AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1950X and 1920X CPU Review @ [H]

Discussion in 'AMD Processors' started by FrgMstr, Aug 10, 2017.

  1. FrgMstr

    FrgMstr Just Plain Mean Staff Member

    Messages:
    48,357
    Joined:
    May 18, 1997
    Hope you have a good camera. ;)
     
    jkw likes this.
  2. n31l

    n31l [H]Lite

    Messages:
    108
    Joined:
    May 6, 2011
    Maybe Threadripper's extra PCIE lanes would enable me to revive my failed project, i.e. 3rd M60 wasn't detected...

    Tiny Quadro 410 hiding in the shadows for 'graphics' :)

    WP_20170630_12_44_29_Rich.jpg
     
  3. nlt25

    nlt25 n00b

    Messages:
    4
    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2017
    Would a Radeon SSG not absolutely munch this setup for that kind of workload? Admittedly I've not been following their pricing though, so may be out of reach ...
     
  4. Gasaraki_

    Gasaraki_ Gawd

    Messages:
    614
    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2016

    4x 1080ti does nothing.
     
  5. tacos4me

    tacos4me Gawd

    Messages:
    774
    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2006
    They sure do. I have 2x Ti here for local SLi/rendering or whatever, in addition, I plan on passing two of the cards through to virtual machines for the purpose of feeding Shield units in my home, perhaps even to a friend in town (GPON FTTH, baby).

    They also mine quite well when they're not doing anything else :)
     
    trick_m0nkey likes this.
  6. tacos4me

    tacos4me Gawd

    Messages:
    774
    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2006
    Most cases, probably. I already had these though, and AMD stuff doesn't have the Gamestream + Shield experience.
     
  7. J3RK

    J3RK [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    9,203
    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2004
    I'd love to know how passing those through like that works for you. I love streaming to the Shield TV, and being able to do multiple sounds very appealing for my house.
     
  8. nlt25

    nlt25 n00b

    Messages:
    4
    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2017
    Assume the drivers won't play nice with each so that you can run both?
     
  9. tacos4me

    tacos4me Gawd

    Messages:
    774
    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2006
    No fault with the drivers really, game stream just wasn't intended to be used like this (multiple games running on same Windows install). You need a dedicated Windows environment w/ GeForce Experience installed to handle the game stream for each card.

    I'll make a post with my experiences when I have some time to get it all set up.
     
  10. FrgMstr

    FrgMstr Just Plain Mean Staff Member

    Messages:
    48,357
    Joined:
    May 18, 1997
  11. Chebsy

    Chebsy Gawd

    Messages:
    523
    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2013
    What a beast !!
     
  12. kac77

    kac77 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    2,205
    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2008
    I still think an all in one solution is better than streaming. You've got tons of cores, and tons of bandwidth. Why not use it beyond one container? You can run many instances and achieve full utilization of the GPU's per container.
     
  13. MrC4

    MrC4 [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,309
    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2010
    Let's see what Threadripper can do with proper cooling. Bring on the results Kyle!
     
    FrgMstr likes this.
  14. Vader

    Vader [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    4,842
    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2002
    I love the posts that talk about multiple GPU's, Cores..etc do nothing. All I have to say is there's more to computing than gaming.

    I'm in a holding pattern right now. I want to see how Intel responds via $$$ and what the additional Core CPU's look like beyond the 7900x.

    If they do nothing tangible and 16core Intel can't keep up due to lower frequency..etc then i'll pull the trigger on Threadripper. I'd also want to see where the thermals and power draws are as well. 7900x overclocked is a power hungry beast.

    Until then, i'll live with my x99/5930k/1080Ti rig for now.
     
  15. Hagrid

    Hagrid [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    8,457
    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2006
    So you will be buying TR then. Intel doesn't usually price their products according to the competition. It's priced on what they want and that's what it is.
     
  16. thesmokingman

    thesmokingman [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    4,962
    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2008
    Is that a joke?
     
  17. FrgMstr

    FrgMstr Just Plain Mean Staff Member

    Messages:
    48,357
    Joined:
    May 18, 1997
  18. Vader

    Vader [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    4,842
    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2002
    It's a matter of simple economics, not fanboi antics. If they start seeing marketshare being lost then they may be swayed. If they dig in, so be it. I honestly don't care as long as I can get better price/performance from one of the two.
     
  19. nlt25

    nlt25 n00b

    Messages:
    4
    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2017
    The 7900X tells you all you need to know. It's already horrendously hot and power hungry, and frequently exceeds the socket specs (hence the photos of burned pins).

    From the precipitously lower clocks of the higher core count SKL-X processors, it's painfully obvious that they're going to be very limited due to heat and power.

    If AMD need to they can no doubt release a 20 core ... and it'll take minimal effort on their part re: conformance, firmware and virtually no product development. Moreover it'll only cost them marginally more to make than the 16 core. I don't even want to hazard a guess, once yields are factored in, at how much more the 18 core is costing Intel than the 10 core.

    Maybe if you really need AVX512, there is some case for SKL-X. Maybe.

    Regarding price, Intel have far less room for manoeuvre than AMD, as the latter's products cost a fraction of their Blue counterparts. I don't see what they can do until they get their own 'glue' on the market - a long time hence.
     
  20. drescherjm

    drescherjm [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    14,476
    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2008
    Isn't that when running avx512 instructions that AMD does not have yet?

    The 7900X outperforms the 1950X more often than not. Although it is clear the TR4 platform is better than the X299 platform. So to me the decision is about if you need the better processor or the better platform.


    With both of these said I will likely get the 1950X (even though the 7900X would be a better processor for a lot of my usage). I want ECC which 7900X does not have.

    Only if you are making the mistake of counting cores. I don't consider 1 AMD core to be equal to 1 Intel core.
     
    Last edited: Aug 19, 2017
  21. nlt25

    nlt25 n00b

    Messages:
    4
    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2017

    Mostly outperforms the 1950X? Virtually every review I saw showed the 1920X some way ahead of the 7900X in almost everything that wasn't gaming or AVX512 optimised.
     
    Last edited: Aug 19, 2017
  22. Meeho

    Meeho [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    4,470
    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2010
  23. cyberguyz

    cyberguyz Gawd

    Messages:
    694
    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2014
    This is probably why future Ryzens may well have the SMT/Hypertreading mode removed. It does throw more overhead on the schedulers than necessary just so you can have more CPUs showing up in your task manager performance page.
     
  24. capt_cope

    capt_cope Gawd

    Messages:
    923
    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2009
    Here's the thing... Intel already has the 7900x beat on single core performance, and AMD has it beat on multi-threaded performance. Comparing an x299 cpu vs tr2 cpu is at best pointless in the current market. x299 was a trashfire from day 1, and despite the fanbois I think most people saw that. Intel doesn't really have anything that competes with the 2950x (or really 1950x) let alone the 2990wx as far as price and performance goes. Sure they have a similarly priced cpu, but at high thread-counts it loses, and it loses to lower end intel chips on the single-threaded apps as well. There's damn near 0 reason to buy an x299 cpu, and there hasn't been a reason since launch (other than "they'll eventually release something worth my money" which is a losing battle IMO.)
     
  25. M76

    M76 [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    9,508
    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2012
    I have a simple question. Is it worth it to buy a 1920X for $400 now? Or wait for the 2920X?
     
  26. IndyColtsFan

    IndyColtsFan Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    323
    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2017
    I’d buy a $400 1920x tomorrow if I could actually find one. I’m hoping the prices will update soon.
     
  27. M76

    M76 [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    9,508
    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2012
    Well shite, I missed it, went up to $500 again.

    Well, maybe it's a good thing with the MB and a cooler it would've been close to $1000 anyway. Which is still more money than I care to spend on an upgrade.
     
  28. Bigbacon

    Bigbacon [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    15,837
    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2007
    what about the 1900x?
     
  29. Nightfire

    Nightfire [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,795
    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2017
    (everyone turns around at looks at Bigbacon)
     
    tayunz, cyberguyz and IdiotInCharge like this.
  30. cyberguyz

    cyberguyz Gawd

    Messages:
    694
    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2014
    **crickets**
     
    tayunz likes this.