cageymaru

Fully [H]
Joined
Apr 10, 2003
Messages
20,785

_l_

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Nov 27, 2016
Messages
1,151
thanks for the heads up - I haven't been tracking the pricing of TR ... the price on the 1900X is very tempting, that will be the CPU used for my next build
 

mvmiller12

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Aug 7, 2011
Messages
1,161
The beauty of AMD is their commitment to platform longevity. It is a perfectly legit thing to start in on the bottom of this platform and expect to be able to move up to a better CPU without revamping your whole system, and there is already another entirely new generation of Threadripper CPU beyond the first.
 

dragonstongue

2[H]4U
Joined
Nov 18, 2008
Messages
3,162
that is one HELL of a discount, because either way they still are beasts for what they brought to the table for a company that for many years people said "they are done, stick a fork in them"
So glad they did not fold, everyone would be worse off for it (not only for x86///x64 but computing in general)

now, if only the Ryzen 1xxx would see similar widespread price drops to clear inventory before christmas season begins...so far the 1700 for amount of cores etc etc is the best $ per core and per thread my simple maths have sorted out, Ryzen 2600 or 1600 are "almost" there but not quite am sure you folks in USA may see different pricing structures so maybe the 1600 or 2600 are the "best" on a per core per thread basis?
 

dragonstongue

2[H]4U
Joined
Nov 18, 2008
Messages
3,162
1900X showing $319.99 on Newegg as of this post. Guess they going to take their sweet time dropping it LOL.

Considering how much the etailers did not fair price the cpu and gpu for majority of 2016-2017 and 2018 IMHO (then there is the ram as well, though this is not directly their fault either) they will probably keep it as high a price as long as they possibly can, make every penny they possibly can (they are in business to make $$$$$$$$$$$$ not to keep people happy) beat th dust out of that dead horse LOL
^.^
 

Oldmodder

Gawd
Joined
Aug 24, 2018
Messages
706
If only they could drop the price for the motherboards.

Reason: i am about to build a new machine, and this time all AMD as i want to support their up hill battle against Intel and Nvidia.
And it make good sense as they have pretty okay hardware right now, and i have not had a AMD system since my dualcore Opteron 185 AKA Denmark processor,,, that i beefed up to 2500 MHZ on air.
But i was going to go with Ryzen 2700,,,,,,, but this change a few things, will have to keep a close eye on prices in the days to come, and also hoping the new Nvidia cards can drop price for Vega GFX cards, though i am only going to need 1080p

/ me ending maiden post.
 

ol1bit

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jan 15, 2007
Messages
1,232
Sigh...My 6700K is suffering in my media PC, 2 Silicon Dust HD streams and youtube/netflix are hurting it. Was think about a Ryzen, but the new pricing makes me think about ThreadRipper. Just needs to fit in Thermaltake's V1. So SFF, mini ITX, I'm not sure there are any for ThreadRipper.
 

Zarathustra[H]

Extremely [H]
Joined
Oct 29, 2000
Messages
33,414
Hmm.

This would make cross shopping an 8C Ryzen 7 and an 8C Threadripper within the realms of possibility.

Of course, the motherboard for the Threadripper probably costs a lot more.
 

Zarathustra[H]

Extremely [H]
Joined
Oct 29, 2000
Messages
33,414
Sigh...My 6700K is suffering in my media PC, 2 Silicon Dust HD streams and youtube/netflix are hurting it. Was think about a Ryzen, but the new pricing makes me think about ThreadRipper. Just needs to fit in Thermaltake's V1. So SFF, mini ITX, I'm not sure there are any for ThreadRipper.

Looks like MicroATX is the smallest available on Neweggs search right now.

In all honesty, it wuld seem like a crazy waste of PCIe lanes to put a Threadripper on a Mini-ITX board where it only gets one 16x slot...
 

/dev/null

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Mar 31, 2001
Messages
15,190
Anyone find someone selling 1920x for MSRP? Seems to be the sweet spot...

1900x = $37.50/core
1920x = $33.33/core
1950x = $37.50/core
 

ir0nw0lf

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Feb 7, 2003
Messages
6,403
Sigh...My 6700K is suffering in my media PC, 2 Silicon Dust HD streams and youtube/netflix are hurting it. Was think about a Ryzen, but the new pricing makes me think about ThreadRipper. Just needs to fit in Thermaltake's V1. So SFF, mini ITX, I'm not sure there are any for ThreadRipper.
Given the physical size of the socket, is it actually physically possible to put a board out in a mini-ITX form factor at all?
 

Nobu

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jun 7, 2007
Messages
7,169
Given the physical size of the socket, is it actually physically possible to put a board out in a mini-ITX form factor at all?
You could probably do it, but it'd be hella expensive, probably require sodimms possibly on the back of the board, and would waste a lot of pcie lanes unless you had a daughter board and/or a bunch of usb-c ports
 

Dan_D

Extremely [H]
Joined
Feb 9, 2002
Messages
59,608
The beauty of AMD is their commitment to platform longevity. It is a perfectly legit thing to start in on the bottom of this platform and expect to be able to move up to a better CPU without revamping your whole system, and there is already another entirely new generation of Threadripper CPU beyond the first.

This has also been something that's trapped AMD in the past. At some point, new CPU's become hamstrung by dated platforms. That was one of the many issues we saw with Bulldozer and its variants.
 

mvmiller12

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Aug 7, 2011
Messages
1,161
This has also been something that's trapped AMD in the past. At some point, new CPU's become hamstrung by dated platforms. That was one of the many issues we saw with Bulldozer and its variants.

But even in this case, you get most of the benefits of the new CPU whilst you pick and choose at your leisure the bits you want for a replacement platform. And hamstrung performance has happened only in that one case (that I know of). In either case, you decide the pace of your upgrade, not AMD.
 

Gideon

2[H]4U
Joined
Apr 13, 2006
Messages
2,940
This has also been something that's trapped AMD in the past. At some point, new CPU's become hamstrung by dated platforms. That was one of the many issues we saw with Bulldozer and its variants.

Doubt it will be a issue since the platform only lasts until DDR5 comes out. It's nice to be able to update the bios and slap in a new faster processor and unless AMD starts dominating they need to push the value factor.
 

STEM

Gawd
Joined
Jun 7, 2007
Messages
614
This has also been something that's trapped AMD in the past. At some point, new CPU's become hamstrung by dated platforms. That was one of the many issues we saw with Bulldozer and its variants.

That's true, but now they can update a platform with newer features without obsoleting a socket Intel style :)
 

SickBeast

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jan 29, 2012
Messages
499
The 1950X is selling for below the new MSRP for only $719.99. Smoking hot deal IMO. Thanks OP.
 

Dan_D

Extremely [H]
Joined
Feb 9, 2002
Messages
59,608
But even in this case, you get most of the benefits of the new CPU whilst you pick and choose at your leisure the bits you want for a replacement platform. And hamstrung performance has happened only in that one case (that I know of). In either case, you decide the pace of your upgrade, not AMD.

I'd argue that AMD has had this problem to varying degrees since the Super Socket 7 days. AMD has largely always had a platform which lagged its competition. Even when AMD catches up, the platform still lags in some area or another. Even X399 lags Intel's X299 platform. I love the platform, but even direct CPU access hasn't allowed M.2 drives to run any faster than they do behind Intel's limited DMI 3.0 bus. Intel was idiotic by forcing vROC license keys to get around the DMI 3.0 limitation, but its just as capable. AMD lacks the flexibility Intel has on its SATA controllers. Not only does AMD lack RAID 5 support (not a big deal, truth be told) but it limits your stripe sizes on all RAID arrays to two different options. 64k and 128k sizes. Intel supports 8,16, 32, 64, and 128k.

Doubt it will be a issue since the platform only lasts until DDR5 comes out. It's nice to be able to update the bios and slap in a new faster processor and unless AMD starts dominating they need to push the value factor.

Fair enough. This is one point in time where AMD won't be able to continue to milk a platform for the length of time that it did with socket AM4. The problem was that until Zen, it had given up just refreshing Bulldozer while letting the platform age badly. This wasn't about keeping value for the customer, but rather avoiding the costs associated with developing platforms for processors that weren't selling as anything but loss leaders. Often times those processors were sold to existing socket AM4 board owners. Some of which had invested in the platform well before Bulldozer came out.

That's true, but now they can update a platform with newer features without obsoleting a socket Intel style :)

I think there is a balance point that's ideal somewhere between what AMD and Intel do respectively. Intel ditches platforms too fast while AMD sticks with them for far too long. Although, I suspect AMD does this because of financial concerns as R&D on the platform side (including chipsets) carries costs with it.
 

Nobu

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jun 7, 2007
Messages
7,169
I'd argue that AMD has had this problem to varying degrees since the Super Socket 7 days. AMD has largely always had a platform which lagged its competition. Even when AMD catches up, the platform still lags in some area or another. Even X399 lags Intel's X299 platform. I love the platform, but even direct CPU access hasn't allowed M.2 drives to run any faster than they do behind Intel's limited DMI 3.0 bus. Intel was idiotic by forcing vROC license keys to get around the DMI 3.0 limitation, but its just as capable. AMD lacks the flexibility Intel has on its SATA controllers. Not only does AMD lack RAID 5 support (not a big deal, truth be told) but it limits your stripe sizes on all RAID arrays to two different options. 64k and 128k sizes. Intel supports 8,16, 32, 64, and 128k.



Fair enough. This is one point in time where AMD won't be able to continue to milk a platform for the length of time that it did with socket AM4. The problem was that until Zen, it had given up just refreshing Bulldozer while letting the platform age badly. This wasn't about keeping value for the customer, but rather avoiding the costs associated with developing platforms for processors that weren't selling as anything but loss leaders. Often times those processors were sold to existing socket AM4 board owners. Some of which had invested in the platform well before Bulldozer came out.



I think there is a balance point that's ideal somewhere between what AMD and Intel do respectively. Intel ditches platforms too fast while AMD sticks with them for far too long. Although, I suspect AMD does this because of financial concerns as R&D on the platform side (including chipsets) carries costs with it.
s/am4/(am2|am3|fm2)/g
 

mvmiller12

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Aug 7, 2011
Messages
1,161
I'd argue that AMD has had this problem to varying degrees since the Super Socket 7 days. AMD has largely always had a platform which lagged its competition. Even when AMD catches up, the platform still lags in some area or another. Even X399 lags Intel's X299 platform. I love the platform, but even direct CPU access hasn't allowed M.2 drives to run any faster than they do behind Intel's limited DMI 3.0 bus. Intel was idiotic by forcing vROC license keys to get around the DMI 3.0 limitation, but its just as capable. AMD lacks the flexibility Intel has on its SATA controllers. Not only does AMD lack RAID 5 support (not a big deal, truth be told) but it limits your stripe sizes on all RAID arrays to two different options. 64k and 128k sizes. Intel supports 8,16, 32, 64, and 128k.



Fair enough. This is one point in time where AMD won't be able to continue to milk a platform for the length of time that it did with socket AM4. The problem was that until Zen, it had given up just refreshing Bulldozer while letting the platform age badly. This wasn't about keeping value for the customer, but rather avoiding the costs associated with developing platforms for processors that weren't selling as anything but loss leaders. Often times those processors were sold to existing socket AM4 board owners. Some of which had invested in the platform well before Bulldozer came out.



I think there is a balance point that's ideal somewhere between what AMD and Intel do respectively. Intel ditches platforms too fast while AMD sticks with them for far too long. Although, I suspect AMD does this because of financial concerns as R&D on the platform side (including chipsets) carries costs with it.

I would argue that that largely depends on the value you place on those features. I have been an AMD user continuously since the Am5x86-P75 and remember when the original K6 plugged into the Intel TX chipset Socket 7 board. I can't really ever think of a period of time wherein I said... "Damn, I wish I had that new feature that's on all the Intel boards right now..." Then again, I may very well be an edge case.

My computer core components tend to get updated far more frequently than my peripherals, and I've always appreciated being able to keep said peripherals around in active use a lot longer than is typically the case with Intel stuff. I specifically got the Asus Prime B350-Plus last year at Ryzen launch BECAUSE it still had 2 regular PCI slots on it, and the Vishera core FX-8350 CPU it replaced was a drop in replacement for the Phenom II x6 1090T that was in the Plex server - no other changes to my set up needed (on Asus M5A97 EVO if you were interested, RAID is provided by a HighPoint Rocket RAID 644L PCIe 4x card connected to an external SATA 4-bay port multiplier box - I've got room for 3 more of these if I need them). Bulldozer core processors have their faults, sure, but Plex loves those things...

Note: I've always preferred RAID cards over mainboard RAID - it tends to be faster, and it is completely platform agnostic. Just move the card. And if my house catches fire (god forbid) I can just grab the RAID box on the way out the door :)
 
Last edited:

c3k

2[H]4U
Joined
Sep 8, 2007
Messages
2,290
I’ve got an i7-4790k which is sitting in the corner, trembling, right now...
 

drescherjm

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Nov 19, 2008
Messages
14,927
how many motherboard changes do you think intel will make in the same time frame?

Probably 1 change. There will be a replacement for X299 before DDR5 happens. The new socket will be similar in size and # of pins as the xeon use but will not be compatible.
 
Last edited:

N4CR

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Oct 17, 2011
Messages
4,850
Anyone find someone selling 1920x for MSRP? Seems to be the sweet spot...

1900x = $37.50/core
1920x = $33.33/core
1950x = $37.50/core
Yeah that 1920 is a compelling offer if you're looking at 6-8 core cpus already.
 

nightanole

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Feb 16, 2003
Messages
2,025
Im not saying this is the reason why $AMD is trading at a P/E of 75, but i can hope...
 

Oldmodder

Gawd
Joined
Aug 24, 2018
Messages
706
the motherboard for the Threadripper probably costs a lot more

I wouldn't say " a lot more" but it is more for sure.
Cheapest TR4 board here in Denmark are the MSI X399 SLI plus at 358 USD, And the Ryzen 7 board i was planning to use was the ( not cheapest ) ASUS ROG STRIX X470-F GAMING that cost 257 USD.
So yeah almost 100 USD, and thats still money.
But it would be nice if the price on TR4 boards could drop a little so i dident have to buy the cheapest one, though the MSI look to have all i need.

I dont do OC any more, have not done that for 5-6 years, But i started OC wit the 700 MHZ back in the day.
Last CPU i was OCing on was my Northwood, also dont do case modding any more, for a new build i will have to recycle my current Lian Li case ( with a few function alterations ) and PSU + H2O cooling system.

Money are not abundant as a early retired Dane, so will have to do what i never liked outside of racing "cut corners"

The old i7-3770 just got to go :happy:
 
Joined
Dec 6, 2014
Messages
59
I wouldn't say " a lot more" but it is more for sure.
Cheapest TR4 board here in Denmark are the MSI X399 SLI plus at 358 USD, And the Ryzen 7 board i was planning to use was the ( not cheapest ) ASUS ROG STRIX X470-F GAMING that cost 257 USD.
So yeah almost 100 USD, and thats still money.
But it would be nice if the price on TR4 boards could drop a little so i dident have to buy the cheapest one, though the MSI look to have all i need.

I dont do OC any more, have not done that for 5-6 years, But i started OC wit the 700 MHZ back in the day.
Last CPU i was OCing on was my Northwood, also dont do case modding any more, for a new build i will have to recycle my current Lian Li case ( with a few function alterations ) and PSU + H2O cooling system.

Money are not abundant as a early retired Dane, so will have to do what i never liked outside of racing "cut corners"

The old i7-3770 just got to go :happy:
Its odd to me that folks grumble so about mobo prices.

When you compare a TR mobo to am4, the amazing thing is its only ~$100 more. All is so much bigger and better. Those 64 lanes have to be connected via traces. usually u get 3xnvme ports included, native raid, more slots. more ram slots & double bandwidth, ...
 
  • Like
Reactions: c3k
like this

Nightfire

2[H]4U
Joined
Sep 7, 2017
Messages
3,280
At only $400 for the $1920x, it seems a little pointless to wait for the $650 2920x at this point. Since TR1 released, memory support has continued to increase. 3200mhz cas14 and better with 100+ Gb/s memory copy speeds are now the norm. Intel really has nothing that can compete here as the 7900x is STILL $1000 meaning the CPU/mb will be about 80% more than the TR1/x399.
 
Top