You will be one of the ‘new’ entrants to their platform.. the larger volume of people buying this new TR. Those they slighted with x399 likely won’t be upgrading until 2022, at which point, i’m sure intel will humble their pricing. Enjoy the one iteration of TR because AMD has already stated that they’re moving to a new EPYC socket after ROme. Welcome to intel 1/2 iteration sockets my friend. I look forward to seeing your screeching commentary in comments during the next upgrade.
@lemans24 :
> Johnny: I think you should wait until more threadripper 3000 boards/reviews come out..ie. Tyan and Supermicro.
There’s really no need at these price points. I’m either throwing a 3950x into my existing AM4 builds to soak the efficiency improvements of this current generation because @$749, it has a value proposition.
and/or I’m booting some TR builds and buying 1st/2nd gen EPYC @32 core and building out the platform I should have had from the start w/o lots more I/O and lots more RAM expandability. Meanwhile, I am stuck w/t the same I/O on the new TR except @ PCIE 4.0 speeds which I have no use for. I can buy a 32 core EPYC for almost half the amount I would pay for a 24 core TR. It has double the I/O and ram capability and the mobo is going to be about $500 (probably less than the new TR board). I have zero use for PCIE 4.0. I seek to double core count not toss another 8 cores on top. and pay 3x as much for the “same” I/O
> Epyc is a great system and I will be getting one as a server system for use as a production linux box. But I do see the value getting a 64-core windows dev box that needs as high a clock speed as possible with much cheaper ram than ECC DIMM. If money is no object then get an Epyc system but there are an awful lot of people who will buy a threadripper over an Epyc system( …diy builders like me)!!
I saw it in 1st/2nd gen eypc/TR and purchased TR accordingly. I no longer see it at core counts >16. If you need a workstation with that many cores, you need to do the proper thing and offload it to a back-end and proper server with enterprise grade hardware which I now will be moving towards. TR helped bridge the gap. Given the no-ram access cpu dies, prior TR was a joke past 16 cores. AM4 can do 128GB now, so if I need a 16 core setup, I go for a 3950x @ 128GB. If I need higher than 16 cores, I skip TR and go for a proper EPYC system. At least I am sure w/ EPYC, I can drop in ROME and follow on processors down the road because AMD actually respects it as a platform. After what they’ve done to TR, I have no clue what they intend to do w/ TR as a platform going forward. It’s still a frankenstein/hobby architecture even in its current form. Asrock makes workstation boards for EPYC, it’s a done deal. I’m not going to pay EPYC prices for 1/2 and 1/4th what I need. If you need 24+ cores, you shouldn’t be obsessing about clocks anyway. Single core performance is not what you’re after and the UI more than handles itself @ EPYC clock speeds. What should be important is RAM capacity and core count scaled with your application needs. If they are sufficient for HPC and far higher end computing, i’m sure it will suffice for a random developer. Decisions made ! Thanks for the healthy and sensible exchange here.
Johny: do the hell whatever you want then!!
In the meantime I am getting a windows dev box with a 64-core midly overclocked (all core clocked all the time) threadripper 3990x with 64GB(..maybe 128GB) of ddr4-3200 memory, dual 2080ti cards and 4 m.2 ssd’s totaling at least 2 TB’s. Once i get all this, I am sure I can pay it off in less than 2 months based solely on faster compilations/unit testing alone!!
I would love to see a review of the Ryzen 9 3950X sometime.
It’s a pitry that, as far as I know, AMD still isn’t giving official ECC support to the new Ryzens. On that note, it would be interesting to get some in-depth testing of ECC functionality if you do write a review of the 3950X. Does ECC work reliably when the CPU is used with a mainboard that supports this feature?
@Lemans24 : And a 64 core didn’t make sense to you until 11/7/2019 even though AMD offered it years ago? Or even a 32 core? But now it makes sense to drop $3,000 on a workstation processor for code compilation? Code compilation… 2months that pays itself off? What are you running on now a quad-core or something? Dream on. The launch/sell date aren’t even specified for 3990x.
> threadripper 3990x with 64GB(..maybe 128GB) of ddr4-3200 memory
Run out of cash or something? You gonna run 8GB sticks on the TRX80? (8-channel) lol
> 4 M.2 nvme..
wew impressive
> Dual 2080tis
Using cuda to speed code comp?
enjoy the interesting build…might want to save some pennies for the proper around of RAM for that kind of core count.
@johny – It is just a computer!!! Why so much excitement in all your comments!!!
Amd did not make a 64-core until Epyc 2 which just came out a few months ago.
I want as good a price performance as possible and usually I skip a generation whenever a new chip comes out so for me, threadripper 3000 is the one. I bought top of the line a few months after it came out and I will definitely do the same in 2020 as far as getting a 3990x. The second generation 2000 threadrippers did not offer enough TOTAL performance uplift for real time options trading over my 1950x but would have been good for code compilation. The 64 core threadripper with pcie 4.0 m.2 cards will definitely be more than twice as fast as my 1950x and I definitely want minimum 4GHz all core clock speed with as many cores as I can afford for an options trading dev machine. I will get a cheaper linux machine to run my backend code with proper ECC memory as mandatory. The dual gpu cards are for CUDA based c++ Monte Carlo based option metric calculations that need to run under 2 seconds when ever the option price changes from my real time market data feeds. Once development is complete, I will run all backend code on a linux box with only the GUI client running on my dev box .
I definitely have no need for an Epyc system for my dev machine but will get one for my production server and I am sure I will only need a 16 core chip as well.
What?! You need a new mobo to run the new TRs *&^%$#@!
That’s it AMD, I switching back to Intel where the sockets last forever.
I can no longer bear reader comments on STH. I think I’m going to move to anandtech.com where it is so much more professional.
What the hell is wrong with you people?
I will by TR. I don’t care if it is +/- $300.
PLEASE RDIMMS!!!!!
@Dave: “…What the hell is wrong with you people?…”
Thank you. I was wondering if I was the only one who could not absorb this mad ranting diarrhea.
I like the 3950X and the 3960X but I already invested in a 2950X (good price on eBay) and a 3900X this year. So I think I’ll wait a year for a TR 3000 or EPYC Rome. By then the Linux distros will have caught up with all the drivers for the new boards.
This being said, that’s for personal use. At work, I have a 50% say in which machines we are going to acquire and that will definitely be AMD.
So who needs so many PCIe lanes, cores and memory?
Me!
Reason: Two or three IDEs, several VMs, Cassandra server, several web server sites, other services, unit-tests, 1GbE, 56Gb/s InfiniBand all running in parallel. I love my TR 16C/32T with 128GB of memory.
Hold the production line AMD, gotta rethink your entire business model because a self-entitled nobody is having a tantrum meltdown on the internet. Offering unprecedented performance at any given price point ain’t gonna cut it for him, you need to price stuff according to his lowly standards, even if it means going bankrupt, because you owe him that!
Because you somehow deceived and ultimately cheated him when he bought a platform you never committed to long term support. This injustice will not stand!!! How dare you quadruple the bandwidth between the CPU and the peripheral chipset to remove a system bottleneck, the TR platform must remain gimped for the sake of his personal convenience. Now dare you introduce PCIE4 and the cost increase it brings? How dare you?!? It boggles my mind, and grinds my gears to a halt.
Poor little Johny, still believes that the universe revolves around him, if something doesn’t make sense to him, then it doesn’t make any sense to anyone anywhere… Crying like a baby over a 200$ price increase, which is quite literally next to nothing relative to the total cost of a professional workstation, hardware and software included, totally incapable of acknowledging the tremendous increase in product value it brings.
You should head over to wccftech Johny, this is where you truly belong.
@DGO: You took the words right out of my mouth…great comment: ‘…Poor little Johny ‘
@lemans24 : And there it is… The wonderful ‘pro use case’ :
> real time options trading
> code compilation.
> an options trading dev machine.
> a cheaper linux machine to run my backend code with proper ECC memory as mandatory.
> The dual gpu cards are for CUDA based c++ Monte Carlo based option metric calculations that need to run under 2 seconds when ever the option price changes from my real time market data feeds.
> Once development is complete, I will run all backend code on a linux box with only the GUI client running on my dev box .
> I definitely have no need for an Epyc system for my dev machine but will get one for my production server and I am sure I will only need a 16 core chip as well.
And this folks is how it ‘pays itself off in 2months’. Magical bot-net RT options trading that never loses money in a clearly ‘trending’ market. Yep, I knew something was ‘off’ w/ your commentary. Now I know.
@jonny: what is your point?? is threadripper solely reserved for poor people??
Can you not say at least one good point for buying a 3990x?? LOL
What I can’t figure out is the value offered by Gigabyte/MSI/ASUS/ASRock stepping up and down their product stack.
With a rumored $400 price delta between the top and bottom, I struggle to see how on-board 10gbe or 1-2 extra PCIe/M.2/SATA slots account for that added cost.
These comments are funny. New TR only has about a 30% generation over generation increase in performance… Oh they’re changing the socket and chipset after 2 generations… Oh the price went up because AMD now has a bleeding edge tech that is ALSO proven now…
I wish people acted like this in 2006-2016 with Intel’s 2 chip socket cycles and MASSIVE 4% generation over generation performance improvements.
Let us not be entitled and greedy. AMD had great pricing for Zen 1 as it was introducing a new and unknown product. Zen 2 is a massive improvement across the board and is proven now. AMD need to make money on their hard work.
I am guessing that ThreadRipper is going to be AMD’s PoC platform for Entreprise solutions .. .they might validate some tech and tricks on TR …before they are implemented on EPYC … or they get more time to optimise for EPYC with learning from TR.
A reason to go PCIe 4.0 is: M.2 Gen 4 storage, USB 3.2 Gen 2 standard (and USB4, which will come), Wi-Fi 6 and 10 GbE connectivity. PCIe 5 probably isn’t worth waiting for, for someone with a computer at home, and will be expensive (not just for the motherboard but also for the devices able to maximize use of it).
If PCIe 3 is good enough there’s no reason to go 4 and the money can be reallocated to other parts or saved. I wish 4 brought more to the table, after such a long wait, but it’s what some of us are buying into because we want our old computer (when today’s computers are “old”, 6-10 years from now) to be useful for something; instead of yet another junker.
I’m waiting for Milan because there’s a chance there’ll be some unannounced (unrumored) improvements, it not then the current generation will be that much cheaper.
Don’t buy until you need to, and buy what you want.
I wish a site admin would delete this entire thread. This is a site for professionals, act like one.
I think AMD could foster goodwill and loyality by producing some Zen2 TR models for the TR4 socket as a drop-in upgrade at the very least. Owners will be without PCI-E 4 but I don’t think we’ll miss it.
@jonny, stop it. Immediately.