Thursday, August 29th 2019

AMD Readies Three HEDT Chipsets: TRX40, TRX80, and WRX80

AMD is preparing to surprise Intel with its 3rd generation Ryzen Threadripper processors derived from the "Rome" MCM (codenamed "Castle Peak" for the client-platform), that features up to 64 CPU cores, a monolithic 8-channel DDR4 memory interface, and 128 PCIe gen 4.0 lanes. For the HEDT platform, AMD could reconfigure the I/O controller die for two distinct sub-platforms within HEDT - one targeting gamers/enthusiasts, and another targeting the demographic that buys Xeon W processors, including the W-3175X. The gamer/enthusiast-targeted processor line could feature a monolithic 4-channel DDR4 memory interface, and 64 PCI-Express gen 4.0 lanes from the processor socket, and additional lanes from the chipset; while the workstation-targeted processor line could essentially be EPYCs, with a wider memory bus width and more platform PCIe lanes; while retaining drop-in backwards-compatibility with AMD X399 (at the cost of physically narrower memory and PCIe I/O).

To support this diverse line of processors, AMD is coming up with not one, but three new chipsets: TRX40, TRX80, and WRX80. The TRX40 could have a lighter I/O feature-set (similar to the X570), and probably 4-channel memory on the motherboards. The TRX80 and WRX80 could leverage the full I/O of the "Rome" MCM, with 8-channel memory and more than 64 PCIe lanes. We're not sure what differentiates the TRX80 and WRX80, but we believe motherboards based on the latter will resemble proper workstation boards in form-factors such as SSI, and be made by enterprise motherboard manufacturers such as TYAN. The chipsets made their way to the USB-IF for certification, and were sniffed out by momomo_us. ASUS is ready with its first motherboards based on the TRX40, the Prime TRX40-Pro, and the ROG Strix TRX40-E Gaming.
Source: momomo_us (Twitter)
Add your own comment

51 Comments on AMD Readies Three HEDT Chipsets: TRX40, TRX80, and WRX80

#1
1d10t
Been holding since desktop counterpart launch, glad to see AMD brings 8 channel to HEDT. Can't wait to see the prices...um...I mean benchmark.

-=Edit=-
Ultra high end chipset reminds me of these
Posted on Reply
#3
kapone32
I am so glad I went with Threadripper. These new boards should be spectacular in terms of computing power and flexibility. Not that it would,,,,or would it make a world wide difference with an expansion card with 4 PCI_E 4.0 NVME drives in RAID 0 vs a regular drive. My only fear is price. I can't see a company like Asus selling a TR4 board for anything less than their most costly X570.
Posted on Reply
#4
lexluthermiester
kapone32, post: 4106554, member: 181865"
I am so glad I went with Threadripper.
I think that's going to be my next choice of platform. The OG TR's are coming down in price to levels that make them very attractive.
Posted on Reply
#5
EarthDog
kapone32, post: 4106554, member: 181865"
I can't see a company like Asus selling a TR4 board for anything less than their most costly X570.
I assure you they will have models well below their most costly X570 board...

...considering the X570 Crosshair VIII Formula is $700. ;)
Posted on Reply
#6
kapone32
EarthDog, post: 4106561, member: 79836"
I assure you they will have models well below their most costly X570 board...

...considering the X570 Crosshair VIII Formula is $700. ;)
If you are right Threadripper could really take off.

lexluthermiester, post: 4106555, member: 134537"
I think that's going to be my next choice of platform. The OG TR's are coming down in price to levels that make them very attractive.
I know I couldn't believe the 1900X was less than $300 CAD and the 1920X was $349.99. That is pretty attractive indeed.
Posted on Reply
#7
Frick
Fishfaced Nincompoop
So how certain are these specs? The word ”could” is pretty prominent here.
Posted on Reply
#8
kapone32
Frick, post: 4106570, member: 23907"
So how certain are these specs? The word ”could” is pretty prominent here.
TR4 was based on the Chipset and CPUs for EPYC with some features nerfed. This should be the same but at PCI_E 4.0 and 7nm just like ROME.
Posted on Reply
#9
EarthDog
kapone32, post: 4106566, member: 181865"
If you are right Threadripper could really take off.
Motherboard cost wasn't holding TR back initially. X399 boards started out around $250. I can see many TRX40's starting below $300...TRX80's under $400. The latter slated to compete with Intel's Xeon/C621 lineup. So yes, I'd bet money says we find some TR40s in the $300 range.

But, it's HEDT, gotta pay to play if you need all those cores! :)
Posted on Reply
#10
eidairaman1
The Exiled Airman
Id like a tweakers WRX80 dual cpu board, akin to skt 1207

Better yet tr and epyc on same exact platform
Posted on Reply
#11
Octopuss
Why would gamers need 4 channel memory and even more cores? (that's what TR is about, right?)
Posted on Reply
#12
kapone32
EarthDog, post: 4106577, member: 79836"
Motherboard cost wasn't holding TR back initially. X399 boards started out around $250. I can see many TRX40's starting below $300...TRX80's under $400. The latter slated to compete with Intel's Xeon/C621 lineup. So yes, I'd bet money says we find some TR40s in the $300 range.

But, it's HEDT, gotta pay to play if you need all those cores! :)
Yes but at that time there were no X470 boards as expensive. The stack on X570 is so layered. Would you agree that a sub $300 TRX40 board would not be more flexible than the best X570. The new chips will be costly I am sure but the 2950x is already cheaper than the 3900X and should drop further when the new chips launch.
Posted on Reply
#13
Lionheart
These new Threadripper CPU's & boards are going to make my 3900X/X570 look plebish. Never the less I'm excited to see what the new Threadrippers can do especially with more memory channels.
Posted on Reply
#14
kapone32
Octopuss, post: 4106592, member: 74316"
Why would gamers need 4 channel memory and even more cores? (that's what TR is about, right?)
TR4 is for more than just Quad channel and cores but also I/O, VMs, Linux absolutely flies on TR4. It is a computer platform period, all computers play games, so they can market it as such. The only thing that makes TR4 seem not to be gaming oriented is cost of the platform and diminishing returns in terms of core count and performance enhancement. For me being a gamer (among other things) TR4 celebrates the spirit of computer innovation as the thought of consumer based 12 or 16 or 32 or even 64 core CPUs was not even in the mindset of most enthusiasts as little as 5 years ago.
Posted on Reply
#15
xkm1948
YES! Wonder how much its gonna cost though. They better support high density DRAM, 32c64t is already pushing 128GB to the limit. If going 48c96t or 64c128t DRAM must be at least doubled
Posted on Reply
#16
Octopuss
kapone32, post: 4106602, member: 181865"
TR4 is for more than just Quad channel and cores but also I/O, VMs, Linux absolutely flies on TR4. It is a computer platform period, all computers play games, so they can market it as such. The only thing that makes TR4 seem not to be gaming oriented is cost of the platform and diminishing returns in terms of core count and performance enhancement. For me being a gamer (among other things) TR4 celebrates the spirit of computer innovation as the thought of consumer based 12 or 16 or 32 or even 64 core CPUs was not even in the mindset of most enthusiasts as little as 5 years ago.
I wouldn't mind the extra stuff, but I don't think I could make use of more than eight cores even with Adobe Lightroom and heavy multitasking. I guess I will see what happens when the platform actually gets released (I wonder when).
Posted on Reply
#17
kapone32
Octopuss, post: 4106610, member: 74316"
I wouldn't mind the extra stuff, but I don't think I could make use of more than eight cores even with Adobe Lightroom and heavy multitasking. I guess I will see what happens when the platform actually gets released (I wonder when).
It depends entirely on what you are doing,. I have been messing around with a 1920X and I can say that it feels faster (AOTS, TWWH2) in some games than the 1900X. Same thing for office and Vegas Pro.
Posted on Reply
#18
krykry
overwhelmingbandwidth力
Posted on Reply
#19
EarthDog
kapone32, post: 4106593, member: 181865"
Yes but at that time there were no X470 boards as expensive. The stack on X570 is so layered. Would you agree that a sub $300 TRX40 board would not be more flexible than the best X570. The new chips will be costly I am sure but the 2950x is already cheaper than the 3900X and should drop further when the new chips launch.
There were X470 boards that cost as much/more than some X399 upon release. I just inferred that previously...

I'm not sure what flexibility has to do with it. You don't need to sell me on the merits of the platform. But if it is used primarily for gaming, it seems like a 3900x or 3950x with its presumably higher clocks.

More memory channels aren't going to do much for the average user. With any HEDT platform, making sure it can be UTILIZED (not used) and it will be worth it outside of simply bragging rights. :)

EDIT: It seems it would be cheaper to go 3900x/3950x and X570 than to jump into HEDT. Faster clocks, cheaper entry... again it comes down to being able to use the features and not simply brag about it. :)
Posted on Reply
#20
yakk
A Threadripper 64 core & 8-channel DDR4 memory with 128 PCIe gen 4.0 lanes looks perfect for enthusiast home servers. If AMD comes through with these specs I can see a lot of happy customers.
Posted on Reply
#21
kapone32
EarthDog, post: 4106620, member: 79836"
There were X470 boards that cost as much/more than some X399 upon release. I just inferred that previously...

I'm not sure what flexibility has to do with it. You don't need to sell me on the merits of the platform. But if it is used primarily for gaming, it seems like a 3900x or 3950x with its presumably higher clocks.

More memory channels aren't going to do much for the average user. With any HEDT platform, making sure it can be UTILIZED (not used) and it will be worth it outside of simply bragging rights. :)
Your price knowledge is based on the US, Unfortunately in Canada we have to pay the non us tax and our products are tiered in terms of pricing. As an example the As Rock X399 Phantom Gaming 6 should have a MSRP of $249.99 but that board has never been south of $400 CAD.

I want to agree with the 3900X and 3950x for gaming but those chips are and will be expensive and hard to come by. In terms of flexible, look at it this way would you buy a 2950X and TR40 MB for a combined $1000 or a 3950X and X570 for $1300 CAD. To me that is just common sense as the performance improvement does not outweigh the increased MB features.
Posted on Reply
#22
EarthDog
yakk, post: 4106628, member: 158293"
A Threadripper 64 core & 8-channel DDR4 memory with 128 PCIe gen 4.0 lanes looks perfect for enthusiast home servers. If AMD comes through with these specs I can see a lot of happy customers.
Perfect for the 100 people in the world who would do such a thing. :p
kapone32, post: 4106636, member: 181865"
Your price knowledge is based on the US, Unfortunately in Canada we have to pay the non us tax and our products are tiered in terms of pricing. As an example the As Rock X399 Phantom Gaming 6 should have a MSRP of $249.99 but that board has never been south of $400 CAD.

I want to agree with the 3900X and 3950x for gaming but those chips are and will be expensive and hard to come by. In terms of flexible, look at it this way would you buy a 2950X and TR40 MB for a combined $1000 or a 3950X and X570 for $1300 CAD. To me that is just common sense as the performance improvement does not outweigh the increased MB features.
Everything is affected equally on pricing isn't it? My point isn't the exact values, but the premise of the pricing structure. It is what it is for you, but it scales the same was the underlying point. Add $50-75 to anything I said, but the point remains.

A 3900x is less expensive than a 2950X. Again, it comes down to needs. 99% of people here cannot use/utilize 12c/24t CPU, so why go more if it can't be used? Higher clocks (good for gaming), lower power use... So, yeah, I would stick with the mainstream platform unless I could actually use it. 8-channel memory and more than 12c/24t isn't worth it for 99% of people.
Posted on Reply
#23
kapone32
EarthDog, post: 4106647, member: 79836"
Perfect for the 100 people in the world who would do such a thing. :p
Everything is affected equally on pricing isn't it? My point isn't the exact values, but the premise of the pricing structure. It is what it is for you, but it scales the same was the underlying point. Add $50-75 to anything I said, but the point remains.

A 3900x is less expensive than a 2950X. Again, it comes down to needs. 99% of people here cannot use/utilize 12c/24t CPU, so why go more if it can't be used? Higher clocks (good for gaming), lower power use... So, yeah, I would stick with the mainstream platform unless I could actually use it. 8-channel memory and more than 12c/24t isn't worth it for 99% of people.
The 3900x is a 12 core CPU and then should be compared to the 2920X. I am confident that the 3950X will be more expensive than the 2950X too. I am not talking about the mainstream of users as it would make more sense for them to use the 3500-3700 for just gaming. I am talking about the user that is indeed looking for more and would have settled on the 3900X or 3950X based on the core count.
Posted on Reply
#24
EarthDog
kapone32, post: 4106657, member: 181865"
The 3900x is a 12 core CPU and then should be compared to the 2920X. I am confident that the 3950X will be more expensive than the 2950X too. I am not talking about the mainstream of users as it would make more sense for them to use the 3500-3700 for just gaming. I am talking about the user that is indeed looking for more and would have settled on the 3900X or 3950X based on the core count.
You said 2950x in the previous post...I went by that.

Your confidence is misplaced. The 3950x is priced at $749 while the 2950X is $900. The 2920x is $649. The 3950x has higher boost clocks by "up to" 300 MHz (400 MHz over 2920X). So while it will be $100 cheaper on the CPU, the cost to enter the platform will be a bit higher due to the board and quad channel RAM as a 'requirement' (much more if you go TR80 and octo channel). The clocks are lower... I don't see the point or benefit.
Posted on Reply
#25
kapone32
EarthDog, post: 4106663, member: 79836"
You said 2950x in the previous post...I went by that.

Your confidence is misplaced. The 3950x is priced at $749 while the 2950X is $900. The 2920x is $649. The 3950x has higher boost clocks by "up to" 300 MHz. So while it will be $100 cheaper on the CPU, the cost to enter the platform will be a bit higher due to the board and quad channel RAM as a 'requirement'. The clocks are lower... I don't see the point or benefit.
Once again I have to point to the Canadian market. The 3900X is almost 90% more expensive than the 2920X. At these prices it makes no sense to me if you want more cores to pay $376 more for the CPU. By your reasoning that is $125 for every 100MHZ. I am willing to bet that the 3950X will be a $1000 CAD chip when it launches.


https://www.amazon.ca/AMD-Threadripper-24-Thread-Processor-YD292XA8AFWOF/dp/B07JDF4QP2/ref=sr_1_1?keywords=2920x&qid=1567088838&s=gateway&sr=8-1

https://www.amazon.ca/AMD-Ryzen-3900X-16-thread-processor/dp/B07SXMZLP9/ref=sr_1_1?keywords=3900X&qid=1567088876&s=gateway&sr=8-1

Also quad channel is not a requirement I have been able to boot X399 with 1 and 2 sticks of RAM used.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment