AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1950X Review
-
Page 1:Threadripper Makes An Entrance
-
Page 2:Game Modes & Architecture, Infinity Fabric Latency Testing
-
Page 3:TR4 Socket, X399 Chipset & Test Setup
-
Page 4:VRMark, 3DMark & AotS: Escalation
-
Page 5:Civilization VI, Battlefield 1 & Dawn of War III
-
Page 6:Grand Theft Auto V, Hitman & Shadow of Mordor
-
Page 7:Project CARS & Far Cry Primal
-
Page 8: Rise of the Tomb Raider & The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt
-
Page 9:DTP, Office, Multimedia & Compression Performance
-
Page 10:2D & 3D Workstation Performance
-
Page 11:CPU Computing & Rendering Performance
-
Page 12:Scientific & Engineering Computations, & HPC Performance
-
Page 13:Overclocking, Cooling & Temperature
-
Page 14:Power Consumption
-
Page 15:Final Analysis
Scientific & Engineering Computations, & HPC Performance
For these tests, we’re using the SPECwpc benchmark suite for workstations with its wide variety of tasks. It tests a number of very different mathematical computations optimized for parallelization. They typically make heavy use of available memory bandwidth and cache, plus expose issues with latency.
Rodinia
The pre-Euler3D CFD test (Computational Fluid Dynamics benchmark) runs very well, with AMD’s Ryzen Threadripper posting great results. It’s interesting to see that the overclocked processors don’t really improve performance all that much.
Convolution
In this benchmark, a mathematical operation is performed on two functions (convolution), which results in a third function. Performance scales similarly well with core count and clock rate.
CalculiX
This test is based on the finite element method for three-dimensional structural computations. The Ryzen Threadripper 1950X does edge out Intel’s Core i9-7900X flagship.
Poisson's Equation
Poisson's Equation is a second-order partial differential equation widely used in physics for boundary value problems.
Overclocking AMD’s Threadripper processors doesn’t yield much of a performance increase. Meanwhile, Intel’s Core i9-7900X dominates the field. The Threadripper chip posts better results than Intel’s remaining Core i9 CPUs, but it needs a lot more cores in order to keep up.
Sequential Reweighted Message Passing (SRMP)
These are algorithms for discrete energy minimization. None of AMD’s processors do well. However, the Threadripper CPU is able to compensate to some degree using core count, whereas the Ryzen 7 CPUs fall way behind.
Kirchhoff Migration
The earth’s subsurface structure can be determined via seismic processing. One of the four basic steps in this process is the Kirchhoff Migration, which is used to generate an image based on the available data using mathematical operations. This benchmark and its underlying computations turn out to be a great fit for AMD’s Ryzen Threadripper processor.
The Threadripper 1950X is a good choice for these tasks. The only exceptions are software packages that just aren't well-optimized for it, such as the SRMP test. Surely, developers will be more cognizant of AMD's hardware moving forward, now that the company has a competitive architecture designed to tantalize this market.
Consequently, negative outliers should become a less and less frequent, just as they have on the desktop with Ryzen 7, 5, and 3. Bottom line: the Ryzen Threadripper 1950X is a great choice when computing power and easily parallelized tasks are involved.
MORE: Best CPUs
MORE: Intel & AMD Processor Hierarchy
MORE: All CPUs Content
- Threadripper Makes An Entrance
- Game Modes & Architecture, Infinity Fabric Latency Testing
- TR4 Socket, X399 Chipset & Test Setup
- VRMark, 3DMark & AotS: Escalation
- Civilization VI, Battlefield 1 & Dawn of War III
- Grand Theft Auto V, Hitman & Shadow of Mordor
- Project CARS & Far Cry Primal
- Rise of the Tomb Raider & The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt
- DTP, Office, Multimedia & Compression Performance
- 2D & 3D Workstation Performance
- CPU Computing & Rendering Performance
- Scientific & Engineering Computations, & HPC Performance
- Overclocking, Cooling & Temperature
- Power Consumption
- Final Analysis
Thanks for review, and hello x299 platform.
Gaming vs. Content Creation mode through Software is just another big NO NO to me knowing how crappy AMD software is. I assume the most people will keep it in Game Mode and leave it as it is.
I appreciate that AMD brought this CPU for $999 with so many cores, helps competition but again there is nothing to drool over here in my book. AMD didn't bring any significant performance bump core vs. core basis. In fact AMD single core performance still sucks which means when Intel releases 10+ core CPU it is going to fun to watch.
Two things i am interested the most is Coffee Lake product and IPC improvement there and possible price adjustment with Core i9.
I am not knowing that Intel is running higher frequency.
I guess if gaming is why you were reading the Threadripper review then you are right it isn't as good as Intel's offerings but did you honestly expect any other result? I don't know why reviewers even do gaming tests on any CPU over 8 cores as it is mostly pointless. If you are doing scientific, encoding, professional tasks in just about every use case that is multi threaded it is blowing away every Intel offering. Of course that may change once there are 12-18 core Intel parts. However spending $1000 for a CPU is a bargain for those than can use it and never in history could you get a 16 core consumer part with this type of multi-threaded performance.
By the way, who in their mind will buy a 16 core CPU and play at 1080p with a 1080 TI... seriously, these 1080p bench are a joke and don't represent reality...
"A standard or point of reference against which things may be compared." Oxford
1080p with 1080 TI with a 16 core processor is not a point of reference at all.
Threadripper is the F250 of CPUs. It's not the fastest, but it's plenty fast for 99% of your tasks, and if you need to haul a 12,000 pound trailer it'll do that, too. This is for people who do a lot of WORK on their machine but also game on the side.
<Moderator Warning: Watch your language in these forums>
You really didn't have to wait to draw that conclusion as it was a given. Course since you did wait Intel will have the i7-8700K coming this year which likely will replace the 7700K as the best gaming CPU and you get 2 more cores.
Interesting analogy. Non-US readers won't understand it though.
Also, people have been hyping Threadripper up left and right about gaming performance. Naturally once the truth comes out, people begin to backpedal.
<Moderator Warning: Watch your language in these forums>
Yeah similarly for someone in the US, gaming tests on this are like taking a 18-Wheeler semi and putting it into a NASCAR race, kind of a given how that is going to work out. Now take that race car and try to move the contents of a large house 1000 miles away and the semi is going to smoke it. Different use cases need different tools.
Why we wouldn't test gaming? So you just said what i said....7900x is better all around CPU, so you get more value for the same amount of money. It is not blowing away Intel offering in multi threaded cases because we are comparing 16/32 setup vs. 10/20 setup and from what i see AMD numbers are not that impressive. I have Xeon 18/36 Broadwell-E based CPU and that thing is faster than Thread Ripper. Funny thing is i got that CPU for $800 on eBay, retail version. And what is even more funny is that Xeon 18/36 Broadwell-E runs games better too.
All this comes down to $$$$. Anyone would buy Intel 18/36 if they can afford it because it will be the best CPU ever. Most of AMD users are cheap people who cannot afford it and that's fine but least they should stop <ModEdit> about products they cannot afford.
With what i write here, i want to make a point...
<Moderator Warning: Watch your language in these forums>
Come on it is blowing the 7900x away due to having 6 more cores which you pretty much agree with due to complaining about it. I'm sure I can find some old surplus Power/Sparc boxes that would smoke the Intel Xeon as well but that isn't the point. The point is this is a consumer, non-server focused CPU and it does blow away every one of the Intel ones in multi-threaded tasks. I am completely unbiased on this front with that said the 7820x would be the better value for someone who is gaming and needs some more cores since you pay $75 per core on the 7820x vs $100 per core on the 7900x.
Forum/comment rules: http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/id-2083474/read-forum-rules-styling-posts.html
People in Canada know what a Ford F250 is.
If your PC is pure gaming, Threadripper is not the CPU you're looking for, i7 or Ryzen and depends on 1080p or UHD+ gaming and your budget.
I'm a little curious on the exotic side, which not even I'll do, a triple Cross-Fire/SLI performs with the PCI-E lanes.
It's still the same issue though, how much is that 2% more worth to you? Not seeing the, "They're blowing them away!" in benches the fanboys are talking about. (All CPUs available now, not just Threadripper)
Glad the waterblock makers have been slow though, reading up that certain games refuse to even work with Threadripper means more research is needed if games I have won't run on it. I do rendering/gaming/video on my machine so Threadripper looks good for the price.
Going to be a kick in the pants for those who preordered it if they have packages that won't work though.
EDIT: LOL, EK has Threadripper blocks up for preorder now.