AMD ThreadRipper. Are you READY?

elmariachi

Supremacy Member
Joined
May 30, 2005
Messages
6,339
Reaction score
1,489
please enlighten me...how does USD 799 and 999 consider cheap? :eek:

Intel's flagship offering to compete with threadripper is at USD$2K!

For 50% of the price, you get a much better processor without all the stupid gunk poop under the IHS. Not to mention faster overall and some reports claim that the threadripper edges ahead in single core but loses marginally on multi-core.
Debauer remarked that all the X299 boards currently have severe VRM and cable overheating issues when overclocked. Looks like Intel rushed the platform to counter AMD but it looks like the X299 is dead in the water. Incapable of competing on price/performance and temps still are an issue because they are stubborn to use **** gunk under the IHS. While it may not be the worst for them, sets to look they are gonna relive the Prescott vs Athlon FX days with AMD taking the lead this time around.

A mainstream platform Coffee Lake should be a better platform if you not going to HEDT.

I am sure they are still optimising but if single core performance is THAT good, it could be a godsend for gamers upgrading their rigs. Factually, most games still depend heavily on single core performance.
 
Last edited:

Psycovirus

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 3, 2007
Messages
1,789
Reaction score
381
There is literally no reason I'd need 16 cores, but I still think I'd feel like a badass sitting there with like 15 cores idle.

You can also take that 16 cores and rub it into my face because I only have 8 cores Ryzen chip :(

Haha. But that 16 Cores is going to be a monster for VM and Photo/Video work loads! I'm already very happy with Ryzen 7s for such stuff.

Intel's flagship offering to compete with threadripper is at USD$2K!

For 50% of the price, you get a much better processor without all the stupid gunk poop under the IHS. Not to mention faster overall and some reports claim that the threadripper edges ahead in single core but loses marginally on multi-core.
Debauer remarked that all the X299 boards currently have severe VRM and cable overheating issues when overclocked. Looks like Intel rushed the platform to counter AMD but it looks like the X299 is dead in the water. Incapable of competing on price/performance and temps still are an issue because they are stubborn to use **** gunk under the IHS. While it may not be the worst for them, sets to look they are gonna relive the Prescott vs Athlon FX days with AMD taking the lead this time around.

A mainstream platform Coffee Lake should be a better platform if you not going to HEDT.


I am sure they are still optimising but if single core performance is THAT good, it could be a godsend for gamers upgrading their rigs. Factually, most games still depend heavily on single core performance.


Recent games are going multi-core (look at Battlefield 1 or upcoming Battlefront II). Soon, mult-threaded games will become the norm as PS4 and XBOX One depends on up to 8 cores processors.

But you're right, Intel dropped the ball by not soldering the IHS like AMD does for their HEDT chips... Come on, already paying a premium for such a high core-count chip, and get mediocre heat transfer because of crap paste they use under IHS. Such a disappointment.
 

elmariachi

Supremacy Member
Joined
May 30, 2005
Messages
6,339
Reaction score
1,489
You can also take that 16 cores and rub it into my face because I only have 8 cores Ryzen chip

Haha. But that 16 Cores is going to be a monster for VM and Photo/Video work loads! I'm already very happy with Ryzen 7s for such stuff.




Recent games are going multi-core (look at Battlefield 1 or upcoming Battlefront II). Soon, mult-threaded games will become the norm as PS4 and XBOX One depends on up to 8 cores processors.

But you're right, Intel dropped the ball by not soldering the IHS like AMD does for their HEDT chips... Come on, already paying a premium for such a high core-count chip, and get mediocre heat transfer because of crap paste they use under IHS. Such a disappointment.

Totally agree but multi-core / multi-threaded games has taken so long to mature for each game. Most games in general do not even max out the cores in gaming as we are in an age where we are more GPU limited than CPU limited. I think IPC is far more important in any processor design today as we become more GPU limited the higher we move into bigger resolutions. CPU. It looks like AMD has the better chip this time around, I only hope that game developers and OS developers maximize the new AMD platform thoroughly. It has absolutely great potential.

Take a look at this. This first batch of all the new colorful X299 boards seems pretty flawed. If anything, I think Intel really rushed it. Double whammy cause even their processor design is half-baked with bad thermals and now even the motherboards has issues with VRM Temps when overclocked with cables coming from the PSU being as hot as 60 degrees. BAD.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f7BqAjC4ZCc
 
Last edited:
Joined
Oct 3, 2002
Messages
129,954
Reaction score
7,233
You can also take that 16 cores and rub it into my face because I only have 8 cores Ryzen chip :(

Haha. But that 16 Cores is going to be a monster for VM and Photo/Video work loads! I'm already very happy with Ryzen 7s for such stuff.




Recent games are going multi-core (look at Battlefield 1 or upcoming Battlefront II). Soon, mult-threaded games will become the norm as PS4 and XBOX One depends on up to 8 cores processors.

But you're right, Intel dropped the ball by not soldering the IHS like AMD does for their HEDT chips... Come on, already paying a premium for such a high core-count chip, and get mediocre heat transfer because of crap paste they use under IHS. Such a disappointment.
Can create own private network infrastructure liao with all the security appliances

Sent from 穷挫矮胖永独 using GAGT
 

Mikiberry

Supremacy Member
Joined
Jun 26, 2010
Messages
5,107
Reaction score
0
Intel's flagship offering to compete with threadripper is at USD$2K!

For 50% of the price, you get a much better processor without all the stupid gunk poop under the IHS. Not to mention faster overall and some reports claim that the threadripper edges ahead in single core but loses marginally on multi-core.
Debauer remarked that all the X299 boards currently have severe VRM and cable overheating issues when overclocked. Looks like Intel rushed the platform to counter AMD but it looks like the X299 is dead in the water. Incapable of competing on price/performance and temps still are an issue because they are stubborn to use **** gunk under the IHS. While it may not be the worst for them, sets to look they are gonna relive the Prescott vs Athlon FX days with AMD taking the lead this time around.

A mainstream platform Coffee Lake should be a better platform if you not going to HEDT.

I am sure they are still optimising but if single core performance is THAT good, it could be a godsend for gamers upgrading their rigs. Factually, most games still depend heavily on single core performance.

Price for 7900x is 999 I think. But I do agree the tim they used is damn Chui and their vrm for x299 is gg.
 

LiLAsN

Master Member
Joined
Dec 14, 2008
Messages
2,700
Reaction score
510
Some Singapore shops are already starting their pre-order bundles.

AMD ThreadRipper 1920X + MSI X399 Gaming Pro Carbon AC = $1829

AMD ThreadRipper 1950X + Asrock X399 Taichi = $2131

AMD ThreadRipper 1950X + ASUS X399 ROG Zenith Extreme = $2431

C0u9IO9.png
 
Last edited:
Important Forum Advisory Note
This forum is moderated by volunteer moderators who will react only to members' feedback on posts. Moderators are not employees or representatives of HWZ Forums. Forum members and moderators are responsible for their own posts. Please refer to our Community Guidelines and Standards and Terms and Conditions for more information.
Top