• Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1950X Overclocked to 4.1 GHz With Liquid Cooling

I don't get why ppl say we don't need so much cpu power. I want it all and whatever i want I'm going to get (whatever i can afford to get)...and if that is 16 cores then so be it. I will not compromise because of what someone else thinks/says. Majority of us build a computer to last, regardless of the upgrade path you choose.
Anyways glad to see so many AMD processors in fellow forum members build. A year ago who would've thunk it. AMD has come a long way and i will support the competition as well.
 
4.1 Ghz on the 16-core Threadripper is outstanding. 7900X already hits a huge wall in terms of temperature and power consumption. If they don't do anything about that the 16-core and 18-core are going to be horrible overclockers.
 
Reading and looking a lot of folks posting single thread performance about Threadripper. Anyone who buys this chip solely for gaming has too many dollars and not enough sense.

You can bash AMD all you want, they did a great job with this architecture and I surely will be looking to buy one in the near future for what I do in the professional realm.
 
4.1 Ghz on the 16-core Threadripper is outstanding. 7900X already hits a huge wall in terms of temperature and power consumption. If they don't do anything about that the 16-core and 18-core are going to be horrible overclockers.
id bet money they will reach 4 ghz.. ;)
 
Well, you know, someone who is willing to play 144Hz monitor probably has a quite expensive rig. And when you have that expensive rig, you may get money for a Freesync or G-Sync monitor... please.

Gsync and Freesync have no room on competitive games. Input lag.
 
id bet money they will reach 4 ghz.. ;)

I have my doubts , the TIM really hurts OCing , unless they solder the IHS I really don't see how that will be possible.
 
Considering 4.5 ghz is possible on an average non delidded 7900x...i have less doubt than you do. :)

Now, you may need 3x120 aio or custom to get there, but id bet 4 ghz all cores no delid is possible. :)
 
7980XE is almost twice the silicon that the 7900X is so...yeah
 
Indeed it is. Ill let you know when you mention something I didnt already consider. :p

Edit: the thing boosts to 4.2 ghz on boost 2.0 and 4.4ghz on boost 3.0. Now that clearly isnt all cores (4.4 is one core), but... says a little something too. :)
 
Last edited:
As if a person who buys a 16 core processor cares about waiting a couple extra seconds for a single thread app.

18 core SKLx at 4.0 ghz? Not likely.

There is a reason they dropped thr clocks so much for the 7820x.

Even still, the 7980xe is twice as much.
 
Gsync and Freesync have no room on competitive games. Input lag.

Almost no existant input lag with those, those exist because people wanted vsync without input lag xD. The only moment they can lag is below low fps threshold and those type of games aren't usually very demanding, in fact is common to quit eye candy.
 
This has got Intel running scared. Perfect.
 
Well im a bit disappointed, Intel gonna win again in Raw Power sadly :/

had hope it would be more powerfull when it had 16 cores, mabye next time I buy AMD.
 
Thats amazing, so much want.
 
Gsync and Freesync have no room on competitive games. Input lag.

A youtuber by the name of Battle Nonsense makes youtube videos where he extensively tests input lag on multiplayer games using a high speed camera and a LED wired to a mouse button.

Anyways, he did a test on how much limiting frames actually affects input lag. In CS:GO, G-sync literally added 0.2 milliseconds of input lag, while Overwatch actually decreased 0.2 milliseconds of input lag.

This test is done in a less than 7 minute video. It is very informational and I recommend watching the entire video, as well as his other videos. However, if you are just interested in the comparison graphs, pause the video at 5:15:

 
You do understand that clocking the 8 core skylake-x @4ghz is actually downclocking it right?

At stock it will turbo two cores up to 4.5GHz and the all core turbo is already at 4GHz.

Turbo clock is not a baseline clock. It'll NEVER operate at 4GHz on ALL cores. So, when you overclock both to 4GHz on ALL cores, that means both actually operated at 4GHz on all cores at all times. Something NEITHER does out of the box, tubo or not.

Don't mix up special "All Core Turbo" settings in BIOS that forces CPU to run the turbo clocks on all cores. But that's not what any Intel CPU does when within factory specs.
 
Zen's gaming performance isn't amazing and may bottleneck rx vega at 1440p. Got a feeling that because I don't NEED 12 cores anymore because I'm going to be a streamer/gamer first, youtuber second, I'm going to end up getting a coffee lake 6-core, which I might sell for a possible 10nm upgrade early next year, which could actually be a free/profitable upgrade because of tax breaks when you buy a cpu and/or mobo in Holland. My gpu has to be rx vega because I want a 32" WQHD main monitor, which leaves normal or freesync options and I really want adaptive sync.

Tax breaks for buying PC hardware in NL? Please tell me more :D
 
You do understand that clocking the 8 core skylake-x @4ghz is actually downclocking it right?

At stock it will turbo two cores up to 4.5GHz and the all core turbo is already at 4GHz.

That's not the point, clocking both at the same speeds gives the best comparison.
 
The amount of salt from some of the Intel fanboys around here is really annoying....
 
Well im a bit disappointed, Intel gonna win again in Raw Power sadly :/

had hope it would be more powerfull when it had 16 cores, mabye next time I buy AMD.
Actually you want to buy a 16-core CPU or what? Because its single core performance will not be that much higher while at same cores Intel should be better in multi tasking by about 10-20%. And for what price? Yeah, twice the price. No thank you. :D
 
Actually you want to buy a 16-core CPU or what? Because its single core performance will not be that much higher while at same cores Intel should be better in multi tasking by about 10-20%. And for what price? Yeah, twice the price. No thank you. :D

For 999, TR 16 core is cheap yes yes. Dont get me worng, I would love for AMD to win this fight, for sure, so i COULD buy TR. But can see I need to buy Intel again :)
 
Back
Top