AMD's Ryzen CPUs (Ryzen/TR/Epyc) & Vega/Polaris/Navi GPUs

Those were no clues, just conjecture.

 

AMD Lists Threadripper 3000 CPU With 32 Cores, Possible New Socket tomshardware.com | Oct 17, 2019

AMD posts preliminary new information on its forthcoming Ryzen Threadripper 3000-series processors.

Third-Generation Threadripper 3000 Specifications
Starting with the most obvious new information, AMD lists an unidentified Ryzen Threadripper with 32 cores and a 280W TDP (thermal design power). The Ryzen Threadripper 2990WX, AMD's previous flagship, is rated for 250W. That's a 30W (12%) difference and hints that the new third-generation Ryzen Threadripper chips will probably be limited to 32 cores, which is the same as the prior-gen chips. There also isn't a listing for the rumored 64-core Threadripper.

 

looks to be back in stock;

 

maybe a clue;
https://twitter.com/TUM_APISAK/status/1184653669179916289

 

Remember when I argued that they would have Threadripper, then the workstation platform, which doesn't overclock, would get speed optimized Epyc CPUs? I'd like to, next month, take a bow on that prediction.

Even with that, still going with my decision to ride this platform out to 2021. A new MB was not in my budget, so the hard drives are on their way. Then begins the arduous move of data over to the array (including moving data from old pata drives to it, will be happy to destroy those drives after this).

But, if AMD delivers on a sizeable IPC uplift with both Zen 3 and Zen 4, it will be over a 30% IPC uplift (not just overall performance uplift) from Zen to Zen 4. Not bad when compared with Intel's IPC gains since skylake.

Still, AMD should have been up front early on when they knew you'd need a new MB. Them not doing that lost a sale here for Zen 2 & 3.

 

Same here, I will not bother with the 2950x and am not about to do a new mb and zen 2 or zen 3. Maybe Zen 4, we shall see.

 

I would be shocked to see AMD leave current TR4 owners out of the loop and have a surprise ThreadRipper motherboard upgrade requirement. That's just so out of character for AMD that prides itself in providing continual updates for sockets and plenty of notice when a change to a new socket is planned.

It makes more sense for AMD to create a Zen 2 ThreadRipper CPU where you could upgrade to a new CPU on existing TR4 motherboards - but not get all of the new features like more memory channels that require a new motherboard - and also support upgrading the motherboard socket to get more memory channels, owners choice.

What I am saying is I wouldn't give up yet, AMD could very well do the right thing and deliver Zen 2 to current TR4 owners as well as the new Zen 2 with more memory channels requiring a new motherboard socket.

Did Arctic just confirm the existence of the 64 core TR?
Submitted 10 hours ago by zer0_c0ol
https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/dj5byg/did_arctic_just_confirm_the_existence_of_the_64/

 

Give me that 64 core cooler and put it on a 16 core

 

I've seen the rumored mill. I've read the BS about changes in memory causing a change in socket (which makes no sense because the TRX40 boards have the same number of memory channels).

Here's the deal, they only have 24 and 32 core TR SKUs from current information. The 32 core is rumored to be a 280W part, where the last gen were 250W. All first gen X399 boards, thereby excluding the MSI creation board and I think possibly the one gigabyte board, have 8x60A power stages. The cooling, although better than X299, still sucked. There are now mainstream boards with better power delivery than X399 boards on average (to be clear, some of the 12-phase boards are 12x40A or 12x50A). They also have better cooling. The ZEA from Asus was a joke of an upgrade.

So, when you are dropping chips that need better power delivery and have no need to support 8-16 core CPUs anymore, they changed the socket so consumers, whom they feel are stupid (right or not), don't blow up their board and possibly take the chips with them when trying to OC a 24 or 32 core chip that can take more power than the prior gen. The change, I believe, is purely on the power delivery. Then not telling until last minute matches their MO to a degree before Ryzen, so not really worried about that. Instead, they should have given a heads up, but were using the wiggle room with only talking Epyc socket and AM4 to 2020.

As to 64 core TR, nah, not this generation. It will be like the water cooled variant 7H12 and speed optimized variants coming like how the 7371 was that are meant for the workstation board.

I'll eat my words if different, but 10:1 odds here I'm right. Either way, I've spent what was saved for the CPU on HDDs and I will NOT buy a Zen 3 when it requires a new board and the next year I get DDR5 and potentially PCIe 5. I don't need the upgrade that bad over my current performance.

IMO, AMD screwed themselves on Threadripper 3000. They dropped the 16-core, leaving a lane for Intel in HEDT, they changed the socket without notice, etc. I do like the Epyc workstation idea, as it is a server type board optimized for a desktop use scenario on I/O, but keeping it locked is LOL, so they won't get enthusiasts to buy, only true professionals, while leaving them as the only company playing in the $1K-$2K realm on HEDT. Sure, they take the HEDT crown, but they are about to learn that HEDT won't give up certain features to step back down to mainstream, even if gamers and steamers will step up to 12 and 16 cores on the mainstream platform at that price.

They were worried how to do the 16-core mainstream chips. Well, their plans just screwed their HEDT margins because they were scared of an 1800X reoccurrence, then decided they also needed better guidance on power delivery to MB MFRS, instead of telling them to go bigger knowing higher core counts were coming. This is AMDs own fault for not planning ahead.

And all this talk on PCIe 4 being the reason (seen elsewhere) is BS. We've seen compatibility on AM4 and Epyc server boards.

Either way, for me, they lost it. This is why I said the 16-core HEDT for existing boards, but since my money is spent, too little too late even if they pulled that out now. I'm not saving that money up again so close to Christmas for myself and I won't upgrade next year with DDR5 in 2021.

AMD messed up and gets to live with their follies, from handling HEDT designs early on with power requirements to mishandling removing the 16-core to try to figure out how to market it to mainstream, making a hole for Intel to slash prices and offer compelling performance at that price point with more lanes and memory bandwidth.

 

I'm an idiot, I just want a 16 core @4.5ghz because I like that number. I can wait another generation or two if need be, I'm still having fun tuning my Ranger at the moment.

That all being said I won't be buying intel/Nvidia next go around.

 

I find myself totally deflated. AMD could easily have dispelled rumors with a simple statement, but none as of yet either way.

 

I didn't call anyone specific an idiot, I said the company feels consumers will blow up their boards because they don't know how to monitor temps and the boards are not made robust enough, in their opinion. Granted, I water cool my VRM. But if I was overclocking a 24 or 32 core, I'd hit my VRM limit before the CPU limit with Zen 2 on this board. It's simple physics. It also goes to the root of the problem: AMD not properly telling MB MFRS about power delivery. Granted, at the time they feared being considered power hungry or running hot effecting initial sales, no doubt, as they were comparing TDP to Intel's improper TDP. That fear had led to this moment where they should have known would come. This is why Asus added active cooling and a slightly better heatsink, with a couple other tweaks, but the MSI board gave a truly robust VRM for Zen+. But that was the stop gap and all pretenses of the VRM designs being enough now must be dropped. That was the original sin necessitating the change.

The recent sin is fearing the 16-core TR and 16-core Ryzen 3950X could not coexist. This means they have nothing competing with Intel's 10-18 core HEDT lineup. Intel is pricing comet lake 10-core $100 cheaper than the HEDT platform and releasing the X299X to use their optane DIMMs (which is a waste, but that was already discussed in another thread). That means if you need a 10-18 core for under $1K, with 40 PCIe and quad channel memory, only Intel delivers. AMD 16-core will not have the memory bandwidth to compete on some prosumer tasks at that price level, and there is still a fair amount of software that doesn't scale beyond 22 threads, especially on the consumer side. So the next step up for AMD is 24 cores, but at $1200-1400. They will have no competition there. Same with the 32-core, which Intel has not shown signs of thrashing the 28-core OCable Xeon on pricing.

But, that means anyone looking at HEDT now has to consider if the extra money is worth it for an AMD part. Take a moment to digest that! AMD is now the premium part in HEDT, but may not be the value part. A 16-core Zen 2 would have fixed that. Too late.

And that is why marketing teams are full of idiots. They forget what is right in front of their face. AMD had to have assumed Intel wouldn't cut prices, whereas it is obvious that it was a necessity and as such was coming. AMD being so blind there really opened them up, and this punch to their earnings is going to hurt.

Edit: was it August or September Intel leaked the 2x performance per dollar slide and I instantly said Intel was skating prices hard? I estimated $1200 for the 18-core, off by like $200. By then, they knew they were moving the 16-core mainstream to November release and damage control over boosting. Yet they had no one raise a hand and say they are exposed, or believed people would step down to 1 x16 and a couple NVMe drives and less memory bandwidth without a thought. I saw people pushing it and many X399 owners pushing back on that idea. We'll see who was right.

 

I literally said I am an idiot and that's construed as something that never existed? Lol you guys are a little intense in here. Sometimes things are exactly as they are meant to be, and that is that I am an idiot.

I just want 16 core @ 4.5ghz that I can potentially actually purchase for when I finally settle down some day.

 

I was just making sure the statement was not brought on by a misconstruing of my prior statement on thinking consumers are idiots is all.

 

3750x?

 

Threadripper;
https://videocardz.com/82293/exclus...per-3960x-3970x-and-3990x-launch-dates-leaked

Have to add an edit as 11/19/2019 is my 62nd birthday, an Omen?

 

3950x;
https://www.tweaktown.com/news/6827...ntels-i9-10980xe-3dmark-firestrike/index.html

 

Pre-order tracker;
https://www.gearinstock.com/amd-ryzen-9-3950x-processor-pre-order-in-stock-availability-tracker/

 

If AMD looses x399 it will hurt a lot of present TR owners. I have had my 1950x for 2 years and could have justified the loss of $1,000 CPU for that time but not an additional $500 for the main board. Especially where it is a want and not a need. This puts it as the present system is more a 4 year investment.

By then we may be talking Zen 4 and DDR5, so we are left with no immediate semi-economical upgrade path.

 

You can create some magic and re-coop some of the costs by re-fitting your ThreadRipper 2 PC to sell it to some worthy person for a reasonable price, and thereby create another AMD owner, where there was only 1 - now there are 2 happy AMD owners

By bundling the CPU + Motherboard + everything else all into one sale you save time and maintain the future for that computer into the distant future. There are people waiting for ThreadRipper 3 to release so they can buy inexpensive ThreadRipper 2 computers.

Selling parts is a time consuming PIA - for the most part.

Even better, having a working ThreadRipper 2 computer for a couple of weeks / months while building your new ThreadRipper 3 computer will provide backup as you spend time learning the tuning of the new CPU / System.

 

Looking into the B550 and discovering it's particular charms... it's both PCI 4.0 - with one PCI 4.0 x16 Slot + one M.2 PCIE 4.0 socket, both powered through a Zen 2 CPU, but the rest of the IO is all PCIE 3.0 including the chipset to CPU connection - limiting throughput.

I suppose if you only have a single GPU / M.2 SSD as PCIE 4.0 devices that kinda makes sense, unless you have a bunch of PCIE 3.0 lanes running at the same time through that chipset - limiting overall simultaneous throughput.

ASRock AMD B550AM Gaming Motherboard Spied
UPDATED by btarunr Wednesday, 05:43 Updated: Wednesday, 06:59 Discuss (10 Comments)
https://www.techpowerup.com/260185/asrock-amd-b550am-gaming-motherboard-spied

"...While the X570 is an in-house development by AMD, the B550 is sourced from ASMedia, and is expected to be a new version of the "Promontory-LP" silicon. The only thing that sets this chip apart from the 400-series "Promontory-LP" is PCI-Express gen 3.0 certification. The chipset talks to the AM4 SoC over a PCI-Express 3.0 x4 link, and puts out up to 8 PCI-Express gen 3.0 downstream lanes. A 3rd gen Ryzen processor on a B550 motherboard still puts out PCI-Express gen 4.0 connectivity, which means you get one PCI-Express 4.0 x16 slot, and one M.2 slot with PCI-Express 4.0 x4 wiring. The rest of the chipset's I/O will be similar to the 400-series, which includes six SATA 6 Gbps ports, up to two 10 Gbps USB 3.1 ports, up to four 5 Gbps USB 3.1 ports, and eight USB 2.0/1.1 ports. If the AM4 SoC installed is a 3rd gen Ryzen, then you'll get a couple more 10 Gbps USB 3.1 ports. AMD partners could use the opportunity to launch some of the more upscale B550 motherboards with the latest 2.5 GbE wired LAN, and 802.11ax Wi-Fi 6."

"Update (16/10): We learn later down in the referenced Reddit thread, including from comments by AMD's Robert Hallock, that the B550A is a rebranded B450 targeted at OEMs. The B550 (non-A) is what is the upcoming chipset detailed in this article."

So still no actual B550 has been seen...

 

I have originally $4,000 in the system, I would be lucky to see $2,000 so if I do not want to loose more than $1.000 why do you think I want to loose 2,000 making a new system? If no x399 for TR 3000 then I am waiting a while, so will a lot of others too.

 

You'll likely want to remove the expensive SSD's, Memory, expansion boards, change from Water cooling to Air cooling, maybe move it all to a cheaper case, and adjust the build to sell into a running but basic build to optimize $ return.

And, there's a lot to be said for keeping both builds running indefinitely until the new ThreadRipper 3 build is stable and optimized, which means during that time you'll want to have both running side by side for weeks or months.

Swapping CPU's might seem simpler - cheaper, but it's far more time consuming to swap CPU's back and forth to check performance and to return to running the previous CPU if the new CPU isn't stable.

Having a stable unchanging ThreadRipper 2 build running along side the ThreadRipper 3 build would be better - at least in the short term.

Besides, who that can spend $1000-$2000 on a new ThreadRipper 3 CPU isn't going to want to upgrade memory, upgrade SSD's to PCIE 4.0, and maybe even get a new PCIE 4.0 GPU now or early next year?

PCIE 4.0, and the memory configuration opportunities brought about by new memory lane expansion begs for a motherboard upgrade to make that expensive ThreadRipper 3 CPU upgrade worthwhile.

You'd want to upgrade the motherboard to one that supports more memory lanes and PCIE 4.0, not stay on the previous generation motherboard limiting the performance of your brand new ThreadRipper 3 CPU.

Why wouldn't you want to upgrade to a new motherboard that supports more memory lanes + PCIE 4.0 + etc?!

 

Not going to happen, add it up way too costly.

 

That's all about the HEDT pricing.

It's outside most people's reach for personal use. HEDT only makes sense for work use.

Using it as I suggested is how I set up new work hardware in for evaluation - keeping last generation(s) in operation for comparison testing. I wouldn't recommend replacing a working production setup with new release hardware without evaluation and testing first.

Maybe wait a few months for new firmware to settle and initial problems are resolved to be assured a CPU swap on your older motherboard will be successful?

Firmware evaluation / testing on your existing motherboard is a major consideration as well. You could end up stuck with an unstable system unless you kept your previous CPU - at least.

Better to keep the old system up and runing as is until your new system build is satisfactory to replace the old one.

 

I keep two running systems. The AMD laptop is my daily driver. The heaviest CPU task is video encoding and backup of BR's and DVD's. the 1950x is way more than the task's. So there is no need to upgrade but I would have. And it is not the way the HEDT cookie crumbles as all the original leaked benchmarks were on Whitehaven chipsets, the first iterance.

I believe this was a marketing decision. If they do not include x399 upgrade as a path it will lower the high demand of the chips. TR's will still be in high demand but it will be more manageable.

 

Imagine that, AMD is getting pushback as described. Also, notice how the part you said about HEDT is now false. For $600-1000, you can buy an Intel HEDT platform. Can't say that about AMD now. And I don't care if the mainstream 16-core beats my current 16-core. I care about the platform, and mainstream is not something I care to step back to. If mainstream had 32-40 lanes or so, I might consider it, although the dual channel memory is a factor cutting against it for me.

AMD didn't face much competition from Intel HEDT until now. Intel overpriced and AMD was an easy decision. Not anymore. In fact, depending on overclocking, the 14-core cascade-X with hardware mitigations is likely my recommendation over the 3950X if overclocking in all honesty. X299 is long in the tooth, but it makes sense for the features and not needing to delid anymore. If I was buying today, I'd go Intel due to pricing and features (meaning Zen 2 vs cascade).

AMD's marketing decision was a problem. They should have treated the X399 like a B450, but they chose not to. They could have split the chiplets between a 16-core mainstream and a 3955X HEDT chip, then tested for sales, then adjusted volume of each accordingly, but they did not.

As I said, AMD is going to learn a hard lesson with Zen 2. It's of their own making. And because fewer will adopt sTRX40, it will ripple into the Zen 3 HEDT sales. This is a two year folly. How they enjoy the ride (good thing EPYC revenue will make up for it).

 

You could even say x399 is getting long n the tooth, but that is how it was supposed to be. I could have understood only doing the 32 core on x399 with the TRX being above that for the power delivery.

Even if TRX is Zen3 ready who is going to drop another $1,000 plus a year or so later for just an 8% IPC gain? By excluding x399 they have made TR a non upgradable platform other than within the generation and core counts. As it is no one wants a 2950x if they have a 1950x as only 3-5% IPC uplift.

 

Given there are no officially published info on what AMD HEDT is really all about for Zen 2 / ThreadRipper 3, it's way too early to start damning AMD's technical or marketing decisions.

Of course unfounded wild speculation is right on time.

 

As is always the time for you to blindly defending AMD when they're doing things Intel would be executed for.

 

Are you really going to stand there and at that after they have been screwing over consumers for how long? Although I'm glad you enjoyed my scathing comments of AMD, you are not the one to chime in here.

And yes. It is the time to chime in. AMD only serves HEDT in the $1K-2K range, plus a new MB for $400-1000, bringing the cost to likely $1600-$2800 to adopt their Zen 2 platform for HEDT.

Intel's platform, although fewer lanes, can be had with MBs as low as $250 (although let's say you grab a $350 model). That means for $950 you get a 10-core, for around $1050 you get a 14-core, and for around $1320 you get an 18-core. The 18-core plus motherboard costs as much as the 24-core alone, and is compatible with the same motherboard of the HEDT lineup that came out at the same time as the thread ripper 1950X X399 boards.

So did I miss something? Or do you think people that need or want the extra memory bandwidth or PCIe options, but only need a 16-core being forced to buy a new MB no matter what on top of the cost of the chip, while otherwise in no man's land, with the mainstream costing $1100 for the 3950X and the HEDT jumping up to $1600 means nothing with Intel's more moderate options filling in all that space between?

Intel's auctioned 14-core premium chip that overclocked like a beat performs extremely well. Do you really think no one will think to get that if they need the PCIe or memory bandwidth?

See, Intel's failed 4-core HEDT chips were based on a good plan. Intel planned to step consumers onto the HEDT platform where they would get the benefits of the platform. Where they screwed up is on the upsell. They severed off lanes and features arbitrarily. They also did not realize AMD was bringing 8-cores mainstream. If not for those things, Intel's strategy was right, although execution was all wrong.

Here, AMD is in a similar place, plus AMD's 1800X/1900X experience making them gun shy, which attempted the same thing as Intel. The difference is, the latency was WAYYY worse with the 1900X, so wasn't gaming, the 1920X was just a small amount more for way more performance, etc. Here, the latency will be close to the same, just one with extra PCIe and memory, the other without.

Hell, Intel is even doing this strategy again with the comet lake 10-core for $500 and the cascade-X 10-core for $100 more. Guess what, I'd tell anyone to pick up the HEDT unless it was a gaming exclusive system where the Mesh is less favored than ring if ring is used on comet.

Instead, AMD has a $500 gap between mainstream and HEDT whereas Intel is at $100. You can get an 18-core and have a couple hundred extra over the 24-core, arguably for a higher tier graphics card or more storage or ram. If performance is where I think it will be, sure AMD may win and lose some, but if you need HEDT but don't need the core count, Intel is compelling.

So, yes, without more information and with only 3 leaked SKUs with no spacing in the naming scheme to leave room for less than a 24-core on HEDT, I think we've got enough information to start having accurate conjecture.

With that said, gamers will eat up the 16-core chips. It is a smart play. And not having lower SKUs that have as many cores as your flagship is a very good strategy. It was the 1700 and 1700X that made the 1800X useless, after all, which in turn gamed better than the 1900X significantly making it useless as a step up when you could do better for hundreds cheaper.

With Zen 2, the 16-core mainstream is more heat area dense, with the chiplets packed so close together, compared to TR. That alone can help boost. But going to the I/O die, latency would be similar, all while doubling memory bandwidth to keep the L3 fed. Near far latency on memory controllers are drastically reduced/standardized, at least going by EPYC's numbers. So it isn't nearly the same situation as the 1800/1900x.

But that's how I see it.

 

Where are you getting your pricing?
According to Arstechnica, AMD is still ahead of Intel in pricing comparing Skylake to TR 2x
https://www.anandtech.com/show/14925/intel-cascade-lakex-for-hedt-18-cores-for-under-1000

From the sheer number of available cores, AMD offers far better value.
The 12 core TR is about 45% cheaper than Intel 12 core.
16 core TR is $85 cheaper than Intel 14 core.

As for Zen 2 HEDT, I don't think we have any pricing available as of yet, do we?
Plus, if the pricing for ZEN 2 Threadrippers will be initially higher (which it may be), you have to keep in mind that those will offer higher performance, far greater efficiency and superior security than Intel systems.

Also, we've seen that Zen 2 is more expensive compared to Zen+... its initial pricing seems in line with Zen 1 , so its possible we won't see comparable prices to Zen+ until Zen 3 (7nm+) comes along.

 

No matter how this turns out, I am quite happy AMD forced Intel and Nvidia to adjust their pricing down. In some cases pricing was adjusted down quite drastically (I'm looking at you Intel). This is a major win for consumers on both sides.

I'm still not doing cartwheels over the 5700xt because the drivers are still subpar, but AMD is a major player on both sides right now.

 

I already addressed a couple posts above that that many consumer softwares available today don't scale above 22 threads. That means a 24-core CPU without SMT would be more cores than is needed. If you use legacy software, you'll cap the software and may get weird issues like (and I know this is a game, but on point for the illustration) GTA V had, where it couldn't handle the 1950X at first.

Next, you are talking about buying a dead platform with Zen+ with no upgrade path. It makes sense depending on your use, but not nearly as marketable as AM4 or the Epyc socket. So that narrows the field of people in that market with a new board and TR line.

Third, when prices came out for Zen+, we saw around $1700 for the 32-core and around $1300 for the 24-core. My low range, estimating $400 for the board, estimated that the 24-core price dropped $100. It could stay the same or be as high as $1500, although I don't really see over $1400 realistically. So my pricing is estimated off of the prior generation's pricing at launch, then tacking on board costs, which mainstream showed how much PCIe 4.0 will tack onto the pricing. Also, instead of being Intel ports, the new boards will be designed ground up to better utilize the lanes of the CPUs, have better VRM, better memory compatibility, etc. I get it. But if you weren't expecting to need a new board for another gen or two and got on the platform for a future upgrade (I planned on buying a Zen 2 to drop into this board assuming sTR4 socket would remain the same like the AM4 promise), then you fell like Intel constantly changing the socket. But at least Intel didn't hide it: 1 year on mainstream, 2 years on HEDT, 2 years on server. When Intel hit die shrink problems with haswell, they made it compatible with Z97, then made broadwell compatible. With Z170 and Z270, you saw a bit of the same. With Z370 and Z390, the same. And with a modded firmware, coffee could go in a Z170 board.

So screw that analysis, as I'm comparing current gens coming at the same time. As I said, AMD is now the HEDT king, but you have to ask yourself if it is worth the price. That is where Intel was before now. Now Intel is the budget option. Sure, you may want to consider Zen+ if you don't have Zen, but for owners of Zen, Zen+ is not a real option because the performance gain is too small. So telling us owners of 1950X that the 2000 series is a good value is meaningless.

I'm sure I missed a couple points, but you get the idea.

 

I look at this as steering. AMD uses 4x the CCX chips on a TR chip. By not allowing them as a simple upgrade they are avoiding mass shortages of 7nm chips. they also can control supply better by controlling the new chipset supply. Designing a hardware incompatibility is more a marketing strategy. Shortages of 3900x would have been nothing by comparison.

 

Sigh, nobody can screw consumers if they don't want to be screwed.

There is no gun to anyone's head to buy something that doesn't work for them. Especially not work better than what they had already (if they were upgrading, of course, and using half their brain to evaluate the new/proposed hardware).

To just defend one company and not all just shows bias and fanboyism. I'll call that out.

I am able to comment on anything I want. Your permission not required.

If I had made the same 'scathing comments' against AMD, I would probably be threatened with being banned here... whatever.

When I said over a year or more ago that AMD should be charging as much as they can, I meant it.

However, now that they have tasted the greed pie, they've fallen in headfirst. So much for their fans supporting them for so long. This is the thanks they get. Sigh...

The point is; they're just as greedy a corporation, full stop. They all are.

They're not underdogs or soft and cuddly. They want to get into your wallet - deep. They don't need defending here (or anywhere else, either).

Have you seen how big a flop the consumer Surface Laptop 15" is? They still have a long way to go and they will be worse if they get to the level of Intel, today, from what we've seen so far from them.

Like I have said so many times; I support superior products. Not the companies behind them. What they're pushing out right now stinks (TR).

 

Gigabyte is readying support hardware for the new ThreadRipper PCIE 4.0 motherboards:

GIGABYTE Unveils AORUS Gen4 AIC Adapter Just in Time for TRX40 +
by btarunr Yesterday, 21:04 Discuss (8 Comments)
https://www.techpowerup.com/260341/...4-aic-adapter-just-in-time-for-trx40#comments

"Just in time for AMD's 3rd generation Ryzen Threadripper processors and the AMD TRX40 chipset, GIGABYTE launched the AORUS Gen4 AIC Adapter, an add-on card that converts a PCI-Express 4.0 x16 upstream link to four M.2-22110 slots with PCI-Express 4.0 x4 wiring, each. This isn't the first card of this kind, but is certified to work with PCIe gen 4.0 SSDs. The TRX40 platform provides at least two PCI-Express 4.0 x16 slots, from which one can be allocated to your graphics cards, and the other to a fast storage solution like this, so you can use your motherboard's NVMe RAID features. The card is backwards compatible with older generations of PCIe.

The card features a large copper heatsink that cools the drives under the airflow of a fan. The PCB of this card features a PCI-Express 4.0 x16 interface, four M.2-22110 slots with PCI-Express 4.0 x4 wiring, each, and a controller that uses eight thermal diodes to sense drive temperatures and accordingly adjust the speed of the 50 mm lateral-flow fan that pushes air through the heatsink and out of the rear panel. The card also has four LEDs that provide link+activity indication. It meets the electrical specification of PCI-Express gen 4.0, and features gen 4.0 re-drivers. An aluminium alloy shroud and back-plate with brushed-metal finish and diamond-cut edges make for the rest of it. We expect this card to be priced around USD $130. A credible source tells us that the card will also be included with some of GIGABYTE's premium TRX40 motherboards."


From earlier, including new TR motherboard comparison:

AMD Readies Three HEDT Chipsets: TRX40, TRX80, and WRX80
by btarunr Aug 29th, 2019 03:45 Discuss (51 Comments)
https://www.techpowerup.com/258739/amd-readies-three-hedt-chipsets-trx40-trx80-and-wrx80
Source: momomo_us (Twitter)


More details on that "64 core" Cooler from Arctic:

ARCTIC’s Mammoth Freezer 50 TR CPU Cooler For AMD Ryzen Threadripper CPUs Launched – Designed For Up To 64 Cores With 250W TDP
By Hassan Mujtaba, Oct 17 2019
https://wccftech.com/arctic-freezer-50-tr-amd-ryzen-threadripper-32-64-core-cpu-air-cooler-launch/

"ARCTIC has launched its latest Freezer 50 TR CPU cooler that is designed specifically for AMD's Ryzen Threadripper processors. The new cooler comes in massive dual tower design heatsink & has been fitted with dual fans that are accompanied by some nice A-RGB LEDs.

The ARCTIC Freezer 50 TR is a massive heatsink and has massive cooling potential. The reason for this design choice was that it has been built specifically for AMD Ryzen Threadripper CPUs. The air cooler comes in an asymmetrical (U-shaped) dual-tower design which has two aluminum fin stacks through which eight 6 millimeters copper heat pipes run. The heat pipes make direct contact with the processor which allows for efficient thermal load transfer to the fins stack. Some features of the heatsink include:

• Dual-Tower Design with 8 Heatpipes for Maximum Performance
• 100 % Die Coverage
• Addressable RGB for Fully Customisable Illumination
• Two Pressure-optimised Fans
• Wide RPM Range for Highest Performance and Low Noise Level
• Easy Mounting Solution
• MX-4 Thermal Paste Included

"With the Freezer 50 TR, the target was simple yet hard to reach: we had to be the best air cooler in the market and be able to cope with the amazing wattage that the Threadripper can pull out," said Vincent Andre, Technical Director at ARCTIC. "Countless hours of design, simulation and testing were necessary, but I think we have reached our target. With A-RGB integration, the Freezer 50 TR is not only the most powerful ARCTIC air cooler to date, but it's also the first-ever with lighting effects." via ARCTIC

According to ARCTIC themselves, the contact surface doesn't make full contact with the CPU heat-spreader but is actually ideally sized to make contact where the processor dies are located. There are two pressure optimized fans on the heatsink, one of which is a 120mm design with a max of 1800 RPM and the other is a 140mm design with a max of 1700 RPM. Both fans are controlled by the PWM unit and are connected over the 4-pin fan ports. Some of the highlighted features of the P-fan from ARCTIC are listed below:

• High static pressure for increased cooling performance
• Broad RPM Range
• Lower power consumption
• Less vibration
• Extended lifespan
• High-quality bearing
• PWM for synchronous fan/pump control

That's about it as far as the heatsink is concerned, ARCTIC mentions that while there Freezer 50 TR has support listed for all AMD Ryzen Threadripper CPUs, it also supports 32 cores and beyond which is referring to the upcoming 3rd Gen AMD Ryzen Threadripper processors. The packaging lists down that the Freezer 50 TR can support up to 250W TDP 32 core and 64 core CPUs and since there is no existing HEDT Threadripper CPU with 64 cores, it basically confirms that it would launch with AMD's next-gen Threadripper lineup. This would be one of the many Threadripper exclusive heatsinks which have been developed recently which also include the Cooler Master Wraith Ripper, Deepcool Fryzen TR4, Be Quiet Dark Rock Pro TR4 and Noctua's upcoming NH-D15 TR4."

Spoiler: Click for images...

GIGABYTE teases Threadripper TRX40 AORUS motherboard
Published: 20th Oct 2019, 10:24
https://videocardz.com/newz/gigabyte-teases-threadripper-trx40-aorus-motherboard

"The first AORUS TRX40 motherboard is here. Is this the first consumer motherboard to support 64-cores?

The picture released by Gigabyte shows yet undisclosed AMD HEDT motherboard. The branding does seem to indicate that we are looking at a premium AORUS motherboard. The socket, which looks identical to Threadripper 2000’s TR4, is likely to be the new TR4+ or TR+ socket. The discussion on backward compatibility has not yet materialized in any substantial proof that it might work. Hence, we cannot be sure if TR2000 chips will work on TRX40 motherboards and if TR3000 CPUs will work on X399.

The AORUS TRX40 motherboard is clearly an E-ATX standard (same as X399 AORUS Xtreme) while the previous GBT X399 motherboards kept a standard ATX form factor. This board features four PCIe x16 slots (4.0) and eight DDR4 slots for quad-channel memory. We can also see a fan over the chipset and debug LED.

Large fin arrays can be spotted around the CPU socket, this is likely an indicator of very high wattage of the Threadripper 3000 series (rumored to go up to 280W). We recently revealed that AMD is planning to announce the new TR series on November 5th. New motherboards are also expected to be showcased at the same time.

Based on confidential documents that we have, in November AMD will announce a Threadripper 3990X CPU, which might be a 64-core CPU (unconfirmed). This motherboard would definitely support it."

 

Your entire response wreaks of fanboy, as you literally only defend and hype Intel and literally only crap on AMD. That is tribalism in anthropology, also called "team mentality" in sociology and partisanship in politics.

I rip on both AMD and Intel, and praise both. That's been clear, even when people like you call me a fanboy.

Also, this isn't a "fan" "turning" on anything. This is me calling out what I see as faulty decision making, which corporate strategy is something I understand (it's a corporate decision no different than if I was advising on how to enter a market, where to manufacture and comply with local laws, etc.). I've done this with many companies for awhile.

Hell, I was one of the first to definitively state and interpret what news leaks meant to the market on many occasions, including the meaning of Intel's PPD slide months ago being a slashing of prices. They beat my estimate (which was $1200 for the 18-core), which resulted in my scathing comments on the TR3000 lineup. Why? Because it is showing why a person getting a new system would be possibly better off getting one new product versus another. That's called analysis. I welcome you to try it sometime (although in the years I've talked to you, that never changed, so don't see it changing now).

And yes, consumers are getting screwed because the products are overpriced. During bulldozer era, there was no choice. If you needed that performance, there was no other choice and you had to pay the premium. It is like hiring another person, you have no choice if you need that person's labor. You don't just throw your hands up and say, "screw it, I'm quitting, you are all fired just because I don't want to hire one more person."

Or better analogy is insulin. You don't just not buy it because it's $600 and you don't want to die. That's absurd. No one held a gun to your head, but there are severe negative consequences if you don't act.

Your mentality is precisely why there are protests going on around the world, primarily resulting from income inequality. But that is for another time and forum.

I'm sure my point is made.

 

Was wondering how 2070 Super vs 5700XT was doing, here's HU's benchmarks vs 2060 Super... 2070 Super is about 10%-12% faster than 2060 - so that's about the same as the 5700XT.

Also, RTX still sucks - RTX "Control" performance is shown:


AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT vs. Nvidia GeForce RTX 2060 Super, 41 Game Benchmark
Hardware Unboxed
Published on Oct 21, 2019
https://www.techspot.com/review/1931-radeon-5700-xt-vs-geforce-2060-super/

 

backwards compatible x399?

 

Old leak from August. In September and October, further leaks from multiple sources changed that to no backwards compatibility or forward compatibility. Considering those leaks came with more information on the TR lineup, I'd call that dubious at best. Doesn't mean false, but highly suspect.

 

AMD gives us something...

3rd Gen AMD Ryzen Threadripper – Coming Soon
AMD
Published on Oct 22, 2019
This November, get the processor battle tested by the award-winning Visual Effects Company, Blur Studio – 3rd Gen AMD Ryzen Threadripper.


AdoredTV caught an AMD uploaded video that was pulled, and discusses:

Tech Talk 6 - AMD Milan Info, TSMC Levels Up Again
AdoredTV
Published on Oct 21, 2019
Plus more on Intel and Nvidia.

 

Your analogy is grotesque. AMD vs. Intel, HEDT vs. mainstream, is not remotely in the same category as insulin vs. not. No one is going to die because they have to make a decision.

 

Threadripper;
http://www.madshrimps.be/news/item/191128#axzz63CNInVI3
https://www.anandtech.com/show/1499...-generation-ryzen-threadripper-32-cores-280-w

 

All such decisions have the same basis, just with the levels of negative consequences being different. It's like sanctions from the US being traceable to 40,000 deaths in Venezuela or 500,000 in Iraq during the 90s. That is a natural consequence of capitalism, the military industrial complex, and the energy sector.

You may not like the more extreme examples, and may even find them arguing to the absurd, but even in the Intel vs AMD issue, we saw Intel engage in antitrust violations to squeeze out AMD when they did have competitive products so that they could later gouge consumers without competition, as any monopoly does. Using the example of an oligopolistic industry, such as pharma, shows the same behavior, which is a natural consequence of capitalism. You try to divide it on life and death versus not, but the behavior is the same. Maybe you are a consequentialist. Who knows.

But you evidently misunderstand the nuance of the comparison, focusing on the visceral nature of the example over the very parasitic nature of the system and ideology that comes from supply side economics and behavioral economics, the progeny of Austrian economic theory.

 

lol, funny to see that both articles use the exact same wording in the first two paragraphs...wonder who stole from who? hahaha

Sent from my Xiaomi Mi Max 2 (Oxygen) using Tapatalk

 

I think Anand was the original. I see though they are talking 16, 24 and 32 core variants. It could be these are designated for the TRX40 and are compatible with x399 but maybe the higher core counts need TRX80 or WRX80 and are not compatible. Time will tell.

 

See, I haven't seen a 16-core referenced other than these couples. Of the benchmarks for 16-core Zen2 this summer, most were attributed to the 3950X. AMD had no mention of a 16-core for TR being released in November. So maybe Anton knows something no one else has heard yet, or who knows.

As for the leaked $1K price tag for the 24-core, if true, then I will retract in part parts of my above statements, as that would have been $1400 for the new MB and CPU, making it a clear competitor for the 10980XE. Still, my recommendation on the 14-core Intel stands until more info cones in regarding the 3950X, whereas I recommend the 3900X over Intel's 10 core X299 unless the PCIe or mem bandwidth is needed.

But, being so slow with the leak makes it where I'm still sitting out. I had around $1300 ear marked, because I may have got a cheap X399 board and moved the first gen to it (or got the 24-core if it was compatible). But with them not controlling information effectively, that money is gone. As said, I won't buy the Zen 3 with the next gen platform in 2021. And since my electronics budget goes toward phones and GPU next year, it looks like CPU will wait (especially since compatibility isn't clear with X399).

So those two rumors have softened my stance in part, but only in regards to the 10980XE. The 3950X vs 10940X recommendation stands.

And still, AMD needs to be more forthcoming on the socket news. Granted they leaked it around August to start, thereby trying to prime the market for November, but with only rumors, and some from MB MFRS saying no backwards compatibility, I'm going to stick with it not being compatible until more solid information is known.

Once again, there is a chance due to VRM that MB MFRS do not support it. And with extended TDP ranges now known, it makes sense.

 

If $1,000 for the 24 core and a cheap $300 or so TRX40 is available I could see taking the dive. I originally figured about $1,400 to $1,500 for the 24 core as it is. I still have not spent it yet so we shall see. While 32 cores would be nice, I have no need. I could even do 16 cores but it is hard to justify the large expense with so little gain. a 24 core should close to double the multi-core performance over the 1950x.

 

TRX40 speculation;