• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

AMD Zen 2 (Ryzen 3000) - *** NO COMPETITOR HINTING ***

He said, she said, blah blah blah. 3xxx series Ryzens are just a matter of a couple of months away so just hold yer horses and see whats what!
 
Someone said there were leaks from the 23rd partner meeting "if you look hard enough". Anyone got links? Scouring here, reddit, google news with a date stamp limit, etc. Not found much yet :)
 
If it is slower at 720p Pubg than anything from Intel then we'll never hear the end of it. Of course, in the real world very few people play games at 720p on a 244Hz monitor. I know it's hard to believe, but some people don't even play games.

This is so true, I have no idea why some people are solely obsessed with games performance. CPU's are not designed for gamers and hobbyists, I would say in fact less than 2% of the CPU's shipped annually see any sort of game use whatsoever in their entire lifespan; but 5% slower in "Game title" equals disaster and spending 2-3 times as much is somehow worthwhile.
 
This is so true, I have no idea why some people are solely obsessed with games performance. CPU's are not designed for gamers and hobbyists, I would say in fact less than 2% of the CPU's shipped annually see any sort of game use whatsoever in their entire lifespan; but 5% slower in "Game title" equals disaster and spending 2-3 times as much is somehow worthwhile.
Though picking numbers out of a hat doesn't lend credence to a theory either.

It could be end of year before we see 16c Ryzen 3xxx processors. If so, no matter. I'll be slightly disappointed personally as I'd love to see a 16c mainstream processor. Doesn't bother me much though as I'm on the Threadripper train anyway.
 
Though picking numbers out of a hat doesn't lend credence to a theory either.

It could be end of year before we see 16c Ryzen 3xxx processors. If so, no matter. I'll be slightly disappointed personally as I'd love to see a 16c mainstream processor. Doesn't bother me much though as I'm on the Threadripper train anyway.
I'll be surprised if the 16 core comes that late. I'm expecting a top end CPU and also a great performance/£ gaming part, only based on marketing though rather than knowledge of the process etc. Releasing a top end CPU early may persuade those who don't really need it, to buy one :). 16 core anniversary special? That would be in high demand.
 
The only issue apart from supply is that it might impact sales of TR too much.
Not even remotely. There's more to Threadripper than just the core count. Massive memory capacity, ECC memory support, proper amount of PCIe lanes for arrays of workstation GPUs or solid state RAID, etc.

If you only need cores for amateur/hobbyist/prosumer creation (Premiere Pro, Blender, etc.) then you'd probably only need a 12 or 16 core Ryzen. For proper pro creation workloads, software development, multiple VMs, Threadripper is what you really need.
 
16 core anniversary special? That would be in high demand.
I long suggested the leaked 16c/32t 3850X would be an anniversary model, essentially a very highly binned 3800X with the mythic 5GHz guaranteed, and then release the actual 3800X later on when the limited run has been allocated (like 8700K and 8086K but in reverse), but it looks like AMD are going with a 2700X and Radeon VII for the anniversary.

Although granted that doesn't mean to the exclusion of anything else.
 
Not even remotely. There's more to Threadripper than just the core count.
As a forum for enthusiasts I’m sure that doesn’t even need stating here.
It would be interesting to have a poll asking TR purchasers which of the workstation features they use, if any.

If you only need cores for amateur/hobbyist/prosumer creation (Premiere Pro, Blender, etc.) then you'd probably only need a 12 or 16 core Ryzen. For proper pro creation workloads, software development, multiple VMs, Threadripper is what you really need.

That’s a massively blanket statement and how do you back that up? A poll would be interesting.
Do we even know what extra features, if any, that the new AM4 chipset will offer? That alone might reduce the requirements to move up from AM4 for some.
ECC is already supported with some AM4 boards.
I used to be a professional software developer and TR would have been complete overkill for me.
So there’s clearly a crossover between 16C on AM4 and TR so to suggest that is not ‘remotely true’ as you did is just plain wrong.
Thoughts of those that have TR!
 
As a forum for enthusiasts I’m sure that doesn’t even need stating here.
It would be interesting to have a poll asking TR purchasers which of the workstation features they use, if any.



That’s a massively blanket statement and how do you back that up? A poll would be interesting.
Do we even know what extra features, if any, that the new AM4 chipset will offer? That alone might reduce the requirements to move up from AM4 for some.
ECC is already supported with some AM4 boards.
I used to be a professional software developer and TR would have been complete overkill for me.
So there’s clearly a crossover between 16C on AM4 and TR so to suggest that is not ‘remotely true’ as you did is just plain wrong.
Thoughts of those that have TR!

I know someone with a TR setup. Very pleased with it and doesn't use all of the resources available. However what it has is possibilities, for tinkering, RAID, VMs, future upgrades and lots of lanes. It does seem to be an enthusiasts dream albeit not a cheap one but much cheaper than Intel.
 
I know someone with a TR setup. Very pleased with it and doesn't use all of the resources available. However what it has is possibilities, for tinkering, RAID, VMs, future upgrades and lots of lanes. It does seem to be an enthusiasts dream albeit not a cheap one but much cheaper than Intel.
When you consider the performance of a single decent NVMe drive RAID becomes ever more niche.
VMs don't inherently require much in terms of CPU or I/O but they always require RAM.

I've seen a decent amount of people in this massive thread interested in a 12 or 16 core AM4 chip when they have already been available relatively cheaply for TR; especially the 1st gen chips.
So the interest is always there for more CPU grunt and especially if the overall platform cost is noticeably less as with AM4.
I will stick my neck out and say that is a fact.
 
That’s a massively blanket statement and how do you back that up?
20 years in the creative media industry tends to give you an idea ;) A decade of that was with a production company that specialised in film and video. At the beginning we were fine with single CPU systems as our bread and butter was short corporate pieces outputted to VHS so we never had the time nor budget to push anything crazy, but as the work started ramping in length and complexity our investment in a couple of dual socket Pentium III workstations paid for itself very quickly.

By the time I left we were fully solid state recording, either holding all the rushes on central NAS with fibre channel connections or a massive RAID 0 on each system. 64GB RAM was minimum. A former colleague from those days just bought a couple of edit machines for his freelance business, all based around Rampage VI Extremes, NVMe RAID for his rushes source, all 4:4:4 4K RED footage, and 128GB RAM (he was advised against Threadripper). That's HEDT for you, couldn't do this on a mainstream platform.
Do we even know what extra features, if any, that the new AM4 chipset will offer? That alone might reduce the requirements to move up from AM4 for some.
ECC is already supported with some AM4 boards.
Granted, we don't know exactly what X570 will bring, but I can guarantee you it won't be to the same level as HEDT. Will be interesting to see how vendors make use of PCIe 4, which could lead the way to properly implementing multiple NVMe drives at full chat, and that will bring a Threadripper benefit down to the mainstream. But there's no way you're getting 128GB RAM on AM4, and only the super expensive boards will have things like 10Gb ethernet on them (by which time the board cost is pushing into Threadripper territory anyway).
I used to be a professional software developer and TR would have been complete overkill for me.
I've worked with many people who have used HEDT platforms for a fairly beefy server setup at a development level to bench scalability of their code before deploying live. It's also very useful to smash a bazillion VMs with every major permutation of your target OSes on a single physical machine. Hell, for years even my web stuff had to support back as far as IE6 and I sure as hell aren't having 10 dev boxes in my studio! Fire up multiple instances of Windows from XP and up across VMs and you still need a bit of grunt.

In your corner of the world you may disagree, in my corner of the world I fully stand by what I said: 16c/32t Ryzen will not even remotely impact on Threadripper.
 
When you consider the performance of a single decent NVMe drive RAID becomes ever more niche.
VMs don't inherently require much in terms of CPU or I/O but they always require RAM.

I've seen a decent amount of people in this massive thread interested in a 12 or 16 core AM4 chip when they have already been available relatively cheaply for TR; especially the 1st gen chips.
So the interest is always there for more CPU grunt and especially if the overall platform cost is noticeably less as with AM4.
I will stick my neck out and say that is a fact.

Think less abut need and more about fun to use and ability to try lots of things you can't do on mainstream. Then it makes sense.

Mainstream is hamstrung with limited lanes. Maybe you want to play with multiple GPUs, RAID (even if overkill), 10Gbit etc. You can do all of that on TR, at the same time. You don't need it but some people want it ;)
 
In your corner of the world you may disagree, in my corner of the world I fully stand by what I said: 16c/32t Ryzen will not even remotely impact on Threadripper.
I see the misunderstanding.
I agree that AM4 16C will not impact those who actually require TR's extras.
I'm simply saying that there are people who have jumped to TR in reality purely for the additional cores.
The extra platform features may have titillated them and helped them to justify the cost in some cases but in reality they weren't needed or used.
You are talking about true workstation users where TR was a complete no brainer.
So for them it wasn't AM4 v TR but Xeon v TR, so a completely different discussion.
 
RE: TR stuff

I'm using a TR machine as my main system - I use it because the equivalent features and performance on Intel cost a bomb and AM4 couldn't match it.

I was able to replace a 2 CPU system that was getting a bit long in the tooth (2x5660 Xeon with 144gb RAM) - it was massive and burnt a lot of leccy, and now I have more power available for work in something that fits in a very small ATX case that's nearly silent in operation.

You cannot fit lots of NVME, NICs, HBAs and GPUs in any other system for the cost of my setup (at least when I got it), you can't put 128GB of RAM in an AM4 board either.

For my workload which is essentially disk IO limited I'm able to cut the time taken to complete a job to a fraction of the time it would take with SATA SSDs.

VMs are normally memory bound - but if you've got enough disk performance, the over allocation of memory is much less noticeable when your able to pull data off of an NVME RAID array at a rate that's several orders of magnitude higher than traditional disk.

AM4 is getting better for heavy workloads, we might see 12 and 16 core offerings soon, 32gb udimms should also be generally available (and hopefully supported) this year, and boards with better support for PCIE bifurcation are appearing - like the new Asrockrack X470D4U, boards like this don't require you to waste 8 or 16 lanes on a graphics card, freeing up capacity for other devices, which might better suit users like myself, who don't game that much, but want a lot of performance without using some refurbished eBay special enterprise gear that will take up way to much space and have other odd quirks that make them unsuited for the home.

AM4 can currently compete with the E3 / Xeon E lineup quite happily - but cannot match anything bigger (yet)
 
I am just shaking my head at the mere thought of a nvme raid 0, raid 1 yes by all means, but raid 0? raid 0 should never have ever existed in the first place as raid is about redundancy, but ssd's should have long killed off raid 0 now.
 
why we dont know if the amd chips are faster yet ?
What does it have to do with AMD? Intel have had a process lead for their entire existence, yet the slide suggests a process they were supposed to be using in shipped parts in 2016 now might not be ready until 2022. That is embarrassing regardless of anything AMD is doing.
 
I am just shaking my head at the mere thought of a nvme raid 0, raid 1 yes by all means, but raid 0? raid 0 should never have ever existed in the first place as raid is about redundancy, but ssd's should have long killed off raid 0 now.

I have my OS and important stuff on an SSD mirror, but anything that's in flight data or VMs I can quite happily run on striped NVME - just take snapshots and copy them to a NAS in my case (or sometimes another local drive).

The endurance and MTBF rating on something as cheap as a Samsung Evo is more than enough at the price point - just chuck in bin and get another for £70
 
Back
Top Bottom