• 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.

OcUK Threadripper 2 review thread

blaineoliver said:
Comes from the same flawed logic as:
Let's not build a new cpu, no applications need the power.

We should build new hardware to drive software changes.
Click to expand...
You're not getting it.

There's no flawed logic and there's no anti AMD agenda going on here.

I agree with you that a lot of the software is not fully optimised for the rapidly increasing number of cores that are being flung at them. Believe me, if TR2 with 32 cores was 75% faster than my overclocked 7960X then I'd have been on it like a rash and sold my cheap as chips 7960 for a nice profit.

It's great that AMD are pushing the envelope and in turn pushing Intel out of their complacency mode.

None of the above changes the fact, that for me, there is no compelling reason to swap to a 2990 at this time.

If the situation changes then I'm happy to re-evaluate.
 
Pooh said:
There's no flawed logic
Click to expand...

Where it falls off a cliff is saying Intel should be happy in context of your situation of your programs being incapable of using the cores and threads.

Firstly, other people do have workloads that are not restricted. Obviously not of benefit to Intel.

Secondly Intels advantage in thread limited programs is not in their hands. It's the software writers.
 
However you look at it I'm still not rushing out to buy a TR2

I'll leave you alone to enjoy your logic... have fun.

4199675334_66c3e3d61d_z.jpg
 
Last edited:
Interesting logic.

I didn't even suggest buying a TR2. Why would I when you said you're doing fine on what you have.

Did post twice about your conclusion of good news for Intel though.
 
I did see that review re Linux and I agree with what you say.

Anyone who uses Adobe is stuck with Windows unfortunately.

At the end of the day it's not just about the CPU or RAM or OS or Application. It's about how they all come together and allow you to maximize productivity. For all the foibles of Adobe products, there's a reason why people, and companies use them. They're rather good at what they do even if they're not perfect.
 
Just an FYI. Buildzoid posted a break down video on the MSI X399 MEG.
Very rarely you hear him saying that the board is ridiculous but awesome... and the only upgrade of it, could be adding a sisterboard with more VRMs....
So those of us planning to get new TR boards should consider it, compared to Zenith for example, which has worse VRM than the X470 Crosshair 7...

-----------
@Pooh Adobe hasn't done anything to patch their products to work with Threadripper a year now.
That shows how much interest have for their customers, other than money grabbing. Most other applications similar to, have being patched.
And Windows 10 will be patched to improve TR performance on things that we see is behind compared to Linux.
That doesn't mean is a not a good CPU.

Also look at the previous page the video comparing the 7960X with the 2950X and 1950X.
on Premier there is 10% difference to 7960X yet both AMD CPUs are cheaper one of them 50% the other around 30%+.
And many would consider value for money here also, especially in light that they could keep their X399 boards for 2019 and 2020 CPUs.

While Intel already announced the X599 LGA 3467.
 
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 said:
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.
Click to expand...

True and especially since Ryzen launch we see how slow Microsoft is to deal with hardware changes.
Linux on the other hand is ahead.
 
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.
 
Adobe are well behind the curve for their software. So many better options out there. The 2950X seems like the ideal CPU for most home power users though for price and allowing some gaming too. For the price there just isn't anything not to like.
 
 
From the review

"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."
 
humbug said:
The problem is Windows....
Most of the people who buy these sort of CPU's don't use them in Windows, Windows is junk it cannot handle the power they have to give.
Click to expand...
What are you basing this assertion on?
Linux is extremely popular for servers no doubt but not seen any data for how much it's used for workstations.
If the 2990WX can only really take flight with Linux then that might limit sales for what is already a niche product.

I wonder how well a 32C/64T TR3 on 7nm using dual 16C dies would compare with 2990WX?
Being only dual die should reduce the inter-die communication problem for some workloads.
 
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.
 
Pooh said:
From the review

"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."
Click to expand...

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?
 
Last edited:
humbug said:
The problem is Windows....

For example:

wJoeXTL.png


Look at Linux reviews, the 2990WX is faster than the 7980XE in every single test, often hugely faster.

Most of the people who buy these sort of CPU's don't use them in Windows, Windows is junk it cannot handle the power they have to give.

https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=amd-linux-2990wx&num=4
Click to expand...

Too be fair to MS I don't think anyone could have envisioned a world full of reasonably priced 32/64 thread desktop chips offering this level of performance. Well not this side of 2025 at least.
 
jigger said:
Too be fair to MS I don't think anyone could have envisioned a world full of reasonably priced 32/64 thread desktop chips offering this level of performance. Well not this side of 2025 at least.
Click to expand...

Windows has been a piece of crap OS for more than a decade, they are a pretty useless company with some very badly designed software, what they have is a monopoly routed from the fact that because they have 90% of market share 90% of software is for Windows which then perpetuates the existing monopoly.

I'm sorry, it very very difficult to be fair and kind to Windows, to be fair to Windows its not to be kind to them.

A lot of content creators don't use Windows where they don't need to.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom