Review: AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1950X

I don't think people are seriously saying that Intel is doomed - it's mostly just a turn of phrase. I mean, when someone says "I'm dead" they are not saying that they are literally going to die (or that they're a zombie ), it just signifies that something really bad is going to happen. Seriously guys, stop taking things so literally.

It's obvious that Threadripper will not be the end of Intel. In fact, it will probably have little effect on the bottom line, of both companies (only a few people buy these chips). The biggest impact of Threadripper is on Intel's ego and reputation, since they no longer make the fastest desktop processors in the world (that distinction now belongs to AMD). It also demonstrates the versatility and scalability of the Zen architecture, where they can keep clocks relatively high at such large core counts - something that is not possible with Intel's monolithic approach (a base clock of 2.8 GHz for the 7960X is a downright embarrassment, compared to the 1950X's 3.4 GHz).

I think it should also be noted that Threadripper ups the ante for all HEDT chips going forward. Prior to this, HEDT was limited to 10 cores, but now they can be up to 18 cores. Most surprisingly, it is AMD who is dictating the pace of progress, forcing Intel to react, something that hasn't happened for a long time.

 

Ryzen 5 actually did very well, for gaming it is Much Much better value for money and even beat the 1950x in some tests (it was not in all the benchmarked games sadly).

The 1950x is most certainly not a "Master of all trades", though while clearly dominating in professional applications it is still really no big letdown in games - achieving around 120fps in many 1080p games.

In general if you want a 144Hz monitor with 1080p gaming though, then stay well clear on this chip (still can do that in a few games too!). Here the 7700K makes much more sense


If I wasn't as happy as I am with my pre-Sandybridge (currently 4GHz) 6c/12t Xeon I would be lining up to buy a Threadripper. It is a Damn Good option for many people.


EDIT:

I have noticed that in a lots of reviewers benchmarking, the 1950x does not appear to be ramping up to the expected 4.2GHz for some reason, I feel the cause is not always temperature related, so it seems possible that some future updates might release some performance improvements in my opinion. (still won't make it the best gaming chip though ofc )

 

Exciting times for CPU's once again! I have fond memories of my 2500XP clocked to 3200 speeds back in the day, followed by Athlon 64 and my FX55!

Anyhow, threadripper looks pretty awesome to me. I'm seriously tempted to do a threadripper build for two reasons:

1) I do more and more encoding, and you can never have "too fast"

2) It just damn cool LOL!

Waiting for a few motherboard reviews to come out first though. The Asus Extreme looks awesome but you pay a hell of a lot over the odds for a number of extras that I probably wont use.

Also, I noticed here in the UK, the CPU's are in stock, but nowhere seems to have motherboards.

 

Yeah motherboards seem to be an issue (again!) the only ones I could find were on Amazon but they were silly money (even for you Mike )

 

Ipc and max clock wise compared to current i7s the sad truth about threadripper is that it's the same gap that made everyone disgusted with bulldozer when it came out.

I'm saving up money more my biggest ever pc build now and had the delusional idea of getting the 1950x and maybe 64gb of ram and 3 m.2 sata drives etc...I'm glad I'm not the sort of person who pre orders things becaus if you have a difference of 140 frame for ontel and 90 for amd in some games now, imagine how slow clock for clock these chips will seem compared to what's coming out in the next 1-2 years.

People say that ryzen is the hapy medium for gaming but really it's just a very slightly lesser compromise.

Obviously if amd could have made a 6 and 8 core ryzen part that overclocked to 4.8 or something they would have, so you have a massive core count cpu with very low per clock performance, ryzen with a bit better performance and a black hole where the 'performance' chip would be....which is where intel has always dominated.

As I said in a previous post....these will target a completely different market that intels offerings, and intel had been selling overpriced high end extreme edition cpus etc for years but you could never accuse any of them of being bad for gaming, not to the extent that these are....and yes...I know amd didn't say these were gaming chips. But they are a $1000 cpu with an extremely expensive chipset and for anyone who has an all around pc, who games and does videos etc, it still seems like intel is a better choice at the same price.

I also understand that skylake has way more problems with power and temps and for someone who has always overclocked on air ....I woulf never be able to go down that route. So I can see the appeal but it's net isn't all encompasing, it's just for fish in a different pond.

 

That would be best for everyone. If intels 6 core coffeelake is still the best seller then things could stall at lower core versions and AMD can't afford to just push forward if they aren't selling as expected, they don't have the overhead.


If the market sets the bar at 8 cores minimum for a $500 cpu from now on then it will stay there or go up.

 

That's just plainly not correct when it comes to IPC. The IPC between Intel and AMD is not that different lol. It is in Intels favor, but it's not majorly different to the point people care about the IPC difference. The only place there's a big difference, is max clock, and that's it.

 

Dear Hilbert Hagedoorn.

On the 3DMark Time Spy CPU test. You said "As you can see, the CPU score disappoints somewhat."

But I bring you news:
https://community.futuremark.com/fo...tirk-Any-fix&p=1926839&viewfull=1#post1926839

https://community.futuremark.com/fo...tirk-Any-fix&p=1926859&viewfull=1#post1926859

 

The test still scales well with intel 10-14 cores so that theory is debunked

 

Seems that X399 motherboards are sold out as well. Unbelievable... I thought AMD and/or mobo makers would have learned their lesson from the Ryzen 7 launch, but I guess not! Seriously now, how difficult can it be to ensure sufficient stock before releasing a product??? :bang: :bang: :bang:

Last time, I had to wait up to a month to receive my X370 board (which I preordered!). I also preordered a X399 board, and I fear that it might happen again Unbelievable!...

 

Thanks for review HH

I didn't expected these ThreadRipper chips will be gaming chips and due this I'm not disappointed

For rendering these chips looks like are best option, in Corona they just fly, in V-RAY I expect they will fly as well and in many applications where core and threads are just needed these chips will be best to have

I'm still in waiting game on boards availability and on EK ThreadRipper CPU waterblock how this block will perform and mainly hope there will be board with 6* or 7* PCI_E slots and at least 10* SATA ports

But I'm sure I will be getting one

Thanks, Jura

 

I mean, i certainly would love you to try and gauge, correctly, without overly producing product creating waste (loss of income).

Until you are in their shoes, there's really no point is trying to make statements like you have. You have no idea how much interest there is in the product vs how much expected interest there was in the product. So how hard could it be you ask? Extremely, extremely difficult.

 

Is it possible to disable SMT on these processors?

 

Yes, its actually recommended to turn SMT off for gaming. (Some games freak out due to cores count).

 

Do not bash me for this question.

Is windows 7 installable on this systems?
I would really want to keep it as my main OS and switch to newer with a dual boot just in case some dx12 needs.

 

Great review as usual, Hilbert.

Although... I'd say the memory option between UMA and NUMA modes isn't really a flaw. I mean, if we didn't have such an option, would it be better? I think the more options the better. In the end, there will always be that machine that you're using for a specific purpose and that works better by toggling option x, y or z in your BIOS.

Of course, things would be much better if these CPUs knew when to adjust for better threading or lower latency.

That aside, I fully agree with you. This is a great CPU for content creators and, generally speaking, anyone who needs a server or workstation type of computer (with that many cores and threads, of course).

 

Perhaps, but I find it extremely frustrating that it is happening yet again. I was willing to overlook the Ryzen 7 launch, since it was a brand new chip architecture and they had no idea what the demand would be like (and the mobo makers said AMD didn't give them enough time), but I thought they'd be more ready this time. It seems that the mobo makers keep underestimating the popularity of these chips.

 

I'm just quoting what Futuremark Staff said. I wouldn't take what they say a grain of salt.

 

Where have you seen it scale well with intels 14 cores? It does not scale over 8 and well intels cpus clock better. So auto win.

If futuremark staff says the test is designed around 8/16 it most likely is. They are making a new one where it scales towards 28 maybe 32 cores. But atm it's 8. That is why 6900k and 6950x at same clocks score roughly the same. Most likely same thing applies to other gpu benches futuremark has currently.

 

no all you would really have to do is use your best 16 cores and turn ht off on these amd chips.
oh and read between the lines on what Jarvis said....we used intel cpus to make it so it may be more tailored to intel.
anyways only testing it on amd will we really know how they the two company compare in fm benches we already know what the intel cpus do