AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1950X Benchmarks Show It 45%+ Ahead Of The Skylake X Competition

[Taf the Ghost]

Just now, Curufinwe_wins said:

 

 

 

Also Amadahl's Law.... Speedup scaling always decreases as core-count decreases due to increased swapping time.

Infinity Fabric's scaling rate is pretty amazing as well. Seems to run pretty close to 95%, once adjusting for clocks. With Intel's Mesh, so far, it seems closer to 80%. We'll need a lot more data to know.  Plus, where does the Mesh get bandwidth starved? Haven't seen testing for that yet.

 

Handbrake tests are going to be hilarious.

[MageTank]

I'll just leave this here.

 

[ARikozuM]

4 minutes ago, MageTank said:

I'll just leave this here.

How did you get 3200MHz running in quad-channel? Does this mean they fixed the IMC for Threadrypper?

[DocSwag]

22 minutes ago, ApolloFury said:

Does quad channel help in single-thread performance?

Probably not, I don't see one core needing more than what dual channel could provide.

[MageTank]

Just now, ARikozuM said:

How did you get 3200MHz running in quad-channel? Does this mean they fixed the IMC for Threadrypper?

Oh god no. C19 is by no means "good". They simply chose frequency over latency, as that is what that benchmark cares about. Threadrippers IMC is still just as bad as any Ryzen IMC. 

[DocSwag]

3 minutes ago, MageTank said:

I'll just leave this here.

 

Where is dat from

[MageTank]

Just now, DocSwag said:

Where is dat from

Places and stuff.

[DildorTheDecent]

3 minutes ago, MageTank said:

Oh god no. C19 is by no means "good". They simply chose frequency over latency, as that is what that benchmark cares about. Threadrippers IMC is still just as bad as any Ryzen IMC. 

It's not REALLY C19 though is it? Maybe they just forgot about pulling latency down? 

 

C19 would be a 3800+ kit usually right? 

[MageTank]

Just now, DildorTheDecent said:

It's not REALLY C19 though is it? Maybe they just forgot about pulling latency down? 

 

C19 would be a 3800+ kit usually right? 

Usually, yes. However, quad channel brings serious hurdles one must overcome. Not only that, but if you look at the screenshot, he used 128GB of ram, meaning 8x16GB (2DPC). Ryzen already hates 2DPC in dual channel. Now add 2DPC, dual rank (Rank Interleaving), AND quad channel (poor efficiency scaling) and you have a recipe for disaster with memory overclocking. It's extremely safe to assume 3200 C19 was the fastest he could boot, and it certainly wasn't stable for long term. 

 

If you want fast ram on threadripper, you will need to forego rank interleaving entirely (stick to 8GB single rank sticks) and only use 1DPC (4 sticks out of 8). This will allow you to push higher frequencies and tighter timings, at the cost of rank interleaving and capacity. However, given what Threadripper is targeted towrads, I highly doubt people will go this route. 

[PocketNerd]

21 minutes ago, dtaflorida said:

They probably are in the same price bracket actually. So as far as I'm concerned it is a valid apples to apples comparison. $1k cpu vs  $1k cpu.

That would make sense, stop doing that!

Though to be serious, that Single-Core performance is really tight, which makes me happy

[Princess Luna]

18 minutes ago, MageTank said:

.

Ew Windows 8

[Jito463]

15 minutes ago, MageTank said:

C19 is by no means "good". They simply chose frequency over latency, as that is what that benchmark cares about. Threadrippers IMC is still just as bad as any Ryzen IMC. 

Wouldn't that effectively be C20, then?  I remember reading (from someone here) that above C14, the CAS was automatically adjusted to the next even number on Ryzen.

[NvidiaIntelAMDLoveTriangle]

While it's all nice and all, these benchmarks mean nothing in the real world performance.

[MageTank]

Just now, Jito463 said:

Wouldn't that effectively be C20, then?  I remember reading (from someone here) that above C14, the CAS was automatically adjusted to the next even number on Ryzen.

Not exactly. There are random deadspots in which C15 becomes C16, and C17 becomes C16, but some odd values do work (C13 for example). I am thinking it's related to the bus/dram strap, but I need to test more with my Ryzen testbench before I can be certain. I know for a fact frequency deadzones do exist. 2933 works, 3200 works, but anything in between absolutely refuses to post on my rig. The same with 3466 working, but 3333 refusing to post.

 

I need another board as well, to make sure the timing issue is not board dependent. 

[8KDPS]

@4.1

[Jito463]

1 minute ago, MageTank said:

I know for a fact frequency deadzones do exist. 2933 works, 3200 works, but anything in between absolutely refuses to post on my rig.

That's probably why my board lists all 3000MHz RAM (such as my Corsair kit) as down clocked to 2933.  Interesting stuff as always, MT.  Thanks for at least partly clearing that up.  I look forward to any more information you may discover about this.

[MageTank]

Just now, 8KDPS said:

@4.1

Much better ram speed. Quad channel, 1DPC (if using 16GB sticks), looks like a much stronger configuration for benching. Righteous!

[PCGuy_5960]

Impressive chip!

[DocSwag]

1 hour ago, MageTank said:

Places and stuff.

Thanks for being specific  

[leadeater]

1 hour ago, ARikozuM said:

How did you get 3200MHz running in quad-channel? Does this mean they fixed the IMC for Threadrypper?

It's actually more like dual dual channel . Exactly the same IMC just two of them.

[flibberdipper]

Anything that busts Intel to pieces makes me happy. So tired of no competition and Intel's price gouging. And AMD is KILLIN IT YEA BOIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII

[JoostinOnline]

Is there any reason you'd care about single thread performance if you're busy Skylake-X or Threadripper? If you're buying that many cores you are obviously concerned with multi thread workloads. 

[JoostinOnline]

2 minutes ago, tmcclelland455 said:

Anything that busts Intel to pieces makes me happy. So tired of no competition and Intel's price gouging. And AMD is KILLIN IT YEA BOIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII

Yeah, I want them to catch up eventually, but right now AMD dominating in price/performance is so good for the market. 

[ARikozuM]

14 minutes ago, leadeater said:

It's actually more like dual dual channel . Exactly the same IMC just two of them.

So, AMD didn't fail on the quad-channel, they merely went overboard with dual-channel. Interesting...

[Drak3]

48 minutes ago, JoostinOnline said:

Is there any reason you'd care about single thread performance if you're busy Skylake-X or Threadripper? If you're buying that many cores you are obviously concerned with multi thread workloads. 

Most tasks benefit from having better single core performance, when comparing identical core count