AMD Ryzen Threadripper 3990X Review 64 Cores for a Workstation

12

AMD Ryzen Threadripper 3990X SPECworkstation 3.0.2

SPECworkstation 3 has been updated to 3.0.2 which measures the 3D graphics performance of systems running under the OpenGL and Direct X application programming interfaces. As a result of the new update, we cannot compare between past version 3 results so we will show the screenshot of the results here and graph them in later reviews.

AMD Threadripper 3990x SPECworkstation 1
AMD Threadripper 3990x SPECworkstation 1
AMD Threadripper 3990x SPECworkstation 2
AMD Threadripper 3990x SPECworkstation 2
AMD Threadripper 3990x SPECworkstation 3 Part 1
AMD Threadripper 3990x SPECworkstation 3 Part 1
AMD Threadripper 3990x SPECworkstation 3 Part 2
AMD Threadripper 3990x SPECworkstation 3 Part 2

We had a few of the tests error out on us due to the core counts. That is not uncommon with new chips that substantially change the landscape. AMD sent us the chip with only a few days to test, so this is one of the areas that we see an impact on the testing timetable.

Looking at the individual results, some end up around the range of 32 core Threadripper parts. Others, such as the General Operations and Energy test segments absolutely show the Threadripper 3990X well beyond its competition.

AMD Ryzen Threadripper 3990X PassMark 9

PassMark Performance Test allows you to benchmark a PC using a variety of different speed tests; it tests the entire PC and all its components.

AMD Threadripper 3990x Passmark 9
AMD Threadripper 3990x Passmark 9

As you can see, this is a workload that is highly Intel optimized. We are just going to keep moving on without spending too much time here.

AMD Ryzen Threadripper 3960X PCMark 10

PCMark 10 is another system benchmark that we have not run to date but will start doing so in future reviews.

AMD Threadripper 3990x PCMark 10
AMD Threadripper 3990x PCMark 10

Clock speed is important. When the system runs into tasks where workloads cannot scale across cores, then we see results that are good, but not quite as good as some other options. This makes logical sense.

AMD Ryzen Threadripper 3960X Blender Benchmark

The benchmark consists of two parts: a downloadable package which runs Blender and renders on several production files, and the Open Data portal on blender.org, where the results will be (optionally) uploaded. This benchmark can be downloaded here.

AMD Threadripper 3990x Blender Benchmark CPU
AMD Threadripper 3990x Blender Benchmark CPU

Again, it almost feels like AMD designed these parts for media and entertainment creators. On Blender, the results scale very well versus 32 and 28 core alternatives. This is also a segment that can extract a lot of value from faster CPUs so it is a good fit for the 3990X.

Next, we are going to look at AIDA64 CPU Benchmarks.

12 COMMENTS

  1. I know it’s an ad, but the point made in the “Red Digital Cinema gets 64-Core Performance” video is what makes these CPUs so important:

    Jarred Land: When I see this, how fast it is, it lets me get a liiiiiittle bit more aggressive with what we’re going to do next. With what we have on our roadmap, please, keep going, keep going, because we’re gonna need it.

    Everything is connected. You can’t push the boundaries in one field if the technology in another is lacking.

  2. Great review, John.

    Just a thought/suggestion for a future article: It’d be great to see a round up of these workstation CPUs benchmarked with 16, 32, and 64 threads loaded. Particularly given how the higher end models can be quite a lot better binned silicon and how the CPU boosting technologies are implemented. It’d be really interesting to see the power draw and performance to see if the higher end models perform similarly at less power at moderate loads. I know previously it’s sometimes been better and cheaper, TCO wise, to buy the more expensive models for finish quicker then sleep efficiency advantages and also the better silicon – am curious if this might be the case for the 3990X.

  3. According to Anandtech, you need Windows for Workstations to be able to use more than 64 threads effectively. I don’t see this being commented on in this article. Has that Windows version been used for the testing?

  4. @Nikolay
    you can use more than 64t but consumer versions partition it into processor groups thinking they are on separate sockets. However someone had mentioned that his Windows Pro machine only sees one socket in the task manager so I don’t know. Maybe it’s due to firmware or uefi settings? Or a much more recent update/patch or chipset driver package from AMD?

  5. Imagine what it will be like in 3-5 years after Intel and AMD go a few more rounds. Looking forward to purchasing a 256 core 512 threads . Maybe then I can install Oracle Fusion Applications in my home lab.

  6. I have a 3990X machine here that I initially set up with Windows 10 Pro and then for fun decided to “upgrade” to Windows 10 Pro for Workstations. Can safely say there was 0% difference between the two OS, zero difference in how thread scheduling works, both have two NUMA nodes for the CPU.

    The only change is that my bank account lost around $150 for the upgrade fee. Every other feature that Win 10 Workstation offers is basically useless far as my purposes.

  7. Is it a do for Short list linked compatible single dual quad socks momo,s for all cpu’n review White Sheets. Thank I Today, Another Good Day With God

  8. How does this New NUMA Node Layout effect something like ESXi and VMs within it? I would think consolidating to One node instead of 4 (2 with direct memory access and 2 without) would be a game changer. I am new to reading up on all this so I was hoping you could provide your opinion

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here