Intel Core i9 9900KS processor review
AMD Ryzen 9 3950X review
Promo: Windows 10 Pro for $13 With Office 2016 For $33
ASUS PRIME X570 Pro review
ASUS ROG STRIX Scope keyboard review
GALAX GeForce RTX 2070 Super WTF review
ADATA Spectrix S40G 512GB NVMe M.2 SSD review
Red Dead Redemption 2: PC graphics performance benchmark review
XFX Radeon RX 5700 XT THICC III Ultra review
Promo: URcdkey Halloween sale Windows 10 Pro for 11$
Whoops: AMD France lists Ryzen Threadripper 2990WX + Cinebench score
AMD is pretty focused not to have anything Threadripper leaked, and we all know how that always works out; Specs, prices and everything is sitting on the street already. Tomorrow btw, we'll have an unboxing and a bit of a preview to offer you guys. Anyhow, It surely doesn't help that AMD had a full listing of Ryzen Threadripper 2990WX Cinebench score online.
I am currently not sure if AMD pulled the page already, but our forum regular HWGeek ran into an official AMD France page. Which listed quite a bit, including a Cinebench score of 5099 for Threadripper 2990WX. The scores were readable in the footnotes of their webpage:
- Intel i9 7980XE score: 3,335
- AMD Ryzen Threadripper 2990WX score: 5,099
Test setup:
AMD:
- AMD Ryzen ™ Threadripper ™ 2990WX
- sTR4 motherboard socket X399
- GeForce GTX 1080 graphics card (driver 24.21.13.9793)
- 4 x 8 GB DDR4-3200
- Windows 10 x64 Pro (RS3)
- Samsung 850 Pro SSD
- score: 5,099
Intel:
- Gigabyte X299 AORUS Gaming 9
- Intel Core i9-7980XE
- GeForce GTX 1080 graphics card (driver 24.21.13.9793)
- 4 x 8 GB DDR4-3200
- Windows 10 x64 Pro (RS3)
- Samsung 850 Pro SSD
- score: 3,335
airbud7
Senior Member
Posts: 7511
Joined: 2011-07-20
Senior Member
Posts: 7511
Joined: 2011-07-20
#5571039 Posted on: 08/05/2018 11:10 AM
The most powerful desktop processor in the world.
Priyeshbabariya
Member
Posts: 54
Joined: 2013-12-25
Member
Posts: 54
Joined: 2013-12-25
#5571061 Posted on: 08/05/2018 02:29 PM
It's only 53% faster?!!!!!!!. 18c vs 32c?!!
It's only 53% faster?!!!!!!!. 18c vs 32c?!!
HWgeek
Senior Member
Posts: 439
Joined: 2005-04-04
Senior Member
Posts: 439
Joined: 2005-04-04
#5571071 Posted on: 08/05/2018 03:13 PM
I think this is why after Intel's answer to 2990WX we will see new chipset x499 with 8ch memory.
I think this is why after Intel's answer to 2990WX we will see new chipset x499 with 8ch memory.
svan71
Member
Posts: 40
Joined: 2016-08-19
Member
Posts: 40
Joined: 2016-08-19
#5571075 Posted on: 08/05/2018 03:32 PM
What is really awesome is we are on Ryzen gen 1.5, imagine when its a 7th 8th or 9th gen part like Intels is. Intel will be loosing this battle top to bottom by the 3rd zen gen.
What is really awesome is we are on Ryzen gen 1.5, imagine when its a 7th 8th or 9th gen part like Intels is. Intel will be loosing this battle top to bottom by the 3rd zen gen.
Frag
Junior Member
Posts: 4
Joined: 2014-10-26
Junior Member
Posts: 4
Joined: 2014-10-26
#5571077 Posted on: 08/05/2018 03:40 PM
Intel is not into losing, they have a big budget and things will change
finally though its not just a one horse race and for the first time in decades I'm thinking of AMD for my cpu
What is really awesome is we are on Ryzen gen 1.5, imagine when its a 7th 8th or 9th gen part like Intels is. Intel will be loosing this battle top to bottom by the 3rd zen gen.
Intel is not into losing, they have a big budget and things will change
finally though its not just a one horse race and for the first time in decades I'm thinking of AMD for my cpu
warlord
Senior Member
Posts: 2396
Joined: 2012-10-22
Senior Member
Posts: 2396
Joined: 2012-10-22
#5571080 Posted on: 08/05/2018 04:02 PM
Well 77.78% more cores for 52.90% more performance. Nothing interesting here really. It is negative scaling even if we are talking about different CPUs. TR 2990WX is much newer than i9 7980XE, I expected a 'lil better.
Well 77.78% more cores for 52.90% more performance. Nothing interesting here really. It is negative scaling even if we are talking about different CPUs. TR 2990WX is much newer than i9 7980XE, I expected a 'lil better.
asturur
Senior Member
Posts: 406
Joined: 2010-05-12
Senior Member
Posts: 406
Joined: 2010-05-12
#5571082 Posted on: 08/05/2018 04:07 PM
Intel Cores are more powefull and i do not think 32 cores can go high clock.
I also do not think AMD Cores won't equal intel core easily, and memories controller will always play a role.
I m very happy of those enhancements on both sides anyway, and to be honest my next rig will be AMD whatever intel pulls out, just because i have to do my part in giving a reward for the efforts
It's only 53% faster?!!!!!!!. 18c vs 32c?!!
Intel Cores are more powefull and i do not think 32 cores can go high clock.
I also do not think AMD Cores won't equal intel core easily, and memories controller will always play a role.
I m very happy of those enhancements on both sides anyway, and to be honest my next rig will be AMD whatever intel pulls out, just because i have to do my part in giving a reward for the efforts
asturur
Senior Member
Posts: 406
Joined: 2010-05-12
Senior Member
Posts: 406
Joined: 2010-05-12
#5571084 Posted on: 08/05/2018 04:09 PM
We can't count core only.
We do not know of chinebench limits, we do not know of OS limits under it.
Also there are more than one scaling, ryzen is generally with a lower clock and also consider EUR per performance too.
Well 77.78% more cores for 52.90% more performance. Nothing interesting here really. It is negative scaling even if we are talking about different CPUs. TR 2990WX is much newer than i9 7980XE, I expected a 'lil better.
We can't count core only.
We do not know of chinebench limits, we do not know of OS limits under it.
Also there are more than one scaling, ryzen is generally with a lower clock and also consider EUR per performance too.
Srsbsns
Senior Member
Posts: 147
Joined: 2015-01-28
Senior Member
Posts: 147
Joined: 2015-01-28
#5571091 Posted on: 08/05/2018 05:06 PM
Cinebench is not a good tool to benchmark cores that high. I believe at somewhere around 20 cores the benchmark completes so fast that the scores become extremely inconsistent and scale negative.
Well 77.78% more cores for 52.90% more performance. Nothing interesting here really. It is negative scaling even if we are talking about different CPUs. TR 2990WX is much newer than i9 7980XE, I expected a 'lil better.
Cinebench is not a good tool to benchmark cores that high. I believe at somewhere around 20 cores the benchmark completes so fast that the scores become extremely inconsistent and scale negative.
tunejunky
Senior Member
Posts: 881
Joined: 2017-08-18
Senior Member
Posts: 881
Joined: 2017-08-18
#5571093 Posted on: 08/05/2018 05:17 PM
cinebench is handy and that's about it.
if you use a proper metric (soon to be coming from HH no doubt) you will have your mind blown
and for the uninitiated, core speeds on all multi-core cpus will always be lower the more cores you have. it's called physics and the waste heat has to go somewhere, so lower clocks equal lower power and heat.
but, "threadrippers" are binned for high clocks as opposed to data center cpus which never want high clocks (24/7 operation).
and you will find that these clock pretty damn high...certainly higher than zen (gen 1.0) and the original threadripper.
cinebench is handy and that's about it.
if you use a proper metric (soon to be coming from HH no doubt) you will have your mind blown
and for the uninitiated, core speeds on all multi-core cpus will always be lower the more cores you have. it's called physics and the waste heat has to go somewhere, so lower clocks equal lower power and heat.
but, "threadrippers" are binned for high clocks as opposed to data center cpus which never want high clocks (24/7 operation).
and you will find that these clock pretty damn high...certainly higher than zen (gen 1.0) and the original threadripper.
Caesar
Senior Member
Posts: 785
Joined: 2015-06-18
Senior Member
Posts: 785
Joined: 2015-06-18
#5571096 Posted on: 08/05/2018 05:36 PM
abit ....... defying intel xeon.......:
abit ....... defying intel xeon.......:
RooiKreef
Senior Member
Posts: 368
Joined: 2016-06-08
Senior Member
Posts: 368
Joined: 2016-06-08
#5571101 Posted on: 08/05/2018 05:58 PM
Maybe I’m wrong about this, or maybe I’m not seeing the bigger picture here.
About a week ago Der8auer made a video where he basically tried to overclock the 32 core Epyc cpu and he pulle off a 6099 Cinebench score at only 3.8Ghz. As far as I know the new 2990WX will be boosting all the way to 4.2Ghz. How on earth is this CPU a whole 1000 points behind the older Epyc CPU?
Like I say, maybe I’m missing something...
Maybe I’m wrong about this, or maybe I’m not seeing the bigger picture here.
About a week ago Der8auer made a video where he basically tried to overclock the 32 core Epyc cpu and he pulle off a 6099 Cinebench score at only 3.8Ghz. As far as I know the new 2990WX will be boosting all the way to 4.2Ghz. How on earth is this CPU a whole 1000 points behind the older Epyc CPU?
Like I say, maybe I’m missing something...
HWgeek
Senior Member
Posts: 439
Joined: 2005-04-04
Senior Member
Posts: 439
Joined: 2005-04-04
#5571103 Posted on: 08/05/2018 06:11 PM
Der8auer got around 5370 on 3.5Ghz all cores, and 6000+ with 4.05Ghz, 2990WX boosts to 3.4Ghz all core so it's close to Der8auer's score.
And remember that was with 8Ch memory, I am sure that 2990WX with 8CH memory@3200Mhz could got much higher then 5099 points, so lets hope that AMD prepering X499 chipset after Intel's respond.
I am sure about it only because AMD chose not to Rebrand the current X399 as X499 for the upcoming refreshes X399 motherboards.
Der8auer got around 5370 on 3.5Ghz all cores, and 6000+ with 4.05Ghz, 2990WX boosts to 3.4Ghz all core so it's close to Der8auer's score.
And remember that was with 8Ch memory, I am sure that 2990WX with 8CH memory@3200Mhz could got much higher then 5099 points, so lets hope that AMD prepering X499 chipset after Intel's respond.
I am sure about it only because AMD chose not to Rebrand the current X399 as X499 for the upcoming refreshes X399 motherboards.
TLD LARS
Senior Member
Posts: 114
Joined: 2017-03-01
Senior Member
Posts: 114
Joined: 2017-03-01
#5571104 Posted on: 08/05/2018 06:12 PM
Maybe I’m wrong about this, or maybe I’m not seeing the bigger picture here.
About a week ago Der8auer made a video where he basically tried to overclock the 32 core Epyc cpu and he pulle off a 6099 Cinebench score at only 3.8Ghz. As far as I know the new 2990WX will be boosting all the way to 4.2Ghz. How on earth is this CPU a whole 1000 points behind the older Epyc CPU?
Like I say, maybe I’m missing something...
AMD allcore boost is not as aggressive as Intels, dont expect allcore higher then base clock 3Ghz or maybe +200-400Mhz, the 4.2Ghz is single/dualcore boost.
Maybe I’m wrong about this, or maybe I’m not seeing the bigger picture here.
About a week ago Der8auer made a video where he basically tried to overclock the 32 core Epyc cpu and he pulle off a 6099 Cinebench score at only 3.8Ghz. As far as I know the new 2990WX will be boosting all the way to 4.2Ghz. How on earth is this CPU a whole 1000 points behind the older Epyc CPU?
Like I say, maybe I’m missing something...
AMD allcore boost is not as aggressive as Intels, dont expect allcore higher then base clock 3Ghz or maybe +200-400Mhz, the 4.2Ghz is single/dualcore boost.
Click here to post a comment for this news story on the message forum.
Senior Member
Posts: 1237
Joined: 2003-09-14
Good find