Threadripper 3000, 3000g

Discussion in 'HardForum Tech News' started by Mega6, Nov 7, 2019.

  1. Nightfire

    Nightfire [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,878
    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2017
    $50 for the 3000g - nice for a budget build. Memory prices help too.

    Give or take, $50 cpu, $60 for descent 16 gb ram, $70 B350, $30 240GB SSD, $50 case and psu. Even with a disc drive, you can make a great office PC for under $300 which is pretty cool.
     
    westrock2000 likes this.
  2. Zarathustra[H]

    Zarathustra[H] Official Forum Curmudgeon

    Messages:
    28,646
    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2000
    I'd argue memory prices are still too damned high, but I agree, for light gaming, you can do a lot for very little money with that chip.
     
  3. aokman

    aokman Gawd

    Messages:
    801
    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2012
    probably wont be as hard as people think given the split dies...
     
    IdiotInCharge likes this.
  4. IdiotInCharge

    IdiotInCharge [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    12,043
    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2003
    TR is already fairly easy to cool at its TDP given how the dies are arranged, and coolers have gotten better.
     
    aokman likes this.
  5. RanceJustice

    RanceJustice [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    6,033
    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2003
    What happened to TRX80 and WRX80 chipsets? Any info on those? I'm wondering what other Threadripper 3000 parts may be coming down the line too.
     
  6. drescherjm

    drescherjm [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    14,527
    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2008
    I expect these will be released later possibly Q1 2020. Maybe they are waiting on 32C+ parts.
     
  7. RanceJustice

    RanceJustice [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    6,033
    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2003
    Given the price points of the 24C and 32C parts, I would be surprised they'd need 2 more chipsets. If the "TRX40" is the "low end enthusiast/performance", then the "TRX80" should be the high-end version, with the "WRX80" being the "workstation/server, highest thread count version" instead. What other TR 3000's are left to be added? We assume there's a 64C somewhere perhaps... but nothing smaller I assume like a 16C? Thus I can't see how 3 chipsets are divided / necessary.
     
    Mega6 likes this.
  8. westrock2000

    westrock2000 [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    9,128
    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2005
    I’ve got a Athlon 200GE in a file sharing server and it works very well for $50. But it does have some latency under some circumstances when I’m doing several things at once. Will be interested to see how much of an improvement this newer chip is.

    just to clarify though, this used an older video chipset like the Athlon 200GE? Vega 3....I think the more expensive APU’s have Vega 5.
     
  9. Nightfire

    Nightfire [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,878
    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2017
    It's not 'older' just smaller. The 200GE/3000g uses Vega 3. The 2200g/3200g use Vega 8. The 2400g/3400g uses Vega 11.
     
    IdiotInCharge likes this.
  10. Zarathustra[H]

    Zarathustra[H] Official Forum Curmudgeon

    Messages:
    28,646
    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2000

    It looks like it will be a great chip. with the 24c version compared to the 3950x we have:
    + 8 more cores than 3950x if you need them
    - 0.3Ghz lower max boost clock in lightly threaded applications (games)
    + 64 PCIe lanes vs the inadequate PCIe lanes of the regular Ryzen
    + Quad Channel RAM (if you need it)
    - Massive price

    Personally I really want those PCIe lanes, but I am trying to decide if they are worth the price increase and the lower max boost clock. I don't really care about the extra cores or the quad channel RAM.
     
  11. Joust

    Joust 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    2,991
    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2017
    Out of curiosity, how many lanes do you need?

    I am looking for a lot of lanes because I have a bunch of HDD arrays that I want to run off of one machine.
     
  12. Zarathustra[H]

    Zarathustra[H] Official Forum Curmudgeon

    Messages:
    28,646
    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2000
    If they were perfectly aligned to my needs so none were wasted (you know, by things like putting a 4x card in an 8x slot, and stuff like that) I'd need 33. I could get away with 32, because I have a 1x sound card in there I don't really need, but I drop in because I can.

    It is exceedingly rare to have a board that is perfectly laid out to your needs though. In using those 33 lanes, I currently have a CPU/Motherboard with 40 lanes, and all slots are full, so there is some waste.

    I also like to have available expansion, just in case I want to drop something in later which I haven't thought about today.

    I was never one to build a system once, and keep it that way until I retired it, even back in the days when a CPU was close to being obsolete 9 months after launch.

    I'm especially not that way today when CPU's stay relevant for close to a decade.

    My systems are constant revolving doors with parts coming in and going out, and I want to make sure that I have all the expansion I need if I - for instance - four years from now, decide I need to install something else.

    It's all about having that flexibility. Experience has taught me that I never want to go small from an expansion perspective again. I have been frustrated by this too many times, like that time in 2010 I foolishly decided to build an SFF system, only to 3 months later wish I hadn't, because I wanted to drop in more PCIe cards.