Asus ROG STRIX XG43UQ monitor review
Netduma R2 router review
TerraMaster F5-422 NAS Review
Radeon RX 6600 (Sapphire Pulse) review
Radeon RX 6600 (Gigabyte Eagle 8G) review
PowerColor Radeon RX 6900 XT Red Devil review
Corsair Sabre RGB Pro Wireless mouse review
Far Cry 6: PC graphics performance benchmark review
Colorful GeForce RTX 3060 Bilibili 12G review
ACER Predator GM7000 2TB NVMe PCIe 4.0 SSD review
Ryzen Threadripper 2000 Is Sampling (According To AMD slide)
The past few weeks we've talked a lot about the Zen+ update for Ryzen, we all know that Threadripper will be undergoing that same amount of TLC. A public slide from AMD now confirms that Ryzen Threadripper 2900X, 2920X and 2950X are sampling.
Earlier on a document already leaked out, sharing the existence of the three mega-core procs. For Threadripper Gen2 you can expect a refresh of the current line-up; an 8-core Threadripper 2900X, a 12-core Threadripper 2920X and of course a 16-core Threadripper 2950X. AMD will apply the same Zen+ tweaks to the processors; including memory latency optimizations and higher clock speeds. This is going to be huge for Threadripper.
The Threadripper 2000 series is based on the new Ryzen 2nd Gen Pinnacle Ridge dies aka Zen+, and hopefully can achieve the same clocks as the Gen 2 Ryzen counterparts with turbos to the 4200 and 4300 MHz ranges. You should be able to see the same memory improvements on latency as well as higher frequency support. Earlier on it was indicated that Threadripper 2000 will hit the market in Q3, meaning likely at the AMD Computex press conference, they will announce that. BTW, before we begin another long discussion, dates are always a thing with AMD slides, simply put they reuse them all the time ergo, this one mentions 2017. We've verified the slide original, from a media presentation on Ryzen PRO last week.
Ryzen Threadripper 3000 Castle Peak and Dali APU Names Surface Once more - 03/09/2018 08:15 PM
Two more slides have leaked at Spanish website Informatica Cero. Yesterdays slides already included the mention of Castle Peak, the Threadripper update planned for 2019, which would be called Thread...
More Wallet friendly Ryzen Threadripper X399 SLI Plus from MSI in Development - 10/02/2017 02:31 PM
You know, the one thing that I have mentioning with the X399 Threadripper release is that the motherboards might become a little to expensive. Some are 400 euro, the most expensive one reaches 600 eur...
Gigabyte Releases X399 DESIGNARE EX for Ryzen Threadripper - 10/02/2017 08:58 AM
You'll either love or hate the looks of this one, but Gigabyte is releasing a X399 DESIGNARE EX motherboard for Threadripper. The motherboard was announced a few days ago for the TR4 platform....
AMD Ryzen Threadripper Does Have Four 8-Core Dies (32-cores) - 09/15/2017 04:37 PM
Remember that a while ago we mentioned that Threadripper basically is the 32-core processor, yet with 4 DIEs on it? AMD at the time specified that two out of the four dies are dummies, basically blank...
ASUS Prime X399 Ryzen Threadripper Getting Available - 09/14/2017 09:21 AM
When Threadripper was released little over a month ago, the only offering ASUS had was the (lovely) X399 Zenith. It however is a 600 Europ motherboard. So ASUS has been working on something cheaper in...
schmidtbag
Senior Member
Posts: 6156
Joined: 2012-11-10
Senior Member
Posts: 6156
Joined: 2012-11-10
#5546676 Posted on: 05/14/2018 06:52 PM
Calling the OC underwhelming or disappointing is a bit harsh:
Ryzen 1700 from 3000 to 3900Mhz is about the same % as a 8700k from 3700 to 4900Mhz, only the old FX or Sandy can overclock more then the Ryzen 1700.
Not really a justifiable comparison, seeing as the base clock of the 8700K is as high as the 1700's highest boosted clock. The 8700K's all-core turbo clock is higher than pretty much what almost any 1st-gen Ryzen could do on liquid cooling. That being said, the percentage of OC vs stock clocks isn't the only factor to consider, just one of many. Keep in mind both Coffee Lake and Ryzen have very similar IPC - this is what makes the lower clocks of Ryzen a detriment to the series.
The other thing to keep in mind is the silicon quality has very little to do with how far you can go. The average 1700 tops out at 3.9Ghz, but so does pretty much every other 1st gen Ryzen. The 1800X sold so poorly because despite being part of the "better quality bin", it didn't make a difference; you could just get a 1700 and make it reach the same speeds for a much lower price.
As for CPUs that can clock better, there's more than just Sandy Bridge and FX. Pretty much every x86 architecture since 2011 could clock higher than 4.1Ghz (with an unlocked multiplier). If you consider chips outside of x86, various chips POWER6-POWER9 could reach from 4-5GHz.
On air cooling i feel like the Ryzen is easier to handle, then many of the 8700k and the big Intel chips.
I would agree with this.
Keep in mind, I myself have a Ryzen build, I've built another PC for someone using Ryzen, and I intend to do it again. Just because it doesn't have impressive high clocks, that doesn't make it a bad product.
Calling the OC underwhelming or disappointing is a bit harsh:
Ryzen 1700 from 3000 to 3900Mhz is about the same % as a 8700k from 3700 to 4900Mhz, only the old FX or Sandy can overclock more then the Ryzen 1700.
Not really a justifiable comparison, seeing as the base clock of the 8700K is as high as the 1700's highest boosted clock. The 8700K's all-core turbo clock is higher than pretty much what almost any 1st-gen Ryzen could do on liquid cooling. That being said, the percentage of OC vs stock clocks isn't the only factor to consider, just one of many. Keep in mind both Coffee Lake and Ryzen have very similar IPC - this is what makes the lower clocks of Ryzen a detriment to the series.
The other thing to keep in mind is the silicon quality has very little to do with how far you can go. The average 1700 tops out at 3.9Ghz, but so does pretty much every other 1st gen Ryzen. The 1800X sold so poorly because despite being part of the "better quality bin", it didn't make a difference; you could just get a 1700 and make it reach the same speeds for a much lower price.
As for CPUs that can clock better, there's more than just Sandy Bridge and FX. Pretty much every x86 architecture since 2011 could clock higher than 4.1Ghz (with an unlocked multiplier). If you consider chips outside of x86, various chips POWER6-POWER9 could reach from 4-5GHz.
On air cooling i feel like the Ryzen is easier to handle, then many of the 8700k and the big Intel chips.
I would agree with this.
Keep in mind, I myself have a Ryzen build, I've built another PC for someone using Ryzen, and I intend to do it again. Just because it doesn't have impressive high clocks, that doesn't make it a bad product.
D3M1G0D
Senior Member
Posts: 2068
Joined: 2017-03-10
Senior Member
Posts: 2068
Joined: 2017-03-10
#5546677 Posted on: 05/14/2018 06:55 PM
Hmm. Seeing as there's no signs of the 2800(X) for AM4, I would've thought they'd use the 2800X for the Threadripper 8-core model, and shift all the other numbers down. That way, the numbers line up better: the 2920X could have 12 cores and the 2960X could have 16 cores. I assume they're still not going to make 10 and 14 core variants?
Anyway - I suspect these Threadrippers will be the most interesting for Ryzen. First gen Ryzen's OC potential was disappointing. 2nd gen's is underwhelming, but for Threadrippers, you wouldn't really want to OC much beyond 4.2GHz anyway until you start running into cooling or power issues.
Yes, clock speed isn't really important for these types of chips. It's not like anyone's going to shell out $1K for a TR because it can clock to 4.5 GHz on a single core. The multi-core performance is what really matters and the power draw/heat will be the biggest concern... and that's where I'm a little ambivalent, since the 2700X increased the TDP to 105 watts. Will this be the case with the 2950X as well? (from 180 watts to, say, 200)?
Hmm. Seeing as there's no signs of the 2800(X) for AM4, I would've thought they'd use the 2800X for the Threadripper 8-core model, and shift all the other numbers down. That way, the numbers line up better: the 2920X could have 12 cores and the 2960X could have 16 cores. I assume they're still not going to make 10 and 14 core variants?
Anyway - I suspect these Threadrippers will be the most interesting for Ryzen. First gen Ryzen's OC potential was disappointing. 2nd gen's is underwhelming, but for Threadrippers, you wouldn't really want to OC much beyond 4.2GHz anyway until you start running into cooling or power issues.
Yes, clock speed isn't really important for these types of chips. It's not like anyone's going to shell out $1K for a TR because it can clock to 4.5 GHz on a single core. The multi-core performance is what really matters and the power draw/heat will be the biggest concern... and that's where I'm a little ambivalent, since the 2700X increased the TDP to 105 watts. Will this be the case with the 2950X as well? (from 180 watts to, say, 200)?
schmidtbag
Senior Member
Posts: 6156
Joined: 2012-11-10
Senior Member
Posts: 6156
Joined: 2012-11-10
#5546686 Posted on: 05/14/2018 07:16 PM
I wouldn't worry about it. It seems Ryzen's wattage really starts to grow exponentially once you exceed 3.8GHz, and the 2700X seems to dabble beyond that. If they kept the clocks more similar to the 1800X, I'm sure it'd actually be lower than the original 95W TDP.
and that's where I'm a little ambivalent, since the 2700X increased the TDP to 105 watts. Will this be the case with the 2950X as well? (from 180 watts to, say, 200)?
I wouldn't worry about it. It seems Ryzen's wattage really starts to grow exponentially once you exceed 3.8GHz, and the 2700X seems to dabble beyond that. If they kept the clocks more similar to the 1800X, I'm sure it'd actually be lower than the original 95W TDP.
airbud7
Senior Member
Posts: 7835
Joined: 2011-07-20
Senior Member
Posts: 7835
Joined: 2011-07-20
#5546698 Posted on: 05/14/2018 07:54 PM
Regardless, having a reason to upgrade is subjective. There are people still rocking Sandy Bridge systems with no real incentive to upgrade, aside from maybe better power efficiency. The fact of the matter is, software just isn't becoming more demanding on CPUs, and single-threaded tasks aren't going to go away any time soon (if ever).
Totally agree... from a "gamers standpoint" a 1080ti and 1440p monitor will go a lot further than an entire system upgrade
Regardless, having a reason to upgrade is subjective. There are people still rocking Sandy Bridge systems with no real incentive to upgrade, aside from maybe better power efficiency. The fact of the matter is, software just isn't becoming more demanding on CPUs, and single-threaded tasks aren't going to go away any time soon (if ever).
Totally agree... from a "gamers standpoint" a 1080ti and 1440p monitor will go a lot further than an entire system upgrade
Click here to post a comment for this news story on the message forum.
Senior Member
Posts: 240
Joined: 2017-03-01
Hmm. Seeing as there's no signs of the 2800(X) for AM4, I would've thought they'd use the 2800X for the Threadripper 8-core model, and shift all the other numbers down. That way, the numbers line up better: the 2920X could have 12 cores and the 2960X could have 16 cores. I assume they're still not going to make 10 and 14 core variants?
Anyway - I suspect these Threadrippers will be the most interesting for Ryzen. First gen Ryzen's OC potential was disappointing. 2nd gen's is underwhelming, but for Threadrippers, you wouldn't really want to OC much beyond 4.2GHz anyway until you start running into cooling or power issues.
Calling the OC underwhelming or disappointing is a bit harsh:
Ryzen 1700 from 3000 to 3900Mhz is about the same % as a 8700k from 3700 to 4900Mhz, only the old FX or Sandy can overclock more then the Ryzen 1700.
On air cooling i feel like the Ryzen is easier to handle, then many of the 8700k and the big Intel chips.