Threadripper 3000, 3000g

$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.
 
Nightfire said:
$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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
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.
 
drescherjm said:
I expect these will be released later possibly Q1 2020. Maybe they are waiting on 32C+ parts.
Click to expand...

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.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mega6
like this
Nightfire said:
$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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
westrock2000 said:
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.
Click to expand...

It's not 'older' just smaller. The 200GE/3000g uses Vega 3. The 2200g/3200g use Vega 8. The 2400g/3400g uses Vega 11.
 
Algrim said:
It's a serious chip for work that requires it. If you don't get paid for your work then you'll have to decide whether or not it's for you. If you are paid for your work it will (hopefully) pay for itself.
Click to expand...


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.
 
Zarathustra[H] said:
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
Joust said:
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top