AMD Announces Official Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9000 WX-Series Pricing

[TheLostSwede]

A month ago, AMD launched the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9000 WX-Series of processors, but at the time, the company didn't provide any pricing. Today, in a blog post, the company revealed the pricing for five of the six new Threadripper processors, skipping the 12-core 9945WX for some reason. As these are workstation chips with up to 96 cores, pricing is accordingly high, with the 16-core 9955WX coming in at US$1,649. The 24-core 9965WX comes in at US$2,899, followed by the 32-core 9975WX at US$4,099. Things start to get really eye watering with the 64-core 9985WX at US$7,999 and finally the 96-core 9995WX at US$11,699.

In all fairness, the per core cost actually gets a lot lower with the two high-end parts, but it's pretty clear that these 350 W TDP chips are not intended for consumer use. AMD also added some new benchmark figures, comparing the 9995WX with Intel's Xeon W9-3595X. AMD claims to best it by between 40 and 145 percent, depending on the benchmark in question. It's a bit of an unfair comparison though, as the W9-3595X is only a 60-core CPU that has an MSRP of US$5,889, but Intel doesn't have any higher-end options in its workstation lineup either. It would've made more sense to put the W9-3595X up against the 9985WX though, as the two are closer both in terms of core count and price point.



View at TechPowerUp Main Site | Source

 

[unwind-protect]

Ouch,

Can somebody remind me how the Pro ones differ this time? Do they have a different socket? Do the non-Pros use registered RAM?

 

[the54thvoid]

It's a bit of an unfair comparison though, as the W9-3595X is only a 60-core CPU that has an MSRP of US$5,889, but Intel doesn't have any higher-end options in its workstation lineup either. It would've made more sense to put the W9-3595X up against the 9985WX though, as the two are closer both in terms of core count and price point.

It's not unfair if Intel offers nothing to match (does it? I'm almost tech agnostic). You pit both of each manufacturers best against the other, irrespective of stats. So if the 3595X is Intel's flagship, you have to compare against it. And if the AMD chip is the champ, they price it anyway they want. Like all tech companies do.

 

[ZoneDymo]

It's not unfair if Intel offers nothing to match (does it? I'm almost tech agnostic). You pit both of each manufacturers best against the other, irrespective of stats. So if the 3595X is Intel's flagship, you have to compare against it. And if the AMD chip is the champ, they price it anyway they want. Like all tech companies do.

You can compare on stats, compare on price or indeed compare on the best offered sure.
All has their pros and cons.

Here it would be equivalent of Nvidia showing off trhe RTX5090 against the RX9070XT and beating their chest on how much better it is.
Regardless of the massive price difference or that AMD specifically mentioned not trying to compete with the high end.
Its not wrong, there is something to be said for showing off the halo product as that is its entire purpose, but there is also something disingenious about it, ya know, like not lying but not telling the whole truth sorta deal.

 

[Phayzon]

It's not unfair if Intel offers nothing to match (does it? I'm almost tech agnostic). You pit both of each manufacturers best against the other, irrespective of stats. So if the 3595X is Intel's flagship, you have to compare against it. And if the AMD chip is the champ, they price it anyway they want. Like all tech companies do.

Personally I would've liked to see the the Intel chip against the 9985WX, as its the closest in core count and price to the 3959X. However, that might not look so favorable for AMD. Four of those benchmarks show the 9995WX less than 60% faster... on a chip with 60% more cores, for over double the price tag.

 

[Visible Noise]

AMD wants you to know a $12,000 CPU is faster than a $6,000 CPU.

Just in case you’re in the market for one and couldn’t figure it out on your own.

 

[igormp]

Ouch,

Can somebody remind me how the Pro ones differ this time? Do they have a different socket? Do the non-Pros use registered RAM?

I believe it's still the same as the 7000 series, given that the IOD hasn't changed. Different chipset motherboards for Pro vs non-Pro (TRX50 works with both pro and non-pro, WRX90 is pro-only).
TRX50 is quad-channel, pro does octa-channel. Non-pro does x48 5.0 + x24 4.0 lanes, pro does x128 5.0 lanes. There's also that difference when it comes to some security features and extra management support.
Both of them only work with DDR5 RDIMMs, no UDIMM support whatsoever.

There are some TRX50 motherboards that do work with octa-channel when paired with a Pro CPU, but only 4 channels with a non-Pro one (always 1DPC).

 

[TheLostSwede]

It's not unfair if Intel offers nothing to match (does it? I'm almost tech agnostic). You pit both of each manufacturers best against the other, irrespective of stats. So if the 3595X is Intel's flagship, you have to compare against it. And if the AMD chip is the champ, they price it anyway they want. Like all tech companies do.

Well, the AMD chips is about twice the price, so yes, that makes it unfair in the sense that most people/companies don't have twice the budget for a CPU.

Ouch,

Can somebody remind me how the Pro ones differ this time? Do they have a different socket? Do the non-Pros use registered RAM?

If you follow the link in the copy text, that takes you to the AMD presentation from a month ago that has all the details.

 

[blahoink01]

You can compare on stats, compare on price or indeed compare on the best offered sure.
All has their pros and cons.

Here it would be equivalent of Nvidia showing off trhe RTX5090 against the RX9070XT and beating their chest on how much better it is.
Regardless of the massive price difference or that AMD specifically mentioned not trying to compete with the high end.
Its not wrong, there is something to be said for showing off the halo product as that is its entire purpose, but there is also something disingenious about it, ya know, like not lying but not telling the whole truth sorta deal.

You nailed it with your first two sentences. I have clients buying $30K to $40K workstations for Ansys and other software sets. They would gladly spend $6K to reduce run times or increase the number of iterative tests. For them, the best vs everything else (not just Intel's flagship) is a valuable datapoint.

 

[DemonicRyzen666]

Still no 3D cache versions.
The bios leak lied.

 

[JohH]

The bios leak lied.

Not really. The setting is present in the BIOS. Anyone thinking it implied 3D cache Threadripper extrapolated too much. It's a remnant from building on firmware which also supported Genoa-X.

 

[TumbleGeorge]

Ouch,

Can somebody remind me how the Pro ones differ this time? Do they have a different socket? Do the non-Pros use registered RAM?

Same 8 channel RAM access but AVX-512 is undivided with full 512 bit path. In previous 7000 series was executed divided into 2 pipelines of 256 bits each.
Also support faster DDR5 memory and have other changes in front side of CPU.

 

[A Computer Guy]

It seems like a sin to offer a 16-core 9955WX at US$1,649 when 9950x is dipping into $500-$600 price range ($400-$500 used) but let's face it that sweet number of PCIe lanes and RAM capacity of the wx series is awesome.

 

[ir_cow]

Who in their right mind would buy the 9955WX when the Ryzen is under $600? You must really need a lot of extra PCIe lanes.

 

[Dr. Dro]

I recall when people genuinely bemoaned the Core i7-6950X's $1700 launch price. Now that's the pricing for the bottom model, with an $11700 CPU at the top.

Oh, Intel, how I wish you hadn't fumbled everything and could come back in the game. I miss those fantastic $350 HEDT chips like the i7-5820K, and they're more needed than ever before.

 

[HBSound]

I would like to see a manufacturer produce a MATX motherboard for the Threadripper Series. Asrock Rack produces the W790D8UD-1L1N2T/BCM, based on the supports for Intel® Xeon® W-2500/2400 and W-3500/3400 series processors, the chipset - Intel W790, and has the Deep Micro-ATX size (10.4" x 10.5").

 

[JustBenching]

It's not unfair if Intel offers nothing to match (does it? I'm almost tech agnostic). You pit both of each manufacturers best against the other, irrespective of stats. So if the 3595X is Intel's flagship, you have to compare against it. And if the AMD chip is the champ, they price it anyway they want. Like all tech companies do.

You think reviews should be comparing the 9700xt against the 5090?

I recall when people genuinely bemoaned the Core i7-6950X's $1700 launch price. Now that's the pricing for the bottom model, with an $11700 CPU at the top.

Oh, Intel, how I wish you hadn't fumbled everything and could come back in the game. I miss those fantastic $350 HEDT chips like the i7-5820K, and they're more needed than ever before.

Monopoly intel having 99% of the market offered 350$ hedt cpus. Clearly, intelgreedia, hail amd

Ive said it back in early 2020 already even before zen 3 cause i could see the writing on the wall, amd is by far the greediest company humanity has ever seen, they just were never in a position to exercise it. Now they are in the cpu space, and it looks bleak. I feel like an idiot trusting them and buying all of their zen products to support them cause i was just like your typical amd fan back then, it took me 3 years to see the trap.

 

[the54thvoid]

You think reviews should be comparing the 9700xt against the 5090?

Yup. It should be listed in the heirarchy - it allows people to make decisions.

 

[JustBenching]

Yup. It should be listed in the heirarchy - it allows people to make decisions.

I guess we disagree, i think comparisons should take price into account first and foremost.

My pizza is twice the size of my competitors pizza is kinda useless if your pizza is twice the price cause ill just buy 2 pizzas from your competitor.

Now that analogy doesn't exactly work with gpus in all cases but it works in the server space. A 12k$ server chip being faster than a 6k server chip is not really a selling point - since i can scale and put 2 of those 6k cpus in a mobo

 

[Hecate91]

Monopoly intel having 99% of the market offered 350$ hedt cpus. Clearly, intelgreedia, hail amd

Ive said it back in early 2020 already even before zen 3 cause i could see the writing on the wall, amd is by far the greediest company humanity has ever seen, they just were never in a position to exercise it. Now they are in the cpu space, and it looks bleak. I feel like an idiot trusting them and buying all of their zen products to support them cause i was just like your typical amd fan back then, it took me 3 years to see the trap.

So where are those $350 HEDT cpu's then?
Intel has been the most greedy with stagnating the market, and at this tier offering discounts to companies to not buy from the competition. We can see where Intel's greediness has gotten them when they decided to manipulate the market instead of keep innovating.
AMD selling a $12,000 CPU is simply because they're on the top, and Intel has nothing even close to compete with a 96 core CPU.

 

[TumbleGeorge]

So where are those $350 HEDT cpu's then?

Nowhere. Inflation+more expensive lithographic node+much more transistors and R&D. Less yield because more errors when baking wafer, eventually with more than one pass. And in this thread we discuss not HEDT 9000X but 9000WS or workstation CPUs.

 

[JustBenching]

So where are those $350 HEDT cpu's then?
Intel has been the most greedy with stagnating the market, and at this tier offering discounts to companies to not buy from the competition. We can see where Intel's greediness has gotten them when they decided to manipulate the market instead of keep innovating.
AMD selling a $12,000 CPU is simply because they're on the top, and Intel has nothing even close to compete with a 96 core CPU.

Normally - everytime you complain about nvidia or past Intel (the one you call 4core) i'd ask you to think back on what you just said "they are / were simply on the top and the competition has nothing to compete with it", but alas, I don't expect you to think logically, you are too emotionally invested in multibillion $ companies, so it's pointless. Keep doing what you are doing, have fun.

But to actually address your question, Intel is in fact offering quad channel and 64 lane platforms with CPUs starting at 559$ (the w3 - 2525 for example). AMD's cheapest costs 3 times that, doesn't it?

 

[igormp]

Who in their right mind would buy the 9955WX when the Ryzen is under $600? You must really need a lot of extra PCIe lanes.

I guess if you're someone that has no much need for CPU horsepower alone, but do need the memory bandwidth or the extra IO.

Seems like a niche case, but then HEDT in general is a ton of different niche cases globbed up anyway.

 

[JohH]

Are the complaints that AMD doesn't offer a lowend highend desktop product? In general it seems like an odd niche. But I guess if Intel is doing it then it must sell...

 

[Dr. Dro]

So where are those $350 HEDT cpu's then?

It's a good time to ask AMD about that! It's not even that they didn't make the low end Threadripper with the identical core count to the top Ryzen 9, it's just that they added the "Pro" and "WX" monikers and charge $1000 more than they should for it.

Are the complaints that AMD doesn't offer a lowend highend desktop product? In general it seems like an odd niche. But I guess if Intel is doing it then it must sell...

Such "niche" is what made high end gaming PCs and relatively accessible workstation-grade desktops exist up until the late 2010s, with the Intel X299 platform. Intel's foundry woes made their HEDT platform lose viability as to keep up, they needed impressive and equally expensive large slabs of silicon (Solaris owns a W9-3495X, check the Xeon owners' club thread - that processor is the size of a credit card), AMD stepped in and initially, had something going with the X399 platform, but then came Zen 2, COVID, high EPYC demand.

TRX40 platform was subsequently aborted and abandoned mid-way through on Zen 2 receiving no further updates, Zen 3 Threadripper was completed but canceled (then later released only to server and their new "high-end high-end" desktop, aka Threadripper Pro), all while storage and pretty much everything began running on PCI Express, lovely. AMD made consumer Threadripper non-Pro chips at least up until Zen 4, but with extremely high pricing, the top end Zen 4 TR was $5000.

Intel never recovered, and ran into even more trouble of its own, it's a hollow shell of a company compared to what it used to be 10 years ago. With Raptor Lake besieged by microcode and firmware bugs, Arrow Lake failing to meet performance expectations and outsourced to TSMC, unable to be manufactured internally by Intel due to their ongoing and seemingly never ending foundry issues, plus the onslaught by AMD's chiplet server chips and their excellent scalability, Intel's just taking loss after loss after loss, it's brutal out there.