AMD Officially Announces AMD Ryzen Threadripper CPUs For Consumers, Up to 16 Cores and 32 Threads

[Sauron]

Just now, DocSwag said:

It's getting to the point where 6 core is reasonable for gamers.

I'd like to see a game that benefits from having 12 threads over having a higher clock speed

[crystal6tak]

AMD headquarters:

 

Engineer: We're going to release a 16 core 32 thread CPU, it'll rip through threads, what should we call it?

Marketer: THREAD RIPPER

Engineer: BRILLIANT.

[ResidentRad]

14 minutes ago, DocSwag said:

It's getting to the point where 6 core is reasonable for gamers.

Hardly. A i7 is still sufficient since so few engines are written with multiple cores in mind. Itll be years till multi core is part of the mantra for every engine out there. 

[B-17rocks]

Amd is going to start a war with intel and when that happens every 6 months we will have more core higher clocked cpus pretty soon we will have an AMD 30 Core 60 Thread processor. 

 

 

They will probably call it the Thread destroyer #AmdTurnsDarthVader

[Dylanc1500]

5 minutes ago, B-17rocks said:

Amd is going to start a war with intel and when that happens every 6 months we will have more core higher clocked cpus pretty soon we will have an AMD 30 Core 60 Thread processor. 

 

 

They will probably call it the Thread destroyer #AmdTurnsDarthVader

Sounds about right. AMD goes for as large and as many cores as possible, while Intel would stick to their usual smaller higher speed chips.

Then it would blow up just like the Death Star.

[cj09beira]

8 minutes ago, Dylanc1500 said:

Sounds about right. AMD goes for as large and as many cores as possible, while Intel would stick to their usual smaller higher speed chips.

Then it would blow up just like the Death Star.

what will probably happen is amd will focus on improve ipc and clocks, and keep the multi die approach as its much cheaper in so many ways, to increase cores they just trough another die at the equation 

[Taf the Ghost]

14 minutes ago, B-17rocks said:

Amd is going to start a war with intel and when that happens every 6 months we will have more core higher clocked cpus pretty soon we will have an AMD 30 Core 60 Thread processor. 

 

 

They will probably call it the Thread destroyer #AmdTurnsDarthVader

Apparently the Zen2 based Server chip, codenamed "Starship" before the shift to Italian city naming, is going to be 48c98t. All the cores.  

 

Granted, current games don't benefit from that, but, well, even on a Ryzen 7, you can run two games at once if you have the graphics to handle it.   Or as some of the smaller youtubers are already doing, Playing a game & rendering at the exact same time.  Same performance, haha.

[DocSwag]

53 minutes ago, Sauron said:

I'd like to see a game that benefits from having 12 threads over having a higher clock speed

 

39 minutes ago, ResidentRad said:

Hardly. A i7 is still sufficient since so few engines are written with multiple cores in mind. Itll be years till multi core is part of the mantra for every engine out there. 

It's not worth it, YET, but it's getting there. Especially shown by the fact that the 1600 is beating the 1500x by a noticeable margin.

[Silentprototipe]

That moment that a CPU has as many cores and double the threads as your Computer, Laptop and Phone 

[B-17rocks]

3 minutes ago, Taf the Ghost said:

Apparently the Zen2 based Server chip, codenamed "Starship" before the shift to Italian city naming, is going to be 48c98t. All the cores.  

 

Granted, current games don't benefit from that, but, well, even on a Ryzen 7, you can run two games at once if you have the graphics to handle it.   Or as some of the smaller youtubers are already doing, Playing a game & rendering at the exact same time.  Same performance, haha.

 

5 minutes ago, cj09beira said:

what will probably happen is amd will focus on improve ipc and clocks, and keep the multi die approach as its much cheaper in so many ways, to increase cores they just trough another die at the equation 

 

15 minutes ago, Dylanc1500 said:

Sounds about right. AMD goes for as large and as many cores as possible, while Intel would stick to their usual smaller higher speed chips.

Then it would blow up just like the Death Star.

This is going to happen but instead of blowing up like the death star they will win the Processor wars. Intel will only be a memory

[Taf the Ghost]

1 minute ago, cj09beira said:

what will probably happen is amd will focus on improve ipc and clocks, and keep the multi die approach as its much cheaper in so many ways, to increase cores they just trough another die at the equation 

Multi-dies + Infinity Fabric is a way to get around Intel's massive fabrication advantage.  If I remember right, during the late 2000s, AMD had some pretty bad yields for a lot of their chips.  It's really brilliant tech, and I'm glad to see it's already working really well.  It has application for many things in the future of computing.  I mentioned in another thread that they could slap multiple GPUs onto the same chip and make it a transparent 1 GPU to the system.  (Though Raja's points about the problems in graphics being feeding the cards over the GPUs themselves is interesting.)

[Drak3]

11 hours ago, THE_maverick said:

 

And to all else.  Intel is not going to just sit there and see AMD kick their butts this way!!!  We don't have full specs for Intel's 12 core, but apparently on air they are doing an easy 4.5 OC, which makes me believe by the time they are out on water they'll run at 5. 

Skylake OC's nearly identical to Haswell. So, 4.5GHz on water isn't happening on a 12 core Skylake when it barely happens on a Haswell 8 core.

Intel's only options to make their 12 core more attractive is to:

Sell it for a good deal cheaper. Which ain't happening.

Or to load it with Intel exclusive features, which is a given. Optane support on X299 is already confirmed, and the push for thunderbolt has been growing.

 

But Intel's offering is already fairly attractive, it has Intel's name on it.

[DocSwag]

6 minutes ago, Drak3 said:

Skylake OC's nearly identical to Haswell. So, 4.5GHz on water isn't happening on a 12 core Skylake when it barely happens on a Haswell 8 core.

Intel's only options to make their 12 core more attractive is to:

Sell it for a good deal cheaper. Which ain't happening.

Or to load it with Intel exclusive features, which is a given. Optane support on X299 is already confirmed, and the push for thunderbolt has been growing.

 

But Intel's offering is already fairly attractive, it has Intel's name on it.

Skylake generally is a little higher than Haswell, maybe .1 ghz, so I'd expect 4.5 ghz or so. Definitely not hitting 5 ghz though.

[Taf the Ghost]

I'm already making Yoda jokes in my head about Cores.  Oy.

 

I'm really curious if it's just going to be 12c & 16c parts. 10c & 14c would be doable (2+2s or 3+3s mixed) if there isn't some technical issues that crop up.  Obviously, that one list cropped up, but we'll see if that's real.  Though if it's using some Ring-based system for the multiple Dies (1 die = 2 CCX), it really shouldn't matter how many cores are in the CCX.  It just responds to the CCX like any other scheduler would.  

 

Threadripper is going to be fascinatingly sensitive to the Infinite Fabric speed.  That's going to make for some interesting testing.

[DocSwag]

3 minutes ago, Taf the Ghost said:

I'm already making Yoda jokes in my head about Cores.  Oy.

 

I'm really curious if it's just going to be 12c & 16c parts. 10c & 14c would be doable (2+2s or 3+3s mixed) if there isn't some technical issues that crop up.  Obviously, that one list cropped up, but we'll see if that's real.  Though if it's using some Ring-based system for the multiple Dies (1 die = 2 CCX), it really shouldn't matter how many cores are in the CCX.  It just responds to the CCX like any other scheduler would.  

 

Threadripper is going to be fascinatingly sensitive to the Infinite Fabric speed.  That's going to make for some interesting testing.

At the same time, so far the infinity fabric seems to have only mattered in a few games, and since these aren't gaming cpus I'm not sure if it would actually matter.

[SpaceGhostC2C]

1 hour ago, Sauron said:

I'd like to see a game that benefits from having 12 threads over having a higher clock speed

Any game that uses 5+ threads will benefit from having 6 cores. Basically, any game for which i7>i5 (at equal clocks) is a game that can benefit from having up to 8 real cores.

There are a number of those already...

 

1 hour ago, ResidentRad said:

Hardly. A i7 is still sufficient since so few engines are written with multiple cores in mind. Itll be years till multi core is part of the mantra for every engine out there. 

Well, they way you say it, you are clearly wrong, as multiple cores means more than 1, and there aren't many new games that aren't designed to run on 2 or more.

But rephrasing your statement as "few engines are written with a lot of cores in mind", then it depends on the notion of "a lot". Needless to say, quad-core i7s are, and will continue to be for a long time, sufficient. That is not the same as saying that the benefit from having more than 4 cores is zero. It is not, today.

More than 8 cores? Not so much, that is more about whether the future brings that or not. That's where more than 8 threads becomes relevant. But 5-8 threads in an 8-core is strictly better than 5-8 threads in a quad-core, SMT or not (again, at similar IPC/clocks. If the octa-core has worse single-threaded performance, the question becomes how much to trade-off cores for clocks. That will be game-specific).

[Taf the Ghost]

1 minute ago, DocSwag said:

At the same time, so far the infinity fabric seems to have only mattered in a few games, and since these aren't gaming cpus I'm not sure if it would actually matter.

It only matters, in the first generation, to a few things.  Some testing, I think Looncraz, at AnandTech's forums shows the actual latency is about 20-25 ns. And on the first iteration of these systems.  That'll come down with time.  (Also, the first run of Ryzen chips are basically the Engineering Samples.  That's probably the most fascinating bit.)  Though the only reason most of it matters is the Nvidia driver implementation. 

 

The main Nvidia driver really only uses 6 threads, which is why the 4c8t (so 2+2) seems to get hit harder when put under load of at least the 1080.  That step between the 1070 and 1080 range, on the Nvidia driver, seems to hit a cap for how well maintained the main driver thread can be for Ryzen.  It's also the reason why there's such a huge difference between Ryzen 5/7 and the 7700k, specifically, in a few games.  The Turbo Boost pushes through the driver issue that Nvidia has.  This is the reason for so many gaming benchmarks producing clusters of results.  (This also goes to how BAD most Tech Reviewers are at analysis, but that's a separate point.)

 

The current DX11 era is also coming to an end. DX12 and Vulkan will eventually take over, just as DX11 eventually took over for DX9.  (People forget how long that took.) Considering top-tier gaming is about feeding as much information to the GPU to render it, there's kind of a clear path where all of this stuff is going.

[Taf the Ghost]

So, with 16 cores on a Desktop system, you could play a game @ 4K, render a 3D project, encode a video and... what do you do with the last 4 cores?

[DocSwag]

Just now, Taf the Ghost said:

So, with 16 cores on a Desktop system, you could play a game @ 4K, render a 3D project, encode a video and... what do you do with the last 4 cores?

Watch... videos

[Guest]

8 minutes ago, DocSwag said:

Watch... videos

Sorry but I thought Ryzen has no integrated gpu?

[Prysin]

16 hours ago, AlexGoesHigh said:

The ultimate Cinebench CPU... and nothing else.

 

j/k

we all know, the only number that matters is Cinebench score where intel is best.

[The Benjamins]

1 minute ago, deXxterlab97 said:

Sorry but I thought Ryzen has no integrated gpu?

what does that have to do with watching videos? video decoding can be done on a CPU or hardware accelerated chip (usually on the GPU)

[Prysin]

14 minutes ago, Taf the Ghost said:

So, with 16 cores on a Desktop system, you could play a game @ 4K, render a 3D project, encode a video and... what do you do with the last 4 cores?

PORN....

 

[cj09beira]

Just now, Prysin said:

PORN....

 

your profile pic just takes it to another level X-D

[cj09beira]

There is one thing i dont know how to react to though, and that is the fact that amd will be working on two architectures at any point in time, it seems to me that on one side it will allow for longer development periods but on the other hand it might reduce their ability to react to unexpected events such as discovery of a bottleneck in the design or competition making it so that they need to focus even more on clock speeds.