*** AMD ThreadRipper ***

[Tom B]

I'm going to be getting Threadripper very shortly (days/a couple of weeks) after release. When will we likely know what is the best RAM to go for or can we assume that 3200/3600 is the best option?

 

[ViRuS2k]

Probably the 8 Pack

I'm going to be getting Threadripper very shortly (days/a couple of weeks) after release. When will we likely know what is the best RAM to go for or can we assume that 3200/3600 is the best option?

Probably any of the 8 pack stuff would be fine
select the sticks that are speed compatible.... 2666 3200 4200 ect...

https://www.overclockers.co.uk/search?sSearch=8+pack+ddr4

 

[humbug]

Quad channel don't forget, 4 Ram modules.

 

[Panos]

I'm going to be getting Threadripper very shortly (days/a couple of weeks) after release. When will we likely know what is the best RAM to go for or can we assume that 3200/3600 is the best option?

I believe 4000Mhz will be supported because the controller in the CPU is the same for all Zen products. But wait for the board manufacturers. Hoping they won't cheapen out like they did on the X370

 

[DragonQ]

Quad channel don't forget, 4 Ram modules.

You can just use it in dual channel mode though.

 

[Panos]

You can just use it in dual channel mode though.

yes

 

[Boomstick777]

 

[Combat squirrel]

So we roughly know the price of the top end CPU's, but what about the 10 core Ryzen Threadripper 1900 ??

Any ideas or guesses on the lowest end TR CPU cost?

 

[DragonQ]

So we roughly know the price of the top end CPU's, but what about the 10 core Ryzen Threadripper 1900 ??

Any ideas or guesses on the lowest end TR CPU cost?

There won't be a 10c/20t CPU, the CCXs have to be symmetric so you're looking at 4x2=8, 4x3=12, or 4x4=16 cores. I am not sure if they are going to release chips with a single CCX disabled though, which'd allow 3x3=9 cores also. Seems unlikely since it's only 1 more core than the 4x2 configuration, plus they have no yield issues to worry about.

I'd guess there'll be an 8c/16t CPU for the same price as an R7 1800X or slightly higher.

 

[Deleted member 66701]

the CCXs have to be symmetric

Source?

 

[DragonQ]

I don't think AMD have themselves confirmed that yet, so I should say it's not a certainty.

However, the Platform Security Processor supposedly enforces symmetric CCXs. When reviewers were changing BIOS options to simulate Ryzen 3 and 5, they showed options for 2+2 and 4+0 but not 3+1. Also, it'd be a nightmare to optimise code for unbalanced CCXs - it'd be exactly like having a dual socket system with a quad core and hex core in it, which isn't done. It's also pretty telling that they've already announced two flagship SKUs and they are 12c and 16c variants - if there were going to be 10c and 14c variants, why would they not have gone with 16c and 14c as the first two? Their price is not so far apart.

Basically I definitely wouldn't hold your breath on getting a 10c/20t chip. Maybe there'll be a cheaper 12c/24t chip though.

 

[Combat squirrel]

There won't be a 10c/20t CPU, the CCXs have to be symmetric so you're looking at 4x2=8, 4x3=12, or 4x4=16 cores. I am not sure if they are going to release chips with a single CCX disabled though, which'd allow 3x3=9 cores also. Seems unlikely since it's only 1 more core than the 4x2 configuration, plus they have no yield issues to worry about.

I'd guess there'll be an 8c/16t CPU for the same price as an R7 1800X or slightly higher.

Iv seen a ton of lists with TR 10 core 1900/1900x CPU's listed, apparently there will be 10,12,14 and 16 core models, seen it many times, of course they may all be wrong, but strange their all listing such.

I don't think AMD have themselves confirmed that yet, so I should say it's not a certainty.

The Platform Security Processor supposedly enforces symmetric CCXs. Also, it'd be a nightmare to optimise code for unbalanced CCXs - it'd be exactly like having a dual socket system with a quad core and hex core in it. It's also pretty telling that they've already announced two flagship SKUs and they are 12c and 16c variants - if there were going to be 10c and 14c variants, why would they not have gone with 16c and 14c as the first two? Their price is not so far apart.

Or AMD want us to buy the expensive versions first - so not to eat Ryzen sales, then release less cores further down the line when bad yields come out, allowing them to disable a core per CCX..

 

[Rroff]

Given the market differences between the platforms they might not go down very low on core count anyhow - its not like they are limited for options for reusing packages that don't make the grade infact I'm guessing they bin the ones that do make the grade for TR and Epyc rather than the other way around.

 

[DragonQ]

Iv seen a ton of lists with TR 10 core 1900/1900x CPU's listed, apparently there will be 10,12,14 and 16 core models, seen it many times, of course they may all be wrong, but strange their all listing such.

Pretty sure the source for that 9-SKU list was Wccftech, so...

Or AMD want us to buy the expensive versions first - so not to eat Ryzen sales, then release less cores further down the line when bad yields come out, allowing them to disable a core per CCX..

Sure but 14c/28t will be more expensive than 12c/24t, and why would they make a 10c/20t version and not a 14c/28t version? These days it's typical to start with your flagship SKUs.

Also it's not about disabling a core per CCX, it's about disabling a core in some of the CCXs, which is rather different.

 

[humbug]

With Intel's bloated and complicated i9 line-up AMD would do well keeping it simple, no more than 4 TR chips, 2 at different clock speeds with 12 cores and 2 with 16 cores, thats it.

 

[KompuKare]

Iv seen a ton of lists with TR 10 core 1900/1900x CPU's listed, apparently there will be 10,12,14 and 16 core models, seen it many times, of course they may all be wrong, but strange their all listing such.

No it's not strange if you consider how rumours and rumour-copying works on the internet. I'm sure if we posted some credible sounding or looking rumour, it wouldn't take long to make it to wccftech to pick it up and then all the others might run with it. And chances are that nowhere in that chain would anyone check the facts.

 

[DragonQ]

With Intel's bloated and complicated i9 line-up AMD would do well keeping it simple, no more than 4 TR chips, 2 at different clock speeds with 12 cores and 2 with 16 cores, thats it.

I doubt they wouldn't release an 8c/16t chip and 6 SKUs sounds about right to me. A $700 12c/24t as the lowest SKU, for example, would be too high a barrier to entry. Remember the boards will cost more and there's a lot more features that'd make people want it not just for super high core counts. I'm not sure whether they'll go down to 6c/12t but 8c/16t is a certainty in my mind.

 

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

It looks like the design of the box has now been released:

http://hexus.net/tech/news/cpu/108244-amd-reveals-uniquely-designed-ryzen-threadripper-packaging/

 

[Combat squirrel]

I doubt they wouldn't release an 8c/16t chip and 6 SKUs sounds about right to me. A $700 12c/24t as the lowest SKU, for example, would be too high a barrier to entry. Remember the boards will cost more and there's a lot more features that'd make people want it not just for super high core counts. I'm not sure whether they'll go down to 6c/12t but 8c/16t is a certainty in my mind.

Yeah I agree, a £700 starting point seems to high to me, even intel offer low core stuff on x299, again, to get people into the eco system, I think AMD will do the same, perhaps not on launch, but maybe - Id love an 8 core x399 system to start me off, then move to 16core later

 

[Fishbait]

That's definitely a large bit of packaging for a processor!