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

  • iwod - Tuesday, August 7, 2018 - link

    1. Multiple Thread application are INSANELY hard to write CORRECTLY. ( That is why we have
    RUST )

    2. There are still a lot of performance to be squeezed out from parallelism. As proved by Servo.

    3. Because Software has to care about the lowest common denominator, that is why no one is optimising for 8 Core yet.

    If we could push the bottom market to 8 Core, middle market to 16 and top end market to 32 Core, and each segment is then differentiated by its Full Core Speed. We may see software optimise for Multiple Core sooner.

    The only problem is 1. There is no incentive for them to do so and 2. The computer we have today are fast enough for majority of use case.
  • npz - Tuesday, August 7, 2018 - link

    Finely threaded single applications isn't the only use. In guyr's example, one that I also use, it's multi-process. Even compilation is multi process. VM is inherently multi-threaded and multi-process. And there are many highly parallel applications that don't require much synchronization and fine grained locking which is where the difficulty comes from, so generalizing "Multiple Thread application are INSANELY hard to write CORRECTLY" is not accurate. Reply
  • Foeketijn - Tuesday, August 7, 2018 - link

    I'm now regulary waiting for excel to do some numbercrunching. 3 to 4 minutes 100% on all 8 threads (xeon e3 1240). I am wondering if such a threadripper would make that 20 to 30 seconds. If a 2700x would half that time, I am going to hit myself in the head for not going the threadripper route. Reply
  • BigDH01 - Tuesday, August 7, 2018 - link

    Depending on the nature of your formula graph in Excel the problem may not be easily to parallelize. Excel performs some tricks to try and determine if formulas can be calculated concurrently but they can and do fall victim to fragile nodes in their directed cyclic graphs. Even if your graph is very flat, they don't always get parallelism correct as maintaining those facts are either 1) hard to determine in a scalable manner 2) push a lot of state handling to the graph editing side of things which can cause massive slowdowns in user experience to make simple edits. Unfortunately, a lot of programs we use on the desktop aren't just hard to parallelize, but don't parallelize very well (far less than linear scaling). Traversing your graph while tracking state (because excel keeps track of circular dependencies) in the correct order is just a hard problem and even though they can pound your CPU by speculatively executing, you probably won't see a huge speedup unless you've taken steps to make your graph as flat as humanly possible. And if you are doing the latter, why not just use Access? Reply
  • Cooe - Monday, August 6, 2018 - link

    Then you obviously aren't the target market.
  • cerealspiller - Monday, August 6, 2018 - link

    Legitimate is overrated :-) Reply
  • eastcoast_pete - Monday, August 6, 2018 - link

    Go AMD, keep holding chipzilla's feet to the fire and their pricing honest (Intel just reported new record earnings, so there is room there).
    Unrelated, while I assume that the inactive dies in the cheaper TRs may well be dies that binned too low or are just defective, and are locked down better than Fort Knox, just out of interest: Has anybody tried and succeeded to bring back the dead, i.e. reactivate the inactive ones? Anybody? Even trying would, of course, immediately void your warranty, but maybe, just maybe, somebody tried. Would love to hear what happened, successful or not.
  • drajitshnew - Monday, August 6, 2018 - link

    I have thinking about the same thing since it was revealed that the inactive dies have also been etched by derbauer-- are not just pieces of silicon.
    I would like to read that review too.
  • Da W - Monday, August 6, 2018 - link

    And then somehow, you'll see on Tomshardware ''We tested the new CPU with our 1995 suite of games, Intel has superior IPC and shows a 2% advantage on single threaded games, so Intel is better, buy Intel.'' :) Reply
  • Da W - Monday, August 6, 2018 - link

    Seriously though i've been waiting for this AMD for almost 2 decades. Good job! Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now