7 ms·
I guess I was being ridiculously optimistic hoping for the 16 core chip to be around the $600 mark :(
by Ragib_Zaman 7y ago
I guess I was being ridiculously optimistic hoping for the 16 core chip to be around the $600 mark :(
- CriticalCathed 7y ago750 is pretty close at least.
- jchw 7y agoOn the other hand, a 12C with a handsome IPC improvement from last generation at $499 feels pretty tempting to me...
- gravypod 7y agoYou can also buy into TR4 Threadripper 1950x for ~$500 [0]. I'm using one to write this post. It's a great system and you can likely buy used for cheaper than $500. I'm also assuming this price will fall further once they announce another TR4 chip. [0] - https://www.amazon.com/AMD-Threadripper-32-thread-Processor-YD195XA8AEWOF/dp/B074CBH3R4 https://www.amazon.com/AMD-Threadripper-32-thread-Processor-...
- opencl 7y agoI think the whole system price basically ends up as a wash with TR4 motherboards being at least ~$300 and needing a ~$100 cooler, I'm assuming these consumer chips will continue to have bundled coolers. The 3950X also draws 75W less than the 1950X so you can probably save a few bucks on the power supply and of course your electric bills over time. The performance comparison will be interesting though. The 3950X should be quite a bit faster than the 1950X when it's not bottlenecked by memory bandwidth, but of course the 1950X still has twice the memory channels. Slightly offset by the Zen2 memory controller supporting higher frequency RAM. So which one is better will depend heavily on workload. I suspect that for a developer workstation the 3950X would be the better performer, most compilation workloads are not very sensitive to bandwidth.
- gravypod 7y agoYea, the platform cost is higher. I ended up making a build you could make for ~$1,500 now. It was ~$1,600 when I made it. The biggest feature I'm interested in is the availability of PCIe lanes. I want this for adding a 10G nic later and two GPUs at some point as well (host & guest). If you don't need those features you're completely correct about the 3950x.
- jchw 7y agoAh, GPU passthrough? My biggest problem with virtualization is USB. I have a libvirt with GPU passthrough setup that works great, but have been unable to get a USB controller of any sort to passthrough; always winds up in a group with a bunch of other PCI-e devices. And ordinary forwarding with SPICE or something isn’t really sufficient for what I’d like to set up...
- voltagex_ 7y agoHave you tried IOMMU splitting? https://forums.unraid.net/topic/72027-iommu-group-splitting-for-pcie-passthrough-no-success-please-help/ https://forums.unraid.net/topic/72027-iommu-group-splitting-... (disclaimer - I don't own a board that can do this, I will one day, though).
- jchw 7y agoI have, though it causes a lot of stability problems :(
- simcop2387 7y agoIt's technically a security risk, but take a look at the acs patch that's out there. It'll forcefully split up the iommu groups to the hypervisor so you can do the pass through, but it does mean that the cards that were in the same group before can technically see each other's dma and other stuff on the bus. For anything other than a shared host it's pretty much fine though.
- floatboth 7y ago
- reitzensteinm 7y agoI do wonder if they'll continue with Threadripper. If it exists in the next generation, it might simply be as rebadged and slightly nerfed EPYC chips rather than something custom.
- opencl 7y agoAMD has already stated that they're going to continue with Threadripper. It would leave a fairly big gap in the lineup with nothing to compete against Intel's X299 platform. AM4 is lacking in memory channels and PCIe lanes. Epyc has much lower clockspeeds, much more expensive CPUs, and more expensive motherboards than Threadripper.
- bitL 7y agoI hope as well; moreover, I hope they'd release a 64 core TR next year that could last a decade (even if it costs 2,500+). There are rumors Zen 3 should bring 4-way SMP, i.e. 4 threads/core instead of 2, so that might lead to ridiculous numbers of threads in normal systems. As Lisa said, TRs were distinct to Epycs; I guess using UDIMMs vs RDIMMs and much higher base clock (except for the high freq EPYC 7371) led to a few changes.
- TazeTSchnitzel 7y ago> it might simply be as rebadged and slightly nerfed EPYC chips Well, that is what first-gen Threadripper was. Same socket and all, but with half the connected DDR lanes and a pin telling the motherboard it's not EPYC.
- reitzensteinm 7y agoThe first-gen Threadripper only had two dies, and even the WX series was a bit weird internally, with two of the four dies not being able to perform IO. I know it's not a big difference, but given the changes to IO and the 16 core consumer version, I don't see why there would be any internal difference to EPYC this time around (which this article claims will have a variable number of chiplets).
- 7y ago
- DuskStar 7y ago12C with 64MB cache for $499 is looking more and more like the sweet spot to me, too.
- wmf 7y agoConsidering that Intel charges almost $600 for their top 8-core, yes, that would be ridiculous. There were some leaked/rumored prices for Ryzen 3xxx and Navi that were way too low and I didn't understood why AMD would almost give away such good products; the simple truth is that they won't.
- reitzensteinm 7y agoThey're not just adding more cores on because the processes have improved allowing for more on the same silicon. The complexity of the chip is higher than the previous models, with three dies under the hood instead of one. The high end chips are closer to Threadripper than they are to the models they're replacing. I think $750 is still a ridiculously good price, and Intel's feet are being held to the fire.
- celrod 7y agoThe 1950X cost $1000 2 years ago, and it looks like you can pick them up for $500 now. Both are 16 cores with two chiplets. 1950X advantages: - 4 memory channels vs 2 - 64 PCIe lanes vs 16-4-4 3950X advantages: - 64MB of L3 cache vs 32MB - DDR4 3200 vs DDR4 2666 - The PCIe lanes are 4.0 vs 3.0 - 3.5Ghz base clock vs 3.4 - 4.7Ghz boost clock vs 4.0 - 15% better instructions per clock - Full avx2 instead of emulating with two 128-bit units - 105W vs 180W TDP The 3950X sounds like quite the improvement! Definitely a great deal IMO.
- Dylan16807 7y ago> Full avx2 instead of emulating with two 128-bit units Just a note: Two units for fused multiply-add, otherwise it's four units with two multipliers and two adders.
- CoolGuySteve 7y agoThe biggest difference between the 2 imo is that TR4 boards have 8 DIMM slots whereas Ryzen maxes out at 4 even with X570 afaik. Ryzen 3000 specs say it can support 128GB of ram but it’s hard to find 32GB DIMMs on the market. So if you’re trying to build a workstation with lots of ram and more than one GPU, the Ryzen boards are too limited even if you’re willing to buy a nice one.
- penagwin 7y agoI think they've got the market segmented decently. Ryzen's the consumer chip after all, and it's high end configuration boarders on prosumer for sure. I feel like if you're requiring 128GB of ram and/or maxing out the PCIE then you're going to have a bigger budget and ThreadRipper makes more sense.
- kyriakos 7y ago8C 16T for 329 at 65w sounds like an incredible value for money for a budget workstation.
- zanny 7y agoTo be fair 8 core 16 thread Ryzen chips could be had for as little as ~$200 for years now. With this release the respectable 2700X will probably fall pretty low in price till stocks run out.
- nottorp 7y agoAt 65 W?
- pb82 7y agoYes, the Ryzen 1700 is a 65W part
- officeplant 7y agoWhich can easily pull 200W+ when I test out my R7 1700 clocked up at 4.1ghz 1.375v. Of course I know TDP isn't at all realistic to actual power draws once you stop using things at stock settings. It only cost me $159 on sale and its easy enough to keep cool so no real complaints here.
- Kurtz79 7y agoNo, 2700X which is listed as a 105W TDP part. I like small builds that are a good compromise between performance and power needs, and the 3700X looks sweet on 65W at that price point.
- larzang 7y agoIt almost makes me think the TDP of either the 3800x or 3700x is a publishing mistake. 3.6/4.4 to 3.9/4.5 on the same hardware can't possibly require such a dramatic voltage increase to go from 65w to 105w. If it does, it means the process is struggling to produce chips at that speed, so the headroom is incredibly low and you can forget about overclocking.
- m0zg 7y agoI bet there will be such chips. They'll just have a few cores disabled. It's not like they make a separate die for every core configuration - that wouldn't make sense.
- DuskStar 7y agoSo in other words the $499 12C/24T 3900X?
- 292355744930110 7y agoThe Ryzen 7 1800X, the Zen flagship was $499. The Ryzen 7 2700X, the Zen+ flahsip was $329. That was a 34% decrease in cost for comparable models after 1 generation. If that trend follows then the comparible Zen2+/Zen3 model will only be around $500. So, hopefully you just need to wait a year.
- paulmd 7y agoThe 2700X price cut occurred in the context of Intel releasing a 6C12T processor for $350 that kept up with AMD's $500 processor. i.e. very close in multithreaded performance and easily beating it in single-thread. That's not going to happen this time around. Intel doesn't really have a response to 16C consumer processors. Best thing they can do is release the 10C chip they're working on... probably at $500 again. And they will be behind the 12C version that AMD has at $500 already. The only similarly aggressive move that Intel could even make would be to drop 10C to the $350 segment (perhaps with Hyperthreading disabled), which would be a massive blow to their margins.