Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 16 of 24

Thread: AMD Ryzen Threadripper 2950X

  1. #1
    HEXUS.admin
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    27,395
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    1,693 times in 587 posts

    AMD Ryzen Threadripper 2950X

    The better bet for the well-heeled enthusiast?
    Read more.

  2. #2
    Not a good person scaryjim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Manchester
    Posts
    14,818
    Thanks
    1,167
    Thanked
    2,169 times in 1,796 posts
    • scaryjim's system
      • Motherboard:
      • HP Pavilion
      • CPU:
      • A10 4600M
      • Memory:
      • 2x 4GB DDR3-1600 SODIMM
      • Storage:
      • 1TB HDD
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Radeon HD7660G (IGP)
      • PSU:
      • Battery/HP 19v brick
      • Case:
      • HP Pavilion G6
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 10
      • Monitor(s):
      • 15" 1366x768 laptop panel

    Re: AMD Ryzen Threadripper 2950X

    Memory analysis appears to be somewhat strange. There's excellent bandwidth but relatively poor latency.
    Reading around other reviews, it appears that the 2990WX always runs in a NUMA configuration, and Windows is sufficiently aware to keep data & threads local to a single die. The 2950X by default runs in a UMA configuration so the data could be in memory attached to one die while the threads access it are running on the other. I'd say an overall 10% improvement in latency compared to 1st Gen Threadripper is pretty good, though...

  3. #3
    £1000 Tesco Value Beer CAT-THE-FIFTH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Moosetopia
    Posts
    28,359
    Thanks
    3,136
    Thanked
    4,369 times in 3,388 posts
    • CAT-THE-FIFTH's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Less E-PEEN
      • CPU:
      • Massive E-PEEN
      • Memory:
      • RGB E-PEEN
      • Storage:
      • Not in any order
      • Graphics card(s):
      • EVEN BIGGER E-PEEN
      • PSU:
      • OVERSIZED
      • Case:
      • UNDERSIZED
      • Operating System:
      • DOS 6.22
      • Monitor(s):
      • NOT USUALLY ON....WHEN I POST
      • Internet:
      • FUNCTIONAL

    Re: AMD Ryzen Threadripper 2950X

    Quote Originally Posted by scaryjim View Post
    Reading around other reviews, it appears that the 2990WX always runs in a NUMA configuration, and Windows is sufficiently aware to keep data & threads local to a single die. The 2950X by default runs in a UMA configuration so the data could be in memory attached to one die while the threads access it are running on the other. I'd say an overall 10% improvement in latency compared to 1st Gen Threadripper is pretty good, though...
    Its down to improvements in the caches.


    Those despicable Elk,stealing the pond weed!

  4. #4
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    191
    Thanks
    3
    Thanked
    13 times in 11 posts

    Re: AMD Ryzen Threadripper 2950X

    Any thoughts on why Ryzen 2700x is sometimes noticably faster than 2950x? The clocks of 2950x (3.5 boost to 4.4ghz, compared to 3.7 boost to 4.3) seem comparable enough to expect similar performance.

    Is this a case of software faltering on more cores, or something memory-related due to how the cores are packaged?

    I was really hoping to find the 2950x was pretty much comparable to 2700x in all cases, and obviously better on heavy multi-threaded loads, but it doesn't seem to be quite so cut and dried...

  5. #5
    £1000 Tesco Value Beer CAT-THE-FIFTH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Moosetopia
    Posts
    28,359
    Thanks
    3,136
    Thanked
    4,369 times in 3,388 posts
    • CAT-THE-FIFTH's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Less E-PEEN
      • CPU:
      • Massive E-PEEN
      • Memory:
      • RGB E-PEEN
      • Storage:
      • Not in any order
      • Graphics card(s):
      • EVEN BIGGER E-PEEN
      • PSU:
      • OVERSIZED
      • Case:
      • UNDERSIZED
      • Operating System:
      • DOS 6.22
      • Monitor(s):
      • NOT USUALLY ON....WHEN I POST
      • Internet:
      • FUNCTIONAL

    Re: AMD Ryzen Threadripper 2950X

    Quote Originally Posted by Irien View Post
    Any thoughts on why Ryzen 2700x is sometimes noticably faster than 2950x? The clocks of 2950x (3.5 boost to 4.4ghz, compared to 3.7 boost to 4.3) seem comparable enough to expect similar performance.

    Is this a case of software faltering on more cores, or something memory-related due to how the cores are packaged?

    I was really hoping to find the 2950x was pretty much comparable to 2700x in all cases, and obviously better on heavy multi-threaded loads, but it doesn't seem to be quite so cut and dried...
    It could be down to actual realworld clockspeeds and latency due to the use of dual chips??


    Those despicable Elk,stealing the pond weed!

  6. #6
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    113
    Thanks
    10
    Thanked
    5 times in 3 posts

    Re: AMD Ryzen Threadripper 2950X

    This review is such AMD fanboy Bullcrap. Intel wipes the floor with this cpu, only a fool would opt for this over intel. If this was an intel review of the TOP END cpu it would get slated, yet because its AMD you state "Competent for Gaming" looool, you may as well just say that this is a paid for review and be done with it.

  7. #7
    Not a good person scaryjim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Manchester
    Posts
    14,818
    Thanks
    1,167
    Thanked
    2,169 times in 1,796 posts
    • scaryjim's system
      • Motherboard:
      • HP Pavilion
      • CPU:
      • A10 4600M
      • Memory:
      • 2x 4GB DDR3-1600 SODIMM
      • Storage:
      • 1TB HDD
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Radeon HD7660G (IGP)
      • PSU:
      • Battery/HP 19v brick
      • Case:
      • HP Pavilion G6
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 10
      • Monitor(s):
      • 15" 1366x768 laptop panel

    Re: AMD Ryzen Threadripper 2950X

    Quote Originally Posted by Irien View Post
    Any thoughts on why Ryzen 2700x is sometimes noticably faster than 2950x? ...
    Quote Originally Posted by CAT-THE-FIFTH View Post
    It could be down to actual realworld clockspeeds and latency due to the use of dual chips??
    Most likely down to latency, since the biggest wins for the 2700X are in gaming which is usually latency sensitive. It'd be interesting to see the results in all of the benchmarks with the memory set to local mode, to see how that impacts different workloads...

  8. #8
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    764
    Thanks
    45
    Thanked
    97 times in 61 posts

    Re: AMD Ryzen Threadripper 2950X

    Quote Originally Posted by Troopa View Post
    This review is such AMD fanboy Bullcrap. Intel wipes the floor with this cpu, only a fool would opt for this over intel. If this was an intel review of the TOP END cpu it would get slated, yet because its AMD you state "Competent for Gaming" looool, you may as well just say that this is a paid for review and be done with it.
    They said Competent, not amazing. It is competent, it's not going to break records but it will play games.

    Disconnecting your attitude from facts would be very helpful.

  9. Received thanks from:

    Biscuit (16-08-2018),KN1GHT (17-08-2018)

  10. #9
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    507
    Thanks
    23
    Thanked
    97 times in 71 posts

    Re: AMD Ryzen Threadripper 2950X

    Quote Originally Posted by Tabbykatze View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Troopa View Post
    This review is such AMD fanboy Bullcrap. Intel wipes the floor with this cpu, only a fool would opt for this over intel. If this was an intel review of the TOP END cpu it would get slated, yet because its AMD you state "Competent for Gaming" looool, you may as well just say that this is a paid for review and be done with it.
    They said Competent, not amazing. It is competent, it's not going to break records but it will play games.

    Disconnecting your attitude from facts would be very helpful.
    I read it as a workstation chip (for which you'll select brand based on performance in your specific workloads) on which you can game. If you wanted a dedicated gaming system you'd be bonkers to guy this chip. This is not a "top end" chip in the sense it's in a different category to those suited to gaming. It just attempts to straddle the categories slightly and is said to do a "competent" job. It's not it's main focus and only an idiot would buy this for gaming when you can buy something far better suited at a much lower price - be it Intel or AMD.

    Can I assume you've recently purchased an expensive Intel chip and don't like the idea that waiting a bit would have netted you this instead at a lower price with better and more flexible performance? That's the nature of PCs, something better is always just around the corner. That or you've misread this as a dedicated gaming chip when it's clearly not and love to get angry and arrogant online. Try sitting on the fence and not bothering about fanboyism. You can see both sides from the fence. Join us. Be a brand whore. You know you wanna.

  11. Received thanks from:

    afiretruck (16-08-2018),KN1GHT (17-08-2018)

  12. #10
    I really don't care Dashers's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Posts
    849
    Thanks
    30
    Thanked
    98 times in 83 posts
    • Dashers's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Gigabyte GA-X99-UD4
      • CPU:
      • Intel i7-5930K
      • Memory:
      • Corsair DDR4 3000 Quad
      • Storage:
      • Intel 750 PCIe SSD; RAID-0 x2 Samsung 840 EVO; RAID-0 x2 WD Black; RAID-0 x2 Crucial MX500
      • Graphics card(s):
      • EVGA GeForce GTX 970 x2 SLI
      • PSU:
      • CoolerMaster Silent Pro M2 720W
      • Case:
      • Corsair 500R
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 10
      • Monitor(s):
      • x2 23.5" 1080 72Hz OC
      • Internet:
      • Zen FTTC

    Re: AMD Ryzen Threadripper 2950X

    Thanks for the review. This one is far more useful than the excessive end. The entry level chip is still going to be the most interesting.

    What I think would be interesting is driving these chips with some level of crazy SLI. Obviously you're limited on the non-HEDT platforms to the number of PCIe lanes available - but on these chips, maxing our a x4-way SLI, is there any advantage to the 64 lanes on the AMD over the 44 on the Intel etc.

    Quote Originally Posted by Troopa View Post
    This review is such AMD fanboy Bullcrap. Intel wipes the floor with this cpu, only a fool would opt for this over intel. If this was an intel review of the TOP END cpu it would get slated, yet because its AMD you state "Competent for Gaming" looool, you may as well just say that this is a paid for review and be done with it.
    I think this is doing the review, and the processor a disservice. Most people don't buy the most expensive product. Most people need to balance cost with performance and it's not just raw FPS count in games that matter to everybody.

    I suspect you'd probably be better off spending your money on a non-HEDT CPU and getting two GPUs instead if FPS is your only measure.

    This chip "wipes the floor" when it comes to parallel processing tasks. It also does this for considerably less money.

    I have a strong preference for Intel chips, but I don't think I could stomach buying an i9 over one of these at the current prices.

  13. #11
    HEXUS.timelord. Zak33's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    I'm a Jessie
    Posts
    33,418
    Thanks
    2,317
    Thanked
    2,494 times in 1,563 posts
    • Zak33's system
      • Storage:
      • Kingston HyperX SSD, Hitachi 1Tb
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Nvidia 1050
      • PSU:
      • Coolermaster 800w
      • Case:
      • Silverstone Fortress FT01
      • Operating System:
      • Win10
      • Internet:
      • Zen FTC uber speedy

    Re: AMD Ryzen Threadripper 2950X

    Quote Originally Posted by Troopa View Post
    This review is such AMD fanboy Bullcrap. Intel wipes the floor with this cpu, only a fool would opt for this over intel. If this was an intel review of the TOP END cpu it would get slated, yet because its AMD you state "Competent for Gaming" looool, you may as well just say that this is a paid for review and be done with it.
    Lo Troopa

    Fair play to Troopa, he's been a member along time, so let him have his space.

    What CPU you rocking Troopa? Do you have one of the newer Intel's ?

    HEXUS doesn't do Fanboy.... we're a bit grown up for that tbh. But it's good to see why you think it's bull? I myself just opted for a Ryzen 1700 over intel, with my own hard cash, because it better suited my needs and the VFM was exceptional, but intel make a series of lovely CPU's so lets see the Troops(ing) of the Colours
    Last edited by Zak33; 16-08-2018 at 03:55 PM. Reason: more

    Quote Originally Posted by Advice Trinity by Knoxville
    "The second you aren't paying attention to the tool you're using, it will take your fingers from you. It does not know sympathy." |
    "If you don't gaffer it, it will gaffer you" | "Belt and braces"

  14. #12
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    136
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    4 times in 4 posts

    Re: AMD Ryzen Threadripper 2950X

    Quote Originally Posted by Troopa View Post
    This review is such AMD fanboy Bullcrap. Intel wipes the floor with this cpu, only a fool would opt for this over intel. If this was an intel review of the TOP END cpu it would get slated, yet because its AMD you state "Competent for Gaming" looool, you may as well just say that this is a paid for review and be done with it.
    For a workstation: 2950x.
    For competitive gaming: 8700k.
    For everything else: Ryzen 5/7.

    Deal with it.

    PS: If Intel overprices the new mainstream 8 core cpu's with their i9 / i7 switcheroo, AMD will sell a lot of Ryzens.

  15. Received thanks from:

    KN1GHT (17-08-2018)

  16. #13
    HEXUS.timelord. Zak33's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    I'm a Jessie
    Posts
    33,418
    Thanks
    2,317
    Thanked
    2,494 times in 1,563 posts
    • Zak33's system
      • Storage:
      • Kingston HyperX SSD, Hitachi 1Tb
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Nvidia 1050
      • PSU:
      • Coolermaster 800w
      • Case:
      • Silverstone Fortress FT01
      • Operating System:
      • Win10
      • Internet:
      • Zen FTC uber speedy

    Re: AMD Ryzen Threadripper 2950X

    Quote Originally Posted by eugenius View Post
    For a workstation: 2950x.
    For competitive gaming: 8700k.
    For everything else: Ryzen 5/7.

    Deal with it.

    PS: If Intel overprices the new mainstream 8 core cpu's with their i9 / i7 switcheroo, AMD will sell a lot of Ryzens.
    very well worded!

    Quote Originally Posted by Advice Trinity by Knoxville
    "The second you aren't paying attention to the tool you're using, it will take your fingers from you. It does not know sympathy." |
    "If you don't gaffer it, it will gaffer you" | "Belt and braces"

  17. Received thanks from:

    KN1GHT (17-08-2018)

  18. #14
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    191
    Thanks
    3
    Thanked
    13 times in 11 posts

    Re: AMD Ryzen Threadripper 2950X

    I think there is often a misunderstanding of exactly what constitutes a "workstation", and what constitutes "HEDT" and what crossover there is. That confusion then manifests in unusual ways as we see on this thread.

    I have a requirement for a CPU that will crunch a sizeable chunk of video data (handbrake etc), and ideally leave me room to play some games, browse the web, and do "general" computing whilst that's going on in the background. At the moment, that's handled by a consumer-i7 CPU, but the crunching takes a very long time.

    To my mind, this isn't workstation - that'd be dedicated video crunch, rendering, simulation etc, and that would benefit from ECC RAM and threadripper 2990ws/epyc/xeon type CPUs.

    The Ryzen 2700x would probably give a tidy uplift over the i7, but I'd quite like a bit more "spare" processing when grinding, so threadripper fits the bill nicely. The 12 or 16 core offerings would seem the sweet spot. Gaming will drop compared to the i7, possibly, but equally benchmarks never look at this multitasking angle - my suspicion is that actually, a 16 core threadripper might actually game better than the i7 when asked to crunch and game simultaneously (would be interesting to find out).

    I suspect I'm not alone in this kind of workload. The idea that we might want to do more than one thing at once must surely be the norm, now. That's not workstation load, but I think it goes a bit beyond "consumer" - it's the HEDT space I think. Intel will give you fewer cores, but perhaps a slightly more "standard" architecture, so you'll lose in the video crunch, but gain in games. AMD is basically the opposite, but a bit cheaper. I think you probably pay your money and take your choice depending on your priorities.

    That being said, I'd love to see a bench test where a video game is benchmarked whilst something like Handbrake runs in the background. That kind of real-life use would, I suspect, be quite interesting.

  19. Received thanks from:

    KN1GHT (17-08-2018)

  20. #15
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    507
    Thanks
    23
    Thanked
    97 times in 71 posts

    Re: AMD Ryzen Threadripper 2950X

    Quote Originally Posted by Irien View Post
    I think there is often a misunderstanding of exactly what constitutes a "workstation", and what constitutes "HEDT" and what crossover there is. That confusion then manifests in unusual ways as we see on this thread.

    I have a requirement for a CPU that will crunch a sizeable chunk of video data (handbrake etc), and ideally leave me room to play some games, browse the web, and do "general" computing whilst that's going on in the background. At the moment, that's handled by a consumer-i7 CPU, but the crunching takes a very long time.

    To my mind, this isn't workstation - that'd be dedicated video crunch, rendering, simulation etc, and that would benefit from ECC RAM and threadripper 2990ws/epyc/xeon type CPUs.

    The Ryzen 2700x would probably give a tidy uplift over the i7, but I'd quite like a bit more "spare" processing when grinding, so threadripper fits the bill nicely. The 12 or 16 core offerings would seem the sweet spot. Gaming will drop compared to the i7, possibly, but equally benchmarks never look at this multitasking angle - my suspicion is that actually, a 16 core threadripper might actually game better than the i7 when asked to crunch and game simultaneously (would be interesting to find out).

    I suspect I'm not alone in this kind of workload. The idea that we might want to do more than one thing at once must surely be the norm, now. That's not workstation load, but I think it goes a bit beyond "consumer" - it's the HEDT space I think. Intel will give you fewer cores, but perhaps a slightly more "standard" architecture, so you'll lose in the video crunch, but gain in games. AMD is basically the opposite, but a bit cheaper. I think you probably pay your money and take your choice depending on your priorities.

    That being said, I'd love to see a bench test where a video game is benchmarked whilst something like Handbrake runs in the background. That kind of real-life use would, I suspect, be quite interesting.
    I'm pretty sure that if you're planning on doing that, this processor will be just the ticket. The game will throw out a few meaty threads and Handbrake can use the rest of the cores. The 1080p gaming benchmarks just aren't realistic in that I can't think of many people having the kind of wonga / requirement for this kind of CPU who would use a 1080 monitor - sure some will, but most will be looking at resolutions which are going to mean most games are GPU limited.

    End result is that if you are the kind of person who likes to game whilst encoding, why not? You're unlikely to compromise on the gaming element enough to really notice.

  21. #16
    Not a good person scaryjim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Manchester
    Posts
    14,818
    Thanks
    1,167
    Thanked
    2,169 times in 1,796 posts
    • scaryjim's system
      • Motherboard:
      • HP Pavilion
      • CPU:
      • A10 4600M
      • Memory:
      • 2x 4GB DDR3-1600 SODIMM
      • Storage:
      • 1TB HDD
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Radeon HD7660G (IGP)
      • PSU:
      • Battery/HP 19v brick
      • Case:
      • HP Pavilion G6
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 10
      • Monitor(s):
      • 15" 1366x768 laptop panel

    Re: AMD Ryzen Threadripper 2950X

    Quote Originally Posted by Irien View Post
    ... benchmarks never look at this multitasking angle - my suspicion is that actually, a 16 core threadripper might actually game better than the i7 when asked to crunch and game simultaneously (would be interesting to find out) …
    Interestingly, when dual and quad core processors first started becoming mainstream, Hexus did run exactly this scenario, and reported both the game fps and productivity benchmark results (e.g. https://hexus.net/tech/reviews/cpu/1...omenal/?page=7).

  22. Received thanks from:

    Biscuit (16-08-2018)

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •