6 ms·
“consumer variant of the 64-core EPYC” At nearly $4000 for just the CPU, is that still consumer territory? I assume only huge companies would spend that much m
by OkGoDoIt 7y ago
“consumer variant of the 64-core EPYC”
At nearly $4000 for just the CPU, is that still consumer territory? I assume only huge companies would spend that much money on a single CPU.
- Eikon 7y ago"Consumer" is used there for market segmentation, essentially to sell additional features in an other variant. More or less like consumer goods companies are using the "pro" keyword on pretty much any somewhat evolved product but the other way around.
- CoolGuySteve 7y agoIt's clocked at 2.9/4.3 instead of 2.0/3.4 like the 64 core EPYC part. So it's actually a lot faster than the server model. Kind of strange.
- jedbrown 7y agoThe EPYC still has double the bandwidth (8x vs 4x DDR4-3200).
- nullc 7y agomy 7742's seem to spend essentially all their time while in heavy all core use at ~3.2. This isn't the same experience I've had with the consumer threadripper at all, so I don't think these numbers make for a simple comparison.
- nullifidian 7y agoCan someone explain why do server variants always have lower base clocks? In particular I'm interested if consumer higher clocked variants are less reliable for long-term 24 hour full-load use. It has to be something like that, and not just power consumption considerations.
- gameswithgo 7y agoyou can’t fit the kind of cooler you would need in a server case is one reason, power is likely the other.
- lightedman 7y agoThey do make 4U server cases that would fit watercooling, several GPUs, and a heavily-loaded motherboard with redundant PSUs quite nicely.
- tracker1 7y agoAFAIK, you can overclock the Server variants if you have sufficient cooling, not sure on binning or the extra memory bandwidth in terms of CPU overclocking overhead... but there is room there.
- ktm5j 7y agoIf I'm not mistaken, most of these threadripper systems seem to come with a water cooling system that I'd bet isn't present in server systems. That's my guess. It might also be that "consumer" workloads will run the cores at the high speed more infrequently than a server which might be running full tilt 24/7. Just a thought
- xwdv 7y agoMy fridge cost $4k and it does less than this CPU.
- sz4kerto 7y agoI bet it runs cooler.
- greggyb 7y agoI'd be interested in that comparison. A fridge throws off quite a bit of heat when cooling. Luckily they're closed the vast majority of the time and are well insulated. Which uses more energy at Max load?
- selectodude 7y agoDefinitely the CPU. A fridge will use +/- 200 watts. The TDP on these chips is upwards of 250.
- jacquesm 7y agoYou significantly overpaid for your fridge.
- xwdv 7y agoGo check out the price of built in fridges and re-evaluate your comment.
- deepaksurti 7y agoMany large CG/VFX firms buy workstations that cost anywhere between 35K - 80K USD. See [1]. [1] https://twitter.com/yiningkarlli/status/1204564015113895936 https://twitter.com/yiningkarlli/status/1204564015113895936
- Polylactic_acid 7y agoNot sure I would call that consumer. Maybe single user might be more appropriate.
- mroche 7y agoThat’s because we’re buying server racks for virtualized workstations, not deskside systems. Even from Tier 1 vendors a viable deskside workstation for pro VFX doesn’t approach 35K without shoving dual socket 24-core+ Intel chips that have no realistic purpose being in a workstation unless you’re buying for specificity. The Mac Pro is a specialty item, not the norm.
- sitkack 7y agoI'd love to know more about this, because I think it is the future for everyone. What VDI environment are you using, what runs on your desktop vs run on the racks? Are the racks shared or do you have dedicated hardware provisioned to you? Do you use more than one backend rack system at a time?
- omnimus 7y agoDoes it mean people buy Mac Pros because MacOs cannot run inder vm?
- thedaemon 7y agoPeople buy Mac Pros to specifically run Mac Video Editing Software. This is the only reason to own a Mac Pro. IE if you work for Marvel editing films.
- hutzlibu 7y agoThere is a huge gamer market. Every hardcore gamer wants to have the fastest cpu avaiable. Those who can afford it, will buy it. edit: yes, it is definitely overkill for most if not all avaiable games, but in a certain scene "overkill" is considered awesome
- k_sze 7y agoDoes the CPU actually matter that much for modern AAA games? (I haven't played any AAA game in a looooooooooong time.)
- xbmcuser 7y agoAmd has started uping the thread counts with the ryzen processors only. And now that Ryzen has started being adopted by gamers and streamers newer games are getting better at utilising these cores. with current generation games extra threads won't help but newer titles it is going to
- redisman 7y agoNot really. You run the game loop on one core and physics simulation / sounds / world streaming on a handful of other ones. It's more about the maximum single core performance which is not that different on a $150 Ryzen. Going to the most expensive CPU on the market probably only gets you 5 FPS more compared to the top end GPUs that scale rendering in parallel like a dream and can give you 100+ more FPS.
- 7y ago
- blihp 7y agoAMD (currently) only has server and consumer CPU lines. So since Threadripper isn't a server product, it falls into the consumer line even though it will mostly be used by professionals and extreme enthusiasts with deep pockets.
- TD-Linux 7y agoThe original Apple II sold at an adjusted 2019 price of $5,476, and it sold millions. I would say there are plenty of consumers with that much buying power. Of course, that doesn't mean most consumers need that many cores - but that's still true even if it cost $100.
- tracker1 7y agoI'd say Pro-sumer HEDT/Workstation, yes... if you need that much compute and can use it, you're probably making money from it.