4 ms·

I have a three-year old hand-built 16-core ThreadRipper 1950X machine here with 64GB 4-channel RAM. I have a 14" MBP M1 Max on order. I just checked the Geekben

I have a three-year old hand-built 16-core ThreadRipper 1950X machine here with 64GB 4-channel RAM. I have a 14" MBP M1 Max on order. I just checked the Geekbench scores between these two machines: M1 Max: 1783 single-core | 12693 multi-core 1950X: 901 single-core | 7409 multi-core That's a big difference that I'm looking forward to. Also, just checked memory bandwidth. I have 80GB/s memory bandwidth [1] on my 1950X. The MBP has 400GB/s memory bandwidth. 5x(!) [1] https://en.wikichip.org/wiki/amd/ryzen_threadripper/1950x https://en.wikichip.org/wiki/amd/ryzen_threadripper/1950x *EDIT adding memory bandwidth.

jeswin 5y ago
1. M1 Max has 50+ billion transistors (only a part of that count is CPU, so adjust the number downwards), 1950X (first gen 14-nm Ryzen) has 10 billion. 2. Multicore Cinebench R23 for M1 Max: 14970; Ryzen 1950X: 18780 Geekbench tests in short bursts, not taxing the CPU thermals. Cinebench is the opposite. In short, CPUs do well on some benchmarks and not so well on others.
- localhost 5y ago
  The Cinebench R23 results for 1950x[1] and M1Max[2], including single and multi-core: single multi M1Max: 1562 14970 1950X: 1035 18780 Remember that the M1 Max has 8 high performance and 2 efficiency cores vs. the 16 cores of the 1950x. Again, this is a pretty convincing victory - 1.5x single core perf in a laptop - this is not a HEDT part. [1] https://www.cpu-monkey.com/en/cpu-amd_ryzen_threadripper_1950x-756 https://www.cpu-monkey.com/en/cpu-amd_ryzen_threadripper_195... [2] https://www.cpu-monkey.com/en/cpu-apple_m1_max https://www.cpu-monkey.com/en/cpu-apple_m1_max
postalrat 5y ago
So you are comparing a laptop that is just coming out to something 4 years old.
- paulmd 5y ago
  a 4 year old workstation/HEDT that was widely viewed as being an out-of-band excellent performer for its time, and the laptop is outperforming it in multithreaded performance by almost a factor of 2, with half the (performance) cores, with no SMT. yeah, that actually is fairly wild. Granted, there are good technical reasons there (lower memory bandwidth, the 1950X having a NUMA/NUCA arrangement that often hampers the ability to bring all the cores to bear on a single task, Zen1 having extremely high memory latency and cross-CCX latency in general, etc) but it still actually is a very impressive feat.
ben-schaaf 5y ago
> I have 80GB/s memory bandwidth [1] on my 1950X. The MBP has 400GB/s memory bandwidth. 5x(!) Your 1950x also doesn't have a GPU. For comparison the rx6700xt, and Vega 56 have ~400GB/s. The 6 year old R9 nano has 500GB/s.
- localhost 5y ago
  The M1 Max *CPU* cores can access RAM at 400GB/s. My 1950x CPU cannot use the 448GB/s memory bandwidth on my RTX 2080 (which only has 8GB of GDDR6 RAM). This unified memory is wild.

jeswin 5y ago

1. M1 Max has 50+ billion transistors (only a part of that count is CPU, so adjust the number downwards), 1950X (first gen 14-nm Ryzen) has 10 billion. 2. Multicore Cinebench R23 for M1 Max: 14970; Ryzen 1950X: 18780 Geekbench tests in short bursts, not taxing the CPU thermals. Cinebench is the opposite. In short, CPUs do well on some benchmarks and not so well on others.

localhost 5y ago
The Cinebench R23 results for 1950x[1] and M1Max[2], including single and multi-core: single multi M1Max: 1562 14970 1950X: 1035 18780 Remember that the M1 Max has 8 high performance and 2 efficiency cores vs. the 16 cores of the 1950x. Again, this is a pretty convincing victory - 1.5x single core perf in a laptop - this is not a HEDT part. [1] https://www.cpu-monkey.com/en/cpu-amd_ryzen_threadripper_1950x-756 https://www.cpu-monkey.com/en/cpu-amd_ryzen_threadripper_195... [2] https://www.cpu-monkey.com/en/cpu-apple_m1_max https://www.cpu-monkey.com/en/cpu-apple_m1_max

postalrat 5y ago

So you are comparing a laptop that is just coming out to something 4 years old.

paulmd 5y ago
a 4 year old workstation/HEDT that was widely viewed as being an out-of-band excellent performer for its time, and the laptop is outperforming it in multithreaded performance by almost a factor of 2, with half the (performance) cores, with no SMT. yeah, that actually is fairly wild. Granted, there are good technical reasons there (lower memory bandwidth, the 1950X having a NUMA/NUCA arrangement that often hampers the ability to bring all the cores to bear on a single task, Zen1 having extremely high memory latency and cross-CCX latency in general, etc) but it still actually is a very impressive feat.

ben-schaaf 5y ago

> I have 80GB/s memory bandwidth [1] on my 1950X. The MBP has 400GB/s memory bandwidth. 5x(!) Your 1950x also doesn't have a GPU. For comparison the rx6700xt, and Vega 56 have ~400GB/s. The 6 year old R9 nano has 500GB/s.

localhost 5y ago
The M1 Max *CPU* cores can access RAM at 400GB/s. My 1950x CPU cannot use the 448GB/s memory bandwidth on my RTX 2080 (which only has 8GB of GDDR6 RAM). This unified memory is wild.