AMD reports Threadripper 2990 is upto 50% faster than the Intel 7980

[Taf the Ghost]

2 hours ago, GoldenLag said:

Thats the point of cost cuts. They have the money to win a monolithic war of attrition. Problem for intel is that the war isnt monolithic.

 

An 8 core 1 CCX CPU from AMD costs 300$ in the consumer market. Thats roughly 1250$ for an 32 core at consumer margins. They can cut it lower. 

AMD is going to go radically into the Chiplet direction. Zen is an on-die MCM, while Threadripper & Epyc add Package level MCM. As AdoredTV tracked down, they've already done all of the high-level functional research to go all the way to some hybrid Chiplet tech with clusters of MCM core packages. It's probably Zen 4 or 5 before that shows up, but it's quite clear where AMD is headed. (Being Fabless, now, it's also the proper choice because it lets them hedge against the Fab issues as well.)

[Taf the Ghost]

3 hours ago, GoldenLag said:

*Cough *cough. Chiplet design *cough *cough

It's whatever is coming after Sapphire Rapids, which is actually Intel doing a ground-up x86 redesign for the first time since the late 2000s. (A few odd rumors have suggest Intel is going to either depracate or remove some older parts of x86. Probably put them into some sort of emulation mode, but that'll be interesting when it hits.)

[SupremeGOAT]

oh yeah? when intel releases their pro chillers and the 28 core 5ghz CPU hits the market you will all see!

[The Benjamins]

4 hours ago, Ryan_Vickers said:

Doesn't Intel have a 28 core "enthusiast" chip now (as in not server)?  The one from the chiller fiasco?  If so, AMD should really be comparing to that, otherwise we should be taking the 7980 vs 1950X.  If not, where is it and what was even the point of that demo?

I will be impressed if the 28 core can do higher then 4.0Ghz all core turbo to even keep up with the 2990WX

 

From AMDs C15 numbers it seems like the 2990wx could have a all core turbo of 4Ghz

[asus killer]

i really don't see how this can surprise anyone when you compare such different CPU's, i mean 14 more cores and 28 more threads and it has a higher score in Cinebench, i'm shocked. it had to me really bad not to crush the i9 that's not even overclock for sure.

[Taf the Ghost]

4 minutes ago, The Benjamins said:

I will be impressed if the 28 core can do higher then 4.0Ghz all core turbo to even keep up with the 2990WX

 

From AMDs C15 numbers it seems like the 2990wx could have a all core turbo of 4Ghz

That number should be at 3.4 Ghz on all cores. These parts will do 4.0 all-core with a 360 Rad, if you have a full coverage block. Given the 12nm process, it should be around 400W for that load. It rises really fast after that, but 4.0 Ghz all-core should be fairly easy to manage, relative to other costs. Trying to run 4.3 Ghz is a completely different issue.

[Taf the Ghost]

4 minutes ago, asus killer said:

i really don't see how this can surprise anyone when you compare such different CPU's, i mean 14 more cores and 28 more threads and it has a higher score in Cinebench, i'm shocked. it had to me really bad not to crush the i9 that's not even overclock for sure.

It's stock vs stock, but this is also why Intel is launching the A-series. They really don't want a few years of "50% better" memes.

[The Benjamins]

1 minute ago, Taf the Ghost said:

That number should be at 3.4 Ghz on all cores. These parts will do 4.0 all-core with a 360 Rad, if you have a full coverage block. Given the 12nm process, it should be around 400W for that load. It rises really fast after that, but 4.0 Ghz all-core should be fairly easy to manage, relative to other costs. Trying to run 4.3 Ghz is a completely different issue.

From what C15 numbers AMD stated, and a Epyc benchmark I found I calculated that the 2990wx was runnnig at 4.0Ghz. I could be wrong but keep in mind 250w is base clock TDP and 400w of cooling is not something crazy to achive. 

[asus killer]

1 minute ago, Taf the Ghost said:

It's stock vs stock, but this is also why Intel is launching the A-series. They really don't want a few years of "50% better" memes.

i get the stock vs stock, but who buys a k processor and doesn't OC, someone that hates money? in my opinion not OC makes no sense in this comparison. Or better yet it kind of does from AMD perspective i'm sure.

Even if the i9 needs a nuclear power plant and a chiller and all that, i know that.

[leadeater]

4 minutes ago, Taf the Ghost said:

but this is also why Intel is launching the A-series.

Intel A series?

[leadeater]

Just now, asus killer said:

i get the stock vs stock, but who buys a k processor and doesn't OC, someone that hates money? in my opinion not OC makes no sense in this comparison. Or better yet it kind of does from AMD perspective i'm sure.

Even if the i9 needs a nuclear power plant and a chiller and all that, i know that.

That used to be quite true until Intel started lowering the base and boost clocks on the same model non K SKUs, jerks.

[Nicnac]

1 minute ago, leadeater said:

Intel A series?

They fuked up their naming scheme again.

[leadeater]

Just now, Nicnac said:

They fuked up their naming scheme again.

But what is it, must have missed something but I have no idea what A series is referring to (or brain blanking).

[Taf the Ghost]

3 minutes ago, asus killer said:

i get the stock vs stock, but who buys a k processor and doesn't OC, someone that hates money? in my opinion not OC makes no sense in this comparison. Or better yet it kind of does from AMD perspective i'm sure.

Even if the i9 needs a nuclear power plant and a chiller and all that, i know that.

By all of the numbers we have, "most people". It's greater than 80% run at stock. It is what it is.

3 minutes ago, leadeater said:

Intel A series?

The XCC die CPUs that are coming to the HEDT. Skylake-X is X299. Whatever the chipset will be, it'll be i9-xxxxA more than likely.  See the recent roadmap leaks that I didn't get a mention in the WAN Show for.

[Nicnac]

1 minute ago, leadeater said:

But what is it, must have missed something but I have no idea what A series is referring to (or brain blanking).

I'm not entirely sure either  They have an X series and an S series for entry models I believe but yea..... no idea lol

[pas008]

59 minutes ago, MMKing said:

AMD have been in the process of establishing themselves to the server market for the last year already. AMDs flagship server CPU, the Epyc 7601 32 core 64 thread 2.2 GHZ base, 2.7GHZ all core turbo, 3.2 GHZ single core turbo. The CPU cost around 35-40% of what Intels flagship 28 core does, and it performs within 90% of what Intel offers. Now the 2990WX beats the Intel 28 core by 25%, and it costs less than 20% of what the Intel 28 core does.

 

The 7601 peaked the interest in the server market with it's competitive performance and significantly lower price. The 2990WX is in a completely different league compared to what Intel is offering at the moment. Even if it does not retain the performance throne, the price is insane and i don't think AMD is selling it at low margins.

where are you getting this info?

[Taf the Ghost]

2 minutes ago, leadeater said:

But what is it, must have missed something but I have no idea what A series is referring to (or brain blanking).

 

 

[leadeater]

5 minutes ago, Taf the Ghost said:

 

 

Oh right, yea I did see that lol, brain blank it is . Based on that though I don't think we'll see an A at the end of the models though not out of the question, the suffix letters actually have a defined meaning and those are more processor product lines. We don't see an S on the end of every Coffee Lake-S.

[Taf the Ghost]

9 minutes ago, The Benjamins said:

From what C15 numbers AMD stated, and a Epyc benchmark I found I calculated that the 2990wx was runnnig at 4.0Ghz. I could be wrong but keep in mind 250w is base clock TDP and 400w of cooling is not something crazy to achive. 

https://www.hardocp.com/article/2018/04/19/amd_2nd_gen_ryzen_2_2700x_zen_cpu_review/4

 

From there, they had the 2700X with a R15 score of 1900 at 4.2 Ghz. Good ram, likely, as that's a little high, but that works out.  That's 1900 per 8 cores @ 4.2 Ghz. Roughly 45 points per 100 Mhz of clock speed over 8 cores.

 

AMD's official testing is ~5100 over 32 cores, or 8 cores x 4. 5100 / 4 = 1275 points per Zen Die.  It works out to about 2.8 Ghz All-core, if Cinebench & the 32c parts were perfectly linear. They aren't. These should be running at the all-core base, which should be 3.4 Ghz. There's a good chunk of headroom via cooling & memory tweaking to be had here. Probably 6500 will be the record score to hit on the 32c part.

[MMKing]

3 minutes ago, pas008 said:

where are you getting this info?

Intel 8180 MSRP 10 000USD - https://ark.intel.com/products/120496/Intel-Xeon-Platinum-8180-Processor-38_5M-Cache-2_50-GHz

Intel 8180 CB15 multi-thread score 4355 - https://www.cpu-monkey.com/en/cpu-intel_xeon_platinum_8180-820

 

2990WX store price 1800USD - https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819113541

2990WX CB15 Multi-thread score 5099

Spoiler

 

 

Translation

Tests performed by AMD Performance laboratories on 26/06/2018 on the following system. The configurations may vary by PC manufacturer, and give different results. The results may vary depending on the driver versions used. Test setup: sTR4 motherboard with AMD "Whitehaven" socket X399 + AMD Ryzen ™ Threadripper ™ 2990WX + Gigabyte X299 AORUS Gasming 9 + Intel Core i9-7980XE. Both systems feature a GeForce GTX 1080 graphics card (driver 24.21.13.9793), 4 x 8 GB DDR4-3200, Windows 10 x64 Pro (RS3), Samsung 850 Pro SSD. "Power" is defined as computing power as represented by the Cinebench R15 processor benchmark. The Intel Core i9-7980XE earned 3,335.2 points on average in the benchmark, while the AMD Ryzen ™ Threadripper ™ 2990WX achieved an average of 5,099.3, or (5,099.3 / 3,335.2 = 153%) 53% faster than the Intel Core i9-7980XE. RP2-1.

 

 

Granted these numbers come directly from AMD, and should be taken with a grain of salt. So i will concede that it should not be considered fact before it can be verified by independent reviews.

[mynameisjuan]

4 minutes ago, asus killer said:

i get the stock vs stock, but who buys a k processor and doesn't OC, someone that hates money

Me. Slightly higher base clock, OC if needed, higher resale cost. Works out about even

[leadeater]

13 minutes ago, pas008 said:

where are you getting this info?

Dual socket Intel 8180 servers get around the 8000 CB score and that's exceedingly good compared to most review sties using the same hardware.

https://hwbot.org/benchmark/cinebench_-_r15/rankings?start=0&cores=56#start=0#interval=20

 

6500 for dual 8176 here, almost 1000 points lower the hwbot:

https://www.tweaktown.com/news/57963/intel-xeon-platinum-8176-dual-cpu-56c-112t-benchmarks/index.html

 

Very hard to find stock single socket results for these CPUs, here's an OC single 8180

https://hwbot.org/submission/3857158_h2o_vs_ln2_cinebench___r15_xeon_platinum_8180m_5010_cb

[pas008]

5 minutes ago, MMKing said:

Intel 8180 MSRP 10 000USD - https://ark.intel.com/products/120496/Intel-Xeon-Platinum-8180-Processor-38_5M-Cache-2_50-GHz

Intel 8180 CB15 multi-thread score 4355 - https://www.cpu-monkey.com/en/cpu-intel_xeon_platinum_8180-820

 

2990WX store price 1800USD - https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819113541

2990WX CB15 Multi-thread score 5099

  Reveal hidden contents

 

 

Translation

Tests performed by AMD Performance laboratories on 26/06/2018 on the following system. The configurations may vary by PC manufacturer, and give different results. The results may vary depending on the driver versions used. Test setup: sTR4 motherboard with AMD "Whitehaven" socket X399 + AMD Ryzen ™ Threadripper ™ 2990WX + Gigabyte X299 AORUS Gasming 9 + Intel Core i9-7980XE. Both systems feature a GeForce GTX 1080 graphics card (driver 24.21.13.9793), 4 x 8 GB DDR4-3200, Windows 10 x64 Pro (RS3), Samsung 850 Pro SSD. "Power" is defined as computing power as represented by the Cinebench R15 processor benchmark. The Intel Core i9-7980XE earned 3,335.2 points on average in the benchmark, while the AMD Ryzen ™ Threadripper ™ 2990WX achieved an average of 5,099.3, or (5,099.3 / 3,335.2 = 153%) 53% faster than the Intel Core i9-7980XE. RP2-1.

 

 

Granted these numbers come directly from AMD, and should be taken with a grain of salt. So i will concede that it should not be considered fact before it can be verified by independent reviews.

ok but that is on the server

threadripper is on enthusiast which have higher clocks than epyc

we do not know what the enthusiast 28 core is going to clock at or scores

 

that comparison would be like comparing 7980 vs epyc in single threaded

[pas008]

3 minutes ago, leadeater said:

Dual socket Intel 8180 servers get around the 8000 CB score and that's exceedingly good compared to most review sties using the same hardware.

https://hwbot.org/benchmark/cinebench_-_r15/rankings?start=0&cores=56#start=0#interval=20

 

6500 for dual 8176 here, almost 1000 points lower the hwbot:

https://www.tweaktown.com/news/57963/intel-xeon-platinum-8176-dual-cpu-56c-112t-benchmarks/index.html

 

Very hard to find stock single socket results for these CPUs, here's an OC single 8180

https://hwbot.org/submission/3857158_h2o_vs_ln2_cinebench___r15_xeon_platinum_8180m_5010_cb

see post above

[Taf the Ghost]

1 minute ago, pas008 said:

ok but that is on the server

threadripper is on enthusiast which have higher clocks than epyc

we do not know what the enthusiast 28 core is going to clock at or scores

 

that comparison would be like comparing 7980 vs epyc in single threaded

A version of that Intel CPU is coming to "desktop" later in the year. And by "desktop", it's mATX probably at minimum.