Ryzen Threadripper 2 (2990WX and 2950X) Review: AMD Unleashes 32 Cores

Reviews
By ,
last updated

Why you can trust Tom's Hardware Our expert reviewers spend hours testing and comparing products and services so you can choose the best for you. Find out more about how we test.

Workstation - Graphics

Anyone interested in using a Threadripper processor in a workstation should carefully consider the applications they're running. Over and over, we're reminded that not all tasks can be effectively parallelized, and many workloads are only optimized for four to eight cores.

AutoCAD is a prime example. If you work in 2D draft mode, it's rare to see more than two cores utilized. There, IPC throughput wins over core count. Ryzen Threadripper 2950X can at least push out in front of Ryzen 7 2700X. However, Ryzen Threadripper 2990WX looks out of place, given a much higher price tag.

Image 1 of 2

Our results were similar in the Cinebench graphics benchmark, which combines host processing and 3D workloads. Faced with a slightly more demanding benchmark, Ryzen Threadripper 2990WX with PBO enabled hit a high enough clock rate to match Threadripper 2950X.

In the end, though, Intel's line-up fared far better.


SolidWorks consists of several components and packages that utilize host processing resources differently. In the graphics-bound composite, which is not optimized for threading, AMD's portfolio was generally routed.

AMD's extra cores were a little more effective in the Creo graphics composite test. But again, Intel dominated absolutely.

Catia is similar to the Cinebench graphics test, so our results weren't particularly surprising. Ryzen Threadripper 2950X took a wafer-thin lead over the Ryzen 7 2700X, demonstrating that its extra cores don't trip over themselves in lightly-threaded workloads.

Image 1 of 4

This Blender workload doesn't utilize lots of execution cores, but at least it put AMD's newest Threadripper CPUs ahead of Ryzen 7 2700X.

MORE: Best CPUs

MORE: Intel & AMD Processor Hierarchy

MORE: All CPUs Content
AMD Ryzen Threadripper 2990WX
AMD Ryzen Threadripper 2950X

See more CPUs Reviews
Paul Alcorn
Paul Alcorn
Managing Editor: News and Emerging Tech

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.

50 Comments Comment from the forums
  • Rdslw
    first table is broken 32/64 cores/threads :)
    Ryzen Threadripper 2990WX
    Ryzen Threadripper 2950X
    Socket
    TR4
    TR4
    Cores / Threads
    16 / 32
    16 / 32
    Reply
  • bilazaurus
    AMD Ryzen Threadripper 2. Your first choice for encoding!*

    *And nothing else.
    Reply
  • philipemaciel
    Wow, while the 2990WX is a bit of a letdown, the 2950X is a nice surprise. Plenty of bang for your buck!
    Reply
  • TEAMSWITCHER
    Avoid the flagship, buy the $900 part. Sounds a lot like Intel.
    Reply
  • alves.mvc
    Why does Tom's Hardware stopped using the HPC benchmark? It was the most interesting measurement for me that work daily with finite differences and finite elements. Can you return to that?
    Reply
  • totaldarknessincar
    Seems to me the best of both worlds continue to be Intel's 7900x which sells for $699 at microcenter. You get great gaming performance, and great multithreaded performance, and it's not 12-1800 bucks as some of these mega-threaded cards are.

    Despite all the fan-fare, it seems the 7980xe actually remains the best processor when overclocked overall.

    Lastly for gaming, it's still 8700K or 8086 as best, with the 2700x from AMD being the best when you factor gaming and some multi-threaded stuff, while being very competitive price wise.
    Reply
  • feelinfroggy777
    Very surprising performance from the 2950x. Almost enough to consider parting ways with my 1950x. Maybe when the pricing comes down some from the 2950x in a few months I will consider.

    The 2990wx on the other hand is a slight let down. Too bad they could not get the scaling down between the dies like they did with Threadripper 1. But I have read that was going to be an issue. Maybe AMD did not want the 2990wx to cannibalize their Epyc market.

    With that being said, the 2990wx is still a modern marvel of technology, even more so when you consider the price. Only couple of years ago a CPU with less than a third of the cores cost just as much.

    Competition sure is grand!
    Reply
  • basil.thomas
    Looks like Intel has an opportunity to bite AMD when they release their 28-core processor. I have a threadripper 2/x399 system but if I upgrade to the 2990wx, I will also upgrade the motherboard and the power supply as well. I think I may wait until the Intel 28 core comes out and see what kind of performance it delivers as I too notice running custom AI apps on the threadripper is barely faster than my old x99/6850 motherboard overclocked @ 4.3Ghz. I want max performance if I am going to pay over $1800 for the flagship which means core wars is just starting...

    MOD EDIT: watch your profanity
    Reply
  • ffleader1
    21228046 said:
    Seems to me the best of both worlds continue to be Intel's 7900x which sells for $699 at microcenter. You get great gaming performance, and great multithreaded performance, and it's not 12-1800 bucks as some of these mega-threaded cards are.

    Despite all the fan-fare, it seems the 7980xe actually remains the best processor when overclocked overall.

    Lastly for gaming, it's still 8700K or 8086 as best, with the 2700x from AMD being the best when you factor gaming and some multi-threaded stuff, while being very competitive price wise.
    Seem to me that you are mistaking best of both work with jack of all trade. No one who takes rendering seriously would want to sacrifice the performance for gaming. For that price, they may as well grab a 1950X. Sure you lose in gaming, but gain a huge jump in rendering. Also, I don't know about Microcenterbut it's still 1k on Amazon while 1950X is $850. 7900X is like a really really bad choice lol.
    Reply
  • g-unit1111
    Wow, 32 cores for $1,000? I have to say very impressive. Your move, Intel!
    Reply