Poll: A few questions regarding Threadripper vs i9

[Skanky Sylveon]

44 minutes ago, HKZeroFive said:

Honestly did not see that. But the other factors, especially AVX512, are perfectly valid explanations.

I never said it wasn't, I didn't think that they were large enough factors.

44 minutes ago, HKZeroFive said:

Not denying it shouldn't. There are three explanations why:

 

-the first and most obvious is the lack of soldering. Kinda self explanatory for any well-informed hardware enthusiast.

-the second being AVX512 without a proper AVX offset implementation

-the third reason is the constant abuse of MCE by motherboards

Do you think that Intel should have re evaluated their TDP for skylake x?

44 minutes ago, HKZeroFive said:

On all cores, it boosts up to 4GHz with MCE. See slide below:

 

Ah, thanks.

44 minutes ago, HKZeroFive said:

Not denying that the lack of soldering is a problem but the same goes with Threadripper (albeit, not to the same extent). Power is always going to be proportional to v^2 * f. Both CPUs will need beefy cooling options. Skylake-X just has more headroom since it's not architecturally limited.

Threadripper will use a lot of power, no doubt.

If you got even 4.2 GHz on ryzen, you were lucky.

AMD uses solder for their TIM, so Threadripper may have better temps with the same cooling hardware.

 

I would like to clarify that when i said "So does mine." I was reffering to this sentance:

        If one chip needs to throttle because it can't handle its thermals while the other doesn't.

       And they are using the same cooler, that is worth discussing, yes?

 

I wasn't referring to the first question on my poll.

 

[The Benjamins]

I feel that the AMDs 16c will be clocked higher then Intels 16c and even have a higher boost by enough to give AMD a single thread advantage. I plan on getting a Threadripper CPU in the future.

[HKZeroFive]

2 hours ago, Cinnabar Sonar said:

I never said it wasn't, I didn't think that they were large enough factors.

Ah, but they are. AVX is generally very power-hungry, to the extent that Intel doesn't include it in their TDPs.

Quote

Do you think that Intel should have re evaluated their TDP for skylake x?

They've been accurate until SKL-X so yes?

Quote

I would like to clarify that when i said "So does mine." I was reffering to this sentance:

        If one chip needs to throttle because it can't handle its thermals while the other doesn't.

       And they are using the same cooler, that is worth discussing, yes?

I know. You have one chip clocked significantly higher than the other because it's not limited by its process like the other chip. Combine that with a bunch of stuff like AVX and no soldering and of course it's going to be thermally limited. If Ryzen/Threadripper wasn't limited by its process, you'd see the same thing. Any chip can be thermal limited if you push it hard enough.

[Skanky Sylveon]

7 hours ago, HKZeroFive said:

Ah, but they are. AVX is generally very power-hungry, to the extent that Intel doesn't include it in their TDPs.

I didn't know that, thanks for informing me.

7 hours ago, HKZeroFive said:

I know. You have one chip clocked significantly higher than the other because it's not limited by its process like the other chip. Combine that with a bunch of stuff like AVX and no soldering and of course it's going to be thermally limited. If Ryzen/Threadripper wasn't limited by its process, you'd see the same thing. Any chip can be thermal limited if you push it hard enough.

I was mainly referring to if that scenario would happen without overclocking.  

From what I have seen online, it seems that Threadripper will be able to turbo up to 4GHz, for a 16 core chip, that's impressive.  As you add more cores, you generate more heat, with that in mind i'm not sure if the 7960x would be able to keep up, at least if the 7900x's thermals are anything to go by.

 

That's why I said higher core i9s on my first question.  Skylake x's thermals are bad, but not unmanageable.  That may change when you add more cores.

 

I have came to the conclusion that my first two questions were poorly worded, and too vague.

[HKZeroFive]

7 hours ago, Cinnabar Sonar said:

I was mainly referring to if that scenario would happen without overclocking.  

From what I have seen online, it seems that Threadripper will be able to turbo up to 4GHz, for a 16 core chip, that's impressive.  As you add more cores, you generate more heat, with that in mind i'm not sure if the 7960x would be able to keep up, at least if the 7900x's thermals are anything to go by.

 

That's why I said higher core i9s on my first question.  Skylake x's thermals are bad, but not unmanageable.  That may change when you add more cores.

 

I have came to the conclusion that my first two questions were poorly worded, and too vague.

There's no doubt that Intel's 12, 14, 16 and 18 Core i9s will be disgustingly worse when it comes to heat but I still expect them to run at reasonable temps if the cooler in question is actually halfway decent. Hell, even a non-delidded i9-7900X can reach 4.5GHz with satisfactory temperatures, with some delidded ones reaching i7-7700K-like speeds of 5GHz.

 

Intel won't back down on clockspeed and they'll have to compensate by advertising the chip as one with a higher TDP. At stock, I still expect a i9-7960X to be the better chip overall when it comes to pure performance (and that includes single-threaded performance) than the Ryzen Threadripper 1950X, while having manageable temps with a proper AIO... but that comes at the cost of a much worse price to performance and a significantly higher heat output.

[Skanky Sylveon]

56 minutes ago, HKZeroFive said:

There's no doubt that Intel's 12, 14, 16 and 18 Core i9s will be disgustingly worse when it comes to heat but I still expect them to run at reasonable temps if the cooler in question is actually halfway decent. Hell, even a non-delidded i9-7900X can reach 4.5GHz with satisfactory temperatures, with some delidded ones reaching i7-7700K-like speeds of 5GHz.

 

Intel won't back down on clockspeed and they'll have to compensate by advertising the chip as one with a higher TDP. At stock, I still expect a i9-7960X to be the better chip overall when it comes to pure performance (and that includes single-threaded performance) than the Ryzen Threadripper 1950X, while having manageable temps with a proper AIO... but that comes at the cost of a much worse price to performance and a significantly higher heat output.

I mostly agree with you.  I don't think that delidding should ever become a regular thing though.

I believe that Intel will really push clock speeds in a post ryzen world.

I'm still skeptical on whether the higher core chips will be able to maintain their temps.

I am not saying that is what I want though, I really hope that those chips are as awesome as they are expensive.

 

Edit: What would you consider to be a halfway decent CPU cooler?  I suppose that if you are paying 1000$+ on a CPU, that several hundred dollars for your cooler isn't out of the question.

[HKZeroFive]

2 hours ago, Cinnabar Sonar said:

I mostly agree with you.  I don't think that delidding should ever become a regular thing.

I believe that Intel will really push clock speeds in a post ryzen world.

I'm still skeptical on whether the higher core chips will be able to maintain their temps.

I am not saying that is what I want though, I really hope that those chips are as awesome as they are expensive.

 

Edit: What would you consider to be a halfway decent CPU cooler?  I suppose that if you are paying 1000$+ on a CPU, that several hundred dollars for your cooler isn't out of the question.

It shouldn't. Intel did have a somewhat valid justification with Kaby Lake but there's no reason to not do it with Skylake-X other than to save a few pennies.

 

I'd consider a regular 280/360mm AIO to be fine for a stock or lightly overclocked i9. Anything beyond that and that would be falling into custom loop territory.

[He_162]

On 7/17/2017 at 4:31 AM, Simon771 said:

I did update my BIOS to agesa 1.0.0.6 is that's what you had in mind. I'm sticll stuck at 2933 CL14.

Was hoping to get 3200MHz CL15.

Not sure if I would be able to run 2933 CL14 on 4 sticks ... I would like to try one day, but I don't have money now to just go buying RAM  

 

When AMD will make 8 core chip that will score 200 in cinebench on single core, and will cost less than 4 core cpu from Intel ... that's when I will be happy and I will be able to proudly say that AMD beat Intel on all fronts. And trust me, I want that to happen

My brothers got DDR4-3200 CL15 working just fine on his b350m mortar, my ram doesn't clock that high. It's more or less the motherboard OEM's, not AMD's fault. You should look into investing in a X370 motherboard that came out more recently like the MSI x370 gaming pro carbon so that when Zen 2 comes out you can get that as well. Zen 2 will rival Intel's coffee lake, which will make i7's 6 cores in mainstream.

If intel doesn't push 10nm chips out soon, they won't beat AMD when Zen 3 at 7nm comes to the table. (2019)

[Simon771]

25 minutes ago, He_162 said:

My brothers got DDR4-3200 CL15 working just fine on his b350m mortar, my ram doesn't clock that high. It's more or less the motherboard OEM's, not AMD's fault. You should look into investing in a X370 motherboard that came out more recently like the MSI x370 gaming pro carbon so that when Zen 2 comes out you can get that as well. Zen 2 will rival Intel's coffee lake, which will make i7's 6 cores in mainstream.

If intel doesn't push 10nm chips out soon, they won't beat AMD when Zen 3 at 7nm comes to the table. (2019)

I'm glad it's working fine for your brother.

 

I would buy X370 motherboard even for 200€ ... but I want it to be mATX since that's the largest factor that will fit in my case.

Sadly there is only one X370 mATX from biostar and it's not better than my current one.

 

I'm still waiting for mATX AM4 with X370 chipset, Dual SLI support, 6 +2 or better VRMs with passive cooling on all of them and IO cover/shield.

But I don't think any company is working on that for some reason.

 

That biostar X370 mATX have 2 slots for GPUs and it doesn't support SLI ... still don't understand why exactly is it like that.

[typographie]

I value PCIe expandability to a point. But when virtually any Intel H, Z, or X platform offers 20–24 PCIe lanes, having 64 CPU PCIe lanes really doesn't affect my buying decision in the slightest. I'd consider Threadripper if I had a server, or a workstation that needs massive amounts of multithreading for cheaper than Intel provides it.

 

1 hour ago, Simon771 said:

That biostar X370 mATX have 2 slots for GPUs and it doesn't support SLI ... still don't understand why exactly is it like that.

SLI requires special certification and a certain arrangement of PCIe lanes, but Crossfire is perfectly happy to run in 8x/4x. I think any board with the physical slots for it will do Crossfire, regardless of what stickers are on the box.

[Simon771]

2 minutes ago, typographie said:

SLI requires special certification and a certain arrangement of PCIe lanes, but Crossfire is perfectly happy to run in 8x/4x. I think any board with the physical slots for it will do Crossfire, regardless of what stickers are on the box.

Thanks for clearing that up for me.

But I wonder, why isn't there any motherboard manufacturer investing in that ... ATX boards get everything, while mATX are left behind once again.

[Vode]

Threadripper looks pretty good IMO for most prosumers.

 

Those cores will do great in audio production for sure.

[He_162]

11 hours ago, Simon771 said:

I'm glad it's working fine for your brother.

 

I would buy X370 motherboard even for 200€ ... but I want it to be mATX since that's the largest factor that will fit in my case.

Sadly there is only one X370 mATX from biostar and it's not better than my current one.

 

I'm still waiting for mATX AM4 with X370 chipset, Dual SLI support, 6 +2 or better VRMs with passive cooling on all of them and IO cover/shield.

But I don't think any company is working on that for some reason.

 

That biostar X370 mATX have 2 slots for GPUs and it doesn't support SLI ... still don't understand why exactly is it like that.

PCIE SSD's can go in those slots.

[Skanky Sylveon]

13 hours ago, HKZeroFive said:

It shouldn't. Intel did have a somewhat valid justification with Kaby Lake but there's no reason to not do it with Skylake-X other than to save a few pennies.

I agree, but I would go as far as to say that any chip ending with a k, and thus is overclock-able should have solder as their TIM.

Intel as far as I know, has never cared to be the value option, they want to be seen as the premium option, and at this moment, they are.  I, however have a hard time calling their chips premium when they cheap out on their TIM.

13 hours ago, HKZeroFive said:

I'd consider a regular 280/360mm AIO to be fine for a stock or lightly overclocked i9. Anything beyond that and that would be falling into custom loop territory.

I suppose that is fair, skylake x does seem to be a decent bump up from broadwell e.

11 hours ago, typographie said:

I value PCIe expandability to a point. But when virtually any Intel H, Z, or X platform offers 20–24 PCIe lanes, having 64 CPU PCIe lanes really doesn't affect my buying decision in the slightest. I'd consider Threadripper if I had a server, or a workstation that needs massive amounts of multithreading for cheaper than Intel provides it.

I render a fair amount, I prefer GPU rendering since I can use my computer normally with it(outside of gaming and other GPU intensive tasks).  While I don't care about SLI or crossfire, a secondary GPU would allow me to even play games while rendering.  I know that you can use more than one GPU on mainstream boards, if you run on x8, and while that is fine for games, i haven't seen many tests on how/if that affects rendering, when I build my new computer that is something that I definitely want to test.

 

Long story short, I highly value PCIe lanes.  The more the merrier.

10 hours ago, Vode said:

Threadripper looks pretty good IMO for most prosumers.

 

Those cores will do great in audio production for sure.

I didn't even think about that.