64-Core Threadripper and ultra-HEDT X599 Coming End of 2019

Dan_D

Extremely [H]
Joined
Feb 9, 2002
Messages
57,216
Hi. I'm stupid.

What would something like this be used for?

Anything you want.

The less smart ass version of an answer is that CPU's like this can be used for content creation applications, database work, 3D modeling / rendering, video editing and encoding, virtualization, and a ton of other things. Heavily threaded applications are used in various forms of scientific / medical research. The best part is you can do any combination of things at the same time.
 

GoodBoy

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Nov 29, 2004
Messages
1,891
Sounds more like a server part to me. I wouldn't want one of these, the clocks per core will be too low.

The high core count Intel parts that cost $10,000 are clocked at 1.9Ghz to 2.6Ghz. They do have turbo but it's been under 3.9Ghz from those I have looked at. Those make good hosts for VM's. But for us, for gaming, they would be a downgrade. And I would be surprised if this thing was less than $3,000. Makes no sense to get one for gaming.
 

drescherjm

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Nov 19, 2008
Messages
14,863
I'd say they are somewhat concerned.

Intel really doesn't have a good answer to high core counts as long as they are on monolithic dies and have 14nm. However their mobile platform is doing great. AMD has not challenged Intel at all with the Zen APUs. Hopefully 7nm will make the difference.
 

cdabc123

2[H]4U
Joined
Jun 21, 2016
Messages
2,766
They will have them- they're named 'Epyc'. :)

You have literally just described EPYC............

I guess I just dont see any point in a many core chip like when it very much acomplishes the exact same thing as many core server chips do.

The problem with EPYC (when used as a workstation instead of TR) is that it has a lower frequency. I assume that the TDP is more restricted and there is considerably more margin for stability.

tdp is normally less restricted on servers. I have server sockets that can push 250w+ so they can fit more on the die. cooling is also less limited on servers because you can just strap a jet engine to it and call it a day. There should be no reason the epyc chip shouldnt be able to turbo just as high on a finit amount of cores as this chip. Honestly the only way this would make since would be if they were trying to charge substantially more for the ability to run multiple chips but even then windows begins to hit limits at 256 threads and on massively parallel tasks they can normally be distributed over multiple servers
 

cdabc123

2[H]4U
Joined
Jun 21, 2016
Messages
2,766
Intel really doesn't have a good answer to high core counts as long as they are on monolithic dies and have 14nm. However their mobile platform is doing great. AMD has not challenged Intel at all with the Zen APUs. Hopefully 7nm will make the difference.

intel already made an answer to to high core count cpus. it was abunch of modified pentium cores tied together on a die with quad way hyperthreading and 16gb of super quick mcdram. Its called the intel phi it worked pretty well and if they felt like doing it again they very well could thrown abunch of cores on a single chip.
 

Alienslare

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jan 23, 2016
Messages
185
I wouldn't call them desperate. I'd say they are somewhat concerned. Until their money train runs out they will always be a threat to whatever AMD does.

Oh really what do you think about ARM processors, they are threat to Intel as well
 

Nathan_P

[H]ard DCOTM x3
Joined
Mar 2, 2010
Messages
3,434
I'd be happy with a 24 core at decent clocks. Hell if they do a high clock 16c i'm in

I wonder if they are as limited on TR4 as they are on AM4, the socket is designed to shift more power and the cpu's will be better balanced - by that i mean that the I/O die will be in the middle and the chiplets spread on both sides, on AM4 both chiplets are on the same side which means a lot of heat in a very small space. Plus all that I/O:- Dual gpu's, quad M.2 at PICe 4 plus more m.2 on the mobo, u.2, USB 3.2 Gen 2, hell you might even see thunderbolt!
 

mikeo

Gawd
Joined
May 17, 2006
Messages
622
This is the one I plan on finally upgrading to, probably the 16 to 32 core edition depending on what the sweet spot is for single core turbo overclocks.
 

odditory

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Dec 23, 2007
Messages
6,482
This is the one I plan on finally upgrading to, probably the 16 to 32 core edition depending on what the sweet spot is for single core turbo overclocks.
Single core turbo on a 64 banger is going to be around 800MHz (maintain 105W TDP).
 
Last edited:

Nolan7689

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jun 5, 2015
Messages
1,694
But those boards have to be built with the CPU in mind, and the CPU has to be built with the boards in mind.

I think one could argue that the Threadripper platform hits this definition to a T.

There is definitely a lot of engineering that went into that socket. I just wonder how over engineered they really made it.
 

Oldmodder

Gawd
Joined
Aug 24, 2018
Messages
706
Well more are nice, but i will not go under the 4 ghz i run my TR at now, and really i don't think thats too much to ask.
And i assume with more cores wedged in under my massive cobber Heatkiller block i will be fine if some fort of inherent power management have been in play, and i assume new TR CPUs will be 7nm so should be good once i upgrade my radiator from dual 120 mm to triple or quad 120 mm or larger.
 

IdiotInCharge

NVIDIA SHILL
Joined
Jun 13, 2003
Messages
14,712
There is definitely a lot of engineering that went into that socket.

Well, it's the Epyc 2P socket, with less memory channels and external links... so it should be pretty well engineered, as we'd expect for a server platform.

The challenge is that high clockspeeds aren't a thing for nearly all servers vs. consumer uses. You'd generally also use fewer cores for something that craves higher clockspeeds as a tradeoff simply because applications tend to favor one over the other, and trying to get both in the same socket would usually cost more than just building another system.

Now, I'd bet that there'll still be plenty to wring out for enthusiasts given the delta in desired / required stability margins, but we're probably not going to see them clocking as high as the AM4 parts.

Or maybe I'm wrong, and we'll see 800W in the socket :D
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nobu
like this

Nobu

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jun 7, 2007
Messages
4,943
Well, it's the Epyc 2P socket, with less memory channels and external links... so it should be pretty well engineered, as we'd expect for a server platform.

The challenge is that high clockspeeds aren't a thing for nearly all servers vs. consumer uses. You'd generally also use fewer cores for something that craves higher clockspeeds as a tradeoff simply because applications tend to favor one over the other, and trying to get both in the same socket would usually cost more than just building another system.

Now, I'd bet that there'll still be plenty to wring out for enthusiasts given the delta in desired / required stability margins, but we're probably not going to see them clocking as high as the AM4 parts.

Or maybe I'm wrong, and we'll see 800W in the socket :D
Yeah, dedicated 10k psu for the cpu, please! :D
 

Emission

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Dec 6, 2005
Messages
4,412
If they do what they did last time and cherry pick the bins, the clocks should end up just fine. That being said, no idea what the sustained all-core clocks will end up looking like.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mikeo
like this

odditory

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Dec 23, 2007
Messages
6,482
I do:

Not fast enough, because this is [H] ;)

In my parallel, fantasy universe, Kyle un-retires for one last [H] video review, de-lids a 64-Cylinder Threadripper with a skateboard and fire extinguisher and then turns and stares deep into the camera with a kind of animal sense of who has the power.
 
Last edited:

Master_shake_

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Apr 9, 2012
Messages
14,521
fuckinreaterad.png


meanwhile at gizmodo...
 
Joined
Mar 9, 2004
Messages
3,318
I'm going to buy it, since it doesn't make sense to throw away the old CPU, I'll have to build another system with it I suppose. My biggest concern is DDR prices, but I suppose I can run both with my existing ram until they come back to reasonable levels

64 Cores! Think of what task manager will look like, lul
 

drescherjm

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Nov 19, 2008
Messages
14,863
I wonder how much money Intel has spent buying off tech 'journalism' for the last several years and how it compares to AMD's total budget.

In the future probably however have they needed to do this in the past few years? I mean on the mainstream Intel has only lost its lead for about 3 months twice in the 13+ years. On the HEDT platform and server platforms you have a point the last few years have not been great (although server/ enterprise even having a better product does not mean that customers will rush to switch vendors - it will take time). On anything mobile AMD is not competitive except on the low end where ARM is great.
 
Last edited:

Nobu

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jun 7, 2007
Messages
4,943
In the future probably however have they needed to do this in the past few years? I mean on the mainstream Intel has only lost its lead for about 3 months twice in the 13+ years. On the HEDT platform and server platforms you have a point the last few years have not been great (although server/ enterprise even having a better product does not mean that customers will rush to switch vendors - it will take time). On anything mobile AMD is not competitive except on the low end where ARM is great.
If you don't do any at all people will be uncomfortable when you suddenly start again in an unfavorable situation. Better to continue regardless, even if it's not much.

That said, I don't think Intel "buys" anyone. I don't doubt that they offer very nice incentives, however.
 
Top