amd Unannounced TR 1920 listed

[lonestar31]

Quote

According to support pages at various motherboard vendors, AMD will likely launch a new 12C/24T Ryzen Threadripper 1920 model, and there are also signs that the company could expand the lineup further.

While I doubt we will see a cheaper 1900 non X, it's still possible.

http://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-threadripper-1920-1950-1900,35165.html

 

 

[Guest]

soon, Ryzen will have same number as our year

[Princess Luna]

Honestly I very much doubt there will be a TR with 8c/16t configuration because unlike Intel, AMD still makes some sense and wouldn't make a pointless chip that equals de Ryzen 7 1800x on a much more expensive boards just for the lulz like Intel did.

[leadeater]

17 minutes ago, Princess Cadence said:

Honestly I very much doubt there will be a TR with 8c/16t configuration because unlike Intel, AMD still makes some sense and wouldn't make a pointless chip that equals de Ryzen 7 1800x on a much more expensive boards just for the lulz like Intel did.

The 8 core is confirmed and on AMD announcement slides.

[Princess Luna]

4 minutes ago, leadeater said:

The 8 core is confirmed and on AMD announcement slides.

@ONOTech

Is that so? I'm not following it too close because I have no need for it.... I had my hopes though, I literally don't understand it's purpose or the purpose of pretty much identical chips but on different much more expensive platforms, I don't buy the whole buy lower to upgrade higher later as technology advances so fast any ways and no platform is future-proof... I wish this whole tech deal made more sense it frustrates me some times...

[PCGuy_5960]

2 minutes ago, Princess Cadence said:

Is that so? I'm not following it too close because I have no need for it.... I had my hopes though, I literally don't understand it's purpose or the purpose of pretty much identical chips but on different much more expensive platforms, I don't buy the whole buy lower to upgrade higher later as technology advances so fast any ways and no platform is future-proof... I wish this whole tech deal made more sense it frustrates me some times...

It's for people who need more memory channels and more PCIe lanes. If you don't really care about that, get a 1700 and overclock it

[Shimejii]

4 minutes ago, Princess Cadence said:

@ONOTech

Is that so? I'm not following it too close because I have no need for it.... I had my hopes though, I literally don't understand it's purpose or the purpose of pretty much identical chips but on different much more expensive platforms, I don't buy the whole buy lower to upgrade higher later as technology advances so fast any ways and no platform is future-proof... I wish this whole tech deal made more sense it frustrates me some times...

Basically there are usecases in which some Server settings dont utilize the core count but they need the GPU horsepower and they need as many PCIE lanes as they can get. 

[Princess Luna]

Just now, PCGuy_5960 said:

It's for people who need more memory channels and more PCIe lanes. If you don't really care about that, get a 1700 and overclock it

Yes but in my view at least if you're TR for such needs you might as well get the 1920x already (at least) since you're a professional worker can justify a little higher paying for the more senseful/better purchase? It just feels a bit of waste get the lowest end chip that performs like the highest end mainstream just for a few additions.

 

But oh well...

[PCGuy_5960]

1 minute ago, Princess Cadence said:

Yes but in my view at least if you're TR for such needs you might as well get the 1920x already (at least) since you're a professional worker can justify a little higher paying for the more senseful/better purchase? It just feels a bit of waste get the lowest end chip that performs like the highest end mainstream just for a few additions.

 

But oh well...

You're not buying the 1900X for its performance though, you buy it because you need quad channel and more lanes. For example if what you do is GPU accelerated, the CPU doesn't matter that much, but you need as many lanes as you can have.

 

If you want the best performing 8 core CPU, the 7820X costs only $50 more and performs better. (Although, the 1900X should be quite a bit better than the 1700 when using AVX because it has 2x more memory bandwidth)

[Morgan MLGman]

7 minutes ago, Princess Cadence said:

Yes but in my view at least if you're TR for such needs you might as well get the 1920x already (at least) since you're a professional worker can justify a little higher paying for the more senseful/better purchase? It just feels a bit of waste get the lowest end chip that performs like the highest end mainstream just for a few additions.

 

But oh well...

The 8C/16T one costs only 50$ more than the 1800X and has the same clock speeds, 64 PCIE lanes and quad-channel memory, that's a fair price I think, for people who need this kind of I/O.

[PCGuy_5960]

2 minutes ago, Morgan MLGman said:

The 8C/16T one costs only 50$ more than the 1800X and has the same clock speeds, 64 PCIE lanes and quad-channel memory, that's a fair price I think, for people who need this kind of I/O.

It's the same thing that happens with X299 vs Ryzen though, the motherboards cost 2x more. And you can get a 1700 with a B350 board and RAM for less than the 1900X on its own. 

[Taf the Ghost]

I'm still a little surprised we're getting the 8c so early (just 2ish weeks after launch), but the non-X 12c & 16c before about October/November would surprise me. They're going to be coming, as some users just need the cores and don't need all of the clocks.  However, there's no reason for AMD to launch them too early, as the normal users are just going to OC the hell out of them.

[Jito463]

14 minutes ago, PCGuy_5960 said:

It's the same thing that happens with X299 vs Ryzen though, the motherboards cost 2x more. And you can get a 1700 with a B350 board and RAM for less than the 1900X on its own. 

But a B350 and Ryzen 1700 isn't going to get you those 60+4 PCIe lanes or the quad channel RAM.  I don't understand what point you were making.

[PCGuy_5960]

7 minutes ago, Jito463 said:

I don't understand what point you were making.

That the 1900X isn't slightly more expensive than the 1800X (which isn't a processor you should get, because the 1700 costs $200 less and performs the same after you OC it). As I said, if you really need those lanes and quad channel, get the 1900X

31 minutes ago, PCGuy_5960 said:

You're not buying the 1900X for its performance though, you buy it because you need quad channel and more lanes. For example if what you do is GPU accelerated, the CPU doesn't matter that much, but you need as many lanes as you can have.

 

If you want the best performing 8 core CPU, the 7820X costs only $50 more and performs better. (Although, the 1900X should be quite a bit better than the 1700 when using AVX because it has 2x more memory bandwidth)

 

Edited August 5, 2017 by PCGuy_5960

[Salacious B Crum]

Sounds like the 1900x is a miners dream, no? with all that I/o on the chip won't that improver over some of the other options they currently have?

[Jito463]

10 minutes ago, PCGuy_5960 said:

That the 1900X isn't slightly more expensive than the 1800X (which isn't a processor you should get, because the 1700 costs $200 less and performs the same after you OC it). As I said, if you really need those lanes and quad channel, get the 1900X

 

Oh, so you were agreeing that it was worth it (at least for those who need it).  That's not how it came across when I read your post.  Never mind, then.

[Guest]

I think that with the X threadripper variants, the only thing your are sacrificing in terms of performance is clockspeeds, since XFR is disabled on the non X variants, clockspeeds are slightly lower than its counterparts. 

 

In terms of pricing, the price difference between the 1900X and the i7 7820X is a very small margin. Since they both have similar specs and pricing, it would be an interesting to see how these two processors stack up against each other. In terms of specs there isn't much difference apart from the 1900X having a higher TDP which could affect temperatures, I think that these two CPU's will be very competitive with each other. When it comes to the boost frequency between the two, there is a big difference with i7 7820X boosting from 4.3-4.5GHz and the 1900X only boosting up to 4.2GHz. 

 

In conclusion, I think that the threadripper X variants just improve on the base clockspeed and the boost clock frequencies, but I think that when comparing them against each other, they are almost identical. 

 

Quick question: Does the TDP affect the temperatures of the CPU?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Sauron]

1 hour ago, Princess Cadence said:

Honestly I very much doubt there will be a TR with 8c/16t configuration because unlike Intel, AMD still makes some sense and wouldn't make a pointless chip that equals de Ryzen 7 1800x on a much more expensive boards just for the lulz like Intel did.

Unlike Intel, AMD probably won't gimp pcie lanes and feature support on the lower end skews, so buying an 8 core threadripper would still give you the benefits of the more espensive platform.

[leadeater]

21 minutes ago, PCGuy_5960 said:

That the 1900X isn't slightly more expensive than the 1800X (which isn't a processor you should get, because the 1700 costs $200 less and performs the same after you OC it). As I said, if you really need those lanes and quad channel, get the 1900X

 

If PCIe expansion backplanes were cheaper the 1900X could make an epic mining CPU. You could split out those 60 lanes in to a lot of GPUs potentially coming in cheaper than multiple low end systems.

[leadeater]

29 minutes ago, huilun02 said:

AMD handing out pcie lanes like its free. Meanwhile on Kabylake-X...

What's Kabylake-X? I sure that doesn't exist 

[dizmo]

29 minutes ago, TheBeastPC said:

 

Quick question: Does the TDP affect the temperatures of the CPU?

Yes, a higher TDP can mean higher temperatures. 

[dexT]

1 hour ago, Morgan MLGman said:

The 8C/16T one costs only 50$ more than the 1800X and has the same clock speeds, 64 PCIE lanes and quad-channel memory, that's a fair price I think, for people who need this kind of I/O.

I thought the 1900X was $550? 1800X is always $419 on Amazon.

[Jito463]

15 minutes ago, dexT said:

I thought the 1900X was $550? 1800X is always $419 on Amazon.

It's still $499 MSRP though, if I'm not mistaken.

[dexT]

3 minutes ago, Jito463 said:

It's still $499 MSRP though, if I'm not mistaken.

I guess. All of the R7 CPUs sell for cheaper than launch. Are you going to pay $499 when everywhere else has it for $420-450?

[Jito463]

2 minutes ago, dexT said:

I guess. All of the R7 CPUs sell for cheaper than launch. Are you going to pay $499 when everywhere else has it for $420-450?

No, the point was that these are only $50 more than MSRP, not $50 more than retailers sell them for.  It's not guaranteed that these will retail for MSRP, either.  Or if they do, that price will eventually drop like the 1800x did (how long, is the only question).