1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

News AMD reveals 32c/64t second-gen Ryzen Threadripper

Discussion in 'Article Discussion' started by bit-tech, 6 Jun 2018.

  1. bit-tech

    bit-tech Supreme Overlord Staff Administrator

    Joined:
    12 Mar 2001
    Posts:
    1,518
    Likes Received:
    27
    Read more
     
  2. Wakka

    Wakka Yo, eat this, ya?

    Joined:
    23 Feb 2017
    Posts:
    1,529
    Likes Received:
    336
    A bit like the upcoming sequel to Top Gun - I don't need it, but I want it.
     
  3. jb0

    jb0 Active Member

    Joined:
    8 Apr 2012
    Posts:
    340
    Likes Received:
    29
    Intel: "We're number one again! 28 cores, AMD only has 16! Suck it!"
    AMD: "32 cores." *drops mic*
    Man, I love this return to competition.


    You feel the need... the need for speed?
     
    MLyons likes this.
  4. Spraduke

    Spraduke Lurker

    Joined:
    23 Sep 2009
    Posts:
    217
    Likes Received:
    8
    This is ridiculous, now there are thirty two of them!

    I can only imagine this is of interest/need for high end Render or CFD workstations. Interesting that both AMD and Intel are somewhat gouging their own server chips to one up each other. At my last job we used to run CFD software on 8 Core Xeon workstations but I would definitely look at moving (if I still worked there) to Threadripper for bang for buck (ECC memory wasn't really necessary as the simulations would through errors more regularly than you would get a genuine memory error).
     
  5. Vault-Tec

    Vault-Tec Green Plastic Watering Can

    Joined:
    30 Aug 2015
    Posts:
    8,001
    Likes Received:
    455
    It was so obvious. "Here is a 16 core which just so happens to have two extra disabled clusters with 8 cores on each, but honest, 'guv, we're not making a 32 core".

    It's silly, but as cool as hell iced over.
     
  6. Anfield

    Anfield Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    15 Jan 2010
    Posts:
    4,058
    Likes Received:
    225
    Just a little bit insane to do it on the current manufacturing process instead of waiting for the shrink in 2019...
    But if they can price it competitively versus the £1700 i9-7980Xe it will be a very sexy chip for rendering.
     
  7. TheMadDutchDude

    TheMadDutchDude The Flying Dutchman

    Joined:
    23 Aug 2013
    Posts:
    4,443
    Likes Received:
    405
    They already have the chips. Why wait? Release another in 2019. Easy money.

    I hope it’ll be priced well... the current EPYC chips are expensive, but they are awesome.
     
    Vault-Tec likes this.
  8. Zak33

    Zak33 Staff Staff Administrator

    Joined:
    12 Jun 2017
    Posts:
    210
    Likes Received:
    40
    or epic.......
     
  9. Anfield

    Anfield Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    15 Jan 2010
    Posts:
    4,058
    Likes Received:
    225
    The steep performance penalty of the interconnect between the modules combined with the inevitably low clocks seriously limits the appeal of Ripper Ridiculous Edition.
    And we know already they'll double the cores per module next year, so they can do 32 cores in 2019 with just two modules and it will make 2018 32 core Ripper look like a complete joke.

    Of course if they are willing to put 4 fully enabled modules in a consumer cpu then the question in 2019 won't be what AMD did in 2018, but how many years it will take Intel to catch up to the 64 core Threadripper 64 (god I hope they go for that pun based name if they are crazy enough to release it).
     
    Fingers66 and karbonKid like this.
  10. MLyons

    MLyons Half dev, Half doge. Staff Administrator Super Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    3 Mar 2017
    Posts:
    2,225
    Likes Received:
    618
    Think about all the VMs....
     
    Fingers66 likes this.
  11. Anfield

    Anfield Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    15 Jan 2010
    Posts:
    4,058
    Likes Received:
    225
    They drooled themselves dry over the 8 channel memory of Epyc...
     
  12. fix-the-spade

    fix-the-spade Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    4 Jul 2011
    Posts:
    3,132
    Likes Received:
    178
    So the clock speed wars are over and we're now into the 'hold my beer!' phase of core counts.

    I'm waiting for the Intel Core Neuron, with 100 billion cores.
     
  13. perplekks45

    perplekks45 LIKE AN ANIMAL!

    Joined:
    9 May 2004
    Posts:
    5,327
    Likes Received:
    157
    Whenever we see proper review samples I'll show some interest. AMD has not fixed clock speed and nobody knows about overclocking potential, Intel uses a 1 HP cooling unit to get their 28-core chip to 5 GHz. And, as of yet, nobody has a clue about pricing.

    Wake me up when there are samples. It's all exciting stuff but there is no substance right now.
     
  14. Anfield

    Anfield Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    15 Jan 2010
    Posts:
    4,058
    Likes Received:
    225
    I wouldn't expect either to have an all core turbo above 3.5ghz tbh.
    And just for fun I'll throw out a predicted oc headroom using normal (full custom loop, min 360 proper thickness rad, none of this AIO stuff) watercooling:
    3.8 32 core Ripper
    4.2 - 4.3 28 core i9
     
  15. TheMadDutchDude

    TheMadDutchDude The Flying Dutchman

    Joined:
    23 Aug 2013
    Posts:
    4,443
    Likes Received:
    405
    I'd say you're looking closer to 4 - 4.2 on the TR but only, and only with a high-end custom loop.

    Realistically, the i9 will be for the 1% of the 1%'ers. Let's be real. It's a $10k Xeon chip with an unlocked multi. Intel aren't going to drop the price *that* drastically, or else they'd cannibalize their own server market.
     
  16. Anfield

    Anfield Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    15 Jan 2010
    Posts:
    4,058
    Likes Received:
    225
    4 maybe if they bin them very carefully (or you win the silicon lottery) but if you need any extra voltage you can kiss the puny power delivery on x399 boards goodbye.
     
  17. TheMadDutchDude

    TheMadDutchDude The Flying Dutchman

    Joined:
    23 Aug 2013
    Posts:
    4,443
    Likes Received:
    405
    In theory, they should be capable of delivering 750w+ to the CPU ... but that all depends on how well it can be cooled.
     
  18. Anfield

    Anfield Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    15 Jan 2010
    Posts:
    4,058
    Likes Received:
    225
    https://bit-tech.net/reviews/tech/cpus/amd-ryzen-threadripper-1950x-and-1920x-review/8/

    Knock off lets say 152W for storage, ram, idle gpu, psu efficiency, then double it since it is essentially two 16 core Rippers and you get 740W oc'd (and that 1950x used as a baseline was only at 3.85ghz), so even if we give them the benefit of the doubt and assume they can handle 750W+ it would still end up very marginal.

    Now of course AMD said they would bring the same improvements to TR as they did to the 2xxx Ryzen, but 2xxx Ryzen doesn't provide any too significant power savings over 1xxx Ryzen, so the same will probably apply to 2xxx TR.
     
  19. sandys

    sandys Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    26 Mar 2006
    Posts:
    2,944
    Likes Received:
    75
    TR was typically the better binned die so ran with lower voltage for same clockspeed.

    Will be interesting to see how precision boost and a XFR2 work on these, as its 4 Ryzen die instead of 2 like last time so might mean we will see upto 8 threads boosting to >4.35Ghz then slowly rolling off with more cores and heat, that wouldn't be too shabby.
     
  20. N17 dizzi

    N17 dizzi Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    23 Mar 2011
    Posts:
    3,044
    Likes Received:
    298
    Thus igniting the "50 Month Core War"...

    But will it run Minesweeper?
     
    jb0 likes this.
Tags: Add Tags

Share This Page