4 ms·
It'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.
by CoolGuySteve 7y ago
It'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