AMD 3990X MONSTER 64 / 128 PROCESSOR IS AVAILABLE FROM OcUK !!!

I'm possibly being a party-pooper but that 256 MB cache looks rather low for 64 cores. It's only 4 MB per core. The thing is, the chances of a cache miss increase non-linearly with the number of cores and once you get frequent cache misses you're going to be limited by the DRAM bandwidth. (Yes, I'm aware that the 256 MB is shared cache.)
 
Grim5 said:
4x 3950x would also draw 420w while the 3990x is just 280w! That's 4.3w per core!!
Click to expand...
if you go by the TPD then yes because the 3990x has a lower core clock. The TDP's are usually for one thread! and so for both the 3950x and 3990x they will both use more and probably about for the same when using many threads (say 32 threads).
 
Alan1969 said:
if you go by the TPD then yes because the 3990x has a lower core clock. The TDP's are usually for one thread! and so for both the 3950x and 3990x they will both use more and probably about for the same when using many threads (say 32 threads).
Click to expand...

you sure? I 3950x reviews I've looked at show it only between 90w and 105w in full multi thread load from cinebencb and blender.

same goes for 3960x and 3970x - reviews I've seen show between 270w and 280w so it's either right on the money or even lower than stated TDP but I haven't seen higher.

Unless you were looking at overclocked CPus
 
Grim5 said:
you sure? I 3950x reviews I've looked at show it only between 90w and 105w in full multi thread load from cinebencb and blender.

same goes for 3960x and 3970x - reviews I've seen show between 270w and 280w so it's either right on the money or even lower than stated TDP but I haven't seen higher.

Unless you were looking at overclocked CPus
Click to expand...
no I am not sure any more. I thought that previously I read the definition on AMD's website that the TDP was for a single bursty thread. For my 3600 that I use for gaming, I sometimes look at HW monitor and see that although there are 12 threads available, that the games software tends to only use 4 threads simultaneously, they keep changing so difficult to follow, and note that each of those four threads wont be as bursty as when they test and quote the TDP - and therefore I am expecting that my cooling solution needs to be more than 65w (I have an air cooler that quotes suitable for 220w).

However I have just looked at AMD's website in the footnotes etc and knowledge base articles and cannot find any reference to TDP any more. I know that it is a contentious subject and that Intell does it and quotes a different way (so that you cannot differently compare a TDP from Intel with AMD or even the cooler manufacturers).
 
tdp is a made up number, the power draw through the 8 pin measured in real life is the only way to get an apples to apples power figure. gamers nexus have a great video on tdp on amd chips.
 
Alan1969 said:
no I am not sure any more. I thought that previously I read the definition on AMD's website that the TDP was for a single bursty thread. For my 3600 that I use for gaming, I sometimes look at HW monitor and see that although there are 12 threads available, that the games software tends to only use 4 threads simultaneously, they keep changing so difficult to follow, and note that each of those four threads wont be as bursty as when they test and quote the TDP - and therefore I am expecting that my cooling solution needs to be more than 65w (I have an air cooler that quotes suitable for 220w).

However I have just looked at AMD's website in the footnotes etc and knowledge base articles and cannot find any reference to TDP any more. I know that it is a contentious subject and that Intell does it and quotes a different way (so that you cannot differently compare a TDP from Intel with AMD or even the cooler manufacturers).
Click to expand...
Anandtech have already shown all ryzen chips exceed way past a 100w, TDP numbers I simply do not follow.
 
TDP is a load of BS that both companies use to prevent simple power consumption comparisons while at the same time giving the impression to the ignorant that it IS power consumption.

The bottom line is it isn't a meaningful reflection of the power consumption of the cpu and each company claims a different calculation for their TDP number. To make sure the water is extra muddy they've even changed what calculation they feel like calling TDP over the years.

Isn't worth the advertising space it takes up, you are obliged to go to third party sites to find actual power consumption numbers.

Obviously Intel and AMD know what their chips use, they simply want to obscure it rather than having it on display.
 
Alan1969 said:
It depends on how you are using your cpu, is it just for gaming? if so then you will be able to get away with a lot less. I intend to use my dual fan cpu cooler for a 4900x
https://www.overclockers.co.uk/arct...duo-white-cpu-cooler-2-x-120mm-hs-074-ar.html
Click to expand...

Yep, mainly rFactor 2, Forza Horizon 4 and COD MW, I do the odd video encoding of my sim racing shenanigans (so much quicker compared to the 4790k) but not enough to worry I think! Do also have the 240mm at the top pushing air out of the case at least!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom