3rd gen Threadripper, big fail and missed opportunity for AMD.

vxspiritxv

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Feb 10, 2001
Messages
1,578
Last month I was moments away from pulling the trigger on a W-3175X. $3000 processor $1000 mobo + all the trimmings.
I personally can't wait to see what kind of an effect the 32core TR3 will have on my workload.
I'm saving ~37% going with $2000 processor and $500 motherboard, and I
upload_2019-11-15_21-15-10.png
it will run circles around the xeon.

Current box: T7610, E5-2690v4, 64gig reg ecc 2400, 2080ti hybrid.
upload_2019-11-15_20-39-15.png upload_2019-11-15_20-56-27.png

New box: Air540, maybe Aorus Master, 3970x 64gig ecc udimm 2666 (b-dye, should overclock).
upload_2019-11-15_21-1-14.png
 

N4CR

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Oct 17, 2011
Messages
4,948
But really only a few. The consumer platforms have expanded there too.
Yes and the factor of PCIe4.0 means the bandwidth is double for the same amount of lanes... so if you split that off you can still get almost the same bandwidth as the last TR generation or Intel HEDT... which is shitloads.
 

N4CR

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Oct 17, 2011
Messages
4,948
believe it will run circles around the xeon.
Xeon is a dinosaur now with Epyc/TR3. Even the 3950x desktop CPU beats a xeon with more cores... enough said. Their multi-ringbus mesh and process disadvantage is not helping them one bit.

Luckily AMD has finally released a Zen SKU that's nearly equal to the six year old Skylake CPUs.
You can also say that Intel finally released something barely better than a six year old Skylake CPU and with more than four cores this year?
TLDR 5% or less in it now for some peasant resolution kiddy FPS games, wow. You don't even see that, meanwhile crushed in almost every other area, so choosing AMD is not a compromise at all now. You can have your pro 3r33t rgb kids vidya performance and stream and video edit and shoop and shitpost all at the same time.
 

IdiotInCharge

NVIDIA SHILL
Joined
Jun 13, 2003
Messages
14,679
You can also say that Intel finally released something barely better than a six year old Skylake CPU and with more than four cores this year?

No.

You don't even see that

I really recommend not making assumptions on what others' 'see'.

so if you split that off you can still get almost the same bandwidth as the last TR generation or Intel HEDT... which is shitloads.

Both the bandwidth per lane and the number of lanes are needed, as some peripherals do need the bandwidth to support specific workloads, and some just need a connection point without taking lanes from say graphics, networking, or storage.
 

N4CR

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Oct 17, 2011
Messages
4,948
No.



I really recommend not making assumptions on what others' 'see'.



Both the bandwidth per lane and the number of lanes are needed, as some peripherals do need the bandwidth to support specific workloads, and some just need a connection point without taking lanes from say graphics, networking, or storage.

No?
Well that's strange, you left your shoelaces untied on that one; how can AMD be barely caught up to a 6 year old CPU while being just outside of margin of error or faster vs latest and greatest from Intel?
You can't have it both ways, that's called contradiction.

I'm sure you can 'see' a 3% fps difference between two CPUs which are well above any low refresh rate limit, if you are a computer program.

Last point is good.
 
  • Like
Reactions: kac77
like this

IdiotInCharge

NVIDIA SHILL
Joined
Jun 13, 2003
Messages
14,679
No?
Well that's strange, you left your shoelaces untied on that one; how can AMD be barely caught up to a 6 year old CPU while being just as fast as the latest and greatest from Intel?
You can't have it both ways, that's called contradiction.

The contradiction is your claim that Intel released >four cores this year, when they've had that for years.

I'm sure you can 'see' a 3% fps difference between two CPUs which are well above any low refresh rate limit, if you are a computer program.

If you're talking about frametimes, the difference can be large enough to be felt. If you're not talking about frametimes (which FPS are not), then you're not talking about what's actually relevant to the user.
 

N4CR

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Oct 17, 2011
Messages
4,948
The contradiction is your claim that Intel released >four cores this year, when they've had that for years.



If you're talking about frametimes, the difference can be large enough to be felt. If you're not talking about frametimes (which FPS are not), then you're not talking about what's actually relevant to the user.

You said 'Luckily AMD has finally released a Zen SKU that's nearly equal to the six year old Skylake CPUs.' and have said this in multiple threads now.
Yes sure the 8700k is a few years old, my bad, but when you claim that 3950x nearly is equal to a 6 year old CPU, but it is just as fast as the 9900k or barely slower in most gaming benchmarks and much faster elsewhere, then you are insinuating that the 9900k is nearly equal to a 6 year old CPU as well. Especially when 3950X is significantly faster in most other workloads. Neither 3950x or 9900k being equivalent to a 6 year old CPU is true. Show me a 6 year old CPU that performs as good as a 3950x or a 9900ks. You can't.
What, a 4700k @ 4.6GHz? That's 6 years old. If you seriously think a 4700k has a shitshow in hell of competing with a 3950x in anything let alone a 9900k, I have a padded room for you in Arkham.
Oh, of course, you now will shift the goalposts to clockspeed, yeah you're right, I'm wrong. Whoops, my bad bro!

Semantics. We both fucked up on it, just you can't admit it.


I'm talking about FPS which is a shitty metric as you say, but most of the current benchmarks are only using that.
If you want to talk minimums, they are sometimes in favour for 3950x, other times in favour for the 9900k... they're more relevant for comparison really as that's what you can actually see.
 

IdiotInCharge

NVIDIA SHILL
Joined
Jun 13, 2003
Messages
14,679
You said 'Luckily AMD has finally released a Zen SKU that's nearly equal to the six year old Skylake CPUs.' and have said this in multiple threads now.

And I'm talking about Zen cores reaching single-thread performance of Skylake. Note that every CPU Intel has released for the desktop currently is some form of Skylake.

Semantics. We both fucked up on it, just you can't admit it.

Given the confusion, I admit failing to fully communicate.

I'm talking about FPS which is a shitty metric as you say, but most of the current benchmarks are only using that.
If you want to talk minimums, they are sometimes in favour for 3950x, other times in favour for the 9900k... they're more relevant for comparison really as that's what you can actually see.

I'm quite specifically not talking about framerates, be they averages or minimums, and instead pointing to frametimes, which all respectable reviewers use.
 

mikeo

Gawd
Joined
May 17, 2006
Messages
660
Last month I was moments away from pulling the trigger on a W-3175X. $3000 processor $1000 mobo + all the trimmings.
I personally can't wait to see what kind of an effect the 32core TR3 will have on my workload.
I'm saving ~37% going with $2000 processor and $500 motherboard, and I
it will run circles around the xeon.

Current box: T7610, E5-2690v4, 64gig reg ecc 2400, 2080ti hybrid.
View attachment 200171 View attachment 200178

New box: Air540, maybe Aorus Master, 3970x 64gig ecc udimm 2666 (b-dye, should overclock).
View attachment 200181

I'm planning on a similar build, new to Zen memory, what's the best ecc stuff out there? Was looking at the qvl for the gigabyte board and thinking maybe 4x CT16G4WFD8266, but not at all familiar with ryzen memory OC requirements on ECC.
 

vxspiritxv

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Feb 10, 2001
Messages
1,578
I'm planning on a similar build, new to Zen memory, what's the best ecc stuff out there? Was looking at the qvl for the gigabyte board and thinking maybe 4x CT16G4WFD8266, but not at all familiar with ryzen memory OC requirements on ECC.

That is exactly what I bought, $95 something on amazon. I didn't even bother looking for QVL, just looked for the b-dye stuff & this was the fastest out there.
Felt like a bargain too at that price (at least for me), I paid like $900 for 64gig ecc reg like 3 years ago for my current box.
Check out Level1 videos, they have some great videos on amd/ecc/memory speed.
 

///AMG

2[H]4U
Joined
Sep 19, 2012
Messages
3,743
I have Xeon Platinum 8180s in each of my two work stations at work. My company isn't price sensitive for my workstation, I get new workstations every 2 years (I am available for the new workstations now) so all I care about with TR3 is if the 3970x shows good improvements from the 2990wx. If it does I am waiting for the 3990wx. If you guys are wondering why I don't buy the epyc processors already the clocks are just a lot lower than thread ripper processors. My work load benefits heavily from core/thread count and clock speed and scales pretty linearly.

Even in the case if you were price sensitive the TR3 are massively cheaper than the intel HEDTs.
 

vxspiritxv

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Feb 10, 2001
Messages
1,578
I have Xeon Platinum 8180s in each of my two work stations at work. My company isn't price sensitive for my workstation, I get new workstations every 2 years (I am available for the new workstations now) so all I care about with TR3 is if the 3970x shows good improvements from the 2990wx. If it does I am waiting for the 3990wx. If you guys are wondering why I don't buy the epyc processors already the clocks are just a lot lower than thread ripper processors. My work load benefits heavily from core/thread count and clock speed and scales pretty linearly.

Even in the case if you were price sensitive the TR3 are massively cheaper than the intel HEDTs.

Just an option for Mr money no object...
https://www.supermicro.com/en/Aplus/system/Tower/4023/AS-4023S-TRT.cfm
Tho I do wonder why the page lists a 64 core limit.

Level1 dual epyc was a gigabyte system, and I believe der8auer was too (tho I might be wrong). I can't find it now, but if I had that kind of money to blow, it would be that, or hookers.
 

DuronBurgerMan

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Mar 13, 2017
Messages
1,340
Have you seen the AMD forum here?

"Finally, AMD will save us after Intel ripping us off all these years!"

And then, as predicted by literally anyone not sworn to team green, AMD proceeded to price like Intel. Just as they did last time.

I'm the one dude who kept telling people the other way around. If/when AMD establishes market dominance, they will charge accordingly. I think AMD was down for so long, people forget the days when Athlon X2 was super expensive, because AMD had the first (decent) dual core.

It's fine, though. I don't think the pricing is a ripoff by any means. In fact, I think they priced roundabout right where they should, given their performance in the HEDT space. Just "where they should" isn't "super cheap".
 

DuronBurgerMan

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Mar 13, 2017
Messages
1,340
Honestly that's the coin-flip. The challenge I see for HEDT, regardless of vendor, is that consumer platform performance is increasing too. Given that people have been doing all of these things with far less powerful systems to me it seems that they'd be weighing cost versus amount of speedup -- and in that, you're limited to those that can justify the cost in the first place, i.e. they have the expendable income like many of us, or they actually make money from their 'hobby' work.

Also note that for much of what you mention, especially the video stuff, people will need a very compelling reason to invest in more CPU over more GPU. A 3950X, a striped pair of PCIe 4.0 SSDs, and whatever GPU has the best transcoding block at the moment will likely be near indistinguishable in both output and time per job for most.

So, let me refine my point to take into account yours: I see the HEDT market growing, just not so much more as a percentage of 'prosumer' desktops, and certainly not so much as a percentage of consumer desktops. As cheap as AMD's 7nm chiplet products can make cores, most people- including most prosumers- don't have a need for them.


As an example: so what if a render of whatever takes the length of a Simpsons episode instead of a run to the gas station? Is that worth ~2x the investment? I realize that for some that answer will be an unequivocal yes, I just don't expect it to be more than that.

Mostly agree. I think the 3950X is kinda-sorta HEDT, and kinda-sorta not. For that matter, even the 3900X is in that segment. But certainly it straddles the same market, at least, as will (probably) the Comet Lake 10 core when it releases. And I think that's the difference between our relative positions. I'm counting the high core count (> 8c/16t) mainstream CPUs in the "HEDT" space even when they use the mainstream socket. The richer folks will probably go outside of the mainstream sockets, and the more budget-conscious (hey, it's me!) will probably stick with the consumer socket, but a high core count CPU. It's nice that both companies are providing the option now.

The interesting thing here is that HEDT now kinda-sorta straddles the mainstream socket, and a more 'semi-professional' socket, for both AMD and Intel platforms. So the market segmentation is more of a gradation than it used to be. The 3950X config you mentioned would be perfect for prosumers, and I could see a lot of folks going that general route. And I suspect Intel's future 10 core mainstream CPU will do likewise.

Strictly for gamers, even 8c/16t is overkill.

Regular Prosumers: high core count CPU on mainstream socket.
Richer Prosumers/Budget Professionals: HEDT socket.
Big Professionals: Epyc/Xeon.
 

Johan Steyn

Weaksauce
Joined
Dec 1, 2016
Messages
85
First gen and second gen threadripper was a great opportunity for AMD to get enthusiast on their HEDT segment.

Many many enthusiast are waiting for a good threadripper with good single core and multi thread performance,
so the 3rd gen was the CPU that all people was waiting for BUT...

Price is now stupidly high,
mainstream gained a lot more cores for the same money
while HEDT is getting the same number of cores with really increased price.

On the HEDT segment we don't expect more performance at the same price, we expect more cores at the same price!

Now that Intel is selling the 18 cores i9-10990XE at only $999 an Intel core costs 55USD while the crappy AMD 3960X boosts the price at 58USD per core with a whopping 1400USD.
Leave alone the stupidly high priced 3970X at 2000USD

AMD is missing a big opportunity here, no enthusiast will spend that much for a dying platform like TRX40,
a platform that must die soon due to the USB4 and DDR5 arrival.

BIG FAIL AMD


Please buy Intel! AMD needs to die financially again so that Intel can again have huge prices. That was so great.

1. TR is worth every penny for the performance. For some or other weird reason you have the idea that all cores are equal. Really?
2. AMD actually still desperately needs money. They probably have a small window to get enough money to survive Intel's retaliation. They still have a huge debt to clear. So you remember why they have this and why they almost died? Do you know of Intel's monopolistic practices?
3. Lisa made it clear that TR40 is long term and I do believe she meant not just the pins. The next TR could have both DDR4&5 controllers on it. But time will tell.
4. It was me already made clear that there is still old stock to clear. If cores are all you care about, but an old 32 core. They are still good value.
5. Does power usage matter to you in any way? The Intel 18 core is a scorcher.
6. Just relax. Take a deep breath and rethink your strategy.

For me supporting a mafia like company like Intel is just not an option.

AMD is not doing the same. Maybe one day they will and then I will react the same way.
 

Derfnofred

Gawd
Joined
Dec 11, 2009
Messages
606
Mostly agree. I think the 3950X is kinda-sorta HEDT, and kinda-sorta not. For that matter, even the 3900X is in that segment. But certainly it straddles the same market, at least, as will (probably) the Comet Lake 10 core when it releases. And I think that's the difference between our relative positions. I'm counting the high core count (> 8c/16t) mainstream CPUs in the "HEDT" space even when they use the mainstream socket. The richer folks will probably go outside of the mainstream sockets, and the more budget-conscious (hey, it's me!) will probably stick with the consumer socket, but a high core count CPU. It's nice that both companies are providing the option now.

The interesting thing here is that HEDT now kinda-sorta straddles the mainstream socket, and a more 'semi-professional' socket, for both AMD and Intel platforms. So the market segmentation is more of a gradation than it used to be. The 3950X config you mentioned would be perfect for prosumers, and I could see a lot of folks going that general route. And I suspect Intel's future 10 core mainstream CPU will do likewise.

Strictly for gamers, even 8c/16t is overkill.

Regular Prosumers: high core count CPU on mainstream socket.
Richer Prosumers/Budget Professionals: HEDT socket.
Big Professionals: Epyc/Xeon.

I mean this as a complement to your post:

If only to allude to my post earlier in this thread -- it's worth looking at the specific demands of the software you need when in the prosumer/professional space. Some applications are memory starved and you'd be better with a 2000 series with its quad memory bus (or obviously a TR3 if the $$ is there, but keeping to a modicum of budget), and others where the 3950X might run circles around it. Unfortunately there's no "one best" setup, we have to be diligent and make the best compromise for the applications the specific user needs. But, yes, it make perfect sense for AMD to not initially make a 3950X equivalent TR3 chip, as it plays the role of the "HEDT enough" and gives the differentiation to the >32 cores on the TR3. For now, at least -- as yields and inventories shift, we may see new SKU's emerge. It's great we have these options now.
 

SmokeRngs

[H]ard|DCer of the Month - April 2008
Joined
Aug 9, 2001
Messages
17,765
I mean this as a complement to your post:

If only to allude to my post earlier in this thread -- it's worth looking at the specific demands of the software you need when in the prosumer/professional space. Some applications are memory starved and you'd be better with a 2000 series with its quad memory bus (or obviously a TR3 if the $$ is there, but keeping to a modicum of budget), and others where the 3950X might run circles around it. Unfortunately there's no "one best" setup, we have to be diligent and make the best compromise for the applications the specific user needs. But, yes, it make perfect sense for AMD to not initially make a 3950X equivalent TR3 chip, as it plays the role of the "HEDT enough" and gives the differentiation to the >32 cores on the TR3. For now, at least -- as yields and inventories shift, we may see new SKU's emerge. It's great we have these options now.

I think this is where AMD has hit a homerun this generation. The product stack covers about every use case with at least some minor overlap depending on your use case. With the 3900x and 3950x covering the low end HEDT spectrum while also being in the range of high end enthusiast it allows for a transition between the two usage scenarios where needs and wants can be blurred a bit. There are plenty of use cases where the performance of the extra cores are perfect but the added features of the TR3 platform would be wasted. You still need HEDT performance in the CPU area but can save money in not needing to upgrade to the much more expensive platform. It's basically a grey area where enthusiast and HEDT mix. At the same time you still have the full HEDT platform for those who need/want it with the advantages it brings.

Basically AMD has pulled off a full product stack which scales very well from the low end through the HEDT space and gives basically everyone good options. It also plays really well for marketing; a sector AMD has historically had quite a bit of trouble with.

I'd say the title of the thread is about as fake as you can get considering by any analysis that AMD has executed really, really well from top to bottom.
 

Iratus

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jan 16, 2003
Messages
1,572
So if I get a third gen threadripper and an Apple XDR Monitor I can maximise the number of people I antognise. Got it.
 

mikeo

Gawd
Joined
May 17, 2006
Messages
660
I really should have bought more AMD stock at 23 a share a while ago, they are crushing it.
 

Dan_D

Extremely [H]
Joined
Feb 9, 2002
Messages
61,203
Have you seen the AMD forum here?

"Finally, AMD will save us after Intel ripping us off all these years!"

And then, as predicted by literally anyone not sworn to team green, AMD proceeded to price like Intel. Just as they did last time.

I'd like to point out that I've said this many times over the years. When AMD had the performance crown, the FX-51, 53, and 55 processors were all priced the same as Intel's Extreme Edition CPU's. Many of the Athlon 64's and X2's were also priced well above many Intel models. Let's also consider that the third generation Threadripper CPU's are likely more expensive to produce than the earlier models. If they follow the pattern of using the best dies for them, AMD will always have a shortage of them. I think these CPU's may be priced above what they need to be just as Intel did, but I think a price increase over the last generation's parts was probably unavoidable. Keep in mind that the two Threadripper CPU's coming are the 3960X and 3970X which are priced just ahead of the old 2970WX and 2990WX. The creation of the 3950X for AM4 displaces a potential 16c/32t CPU in the Threadripper line.

Sure, many people would appreciate such an overlap and opt for the more expensive but flexible HEDT platform, but that's what we call a niche within a niche. AMD may decide to release something like that later, but for now its chasing the high end of the HEDT segment and I can't blame them for that. Keep in mind that AMD is having enough trouble making 3900X's and 3950X's. A 16c/32t third generation TR that few people would buy is probably not high on its list of priorities right now.
 
Top