Tuesday, May 30th 2017

AMD Ryzen Threadripper Detailed - Why Intel HEDT is in Trouble

AMD today talked a little more about the Ryzen Threadripper, its upcoming line of HEDT (high-end desktop) processors, which will compete with Intel's recently launched Core i7 and Core i9 X-series processors. The chips will still be launched "later this Summer," and AMD hasn't mentioned models, yet. We know of at least two features which will spell trouble for Intel, and it's not the CPU core performance.

The first of two killer Threadripper features is that it has 64 PCI-Express gen 3.0 lanes across all its models - 12-core and 16-core. This is unlike Intel, where you get 44 (not 64) PCIe lanes to begin with, and those start with the $999 Core i9-7900X ten-core processor. Models below this are relegated to 28 lanes, removing the biggest advantage of the HEDT platform - to be able to run more than one graphics card at full x16 PCIe bandwidth. The second killer Threadripper feature is its memory controller. AMD announced that Quad-channel DDR4 memory will be available across the lineup. This again is unlike Intel, where the Core i5-7640X and Core i7-7740X quad-core LGA2066 chips feature just dual-channel memory. All Threadripper chips further feature 32 MB of shared L3 cache. ASUS, ASRock, GIGABYTE, and MSI are said to be developing Ryzen Threadripper motherboards based on the X399 chipset as we speak.
Add your own comment

90 Comments on AMD Ryzen Threadripper Detailed - Why Intel HEDT is in Trouble

#1
Gasaraki
All aboard...!!! The train is about to depart!
Posted on Reply
#2
Mistral
OK, that is a LOT of PCI lanes...
Posted on Reply
#3
Chaitanya
So basically with HEDT AMD will stick with lower price and slightly lower core count(16) but have better features. Thats a wonderful compromise for any workstation builder.
Posted on Reply
#4
xkm1948
I am very excited about Threadripper.
Posted on Reply
#5
nem..
it seems very soon posible with cpus like threadripper.



Posted on Reply
#6
de.das.dude
Pro Indian Modder
Chaitanya said:
So basically with HEDT AMD will stick with lower price and slightly lower core count(16) but have better features. Thats a wonderful compromise for any workstation builder.
Thats what AMD does all the time.


Also, HOLY SHEET, ANOTHER TPU MEMBER!! FROM MY CITY??
Posted on Reply
#8
Kurt Maverick
Well, so much AMD circlejerk out here...so I suppose that I have to be the voice of reason:

1) So many PCIe lanes are completely useless. People generally don't even recommend mounting a SLI 2x setup, let alone a 3x or 4x one. So unless you're rich and you put tons of M.2 and/or U.2 drives, IDK what will you use so many PCIe lanes for (and if you're rich...what are you doing buying an AMD CPU?).

2) Are you REALLY comparing the memory controller from some 16-core, 1000+ bucks CPU with the ones from 4-core, less than 350 ones? Wow, someone here is really an AMD fan.

And 3) I don't care how many cores does it has if their IPC are crap. Games hardly even use 8 cores, and actual consoles have only 8 cores (face it: 99% of the PC market are consoleports). Add to that weak IPC, and by the time that games finally use them they'll be TERRIBLY outdated, and there will be much better options in the market already. So you're basically paying for shooting your own knee today with poor performance compared to other options, and sub-par performance in the future compared to future options.

Final observation: And people complains that Intel "does nothing innovative but to increase core count". /facepalm
Posted on Reply
#9
Frick
Fishfaced Nincompoop
Kurt Maverick said:

And 3) I don't care how many cores it has if their IPC is crap.
Ryzen IPC is not crap, it's the clock speed that doesn't keep up. Which is about the only unfortunate thing about those CPUs. As for the rest of your comment, multi GPU setups are pretty bad for gaming sure, but there are other uses for GPUs. It might not be the universal killer feature some think, but it is definitely a nice thing to have, and it is really damn nice to have the same amount of lanes across all chips, in those rare cases someone wants a billion GPUs and doesn't require an insane CPU.
Posted on Reply
#10
Jism
Technically, it's nothing special. Just a 2x Ryzen CPU wired together with 2x a memory controller and double the amount of PCI-E lanes. This is how Zen was designed, to make it scale down or upwards with that Infinity Fabric going along with it.

They can do it. They can actually beat Intel on pricing and performance. AMD is back again. The small vs the giant. :)
Posted on Reply
#11
notb
This is very weird since one Ryzen 7 provides 24 lanes and earlier Threadripper was rumored to have 44 (which made sense). What happened? Where did they find the extra 20?

Also, it's essentially a dual CPU package and each has a dual-channel MC. This could be named quad-channel in ideal conditions. In reality it'll be pushing performance down a bit.
This goes on, BTW. 2xCPU Naples server will be called "octa-channel" based on the same mechanism.
Posted on Reply
#12
qubit
Overclocked quantum bit
Good, head to head competition. Let the good times roll. :D
Posted on Reply
#13
uuuaaaaaa
Cool, would love to see Naples supported on these boards, that would get AMD the performance crown.
Posted on Reply
#14
doode
Intel for gaming is the king...but for workstation purposes for me AMD is new winner. Virtualization, rendering, working in multiple instances, doing many things at once while having still room in cpu department for reasonable price... I won't even consider Intel in my new workstation build if they will have still the garbage price... And in my gaming rig I still use 4770K and there is no point for upgrading...
Posted on Reply
#15
Fluffmeister
Wow, that is one humongous chip, hope people don't expect AMD to undercut Intel too much on price if it all.
Posted on Reply
#16
TheGuruStud
Fluffmeister said:
Wow, that is one humongous chip, hope people don't expect AMD to undercut Intel too much on price if it all.
It's much cheaper to make. They're small dies. Intel has a big ass one.
Posted on Reply
#17
Fluffmeister
TheGuruStud said:
It's much cheaper to make. They're small dies. Intel has a big ass one.
If that is the case then great, interesting to see where pricing falls then.
Posted on Reply
#18
Live OR Die
Why does AMD have to rip of Intel chipset naming scheme? come on really X399 why not call it something original!

The chip has 4094 pin vs intels 2066 of cause it has more lans, i would stay away from intels X299 because i see it dieing off and something with more pins coming out.
Posted on Reply
#19
Boosnie
Live OR Die said:
Why does AMD have to rip of Intel chipset naming scheme? come on really X399 why not call it something original!
I agree. Originality set aside, it's effing confusing.
Posted on Reply
#20
EarthDog
HopelesslyFaithful said:
let me know when you have M.2, 10GbE, HBA, GPU, and a couple other cards like DVR or other things...lets see how 16x lane work or even 28.... of thats right....it doesn't work.
let me know how many home users actually have that, would ya?

In a sense, i agree with kurt. 95% of users are fine with skylake's 20... with sli and an m.2. If you want that and multiple m.2 or dvr card or 10gb ethernet, budget wouldnt seem to be as much of a concern...(specifically with multiple gpus and m.2 nvme drives).
Posted on Reply
#21
bug
Live OR Die said:
Why does AMD have to rip of Intel chipset naming scheme? come on really X399 why not call it something original!
Perception. What do you think an uninformed user will pick between X299 and X399?
I don't really care. Whoever is interested in their buy won't fall for that. And a fool will always be easily parted from their money.
EarthDog said:
let me know how many home users actually have that, would ya?
I have two HDDs, three SSDs and a DVD-something (mostly collecting dust, of course) and I can't add another U2 SSD without disabling additional SATA ports. And I don't have spare SATA ports to disable. And if you look at my specs, I'm nowhere near the market for these chips.
Posted on Reply
#22
EarthDog
Hey look....a 5%er at an enthusiast site... who would have thought?!! To be more clear, im thinking about all users. Clearly there is a use case for so many lanes... just not many come close to using it. :)

Here is your actual lane breakdown...
- 6 x SATA3 6.0 Gb/s Connectors by Intel® Z170, support RAID (RAID 0, RAID 1, RAID 5, RAID 10, Intel® Rapid Storage Technology 14 and Intel® Smart Response Technology), NCQ, AHCI and Hot Plug
- 4 x SATA3 6.0 Gb/s Connectors by ASMedia ASM1061, support NCQ, AHCI and Hot Plug
- 3 x SATA Express 10 Gb/s Connectors*
- 3 x Ultra M.2 Sockets, support M Key type 2230/2242/2260/2280/22110 M.2 SATA3 6.0 Gb/s module and M.2 PCI Express module up to Gen3 x4 (32 Gb/s)**

*Support to be announced
M2_1, SATA3_0, SATA3_1 and SATA_EXP0 share lanes. If either one of them is in use, the others will be disabled.
M2_2, SATA3_2, SATA3_3 and SATA_EXP1 share lanes. If either one of them is in use, the others will be disabled.
M2_3, SATA3_4, SATA3_5 and SATA_EXP2 share lanes. If either one of them is in use, the others will be disabled.

**Supports ASRock U.2 Kit
Supports NVMe SSD as boot disks
Why not move the hard drives/optical to the unaffected asmedia sata ports?? Wouldnt that free up ports attached to the chipset?

Ps- threadripper isnt going to be cheap either.. i mean, the octo is 500... that 12 core is going to sniff 800+... so, surely it will be cheaper, but not cheap. ;)
Posted on Reply
#23
Frick
Fishfaced Nincompoop
Kurt Maverick said:
"The clock speed that doesn't keep up", of course. That's why the 6900K beats the 1800X despite the latter having higher clock speeds than the former. Don't make me laugh.

And it's just laughable how do you play the AMD apologist with the rare Bitcoin miner or GPGPU user who'd take advantage of multiple GPUs. Then again, that's how the AMD community are: always delusional and hanging by the thinniest thread.

Have it your way. After all, thanks to you I'll be getting a REAL 8-core CPU for only 100 more bucks than the 1800X :)
So you are saying it wouldn't be a nice thing if every Intel chip had 44 PCIe lanes? And I was agreeing with you, for >90% of the users lane numbers above 20 is moot. I agree on this. But it is nice to have and for some (notice the word) it might be crucial. And there's more to GPGPU than cryptocurrency, you know this, and there's more to PCIe than GPUs.
Posted on Reply
#24
atomicus
protain said:
If the TIM is crap it's not gonna help the AIO remove the heat from the CPU, better heat conductivity from the package to the IHS is the key for any cooling solution - air or otherwise.
AIO or a top end Air cooler won't make any difference... they perform relatively the same anyway. Don't fall for the marketing hype. A custom loop is the only solution that's actually going to see marked improvement in temps, and can be quieter also if done right. No AIO is going to be silent if it's giving the best temps, unless you soundproof the hell out of your case, and then that's going to negatively impact temps anyway.

You're right on the TIM front though, and what Intel use will be key. Given the situation with the 7700K though, I don't hold out much hope for their new chips to run anything less than HOT without de-lidding.

Was there any mention of whether Threadripper will be soldered or not?
Posted on Reply
#25
EarthDog
Actually, this is the first they have used tim on the hedt platform in several generations.

Memory support is better from both mobo makers and amd with their aegsa or whatever microcode updates in those bios....not that dual to quad matters for 99% of people anyway.. moot point...same with memory speed.

...both sides need to get their facts straight. :)





The thread title here though... wtf??? I dont want your (anyones) god damn input... just post the facts, not a bullshhhh opinion that pcie lanes has intel in trouble...
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment