AMD Ryzen 2nd Gen Threadripper 32 Cores Confirmed

Could a minor change to Threadripper's configuration switch over to using 1 DIMM per channel for an 8 memory channel setup since most of the motherboards are already 8 channel anyways? New chips are octa-channel and first gen Threadripper is quad channel based on detecting what chip is in the socket?
 
CombatChrisNC said:
Do we know yet what the clock speeds are going to be on TR2 compared to TR1?

Not just the 32, but also the 16 core parts which should be a direct comparison to the existing TR.
Click to expand...
Considering that Threadripper dies are the binned top 5% of Ryzen chips, I would imagine enthusiasts will see 4.2/4.3GHz.
 
I have to imagine it did well enough in testing that AMD felt didn't impact performance too much. At least it doesn't need exotic cooling to seem impressive. :)
 
Amd threadrippers gen 1's were 32 core with 16 cores turned off. It was basicly a Epic Server CPU with cores turned off. Threadripper 2 is only the server chip now made for desktop use.
 
lucidrenegade said:
Looks like they are either disabling or not connecting the PCI-E lanes and memory channels on 2 of the 4 die. 250w TDP @ 3.0Ghz base / 3.4 turbo... :eek:

https://www.anandtech.com/show/12906/amd-reveals-threadripper-2-up-to-32-cores-250w-x399-refresh
Click to expand...

That's just Ian's sketch, the actual routing of the lanes and channels is up in the air. I'm hopeful that all eight channels will have DIMMs - notice how there is no 16c part in the announced processors right now, which could imply that the 8 DIMM slots on X399 refresh boards will require 4 dies to operate simultaneously. There's also nothing wrong with having the "low cost" 2x8c part only be able to use 4 DIMMs, with current DDR4 prices if you care about money you are unlikely to be buying 128GB.
 
Dan_D said:
AMD could absolutely increase the supported memory module density and double the amount of supported RAM in 4 channels. Whether or not they will do so officially is another matter entirely.
Click to expand...
AMD could enable LR-DIMM support for TR4, and memory size constraints would practically go away.

But that would put Threadripper closer to Epyc, maybe too close for AMD's liking.
 
Can't fault them for wanting to make some money off the server market. They obviously don't want Threadripper to cannibalize the more profitable Epyc sales.
 
Sausagetime said:
Can't fault them for wanting to make some money off the server market. They obviously don't want Threadripper to cannibalize the more profitable Epyc sales.
Click to expand...

I think a 32c/64t Threadripper part is more about marketing than anything. The fact that the CPU will be appealing to a specific prosumer segment and enthusiasts with deep pockets is a bonus. I think this is going to be similar to AMD's 4x4 platform, albeit something we can take far more seriously. I think we are seeing this because the pissing contest between Intel and AMD is back on.

Frankly, we needed this. In the desktop market we have been in a pool of CPU stagnation for the better part of the last decade and I'm over that shit.
 
No doubt we have needed this for a long time. I remember when the original Athlon (good old Slot A) came out and how over the next number of years it was exciting seeing Intel and AMD go back and forth with the performance crown. Obviously I am poking a bit of fun at Intel here. Anyone that is rooting for either Intel or AMD to fail is a fool. That just leads to performance stagnation again.
 
_l_ said:
excellent, simply excellent ...
Click to expand...
exc.gif
 
chithanh said:
Plus it still drops into the same TR4 socket. Intel did not say whether their 28 core chip would be compatible with existing sockets/mobos.
Click to expand...


We don't even know if that Intel chip works with existing coolers (air/water). It doesn't look like a consumer motherboard.

I guess that's the reason for the phase-change jab.

_l_ said:
AMD 32 | Intel 28 ... if it was a scoreboard AMD is the winner.

Has Moore's Law caused them to go the multitude of cores road?
Click to expand...
If someone is buying a 32 core CPU with Infinity Fabric between all the cores it sure isn't for gaming.

It isn't like the Intel mesh solution is massively better for this either.
 
ACC said:
We don't even know if that Intel chip works with existing coolers (air/water). It doesn't look like a consumer motherboard.

I guess that's the reason for the phase-change jab.


If someone is buying a 32 core CPU with Infinity Fabric between all the cores it sure isn't for gaming.

It isn't like the Intel mesh solution is massively better for this either.
Click to expand...

Turn based strategy games that allow for the use of every available core and/or thread should benefit from this.
 
ACC said:
We don't even know if that Intel chip works with existing coolers (air/water). It doesn't look like a consumer motherboard.

I guess that's the reason for the phase-change jab.
Click to expand...

lga 3647 coolers do exist, just not for the insane amount of heat that 5ghz chip generated
 
I'd pay top dollar for a game that could actually make use of 32 cores. Most struggle to put 8 to use.
 
smarenwolf said:
https://www.asrock.com/mb/Intel/X299E-ITXac/ This was possible as well, why not a mITX-TR4? :D
Click to expand...


Because TR4 is 25mm wider than LGA 2011, that's a significant amount of space in an already tight motherboard. This is space that must be kept clear of tall components.

TR4 = 80mm x 105mm space between each cooler screw hole

LGA 2011 = 80mm x 80mm space between each cooler screw hole

LGA 1151 = 75mm x 75mm space between each cooler screw hole

When you significantly upsize the socket area, you reduce the space for other items on the motherboard. EditLGA 2011 is only 13% larger in area than LGA 1151, and yet it has only one mini ITX motherboard. TR4 is 30% larger in area than LGA 2011, so it's incredibly unlikely to fit on a tiny motherboard.

TR4 actual dimensions:

aHR0cDovL21lZGlhLmJlc3RvZm1pY3JvLmNvbS9XL1QvNjk3MTMzL29yaWdpbmFsLzAwMS1EcmF3aW5nLURldGFpbC5qcGc=.jpg


Now where are you planning on scrounging ANOTHER INCH OF HORIZONTAL SOCKET SPACE OUT OF THIS ALREADY FUCKING-PACKED LGA 2011 MOTHERBOARD?

img_3515.jpg
 
Last edited:
I already addressed the above point very simply. Although, I must say I like the pictures. :)
 
Dan_D said:
On a 32c/64t part that's a tall order. I would expect a reduction in frequency, but how much (if any) remains to be seen. If AMD could pull off a 4.2GHz/4.3GHz capable 32c/64t part then that would be absolutely fantastic. Today's Epyc parts with that core count aren't nearly that fast coming in at a 2.0GHz base frequency and 3GHz turbo. That's a far cry from 4.2GHz.
Click to expand...
If Threadripper were a monolithic die I would agree. However, AMD can choose the top 5% dice that individually clock to 4.2 GHz, and then it becomes a matter of power distribution and cooling.

Also don't forget that both memory controllers and PCIe lanes contribute heavily to power consumption, and Epyc has twice as many compared to TR.
 
This is the reason. I didn't swap my R7-1700 out. With the 2700x.

Just gonna move on up to Threadripper 2. Probably going to stick with a 16c/32thread cpu though. I'm sure people will put them to mining and show off how much per day you can make with 32c/64T but outside of that I really don't have a need for that many cores.

Although with their current progression, and AMD already having working 7nm parts. Ultimately I could see myself waiting for Zen 3. Where sometime around this time next year everyone here will be boasting about the 64c/128t cpus.
 
spintroniX said:
Did you Delid it yourself? Im running the same cooler and haven't OCd yet. What did you hit without the delid?
Click to expand...

4.84ghz without the delid (but admittedly very high temps).

There is a local business that offers delidding services for $50 (and he guarantees his work). To me, that was a better value than me and my shaky hands to attempt the delid myself.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top