Preview: Threadripper 2950X and 2990WX (specs and unboxing)

airbud7

2018-08-06 23:25

jortego128:

Its all about E-peens now boys, and AMD once again has the biggest. Their CPU division is on fire.

There slow Dude!....intel 8600k(old) is faster than anything AMD got....Do you have any idea how fast the i9-9900k is gonna be? It's gonna kill everything AMD has....Trust Me!...intel will not go down...it's in the plan..."the harder you fall"

#5571474

nizzen

2018-08-06 23:41

Preorder in Norway too. 900 NOK "90$" cheaper than 7980xe 🙂

#5571516

Thunk_It

2018-08-07 03:31

Hilbert, I am very gratified to see the outstanding review package AMD sent to you. They have definitely earned my kudos!

#5571527

Pimpiklem

2018-08-07 04:56

Honestly if people can see how desperate they look pushing forward Intels 1080p gaming advantage. Its now 2018 not 1995 its honestly so desperate and only hold back gaming. Its time to move on and turn your back on obsolete intel hardware.

#5571532

Elder III

2018-08-07 06:40

I must say that is some mighty fine preview/review packages there. 🤓 🙂

#5571553

Koniakki

2018-08-07 08:44

My 6cores are soooo 2017! :P

#5571569

nizzen

2018-08-07 09:50

Koniakki:

My 6cores are soooo 2017! 😛

*so 2010 😉 Release of 980x...

#5571572

user1

2018-08-07 10:04

༼ つ ◕_◕ ༽つ

#5571707

Larry Cañonga

2018-08-07 17:13

wavetrex:

LC is a must for this kind of horsepower, especially considering anyone who buys these will probably try to overclock them a bit, I think it's safe to say the air cooler can be completely ignored at this price range, doesn't matter how "cool" it looks. As for the versions, not sure which one I should drool more for: 2950X with 4.4!!! Ghz turbo ( And with some luck it will work @ 4.5 too ), and 16 cores is WAY more than enough for anything you can do at home (unless a researcher or similar) or 2970WX ... 24 cores for 1300 $ ... that's an insane amount of computing power for a bit more than what Intel charged on their 8-core HEDT just two years ago ! (Which also didn't go higher than 4.2-4.3 unless very exotic cooling ... talking about Broadwell-E) --- Finally, the 32c monster: Yes, it's way cheaper than any similar-core-count Xeon, but 1800 $ is still a huge amount of money. Plus, it's very unlikely it will have more actual usable performance than the 24 core version, as unless using virtual machines or multiple parallel operations, no "home" software is capable of using that many cores (not even 4K video encoders have that many threads) Too bad those only launch in October. Guess I should start saving until then... time to finally ditch the crappy 6-core Broadwell-E @ 4.1 Ghz ;-)

What are you talking about man, many 3D renderers use as many cores as available, I use VRAY at home (freelancing) and you can't have too many cores (budget is the only limit). I haven't tested on 64threads though, some forums say it works some say it doesn't, max I've done is 32 threads (dual octa-core with HT). Would be great if HH did VRAY benchs too, besides CINEBENCH, Vray is widely used in arch-viz (there is a dedicated vray benchmark)

#5571713

Pimpiklem

2018-08-07 17:31

Not as must at all if your running it at stock clocks. The new cooler works just fine. But honestly why would you overclock this CPU isn't it fast enough.

#5571730

nizzen

2018-08-07 18:09

Pimpiklem:

Not as must at all if your running it at stock clocks. The new cooler works just fine. But honestly why would you overclock this CPU isn't it fast enough.

Cuz faster is faster 😀

#5571731

nizzen

2018-08-07 18:10

Larry Cañonga:

What are you talking about man, many 3D renderers use as many cores as available, I use VRAY at home (freelancing) and you can't have too many cores (budget is the only limit). I haven't tested on 64threads though, some forums say it works some say it doesn't, max I've done is 32 threads (dual octa-core with HT). Would be great if HH did VRAY benchs too, besides CINEBENCH, Vray is widely used in arch-viz (there is a dedicated vray benchmark)

Do you use cpu only, or do you use the gpu for rendering. Or both @ the same time in Vray? My cpu does the V-ray cpu benchmark in 28.9 seconds. https://benchmark.chaosgroup.com/cpu/details?hw=Intel(R)%20Core(TM)%20i9-7980XE%20CPU%20%40%202.60GHz%20x36%2C%20GeForce%20GTX%201080%20Ti%2011264MB%20x2&id=18458

#5571759

jura11

2018-08-07 19:26

Larry Cañonga:

What are you talking about man, many 3D renderers use as many cores as available, I use VRAY at home (freelancing) and you can't have too many cores (budget is the only limit). I haven't tested on 64threads though, some forums say it works some say it doesn't, max I've done is 32 threads (dual octa-core with HT). Would be great if HH did VRAY benchs too, besides CINEBENCH, Vray is widely used in arch-viz (there is a dedicated vray benchmark)

Hi there Agree on this, many renderers use all cores/threads available, I tested dual Xeon E5-2683v3 and E5-2699v3 in V-RAY or Corona renderer Some renderers like Corona and few others don't use GPU for acceleration and they only would benefit from more cores/threads Some programs or SW like is RealFlow doesn't or won't use more than 32 threads but this is limitation of SW itself but some renderers would use all cores threads etc Hope this helps Thanks, Jura

#5571767

jura11

2018-08-07 19:38

nizzen:

Do you use cpu only, or do you use the gpu for rendering. Or both @ the same time in Vray? My cpu does the V-ray cpu benchmark in 28.9 seconds. https://benchmark.chaosgroup.com/cpu/details?hw=Intel(R) Core(TM) i9-7980XE CPU @ 2.60GHz x36, GeForce GTX 1080 Ti 11264MB x2&id=18458

Some renderers like Corona which is many ways is same or similar to V-RAY and in my view Corona is bit better renderer don't or won't benefit from GPU acceleration as they don't use GPU for rendering or rather for acceleration of rendering There few limitations running GPU based renderers like is VRAM and several features are not available when you render with GPU in few renderers like is micro displacement(Poser SuperFly) etc Hope this helps Thanks, Jura

#5572161

HWgeek

2018-08-09 09:09

I have Impoortant question: In 1950X specs on AMD web-page- They list "Max Boost Clock 4GHz" and we know that XFR adds +200Mhz. But on 2950X they listed "Max Boost Clock: 4.4GHz" so should we add +200Mhz XFR to this? Same on 2990WX Max Boost 4.2(+4.4 XFR?)

#5572162

Hilbert Hagedoorn

Administrator

2018-08-09 09:12

Max XFR2 for 2950X is 4400 MHz.

#5572164

Hilbert Hagedoorn

Administrator

2018-08-09 09:13

Larry Cañonga:

What are you talking about man, many 3D renderers use as many cores as available, I use VRAY at home (freelancing) and you can't have too many cores (budget is the only limit). I haven't tested on 64threads though, some forums say it works some say it doesn't, max I've done is 32 threads (dual octa-core with HT). Would be great if HH did VRAY benchs too, besides CINEBENCH, Vray is widely used in arch-viz (there is a dedicated vray benchmark)

VRAY has been added - in CPU mode only of course.

#5572167

HWgeek

2018-08-09 10:06

I have another suggestion for 2990WX bench, As we know not all programs can utilize all the 64 thread, so can you think about special bech that uses 2 programs in same time? Like you put 1 program to render while you keep working on other program so the" WORK DONE" in the end of the day with this 32C CPU is higher then lets say 18C but while you Render you cant use the PC to keep working. Maybe you can think about 2 programs that are used simultaneously by professionals?