Where are the Benchmarks?

As stated, today AMD is only lifting the lid on what the stuff looks like, as well as speeds and details. This weekend however, AMD France accidentally released some information on the Cinebench R15 speed of the 32-core, giving it a score of 5099 :

Rendering: CineBench 15 MultiThreaded

My CPU-focused review, using our newest benchmark suite, will be posted on August 13th. I am still iterating our gaming test suite for CPUs with new games and drivers, so that review will be a little later. I am also in the middle of a 30,000 mile set of travels (FMS, Hot Chips, IFA, vacation), along with some Cannon Lake tests to run, and whatever else might launch soon, so please be a little patient. August has never been so busy, honestly.

Where to Pre-Order

If you really want to go ahead and order before looking at the reviews, then we will add some links in here as we get them. Note that retailers will only be taking pre-orders for the 2990WX today, while the 2950X launches at the end of this month, and then the final two chips in October.

AMD Threadripper 2 Pre-Orders
  Amazon Newegg
TR 2990WX $1799 $1799
TR 2970WX $1299 $1299
TR 2950X $849 $849
TR 2920X $649 $649

X399 Motherboards: The MSI X399 Creation


View All Comments

  • blppt - Monday, August 6, 2018 - link

    R15 is very well multithreaded, not the ideal indicator of real-world performance, so would we really expect an 8700K to dominate a 2600X in an ideal multithreaded benchmark? Reply
  • mapesdhs - Monday, August 6, 2018 - link

    Cinebench as a benchmark may be reaching EOL, unless they update it again somehow. See:


    A better test in some ways would be c-ray, as LTT mentions, since it can scale to hundreds of threads no problem.

  • eastcoast_pete - Monday, August 6, 2018 - link

    Yes, every company puts their best foot/benchmark forward. The 7920/40/60 (all x) chips from Intel will still have a serious advantage in any application that can really utilize AVX 512, as that provides a huge performance boost. Unfortunately (for Intel), using AVX 512 also makes their chips run really, really hot (might be time for Intel to invest in some better thermal solutions for their pricey chips). Ultimately, it still boils down to: What are using your workstation for? Reply
  • virpuain@gmail.com - Monday, August 6, 2018 - link

    Like winrar ??? lel Reply
  • Dug - Thursday, August 9, 2018 - link

    Yes! All day long, every day. :) I can't stop using it! Have to compress everything! Reply
  • Midwayman - Monday, August 6, 2018 - link

    I have no legitimate use for 32 cores, but Hrrrrrgggghhhhhh. Fully torqued for that many cores. Reply
  • HStewart - Monday, August 6, 2018 - link

    I would rather have fewer stronger cores than more weaker cores. Reply
  • The Hardcard - Monday, August 6, 2018 - link

    Even if it was barely more than half the cores that are less than 15 percent stronger? Come on, even your 35-year-old scalar, nonpipelined processor with no branch prediction will quickly tell you that you will be far behind on nearly every workstation task.

    Make a list of the top 15 reasons people who actually do work and could use a high-end workstation to take care of business. Now question: will the Core i9-7980XE be faster atany single one?
  • DigitalFreak - Monday, August 6, 2018 - link

    People here, and on most tech sites for that matter, keep thinking of these processors in terms of gaming. That's obviously not what they're designed for. Reply
  • drajitshnew - Monday, August 6, 2018 - link

    @digitalfreak It is quite correct & true. Even three 1st gen threadripper was not marketed for pure gaming-- more towards content creaters and those who want to stream games professionally.
    On an other note I have reduced going to the sister site "Tom's " because Anandtech has a less FPS centric editorial outlook.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now