Read more.Is Intel bringing more ammo to the battle against AMD Ryzen Threadripper?
Read more.Is Intel bringing more ammo to the battle against AMD Ryzen Threadripper?
As I read it, then it is like they are digging into their work station CPUs and rebranding them..sorry if I am paranoid or anything... though if AMD keeps pushing out good stuff now and in the future + good prices.. then will be AMD next time building a system for sure.
Not a fanboy of either brand but if offer high quality for a more reasonable amount of money then count me in, and if the difference is like 5% or less give or take performance wise either side then wont notice the difference if buying the top products from either company.
And you'll need a mortgage to buy one as well
Old puter - still good enuff till I save some pennies!
So basically intel are releasing their 'xeon cpu's' onto the desktop as i9 then rather than being called xeon like they are now.
Now based on current ryzen benchmarks, where ryzen has better multithreading in the apps I use, plus the current cheaper pricing from AMD I see no reason why I would pick an i9 over a thread ripper assuming AMD keeps the prices cheaper....the motherboards will likely be cheaper on AMD side too. The Intel cpu might give me better fps in games but lets be honest if you're going after 8+ cores the odds are you're not after the cpu to play games, it's for heavy cpu workloads like 3D rendering and video editing etc.
Well this all seems rather convenient, AMD announces and releases Ryzen 8/16 which do quite well, AMD leaks a little of an HEDT range, Intel bring out their cut down/across Zeons as the i9 series up to 12/24 but then AMD states they will have up to 16/32 as their flagship then magically Intel has an HEDT processor with 18/36.
AMD need to keep this up and see how long the stored up ammo that Intel has stagnating is used up and we see the real battle starting
For me personally it's all about the PCIe Lanes. I run an i7 X at the moment for that exact reason, I want to have both my GPU's running at 16 Lanes.
CPU never really gets it's own power used.
What are the AMD chips like on this front? Not really had the urge to look into it as I have been an Intel man since moving away from the Awesome Athlon XP back in the PGA days
Well intel already have 'launched' a 28c/56t cpu (xeon platinum) in the server workspace so adding more cores was never going to be out of the question for intel, the issue for intel is how well ryzen is scaling with multithreading because benchmarks are showing 8 core ryzen beating 10 core intel pretty easily in programs that can make use of all the cores.
AM4 only officially supports 16 lanes for graphics (and you need Ryzen and an X370 motherboard to split that x8/x8), although it dedicates a number of other PCIe lanes to storage, both from the SoC and from the chipset (which, incidentally, is attached to the SoC via a further x4 link that may be available as gen PCIe lanes if no chipset is used).
Based on the published specs of AMD's server processors, it looks like a standard (i.e. 8 core/dual channel memory) Ryzen die actually hosts 32 PCIe lanes. The 4 die Naples server processor has 128 lanes of PCIe, and the 2 die embedded server chips that threadripper is derived from have 64 lanes of PCIe. It's worth noting that Ryzen server chips don't use a chipset as standard - the sockets simply plumb out all of that PCIe and it's up to board manufacturers how they choose to assign it (NVMe/SATA Express, PCIe slots, LAN, etc.).
All that should mean that threadripper - internally, at least - has 64 lanes of PCIe available. Rumour is that it will come with a chipset, which would take up some of those lanes, and there's a reasonable chance that, for platform differentiation's sake, AMD will choose not to plumb out the full complement direct from the socket (in the same way that Ryzen on AM4 doesn't plumb out all 32 lanes that are theoretically available). I believe the latest rumour is that the platform will allow 44 lanes of PCIe, though, which matches Intel's higher end HEDT offerings.
All that said, though, it's probably worth considering that you don't need 2 x16 lane PCIe 3 for dual GPUs. There's plenty of tests out there that show the difference in real terms is minute - just a couple of percent, and therefore probably within margin of error for most tests. 2 x8 is more than sufficient. Obviously part of it's down to personal preference, but to pay the huge overhead for HEDT just to get extra PCIe lanesfor dual GPUs seems a bit of a poor investment, tbh...
Pleiades (30-05-2017)
there are a few x370 boards that do 2x16 GPU but they use plex. in fact there is one that uses a second plex to offer 4x8 or 2x16. MSI titanium. I'd read the manual very very carefully first though before buying it as there must be a catch with that.
Not having read the story I shouldn't comment, but outside of specialist needs and maybe servers/workstations, I struggle to see where the average home user needs anything like this. Maybe if your hobby is animation and you want to set yourself up a render station, but I'm struggling to push the capabilities of my 10 year old s.775 Quad.
Other than bragging rights, what do individuals actually need really hairy-chested, muscle-bound processors for?
To be honest it's probably not aimed at *any* home user. This is aimed squarely at reviewers so they have something to fly the flag against Threadripper and hopefully top various benchmark charts. Then the halo effect should then take care of sales further down the scale. I imagine if they only ever send out review samples and make the odd $1k+ sale to the e-peen crowd they'll be just fine with that...
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)