Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 6th Aug 2018 20:58 UTC
AMD

The biggest news to come out of Computex, AMD's second generation of its Ryzen Threadripper platform, is almost here. Today's announcement is all amount images, speeds and feeds, specifications, and an 'unboxing' announcement, leading to pre-orders a week before retail. As much as it pains me that there is an unboxing embargo and pre-orders before we even know how the new chips will perform, here we are. Today we get to go through the on-box specifications, discuss the design, and show what AMD included in our press kit.

Detailed first look at the new Threadripper processors - including pricing.

Order by: Score:
Comment by Kroc
by Kroc on Mon 6th Aug 2018 21:25 UTC
Kroc
Member since:
2005-11-10

Nice summary in the article:

Across the metrics, AMD has more cores, is competitive on frequency, has more memory channels, more PCIe lanes, and supports higher memory clockspeeds. Intel has lower power, and above 16 cores a slight turbo clockspeed advantage. Meanwhile we already know from Ryzen 2000-series testing that cache speeds are a back-and-forth competition, and Intel has a slight IPC advantage. Game on.

Reply Score: 5

RE: Comment by Kroc
by werpu on Fri 10th Aug 2018 06:44 UTC in reply to "Comment by Kroc"
werpu Member since:
2006-01-18

Well there is one thing for Intel, they always have the higher price.

Reply Score: 2

Workstation/Server != Desktop
by Brendan on Tue 7th Aug 2018 07:29 UTC
Brendan
Member since:
2005-11-16

Hi,

Threadripper includes support for things like ECC, which means that TR 2990WX (around $1800) is comparable to Intel's server/workstation chips (e.g. Xeon Platinum 8180 at around $13000) and it's a little unfair to compare it to Intel's cheap/crippled desktop chips (e.g. Core i9-7980XE at around $2000).

- Brendan

Reply Score: 8

RE: Workstation/Server != Desktop
by Kochise on Tue 7th Aug 2018 08:49 UTC in reply to "Workstation/Server != Desktop"
Kochise Member since:
2006-03-03

It's always fun to consider who are really in the need for such power beasts.

Reply Score: 2

werpu Member since:
2006-01-18

Programmers who want to simulate a full cloud setup of a microservice application. Graphics artists, 3d designers etc, people who run simulations on their desktops.

The only areas where I can think of where you absolutely atm do not need such a beast is games (even the best games currently scale to 8 cores max) and the normal office workers who basically just need something which is not an pain to work with.

This is a real workstation processor from "core to core"

Reply Score: 2

RE: Workstation/Server != Desktop
by Adurbe on Tue 7th Aug 2018 09:28 UTC in reply to "Workstation/Server != Desktop"
Adurbe Member since:
2005-07-06

ah, to live in a world where the i9 is considered cheap and crippled....

Reply Score: 4

Brendan Member since:
2005-11-16

Hi,

ah, to live in a world where the i9 is considered cheap and crippled....


Everything is relative (e.g. "i9-7980XE is cheap, compared to an equivalent Xeon like the Xeon Gold 6150") and all relative statements are reversible (e.g. "Xeon Gold 6150 is expensive, compared to an equivelent desktop chip like i9-7980XE").

Of course it's at least slightly possible (in theory) that I have a hidden agenda (e.g. maybe I hate the way Intel marketing screws people with insane pricing if they want ECC) and that I want people to compare AMD's chips to Xeon chips to highlight Intel's malicious gouging; but then, I can't be too sure...

- Brendan

Reply Score: 5

TheForumTroll Member since:
2018-04-28

At least one of those holds true for all of this world. It *is* a crippled version. Which world are you from?

Reply Score: 2

Lennie Member since:
2007-09-22

Though, it's definitely not cheap.

Reply Score: 2