Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'HardForum Tech News' started by odditory, Jun 14, 2019.
That blows my mind.
Definitely looking forward to a 64 core cpu
in the consumer and even work station market i don't see a point for the processor but for the sake of saying eff you to intel is so worth seeing them release this and also watch it completely destroy all the multi-threaded performance records.
Workstation I can see the point. CAD and video use means grunt is needed. Average consumer? Nope
Anyone that shoots action cam footage and exports to h265 can take advantage of it, h265 encoding is slooooowwww unless you offload it to a 2080ti with nvenc.
Which is what you should be doing. Right tool for the job and all.
Yeah, that's what I do now, but in the past with nvenc or intel quick sync the quality was trash.
I agree, and I do hope that they continue to improve, in terms of quality as well as flexibility. I'd love to see the full range of codec quality settings be available and be able to choose based on output need and resource usage, and I'd love the option in the hardware and drivers to expose a 'hybrid' option to software such that any and all fix-function, CPU, and GPU resources can be used in parallel as desired.
Just thinking of what 128 3+Ghz threads could do in Blender... Jesus H Gomez...
This is classic industrial misdirection. By announcing this, AMD is forcing Intel to go with a craaaaaazy 128 core/256 thread design. They will expend their hordes treasure on it, roll it out, exhausted, and AMD will keep flooding the market with Zen 2. Practicing The Art of War, as preached by Zen Two.
/s. I am impressed and would love to have one.
Patience. You're time to upgrade will come, young padawan.
Good for 3D rendering as well. Animation n all.
I'm saving up for a big upgrade. 64 cores may be too rich for my blood, but chances are the 32 core will be cheaper than the current WX chips and a world different for gaming.
What this news means to me: I get to watch LTT, Paul, Kyle and Jay all run the same rendering benchmarks that will now display onscreen as quickly as their respective jpeg porn collections do when them cameras are off......meanwhile, GTA V might pick up 4-12 FPS if you're running a GPU with enough overhead......
Hahahahahaha, so true.
Speaking of LTT, Linus had an interesting take on this on Friday's WAN show. There's not a great reason to put this out there in almost any market (mainstream, workstation, or server, because... EPYC); there's no real costumers for this because it's so wildly out of line with those groups needs/constraints, whether it's cost or heat or whatever other compromises, it's just "extra" as the kids say these days. But here's the thing: if they release an updated 32 core TR, it will probably best Intel's 28 cores, although not by much. But... if the ryelease a 64core TR, and just smash all the multithreaded records in benchmarks, it gives them an undisputed halo product that Intel can't match, and even if no one buys it except Tony Stark... er... I mean Elon Musk, they will see a big bump in sales.
This depends entirely on how well it scales with current applications on current operating systems. TR 1 and TR 2 were a bit of a fail at 24c and 32c on Windows due to scheduling challenges; they regularly ran slower.
Given that both a) AMD has completed significant work to get the Zen / Zen+ architectural challenges out of the way and b) software developers have been working to bridge the gap, including Microsoft, I expect a 64c TR to be of more utility to consumers upon availability than the TR 2990WX was at 32c.
I just had a frightening thought. If the prices we've seen on X570 motherboards turn out to be true, X599 boards could easily crack $1,000.
AMD's lower CPU pricing may - at some price points - be nullified by motherboard prices.
When I bought my $600 i7-3930k and $400 Asus P9x79 WS in 2011 I thought the pricing was nuts. In the end it wasn't too bad as I've kept them in my main rig longer than any previous CPU and motherboard I've owned, but wasn't AMD becoming competitive again supposed to drive pricing DOWN?
Also, I wonder if there is any truth to the rumor of a higher end x590 chipset becoming available for AM4 boards. That would also make for more expensive boards, I'd imagine.
You know, you don't have to buy the $700 X570 mobos just because they exist.
The cheapest X570 mobo is going to sell for ~$160 according to reports. The prices on the really high end mobos are of course exorbitant, but before X570 there were no really high end AM4 mobos.
Also if you don't like paying for X570/X599, you can still run it in existing B450/X470/X399/etc. mobos (for X399 not officially confirmed but likely).
I doubt it, but I am sure we will see some big clock increases on the memory akin to the rest of Zen 3. Quad channel at 4400+ mhz with an efficient memory controller should do the trick.
Back in the old days when you bought a new game and you didn't have a 3D accelerator there was an option to play the game in software render mode.
How long before there is enough extra parallel CPU power to render via the extra cores and not need 3d acceleration?
You are not the targeted audience, these are specifically designed for professional users like me which is a godsend honestly having access to that many cores.
This would be like trying to run ray tracing on a 1050Ti, but even slower.
Yeah, just try running any modern game on mesa's software fallback on linux for an idea. Will have to set a few env variables to bypass opengl version checks, some features wont work, and it'll still be slow. Some games are almost playable, though.
It's hard to guess where this increase in core counts is going to end up. With clock speed decreasing with die shrinks and IPC gains seemingly being less every generation this could get fun to watch. My compute needs have never been so far below the best of the best. I'll be debating an upgrade from a quad core to truly ridiculous core counts for gaming and IT work. I got a stutter in an open world environment in Metro Exodus earlier this week. That was the first stutter I've noticed since purchasing a 1080 ti on launch day along with a 7700k.
Clock speeds are not decreasing in the consumer space. They are going up. Actually, they are going up everywhere on all but the highest end core count CPU's like Intel's Platinum 9282 etc. Those have really low clocks, but they have an insane number of cores.
My understanding as a layman is that the smaller the electrical path the less voltage and ghz a processor can have. There are optimizations but the fundamental restraint remains.
It may be your understanding, but aren’t basically all Zen 2 parts clocked same or higher than their comparative Zen+ counterparts? And isn’t part of this bump attributable to the die shrink to 7nm?
In regards to the single CPU with lots of threads vs multi CPU with combined equal threads, licensing for a single socket is cheaper. Licensing 64 cores in one CPU is about 25% cheaper than licensing 64 cores spread over 2.
And in regards to the TDP on servers yes jet engines.... but on a server it’s not uncommon to see 16+ phases per socket that isn’t something you are going to see in many desktop class boards and most of the server form factors are pre designed for multi concurrent PSU’s for consistent power delivery from a regulated source. You just have conditions in a server room that are not going to be delivered to 95% of the users. I am very tempted to liquid cool my next server rack. A couple of 1U 9x9 radiators should do nicely.
Or even just one of the new Quadro RTX 4000. Fraction of the cost of the 2080TI and something like 98%!as fast in most production tasks in Adobe, Blender, AutoCAD...
I think it makes sense that we gain some back with optimizations but we were at near 5 ghz on water back in 2011. 4.5 ghz with the Pentium EE before that. All the engineering from the planet's semiconductor manufacturers and we're still in the same ballpark on clock speed.
In regards to Licensing it will depend on how they setup the chip and present it to the os. The Intel phi chips I have actually present each chip as 5 separate CPUs in windows and seeing how amds chips are pretty much just multiple well connected CPUs it may be presented similarly
Any and all licensing I have dealt with was simply Physical sockets and logical cores, I have never seen one that depended on how it was presented to the OS.
it may have just een wierdness with the intel phi chips as windows was convinced i had 5 physical sockets
Is it just me or do the Hardware Tech News subforum make everything disorganized? Nobody puts CPU related stuff in the cpu sub thread and same goes for video cards...
I've seen stuff put into multiple forums- that would probably work best here, especially for news.
Granted the subforum doesn't really make any difference when you use 'New Posts'.
Nah, news should be in the news subforum. If there is something specific you want to discuss (about the architecture or a certain processor's features, for instance) that's a good candidate for the other subforum, as it may not relate directly to the news story.
So I have a question . Why isn't single core VPSs still not getting cheaper despite cheaper and larger core counts from AMD. Cheapest I found from a reputable company is 2.50$ but still tho it seems like it should be cheaper yes the prices are stuck for a while now
Rent, salaries, licencing, electricity. Ultimately, hardware cost is a blip on the sheets compared to the ongoing costs.