Threadripper 1900X

Originally started overclocking the AMD decades ago before having to turn to Intel. Am thinking seriously about trying out the 1900x (max $s I want to spend). Your thoughts regarding it versus other options.

NOTE: I do far more computing than gaming.

What use cases are you considering it for that would require a ThreadRipper 8c/16t vs. a RyZen 8c/16t variant?

Good question Algrim. The vast majority of reviews I've seen regarding that comparison revolve around gaming which isn't my interest.

I do scientific computing that uses multithreads. Info related to multithread and related memory performance would be greatly appreciated. Also any views you might have.

Good entry level if you need the memory performance and PCIE lanes. Supposedly the platforms will remain compatible with future processors

deeppow said:

Good question Algrim. The vast majority of reviews I've seen regarding that comparison revolve around gaming which isn't my interest.

I do scientific computing that uses multithreads. Info related to multithread and related memory performance would be greatly appreciated. Also any views you might have.

Click to expand...

Post below...

gigaxtreme1 said:

Good entry level if you need the memory performance and PCIE lanes. Supposedly the platforms will remain compatible with future processors

Click to expand...

This is the big reason to go with the 1900x are the pcie lanes and memory support as noted above. If you're not sticking RAID cards, accelerators, GPUs, in there or multiple m.2 drives, there's no reason to go 1900x. Chip wise it's really no gain over a 1800x for example.

Depends on your usage scenario?

If your just an avid gamer I would highly recommend Intel X299, even though the x299 is a good board, the way Intel is going about this model structure is absolutely retarded.

If you want superior multithreading performance the 1900x or 1800x are essentially nearly the same in performance.

If you want quad channel ram get the x399 but if dual channel is fine for you then get the x370/b350 etc...

But for IPC single thread you are not going to beat Intel (as of today and that might change soon with Zen2 well see!)

I have a 1950x and it games 1000% perfect. I can't tell the difference between it and some Intel part to be honest but then again I have mine matched with dual 1080ti's so your mileage may vary in regard to your own experience.

I find that the INtel is on a more mature process, thus you are going to get more memory bandwidth with less fuss but at what cost? What is the cutoff of reality here you know?

With AMD it seems the line of diminishing returns starts around 3200 speed. Some will argue 3600 and that is fine with me. Ram is already hella expensive. My system runs fantastic with 3000 speed @ 32gb.

As far as PCIe lanes, I think the days of needing 16x8x16x8 are gone. But 16x16 is really nice for double GPUs. Plus the extra ability to add 3 nvme drives at 4x each full speed and fill every pcie slot on the motherboard with a card and get full bandwidth to each is just awesome to have. With Intel X299 you get up to 44 pcie lanes on the highest end most expensive models of CPU. On amd you get 64 lanes minus the board requirements internally on all 3 chip models.

As far as compute performance goes, the 1900X is mostly the same as 1800X.

The benefit of the 1900X is mostly I/O, and allowing four DDR4 modules without compromising on memory clocks. Do you want many PCIe lanes? M.2 NVMe RAID0 for ultra-fast storage? Then Threadripper is for you.

chithanh said:

As far as compute performance goes, the 1900X is mostly the same as 1800X.

The benefit of the 1900X is mostly I/O, and allowing four DDR4 modules without compromising on memory clocks. Do you want many PCIe lanes? M.2 NVMe RAID0 for ultra-fast storage? Then Threadripper is for you.

Click to expand...

I agree with this as well; if you're in need of PCI-e lanes and quad-channel memory you really don't want to consider the non-ThreadRipper Ryzen. In my own use-case (disclaimer, I don't own either a Ryzen or ThreadRipper yet) I'm more core-bound than I/O so I'm considering the 16c/32t ThreadRipper for a potential build. Since you don't mention the scientific software you're interested in running you could be core-bound if you stick with an 8c/16t processor.

I've stated my needs are related to multiple threads and scientific computations. Where it relates to C++, Java or some other language isn't important. There are multiple studies that say quad-channel or less, memory performance doesn't show much difference. I find little info that leads me to believe they've tested much beyond a gaming framework. Also, more PCIe lanes or not, does the future ensure that this is not a path forward that will be more productive?

Why are you even bringing up languages? Nobody even mentioned C++ or Java before you did just now.


It really is this simple: If you want 8 cores and 16 threads you can get that from Ryzen 7 for much less money.

The ONLY viable reasons to buy a 1900X instead are the following:

1 - You need more PCI-E lanes
2 - You want to expand to MORE than 8 cores later down the road
3 - You need Quad channel memory support instead of Dual.

If none of points 1-3 apply to you, you should be building a Ryzen system instead, at a few hundred dollars less for the same performance in your use case.

4 - you want official ECC memory support from AMD, instead of depending on the mobo vendor

Lol, ok yeah but thats niche as HELL, and frankly anyone that knows they need ECC memory support shouldnt need to ask this question.

While we're doing extremely niche differences -

5 - you'll get worse performance in some cases as you'll have 4+4 cores on two dies communicating across the package rather than within one die as you would on ryzen 7

It sounds like you should just go with Ryzen 1700/1800/1800X. 1900X is pretty much the same as 1800X performance wise its just the extra features you get on X399 chipset that may veer you to it.

Reasons to go with 1900X have been stated above but also buying a 1900X based system allows you to upgrade to cpus with more cores/threads in the future when prices come down.

Thanks for all the comments and suggestions.

My main reason for considering the 1900x was future upgrade. At this point I'm seriously thinking about a 1920x instead. All this aimed at multi-thread scientific computing.