AMD Threadripper is a 16-Core 32 Thread Monster [Rumor]

cageymaru

[H]ard as it Gets
Joined
Apr 10, 2003
Messages
19,817
Turkish tech website Donanimhaber (translator needed) has leaked some new rumors about the specifications of the upcoming AMD Threadripper 16-core / 32 thread processors. While the upcoming 32-core Naples family is destined for servers, the new 12-core and 16-core AMD Threadripper line is for end users. AMD has developed the 16-core Ryzen processors for end users by combining the MCM (Multi-Chip Module) or the 8-core dual processor core in the same module. Of course the 12-core variant will have one core per CCX disabled. This lineup is meant to rival the Intel Core i7-6950X.

There is a four-channel memory controller on tap so that these processors can better compete with Intel's best. We already covered the X390 and X399 chipsets here that AMD Threadripper processors will run on. Currently AMD is expecting these processors to have a 140W TDP for the 12-core and a 180W TDP for the 16-core. 64 PCIe lanes will be available and the lineup sports a 32MB Level 3 memory cache. These processors are going to use the B2 revision of the Ryzen core which fixes errata and the current engineering samples are running at 3.2GHz / 3.4GHz with a 3.7GHz turbo. AMD expects to increase this to a 3.6GHz base with a 4.0GHz turbo by launch. The Cinebench score is around 2500 points.

The author of the article expects to see more information on these at Computex and a release of June or July assuming that everything stays on schedule. This leak sounds like AMD is about to unleash the Kraken on Intel. I can't wait to see some workstations showcased on [H]ardocp with these new Threadripper processors in them. Of course this is all rumor, so don't jump on the hype train just yet. The thought of competition in the CPU space is always wonderful news.

According to Elime, the launch of Threadripper Ryzen processors with 16 cores and 32 tracks will be done during the Computex Fair and will be sold in late June or July, possibly in the following period. Of course, I would like to remind you that AMD has the right to make changes in the launch date and sales schedule without notice because of the early stage information. The price issue is unclear for now, but I know AMD has different scenarios on which to work, but the most powerful processor with 16 cores will cost a bit more than twice the size of the Ryzen 1800X.
 

spaceman

[H]ardForum Junkie
Joined
Jan 7, 2005
Messages
14,749
Nice. Good to see amd continuing this trend of useful products. Let's hope it continues on the GPU side too.
 

LurkerLito

2[H]4U
Joined
Dec 5, 2007
Messages
2,161
I am sure I would want one especially if it can do 3.6 base 4.0 boost and actually run a full RAM slots at the actual ram speed rating. I'd already have bought a Ryzen chip if not for that ram speed issue when all slots are filled.
 
  • Like
Reactions: N4CR
like this

griff30

I Lower the Boom!
Joined
Jul 15, 2000
Messages
5,529
Threadripper?

Am I the only one that thinks this CPU needs penicillin as a thermal paste?

All kidding aside, I hope this is REAL and faster than what is here now.
 

griff30

I Lower the Boom!
Joined
Jul 15, 2000
Messages
5,529
Better, but doesn't emphasize how its a big group of cores.

How about "Bukacore"? 16 cores all standing around your app ready to unleash at once.
..That would be Bukkacore.
Add the extra "k" for reference understood. ;)
 

Burticus

[H]ardness Supreme
Joined
Nov 7, 2005
Messages
4,163
Better, but doesn't emphasize how its a big group of cores.

How about "Bukacore"? 16 cores all standing around your app ready to unleash at once.
I see what you did there. Yes.... all 16 cores ready to "unload" 32 threads to completion

(12 year old me giggles)
 

gxp500

Gawd
Joined
Mar 4, 2015
Messages
865
If amd is just stuffing a pair of r7 dies onto a substrate how can intel compete with this? They're building huge 8/10 core dies with probably low yields, seems like a win win situation for amd.
 

grtitan

Telemetry is Spying on ME!
Joined
Mar 18, 2011
Messages
1,266
If intel dropped 6 core prices they'd destroy AMD :)
Even if they did, I would still buy a Ryzen.

Honestly, I'm just waiting of a CPU revision which will allow an OC higher than 4 GHZ.
 
  • Like
Reactions: naib
like this

tweaked

n00b
Joined
Sep 28, 2004
Messages
53
This is the first time AMD had gotten my attention in 15 years. I'm always telling people I'm not an Intel fan boy, yet i always bought Intel.

Thanks AMD for giving me a real choice.
 

Teenyman45

2[H]4U
Joined
Nov 29, 2010
Messages
2,362
I've said it before in this forum and I'll say it again; The odds of an unlocked multiplier are... ?
 

tesfaye

2[H]4U
Joined
Apr 17, 2003
Messages
3,419
Yeah yeah yeah, 16 cores, 32 threads, buuuut, what's up with that hair in the video?
 

Gigus Fire

2[H]4U
Joined
Oct 14, 2004
Messages
2,275
hmm, i haven't been paying close attention to this. Has there been any release dates?
Any price rumors yet?
 

Stimpy88

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Feb 18, 2004
Messages
1,271
Shit Intel are in trouble...

I'm waiting for the B2 rev Ryzens to come out first, then I'm going AMD, first time in nearly 14 years.
 

Snowdog

[H]ardForum Junkie
Joined
Apr 22, 2006
Messages
10,046
I wonder how Multi-Chip modules work with no separate North Bridge and Memory Controller. Since the Mem Controller is independent in each chip in the module, do you have to populate memory for each chip in the module.

So you end up with something more like 2 indepenedent CPUs with 16GB each, instead of one monster core with 32GB?

Does anyone understand how this works?
 

thingi

[H]Lite
Joined
May 15, 2006
Messages
98
This is a CPU that's begging me to buy it to replace my current unRaid Server rig (3770S/24Gb ram) with Virtual Machines with GPU Passthrough (nVidia 1070 for Windows and 750ti for OSX).

Wallet open, just need it to be released to market.... and proper IOMMU compatibility to be fixed in Linux (or maybe via an UEFI update) - Ryzen can't do it at the mo' :(
 
Last edited:

drescherjm

[H]ardForum Junkie
Joined
Nov 19, 2008
Messages
14,644
Does anyone understand how this works?
I assume it is the same as dual processor systems (and above) today. Google NUMA.

All modules should see the same memory pool but have different latency to RAM depending on if the RAM is directly connected to the module or not.
 

thingi

[H]Lite
Joined
May 15, 2006
Messages
98
I assume it is the same as dual processor systems (and above) today. Google NUMA.

All modules should see the same memory pool but have different latency to RAM depending on if the RAM is directly connected to the module or not.
Good question, I'd like to know too, but with KVM I can separate the pools with zero performance impact due to using VM's with GPU passthru.
 

drescherjm

[H]ardForum Junkie
Joined
Nov 19, 2008
Messages
14,644
when these make it to the 150-250$ price range in 3-5 years we will have a winner.
I doubt that will happen. It assumes that IPC and / or frequency will increase significantly in 3 to 5 years. I expect to see AMD hitting the same wall Intel has been up against for years after Ryzen+ is released.
 

Snowdog

[H]ardForum Junkie
Joined
Apr 22, 2006
Messages
10,046
I assume it is the same as dual processor systems (and above) today. Google NUMA.

All modules should see the same memory pool but have different latency to RAM depending on if the RAM is directly connected to the module or not.
I get the theory, I just wonder about the mechanism for sharing data when it is in memory attached to a different memory die. I assume for AMD it is hypertransport? What is the performance hit on that?

In many ways it reminds me of SLI/CF, you can end up with effectively half the usable memory, because it is really separate pools attached to different chip, and you end up with a lot of duplication.

While you do have access to it through some mechanism, it seems like it would not only be slow, but it would slow down the processor hosting that memory when you use it's memory controller to give access to another chip.
 

TheHobbyist

Hugs Hard Johnnies [H]ard
Joined
Apr 8, 2008
Messages
456
I doubt that will happen. It assumes that IPC and / or frequency will increase significantly in 3 to 5 years. I expect to see AMD hitting the same wall Intel has been up against for years after Ryzen+ is released.
I took it as he was referring to used prices in 3-5 years. I could be wrong, but look at used Xeon prices.
 
Top