Permabanned
Buy threadripper 1950x for £693 or wait for refresh?
-
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.
Ryzen "2" ?
- Thread starter beany_bot
- Start date
Soldato
If you do work that makes use of heavily threaded software then just go for it, TR refresh isn't going to be until Q3, and current TR are still beasts.
Soldato
That's a great price, and when you look at what it would cost to get that much power from team blue it's an awesome deal.
What do you have now, is waiting for Q4/Q4 an option? No real info out there on what we might see in the TR refresh right now (24 core+ maybe????)
Soldato
The general expectation is the same as the Ryzen refresh, same core/thread counts, refined package with higher clocks.
24C/48T stuff won't be until the Ryzen 3 7nm refresh assuming AMD go to 6C per CCX.
Soldato
I would honestly settle for no issue boot up at 3200mhz on the memory, with the improved IPC etc.
For me, the only complaint I had was boot issues. Ryzen is a great chip. Any improvement is welcome.
For me, the only complaint I had was boot issues. Ryzen is a great chip. Any improvement is welcome.
Soldato
Ah but TR wouldnt need to wait for 7nm from a packaging point of view to reach 32 threads though right? After all its same packaging as Epyc but with 2 dummy core complexes....
Though I suppose if those 2 currently dummy complexes get swapped for real ones then motherboard would have to have 8 channel memory and other changes that would almost certainly break compatibility with the current X399 boards
Reading this thread, it does make me wonder if people don't realise that most people who get early release examples of hardware, are generally under a set of release benching guidelines. They can only show certain tests, only against certain other chips and generally in official media from AMD they won't reference INTEL chips at all, they will just show the improvements over the earlier Ryzen chips.
Somebody mentioned earlier that they are up against Intel ' s 6 core chips, as if Intel don't make anything bigger. Well yeah, Intel are limited to 6 cores as we all know /sarcasm. When they feel the need they will bring more cores to the mainstream platform, will that be soon? Well if this Ryzen luanch is as good as initial leaks show, then it could certainly be sooner rather than latter.
Somebody mentioned earlier that they are up against Intel ' s 6 core chips, as if Intel don't make anything bigger. Well yeah, Intel are limited to 6 cores as we all know /sarcasm. When they feel the need they will bring more cores to the mainstream platform, will that be soon? Well if this Ryzen luanch is as good as initial leaks show, then it could certainly be sooner rather than latter.
Intel is a mess, really. Their chips need to be redesigned from a blank sheet, starting with the idea that a chip that will sell for 350$ should not have an internal graphics part on its die, instead in favour of more logical processors.
It's obvious that Advanced Micro Devices won't wait for Intel to get its act together and will always lead the 'more cores' battle.
It's obvious that Advanced Micro Devices won't wait for Intel to get its act together and will always lead the 'more cores' battle.
I would change your processor list to show the most common systems you would come up from either a 4 core i5 or a 4 core 8 thread i7 and also the 6 core i5 and 6 core 12 thread i7.
I would also publish total cost to purchase the whole system as tested on the day of test. To get the review down to merely nutballs and not completely insane I would go with an AMD Rx580 and an NVidia 1080ti on the graphics. I understand wanting to put an 8-core intel in the list but it would be miles from the budget and you would then really need to throw in a Threadripper for comparison.
- 1600x, 1700x, 2700x, 2600x, i5 8600k, i5 6600k, i7 7700k, i7 8700k / All at stock and then all overclocked as high as possible with same AIO.
- Z270 & Z370 for the Skylake and coffeelake - X370 and X470 (if available) for the AMD.
- 16GB & 32GB at stock supported profile
- 16 & 32GB DDR4 at maximum achievable Mhz
- Same install of W10 with same games and software
- Rx580 and 1080ti
- Rest of system same with M.2 OS drive and SSD games/software drive.
- 1080p / 1440p / 4k accordingly
Last edited:
Why? The i7-7820X costs nearly twice as much.
Soldato
I know they're not pitched at the same customers, but it would be interesting to me as a hardware nerd - both chips have same core and thread count, one clocks higher than the other but uses a different way to pass data between the cores, they booth boost in different ways and use a different style of memory subsystem etc.
Yeah one may cost a lot more than the other - but how much performance (or not?) is that getting you, and in which workloads? How would one know if the extra for the Intel chip is worth it without some benchmarks?
I know a lot of people have a team and want them to 'win' - I just want the best bang for my buck - and thats not always the same as 'cheapest'
You live in a fantasy land.
Tough one. I went with a 1950X a few months back.
Soldato
What I'm hoping for one day is that AMD bring more than the current 8/16 threads to the AM4 platform.
That would make me upgrade.
That would make me upgrade.
It's odd the 2800X is missing from the line up.
It is, but the entire generation is built around the 4 core ccx - I don't see how they could get to 12 cores on the same socket.
but...
It seems almost certain there is going to be an 8 core coffee lake released in response to the 2700x which tells us just how well Intel think it is going to stack up against the 8700k.
I think that either AMD know there is some headroom in their new process or they are otherwise siphoning off top chips so they have room to respond to an intel chip that they know is coming but they don't know how good it is yet.
Last edited:
No. The 8-core has been on the roadmap regardless of what the Ryzen 7 2700X will put on the table. These 6-core and 8-core processors are a late response to what the original RYzen offered a year ago.
i dont get what you on about.intel have the fastest chips in every sector just about.the only difference is they cost more than amd chips.amd just do the budget battle and try to sell you more cores than you actually need to do what your doing.so it seems like you getting a better deal.cause they cant match the normal speed of intel.you sell to your strengths.which is why they try and sell the more cores over we cant achieve this or that speed.which intel does.
Neither Intel nor any of their followers have the right to define how many cores we need.
Windows always feels better with more hardware resources.
Just get used to it and start giving more.