OcUK Threadripper 2 review thread

CAT-THE-FIFTH · 13 Aug 2018 at 14:14

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S02-DlKaIIU

Possible NV driver issue with 2990WX!

https://www.golem.de/news/32-kern-cpu-threadripper-2990wx-laeuft-mit-radeons-besser-1808-136016.html
https://www.hardocp.com/news/2018/0...g_benchmarks_stunted_by_faulty_nvidia_driver/

CAT-THE-FIFTH · 13 Aug 2018 at 19:00

Anandtech ran a number of tests with the plastic still on the cooler.

CAT-THE-FIFTH · 13 Aug 2018 at 22:41

Panos said:
@CAT-THE-FIFTH where is your review of the 2990WX. The one you had your cat posing on some other forums?

That wasn't mine(sadly) - I saw it on AT.

CAT-THE-FIFTH · 15 Aug 2018 at 12:27

The issue is if Windows and applications are going to get confused by so many threads,then it probably means X599 will start to have the same problems too.

CAT-THE-FIFTH · 15 Aug 2018 at 12:34

Also I agree with Panos on the 2950X,its going to be far cheaper than the Core i7 7900X,let alone the Core i7 7960X,but it really is competitive even in Adobe software.

BTW,since I into photography,I am starting to move away from certain Adobe applications - for instance I prefer DXO(especially when it comes to noise reduction) when it comes to RAW processing due to DXO Prime noise reduction,and that not only that it scales well with CPU cores,but also can use the graphics card too,which is great when converting a whole lot of images in a batch.

CAT-THE-FIFTH · 15 Aug 2018 at 13:00

OP updated!!

This review seems to test video transcoding and rendering using multiple applications and even does Linux testing:

https://techgage.com/article/amd-ryzen-threadripper-2990wx-32-core-workstation-processor-review/

3. Encoding: Premiere Pro, Vegas, PhotoScan, Resolve & LameXP
4. Rendering: Arnold, Blender, KeyShot, Radeon ProRender & V-Ray Next
5. Rendering: Adobe Dimension, Cinebench, Cinema 4D, Corona, POV-Ray
6. Linux: Rendering, Compiling, Compression, & Cryptography

CAT-THE-FIFTH · 15 Aug 2018 at 15:09

humbug said:
His conclusion makes no sense, it is still mostly faster than the more expensive 7980XE even when not at its best, when at its best its a lot faster than the 7980XE, if you're doing rendering work it hammers the crap out of the 7980XE....

I don't understand how how thinks that is unfortunate, its unfortunate for Intel, not AMD.

Its like saying "CPU A is faster than CPU B, how unfortunate for CPU A" No, are you mad?

He hasn't quoted the full summary for some weird reason:

Final Thoughts
It’s not going to be difficult summing this one up. Without question, AMD is offering an unbelievable chip with the Ryzen Threadripper 2990WX. I’m still surprised that it even exists, more than most, it seems. I just couldn’t see AMD literally doubling the core count after a single year, but here we are.

I’ve talked lots about core counts, but in actuality, it’s not the core counts that really matter at the end of the day. Do you buy your Radeons and GeForces based on their core counts? Probably not. What you want is the overall performance. The same principle should be applied here. On one hand, it’s unfortunate that AMD needs 32 cores to only just beat Intel’s 18-core in select tests, but AMD’s charging about the same ($1799) for its 2990WX that Intel is still charging for its 7980XE ($1850).

But it’s not those select tests that are going to matter to most people who are reading this review to learn how the chip can impact their workload. Like any workstation scenario, not everyone’s needs are the same. One chip might excel in one area, but if it’s not the area you deal with, then the point is moot.

If you use Arnold, for example, you stand to see incredible gains in performance with a chip like the 2990WX. The same could be said for pretty much every other renderer tested. Encoding scenarios are really hit or miss, even within the same suite. AMD performed great in certain tests, but fell behind in others – often attributed to applications that wouldn’t use the CPU properly.

Having tested the 16-core and 18-core chips before this, I felt like I was really quite prepared for this performance look. Admittedly, though, I was thrown some curve-balls, but it’s really to be expected. You can’t just double the cores and expect every bit of software to pretend like it doesn’t notice. HandBrake in Linux used literally half of the CPU, for example. Then there were applications like PhotoScan which did not use AMD’s many-core chips too well – or Intel for that matter, since SMT off proved better for both of them.

Fortunately, scaling worked well overall, just to different levels. If you are a render addict, it’s almost guaranteed that you’re going to see enormous gains, and I’d suspect those gains will only get better as time goes on, as developers design for these architectures and core counts. I have suspicions that AMD will be demoing Threadripper with a partner at next week’s SIGGRAPH, which will be a testament to that.

Even with some 35 graphs, it’s hard to wrap this up and feel like I covered enough ground. There’s much more that could have been tackled, but that’s probably best left for follow-up content. Gaming will never be a focus of mine with these biggest Threadrippers, but I will definitely be following-up on testing once in a while to see how the ecosystem has improved to better cater to these big chips. I’ve been in contact with a few ISVs already, and hope to talk to more at SIGGRAPH next week to gauge their thoughts.

If there’s anything I didn’t cover that you think I should have, please feel free to jump into the comment section and let me know. If you also have ideas for follow-up testing, that’d be welcomed, as well. New GPUs are coming soon, so time is strapped, but I am eager to get more testing done with the 2990WX soon. Having all that power on tap is kind of addicting.

I don’t really think about awarding Editor’s Choices that often; it really has to impress me to earn it. And the Ryzen Threadripper 2990WX definitely does earn it. It’s rough around some edges, partly due to AMD’s obsession with releasing more cores before developers realize they need to code for them, but it’s an incredible performer; a true “ultimate” workstation processor. It might not be for your workload, but if it is, the gains will be simply sublime. And, you don’t need exotic cooling for it.

If it hasn’t been stated enough already though, software optimization is required here, especially with SMT involved. While some software may have been exposed to multi-socket systems with very high-end servers and core-counts, for workstations it’s a different matter. The tell-tale signs are good this early in the release based on synthetic tests, but there is considerable room for improvement in some live software.

I know I didn’t touch on the 2950X as much as I should have, but I feel like we honestly knew what to expect from that to begin with, especially given the second-gen Ryzen series, and also what we knew from the 1950X (which was performance tackled just a few weeks ago). Fortunately, the 2950X was in fact faster than the 1950X in every test, sometimes by a greater margin than I expected. A nice iteration, but of course not a reason to jump up from the 1950X. For those looking to build a new rig, and are tempted by a 16-core processor priced at $899, it’s an excellent option.

He gave it a rare Editors award.

The 2950X looks pretty solid in its price range.

Edit!!

Also look at the very poor core scaling on the Intel chips from 10 to 18 cores.

So imagine how the 28 core Intel CPU on X599 is going to look too.

Second Edit!!

TBH,the Ryzen 7 2700X also looks pretty solid value too.

CAT-THE-FIFTH · 15 Aug 2018 at 15:17

lnoton said:
Do you think MS will start to look at optimisations?

Whislt they are in the server space too, not to the same extent as Linux and likely they only optimise for their server products such as sqlserver etc.

The OS has probably never seen so many cores lol.

Intel has their own Linux distro - Phoronix tested it with the 2990WX,so even Intel is probably aware there are issues too.

Pooh said:
Stop and take a breath Humbug before you injure yourself or that Ryzen 1600 of yours.....

Look, the 2990 has for all intents and purposes 80% more cores than a 7980X, 32 rather than 18 so 14 extra, so the fact remains that while it is beating it, it's not monstering it, irrespective of OS, and that's before you get anywhere near overclocking potential. I don't care how well it does in synthetic benches, I'm more interested in real world performance of the Apps I use, unless I haven't stated that enough in this thread.

The 7980XE has 80% more cores than the 7900X,yet its nowhere near that much faster either. Its probably why Intel has its own Linux distro.

CAT-THE-FIFTH · 15 Aug 2018 at 15:30

It will be interesting to see how the 12 core 2920WX does TBH.

CAT-THE-FIFTH · 15 Aug 2018 at 15:38

SiDeards73 said:
Intel know damn well most of the people using HEDT setups are happy with their product performing admirably in given tasks, they know if they increase core counts on the software they excel at they will blow AMD away, so really there is nothing for them to worry about.

The issue is Intel has the same scaling problem,and you only need to compare the 2950X and 7960X which have the same number of cores to higher end models,so I doubt Intel adding more cores is going to work(there is an Intel Linux distro probably for this very same reason),especially if you look at how massive the Intel chips are. Most of the difference is probably down to IPC or memory bandwidth where the Intel platform has an advantage.

The Intel 10 core lower end HEDT chip is 322MM2 and the middle level HEDT 18 core chip is 484MM2. The 28 core top end HEDT chip is 698MM2.

The Ryzen chip is 213MM2,so yields are going to be much higher for AMD. Its easier for them to add moar cores than Intel.

CAT-THE-FIFTH · 15 Aug 2018 at 15:56

Panos said:
@CAT-THE-FIFTH
Hexus posted a 2950X review to add

https://hexus.net/tech/reviews/cpu/121061-amd-ryzen-threadripper-2950x/

Must say impressive especially it is so close to the 7980XE!!!

Added to the OP.Thanks!

CAT-THE-FIFTH · 15 Aug 2018 at 18:38

Just wow:

https://www.golem.de/news/32-kern-cpu-threadripper-2990wx-laeuft-mit-radeons-besser-1808-136016.html
https://www.hardocp.com/news/2018/0...g_benchmarks_stunted_by_faulty_nvidia_driver/

NinjaCool said:
Golem.de clams that the Threadripper 2990WX is being held back by a faulty Nvidia driver
In some games the 32 core beast run at half the speed compared to the 16 core 2950X when running an Nvidia Geforce GTX 1080 Ti GPU!

Link: https://tinyurl.com/y87glxh6 (Google translated)

Battlefield 1, Warhammer 2, F1 2017, Rise of the Tomb Raider and The Witcher 3 are showing similar issues according to the article.

CAT-THE-FIFTH · 15 Aug 2018 at 19:25

Even Intel seems to benefit from Linux as I suspected.I would love to see the 7980XE and 2990WX benched together under Linux,and maybe the X599 platform too:

8 Pack said:
We have a lot of heavy hitters who benched i9 with Linux and noticed a good improvement. They all chose Linux cluster over Windows.

CAT-THE-FIFTH · 16 Aug 2018 at 16:47

TBF,on the Nvidia driver thingy,its a bit of a fail AMD hadn't tested this out in the first place and at least mentioned it in the reviewer guide(or even mentioned it to Nvidia).

CAT-THE-FIFTH · 17 Aug 2018 at 13:38

pete910 said:
@CAT-THE-FIFTH Phoronix tested win server on the 2990wx, no wonder 99% of servers run Linux!

https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=windows-server-2990wx&num=1

Wow!

Also comparison added to the OP - thanks!

CAT-THE-FIFTH · 18 Aug 2018 at 16:28

NZXT30 said:
I was thinking of getting the 12 core one since its on a good deal and upgrade in the future when I need so. I do need more than 8 cores but nowhere near 32. I just can never see value on an expensive motherboard. Maybe if ddr4 wasn't so overpriced I could stomach a pricey mobo.

That's the thing - I have noticed the AMD AM4/TR2 boards being a bit more expensive than I expected too,but remember Intel is releasing X599 to support CPUs above 18 cores too. This is probably why the TR2 motherboards cost that bit extra since the companies have to support a much wider array of CPUs and make sure things like VRMs are sufficiently powerful enough.

CAT-THE-FIFTH · 18 Aug 2018 at 17:01

arc@css said:
In layman's terms, what do EPYC and HEDT mean?

Epyc is the AMD server platform and HEDT is High End DeskTop.

Competitor rules

OcUK Threadripper 2 review thread

More options

CAT-THE-FIFTH

CAT-THE-FIFTH

CAT-THE-FIFTH

CAT-THE-FIFTH

CAT-THE-FIFTH

CAT-THE-FIFTH

CAT-THE-FIFTH

CAT-THE-FIFTH

CAT-THE-FIFTH

CAT-THE-FIFTH

CAT-THE-FIFTH

CAT-THE-FIFTH

CAT-THE-FIFTH

CAT-THE-FIFTH

CAT-THE-FIFTH

CAT-THE-FIFTH

CAT-THE-FIFTH

CAT-THE-FIFTH

CAT-THE-FIFTH

CAT-THE-FIFTH

CAT-THE-FIFTH

CAT-THE-FIFTH

CAT-THE-FIFTH

CAT-THE-FIFTH

CAT-THE-FIFTH

CAT-THE-FIFTH

CAT-THE-FIFTH

CAT-THE-FIFTH

CAT-THE-FIFTH

CAT-THE-FIFTH

CAT-THE-FIFTH

CAT-THE-FIFTH

CAT-THE-FIFTH

CAT-THE-FIFTH