3 ms·

Doesn't a single thread ripper basically slay this thing?

by bfrog 7y ago

crazydoggers 7y ago
Different market segment. The Mac Pro has 64 PCI lanes, and eight PCI slots, along with supporting 1.5TB memory. 3900x for example only has 24 pci lanes and 128GB memory support. Edit: My bad... I misread thread ripper for Ryzen for some reason
- CarVac 7y ago
  The 3900X is not a threadripper.
- ericd 7y ago
  The 2nd gen Threadripper has 64 PCI lanes, FWIW, haven't seen specs for 3rd gen yet.
mister_hn 7y ago
Yes, The Epyc 2 definitively destroys this one as appeared in multiple benchmarks.
trynumber9 7y ago
The Current 2990WX is typically slower. For example, rendering is a strong point of Zen: https://www.anandtech.com/show/13748/the-intel-xeon-w-3175x-review-28-unlocked-cores-2999-usd/7 https://www.anandtech.com/show/13748/the-intel-xeon-w-3175x-... but here it is behind. The Mac Pro's Xeon W would be slower than that tested Xeon W in multithread but faster in lightly threaded workloads. But AMD said new workstation chips are coming in November. This could be up to 64-core Threadripper chips with PCIe4 support. Though we have no idea on the clock rates so it is possible these Xeon W CPUs may still come out ahead in lightly threaded performance, especially with AVX-512.
bilbo0s 7y ago
You'd be surprised how married effects houses can be to their chip architectures. Attempts to switch can sink you when you realize that some technical artist wrote some extremely critical plugin or extension that's super fast only because it uses Intel only or AMD only instructions. My own theory, Apple has probably already spoken with clients like effects houses long ago. Since these are the clients that will generate most of the revenue with this product, I'd wager they've put it together almost especially for them. If anyone else wants to buy one, gravy, but I'd bet Apple's money comes mainly from clients in those very specialized segments. My guess is, they won't be doing anything those clients don't want them doing with that platform. Apple made that mistake once already, and it sounds like they are done chasing the larger market with their pro platform. Basically, They're going the HP workstation route and just becoming an Intel distributor. Only they're trying to distribute components in a bit more aesthetically pleasing package.

Doesn't a single thread ripper basically slay this thing?

by bfrog 7y ago

Doesn't a single thread ripper basically slay this thing?

Different market segment. The Mac Pro has 64 PCI lanes, and eight PCI slots, along with supporting 1.5TB memory. 3900x for example only has 24 pci lanes and 128GB memory support. Edit: My bad... I misread thread ripper for Ryzen for some reason

CarVac 7y ago
The 3900X is not a threadripper.
ericd 7y ago
The 2nd gen Threadripper has 64 PCI lanes, FWIW, haven't seen specs for 3rd gen yet.

mister_hn 7y ago

Yes, The Epyc 2 definitively destroys this one as appeared in multiple benchmarks.

trynumber9 7y ago

The Current 2990WX is typically slower. For example, rendering is a strong point of Zen: https://www.anandtech.com/show/13748/the-intel-xeon-w-3175x-review-28-unlocked-cores-2999-usd/7 https://www.anandtech.com/show/13748/the-intel-xeon-w-3175x-... but here it is behind. The Mac Pro's Xeon W would be slower than that tested Xeon W in multithread but faster in lightly threaded workloads. But AMD said new workstation chips are coming in November. This could be up to 64-core Threadripper chips with PCIe4 support. Though we have no idea on the clock rates so it is possible these Xeon W CPUs may still come out ahead in lightly threaded performance, especially with AVX-512.

bilbo0s 7y ago

You'd be surprised how married effects houses can be to their chip architectures. Attempts to switch can sink you when you realize that some technical artist wrote some extremely critical plugin or extension that's super fast only because it uses Intel only or AMD only instructions. My own theory, Apple has probably already spoken with clients like effects houses long ago. Since these are the clients that will generate most of the revenue with this product, I'd wager they've put it together almost especially for them. If anyone else wants to buy one, gravy, but I'd bet Apple's money comes mainly from clients in those very specialized segments. My guess is, they won't be doing anything those clients don't want them doing with that platform. Apple made that mistake once already, and it sounds like they are done chasing the larger market with their pro platform. Basically, They're going the HP workstation route and just becoming an Intel distributor. Only they're trying to distribute components in a bit more aesthetically pleasing package.