AMD Ryzen 9 Threadripper CPUs rumoured to offer up to 16C/32T

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by liams

whoa, game on with intel , seriously id love to see prices of thr Ryzen 9 v i9's. Could be game over

---

Let's just hypothesise here. A dominant company with profit margins galore spends 5+ years banking the cash from its dominance and doing not much to innovate or drive things forwards.

Its competitor finally catches up, only to find the dominant company able to use all that banked cash to "incentivise" OEMs to still choose their inferior products over the competitor's better offerings. And if that doesn't work they could threaten to remove the permission to use their products altogether. Not that OEMs would be so complicit or the company dare to be so devious... or anything like that at all.

I expect to see many adverts with the intel inside jingle, and lots of "check it has intel inside" pushes like the last time AMD were doing well. And I expect to see lots of OEMs not offering decent configurations or product lines with AMD CPUs.

But it's the workstation and server side of things where this gets really interesting, the performance end of things generally ordered by people with a bit more knowledge than "does it play solitaire?" Hopefully that will limit some of that nefarious kind of BS from enticing OEMs to the same degree in those markets.

Doesn't matter of brand I go with what is best.. and currently all out AMD seem to be the way, also keep in mind most games is optimized to AMD hardware most of all as it is for starters... just look at console games that is also ported to PC... but what hardware are those consoles running with.. AMD CPU/GFX so AMD is a big player still, they just upped their production lines for PC which is good for us consumers whether if we are in need of professional or fun things to do.

What I like about all this, then it is that it would benefit us all and that nvidia/intel have to cut prices as well to be able to sell stuff.

also would like to say nice touch from AMD to have 44 lanes and DDR4 on all their CPU's unlike intel in this matter.

Pondering about getting an additional system being Ryzen/Vega.

@ik9000 it is unfortunate and i have no doubt these neferious tactics will take place . im just dreaming of a 1998x and a radeon pro ssg and how to pay for it !

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by directhex

https://i.imgur.com/c21ahoc.jpg

Seriously, what are 32 threads gonna do for you on a desktop PC?

---

I guess it may be good when you are watching music videos, downloading torrents, scanning your drive with defender and doing software development and want no loss of speed?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ik9000

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by liams

whoa, game on with intel , seriously id love to see prices of thr Ryzen 9 v i9's. Could be game over

---

Let's just hypothesise here. A dominant company with profit margins galore spends 5+ years banking the cash from its dominance and doing not much to innovate or drive things forwards.

Its competitor finally catches up, only to find the dominant company able to use all that banked cash to "incentivise" OEMs to still choose their inferior products over the competitor's better offerings. And if that doesn't work they could threaten to remove the permission to use their products altogether. Not that OEMs would be so complicit or the company dare to be so devious... or anything like that at all.

I expect to see many adverts with the intel inside jingle, and lots of "check it has intel inside" pushes like the last time AMD were doing well. And I expect to see lots of OEMs not offering decent configurations or product lines with AMD CPUs.

But it's the workstation and server side of things where this gets really interesting, the performance end of things generally ordered by people with a bit more knowledge than "does it play solitaire?" Hopefully that will limit some of that nefarious kind of BS from enticing OEMs to the same degree in those markets.

---

Intel did that before and they got annihilated in court, they wouldn't try it again because they would get hit even harder this time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ik9000

Let's just hypothesise here. A dominant company with profit margins galore spends 5+ years banking the cash from its dominance and doing not much to innovate or drive things forwards.

---

To be fair to Intel, they didn't just bank the money. No, they have a different idea: waste it!
$4+ billion on trying to break into mobile mostly via dumping (aka contra revenue).
$1 billion on Larrabee (well Xeon Phi is soft of based on that).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HW90

Intel did that before and they got annihilated in court, they wouldn't try it again because they would get hit even harder this time.

---

Weren't they rather clever and at least to anti-competitive behaviour they settled out of court?

So unlike Microsoft who were found guilty by the EC, there was no precedent since once there is a precedent, subsequent breaches are dealt with far quicker and harsher.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by will19565

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by directhex

Seriously, what are 32 threads gonna do for you on a desktop PC?

---

games using DX12 use cores more than frequency more now...
gonna be interesting using a 126c/32t cpu to play BF1.
in all seriousness 1/2 years ago Intel/Nvidia were my only real choice for my gaming computer (intel CPU 2 years ago, GTx 1060 6GB this year) but now i would be moving towards AMD for both

---

It's a tough one. I've had Intel since Pentium 4 came out, before that I switched between Intel and AMD pretty much every chip. I don't mind paying the extra for Intel because I know I'm getting the best performance per clock, which matters in gaming. I have a 2700K@4.8ghz, no AMD chip can get near that on air, and that's what matters to me.

As for graphics cards, I've had nvidia since geforce2, but if AMD bring out a 1080Ti killer for a reasonable price you bet I'll be getting one. I just can't see it happening.

1976x is the sweet spot I will defiantly be all over one of them =)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tunnah

I have a 2700K@4.8ghz, no AMD chip can get near that on air, and that's what matters to me.

---

Depends on the game, surely? BF1 multiplayer performs rather badly on a 4C/8T i7 versus Ryzen
https://i.imgur.com/JzaG7Xl.png
(Source: https://www.computerbase.de/2017-03/...-core-i7-7700k)
But then BF is very well threaded unlike most games.

Same here. I do a lot of 3D CAD modeling using my i7 6950x, but it appears I'm going to need another rig along the lines of a dedicated CAD station (so to speak). Rather than spending a fortune for a second 6950, I might be better served spending a fraction while getting more cores with AMD's 16c "Threadripper".