AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1950X Review
Why you can trust Tom's Hardware
DTP, Office, Multimedia & Compression Performance
Although we usually don’t run our application benchmarks on overclocked processors, we're including the Ryzen Threadripper 1950X at stock and overclocked frequencies this time, since we wanted to know how AMD’s architecture scales in different scenarios.
To be fair, we also added a (reasonably) overclocked Intel Core i9-7900X to our results. This makes for an interesting comparison, especially when we see later that both AMD’s and Intel’s flagship processors break the 250W barrier during a rendering workload.
DTP & Presentation
Adobe’s Creative Cloud gives us a look at single- and multi-core performance. As such, it beats synthetic benchmarks as a productivity test.
After Effects CC is a classic when it comes to parallelized tasks, with the number of cores easily being more important than frequency. Conversely, InDesign CC shows Intel’s Skylake-X in the back of the pack, whereas Core i7-7700K scores major points with its high clock rate. Likewise, AMD’s Ryzen 7 beats Ryzen Threadripper, regardless of frequency.
Adobe’s Illustrator CC leaves us scratching our heads in confusion: the Ryzen Threadripper 1950X lands in dead last. Overclocking doesn’t make much of a difference.
Encoding & Multimedia
It’s Threadripper’s time to shine in our HandBrake benchmark. AMD’s processors just crunch those numbers no matter the selected quality setting (even though Intel’s Core i9-7900X ends up right between the Threadripper CPUs with HandBrake set to normal quality).
The order changes at the more demanding high-quality setting. Intel’s large processor can only keep up if it’s overclocked quite a bit first.
Compression & Decompression
AMD's Threadripper processors continue their number-crunching winning streak when it comes to compressing large files. Again, they leave Intel’s Core i9-7900X in the dust, until it gets overclocked.
Intel’s Core i7-7700K easily beats the entire field in our decompression benchmark due to its higher frequency. Still, AMD’s Threadripper processors do well, and they once again best Intel’s Skylake-X flagship at stock clock rates.
MORE: Best CPUs
MORE: Intel & AMD Processor Hierarchy
MORE: All CPUs Content
Current page: DTP, Office, Multimedia & Compression Performance
Prev Page Rise of the Tomb Raider & The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt Next Page 2D & 3D Workstation PerformanceStay On the Cutting Edge: Get the Tom's Hardware Newsletter
Get Tom's Hardware's best news and in-depth reviews, straight to your inbox.
Paul Alcorn is the Managing Editor: News and Emerging Tech for Tom's Hardware US. He also writes news and reviews on CPUs, storage, and enterprise hardware.
Lian Li's DK07 mechanized standing desk PC case debuts at $1,399 USD — room inside for dual EATX PCs
3D-printed Mac Mini enclosure makes the tiny PC look like the world's cutest Mac Pro
Chipmakers race to get CHIPS Act dollars before White House changeover — TSMC and GlobalFoundries finalize applications, facilitating payouts
-
I just looked at gaming benchmark and stopped reading there because as i thought Intel CPUs are killing Thread Ripper in gaming. As far as content creation, naturally having 16/32 setup will be faster than Intel 10/20 but again do you really need more than 10/20 cores. I don't and i heavily use PC for gaming, programming, web design, video/audio encoding. Overall Intel 7900x is better value and all around CPU. But if you are just in gaming 7700k is just enough.Reply
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.
-
Kai Dowin I'm truly impressed to see 16 Zen cores consuming as much power as only 10 Skylake-X ones. Bravo, AMD!Reply -
20045233 said:I'm truly impressed to see 16 Zen cores consuming as much power as only 10 Skylake-X ones. Bravo, AMD!
I am not knowing that Intel is running higher frequency.
-
JamesSneed 20045197 said:I just looked at gaming benchmark and stopped reading there because as i thought Intel CPUs are killing Thread Ripper in gaming. As far as content creation, naturally having 16/32 setup will be faster than Intel 10/20 but again do you really need more than 10/20 cores. I don't and i heavily use PC for gaming, programming, web design, video/audio encoding. Overall Intel 7900x is better value and all around CPU. But if you are just in gaming 7700k is just enough.
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 love Intel even more...all you have to do pop CPU in and shit works and it works well.
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.
-
Lyden Thank you for this review. I was seriously considering Threadripper. Looks like the 7700k is still the sensible choice for the price when gaming.Reply -
Kai Dowin @FREAK777POWER And delivering higher multi-threaded performance with these lower clocked cores. Do you know what that's called? Efficiency.Reply -
redgarl This chip is designed for heavy calculation multithreading, it is not made for gaming, however it is working well with 1440p and 2160p.Reply
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. -
Pompompaihn Who are you people that come here and <ModEdit> about gaming performance on these chips??Reply
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>