• 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.

*** Official Ryzen Threadripper Owners Thread ***

  • Thread starter Thread starter Deleted member 66701
  • Start date Start date
atomic7431 said:
yes its just interesting as i was reading people saying the single core performance from AMD isnt as good as intel in general and in gaming terms.

With it performing as good as my 5820k in that way, then the threadripper is arguably better than my 5820k ocd.

Im just trying to decide whats worth the upgrade and what isnt.

I play Planet coaster right now and it uses all cores and maxes them out, fps is down to 30s, im in two minds if the threadripper would help enough and if there is anything better/compromise between more cores and out right speed.
Click to expand...

I have planet coaster, happy to load up your park file if you send it across to give you an idea? I don't think I have actually played the game yet. One of those ones you buy on steam and just never play.
 
kitfit1 said:
As your 5820K was clocked at 4.5Ghz and the 1950X was clocked at 4.1Ghz, it could be argued that the 1950X is faster i would think.
Click to expand...

Yes, it's IPC is a few % faster than Broadwell.

dante666 said:
what x399 boards do people have and how they finding them
Click to expand...

Have a GB Aorus 7 - awesome board. Strong overclocking, great fan control and looking forward to taking advantage of the 3 NVME slots for some raid action. Bios interface/layout could do with some work though, as could the responsiveness. It functionally all there though, but they need to employ a HCI person.
 
dante666 said:
what x399 boards do people have and how they finding them
Click to expand...
I have the ASUS Prime which I believe is the cheapest board @ £289.

I bought it because:
* it's an ASUS and has good overclocking potential.
* I don't need GIGA Lan or onboard WiFi.
* It has a couple of shimmering lights which I can turn off but I want decent mobo not a disco :D
* It has multi SLi/Crossfire ability
* It is £80 cheaper than the nearest rival and could not justify £550 for a high end ASUS!

Things I don't like:
* Still on the original BIOS
* Only has two M2 slots
* Only one of those works when both are populated!

Overall rating so far is 9/10. It's very well made and it get's you into TR without breaking the bank.
 
I have the Taichi which I have found to be a decent board. It's got all the connectivity you could need, 3 m.2 slots as well as one of those U.2 connectors and all that good stuff, dual nics as well. It's got more overclocking options than I know what to do with to be honest and I am told it overclocks well even though I am not really chasing performance with it. All I needed was for it to be really stable and have a big core count and it ticks all those boxes.

atomic7431 said:
that all sounds very kind and i will look forward to it :)
Click to expand...

Got your trust and have downloaded your park, it is also installing the game now. I have looked through your settings and will run as close as I can but our monitors and gpu are quite different. I'm on a 4k freesync panel with a vega 56 which isn't going to be up to the standards of the Ti. Mind you it sounds like its cpu limited so results might be interesting.
 
dante666 said:
what x399 boards do people have and how they finding them
Click to expand...

I've had two boards, the Asus Zenith Extreme and Gigabyte Aorus. Neither are perfect but I found the Aorus easier in practical terms. Btw, both achieved the same overclocks and I had the same limits in oc and ram timing/oc limits.

Asus only has 6 sata ports, instead it sports 2 U.2 ports which are almost useless. Still scratching my head why they went that way. The Zenith also did not play nice with my PWM MCP35x pump. The Zenith socket was a huge pain in the ass to use, requiring a lot of force to get the screws to thread on the socket. The vrm fan on the Asus is annoying as hell, especially when you take into account the varying temp profiles of each bios. For ex. one bios reads high so that affects the vrm fan where another bios version reads low. Thus it becomes a pain to stay on top of the vrm fan profile. Bios GUI wise the Asus' interface is still the winner out of all the boards made, w/o a doubt. I also run a SSD RAID setup for my games drive, and setting up SSD RAID (not NVME) was excruciatingly slow on the Asus.

Gigabyte's Aorus on the other hand sports 8 sata ports. This was a big deal for me as I run two RAID cards, albeit one RAID in HBA mode, just handles 8 sata drives so with the Aorus I was stoked to be able to retire a RAID/HBA card, something I could not do with the Zenith. The Aorus also did not have a problem with my pump, in either UEFI or Legacy mode. The Asus would not run PWM unless in full UEFI mode. The Aorus took a while to setup SSD RAID, but it was doable where the Asus was so slow it got real annoying. I had no problems installing the cpu on the Aorus socket unlike the sketchiness of the Zenith. Bios GUI wise, Gigabyte is leagues behind the user interface of Asus, but everything is there. It's definitely not as intuitive as the Asus ROG interface, but again it works.

At teh end of it all I returned the Asus. It was $200 usd more than the Aorus and I really didn't feel it was worth it, unless you are using 10G lan since that add-on card is quite expensive. I also looked at the MSI Carbon as I really like it's port layout specifically the internal usb 3.0 ports which are flat on the MSI. The MSI is also pretty cheap and I would probably have gotten one instead of the Aorus had the MSI not been out of stock at the time. My 2 cents...
 
I have the Taichi, and I'm very pleased with it so far. 3600 memory worked straight from the off, just needing XMP enabled, and everything else has needed next to no tweaking. It seems like a very solid, steady away board, that's not over the top in terms of flashy styling. In the past, I always bought Asus (or Abit :D), this is my first Asrock and I've been impressed.
 
Hopefully if all goes to plan, by the weekend, I'll have a 1920x system up and running.

Spec as follows.
Gigabyte aorus x399 gaming 7 (was going to go with the prime, call me daft, but the low cost of the prime and being an asus made me a little too uncomfortable)
Ryzen threadripper 1920x
32GB 8 pack DDR4 3200 C14
EK supremacy EVO TR4 acetal+nickel (prefer straight copper but not available)

This is going with my existing watercooled GTX 780 replacing my old i7 4820K.
 
Just had a few treats from ocuk arrive today. A noctua U14S TR4 and one of those little nvme heatsink kits. I was always planning on a noctua from the off, but had to get the arctic 33tr to tide me over until the noctuas came out.
 
atomic7431 said:
that all sounds very kind and i will look forward to it :)
Click to expand...

Hey, so I did a little testing last night and I am absolutely stumped. I loaded up your park and set the setting to 4k with the preset ultra quality settings and perhaps unsurprisingly I was pinned between 22 and 25 frames a second. It felt ultra smooth and I was using the steam fps counter which I didn't believe so downloaded fraps and that confirmed it. Checked cpu usage and sure enough all 32 threads loaded but utilization around 15%.

Next up I thought, ok let's remove the gpu bottleneck, so I dropped it to 1080p and still no change, I have the same frame rate and what still feels like ultra smooth performance. Next I changed the quality settings to low and still no change. I seem to be pegged at between 22 and 25fps. Next up I decided to try a little gpu clocking, I added some 15 to 20% to performance and nothing still the same frames.

I am stumped, between 1080 low and 4k ultra there is literally at best a 1 frame difference in performance. I sat watching it for a good while and am not sure how it can look and perform so buttery smooth but give frame rates that suggest it should be struggling. I gave up after about an hour of not being able to find the bottleneck.

What I can tell you is that my cpu was loaded up on all cores but never really got above 20% utilization or there abouts. I can make a little video of all of this and was going to last night but the unexpected results made me question what was going on.
 
Thanks for your results, seems that it may be an engine limitation then, the fact its not utilizing more of the cores would point to something along these lines i presume.

I see very similar results, at different resolutions there is at best 1/2 fps difference, its pretty smooth here too gsync helps of course.

Thanks again for all the tests you did, a good idea now that for this game at least the update wouldnt be worth it unless Frontier fix/apply a better cpu utilization in the game/engine.
 
atomic7431 said:
Thanks for your results, seems that it may be an engine limitation then, the fact its not utilizing more of the cores would point to something along these lines i presume.

I see very similar results, at different resolutions there is at best 1/2 fps difference, its pretty smooth here too gsync helps of course.

Thanks again for all the tests you did, a good idea now that for this game at least the update wouldnt be worth it unless Frontier fix/apply a better cpu utilization in the game/engine.
Click to expand...

It has to be said, I really had no idea what to expect but for sure I wasn't expecting the results I got. It did use every last core available just not that much. Nice park btw

Edit: with a 1080ti I imagine it might match your frame rate with more than 50% of the cpu doing nothing at all.
 
Last edited:
1920x arrived today. Making the move from my x79 4820K.
36848986440_65e782c8bc_h.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom