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
POST A COMMENT

104 Comments

View All Comments

  • evernessince - Wednesday, August 8, 2018 - link

    Seriously. Tom's hardware has some crazy single threaded benchmarks. I stopped reading them when they refused to remove project cars from their benchmark suite, which was heavily optimized for Nvidia. It's like they don't realize what an outlier is. Reply
  • SetiroN - Monday, August 6, 2018 - link

    The memory configuration is going to be a huge bottleneck.

    Just try you try to use a 32 core Epyc with only 4 channels populated: performance it's hindered so badly you end up making very little use of the additional cores unless you're not accessing memory at all.

    This all feels like an afterthought.
    Reply
  • artk2219 - Monday, August 6, 2018 - link

    So you're telling me AMD is shaving off features from their more expensive server parts so that theres some market differentiation? For shame! Seriously though, it is annoying that TR4 and SP3 are "2 different sockets", would have been nice to be able to use Epyc's in TR4. Reply
  • drajitshnew - Monday, August 6, 2018 - link

    My "guess" is that while TR4 ( SP3R2) and SP3 are both 4094 pins, in TR4 the pins leading to the 2nd 2 processors are just that-- pins. They are just for physical support & are not electrically connected to anything. Hence, to maintain backwards comptibility AMD disabled the memory & PCIE of the second pair of dies Reply
  • eastcoast_pete - Monday, August 6, 2018 - link

    While I also believe that there is no such thing as too much computing power, the 32 (and 24?) core TRs are the CPU equivalents of a 1,000 HP engine in a car: great for bragging rights, but only useful in very specific situations, and otherwise not faster than mere 8 core chips. In this case, the applications where 32 cores can make a difference are those that are not that dependent on memory speed/access. I would love to see some benchmarks for compiling and complex CAD situations.

    Overall, the question is/remains how well AMD executed on this second round of "NUMA on a chip".
    Lastly, about EPYC vs. TR: AMD learned from the master (Intel). It's not about not letting people run server chips on desktop boards, it's about blocking people from doing the opposite: using much less expensive desktop CPUs in server boards and for server applications. That is also why desktop CPUs and chipsets basically never support ECC RAM, which is a requirement for many servers. TR is almost "EPYC", but just not quite, so you still have to buy EPYC and pay epic prizes for your servers. But than, Intel does the same, and gouges us even worse.
    Reply
  • mapesdhs - Monday, August 6, 2018 - link

    Not sure how these are about blocking people from doing the opposite, since they do support ECC, so surely one could use these CPUs just as they are with a good quality consumer mbd and they'd do just fine for a wide range of server tasks, using ECC memory if desired. If companies cared about cost that much then this is an option. Most though won't do that. There's a belief that companies will cram a consumer chip onto a pro board if they can, but really that's very rare as most bulk buyers of workstations and servers get them from OEMs, very few build their own.

    Nobody's gouging anyone btw, it's still a free market choice whether to buy Intel or not.
    Reply
  • smilingcrow - Monday, August 6, 2018 - link

    In theory TR boards can support ECC but I've heard reports that validation of ECC RAM is not exactly a priority and with all the work Ryzen boards required regarding RAM that's not a surprise.
    So anybody here built a TR ECC system and how did you get on? 1st hand reports are always better.
    Reply
  • Oxford Guy - Tuesday, August 7, 2018 - link

    ECC RAM is sold at slower speeds than typical enthusiast RAM. I fail to see why validation would be necessary. The fastest ECC RAM I know of is only 2666. If there is anything faster it should still fit within the TR2 spec. Reply
  • imaheadcase - Monday, August 6, 2018 - link

    So why did the CPU race slow to a crawl now for years? Have we actually reached a "safe" limit for CPUs until some new tech can make it faster? I know the need isn't as great as it used to be, but remember the days that CPU speed leaped so much each generation..like 500mhz jumps each new CPU it seemed. Now we are seeing boosts..which is basically like saying "We can go this high, but its just a limit because we not sure of ourselves". Reply
  • DigitalFreak - Monday, August 6, 2018 - link

    Two reasons come to mind - technology and competition. It's becoming increasingly difficult to go to smaller process nodes (see Intel 10nm) which are necessary to make faster chips. As to competition, Intel hasn't had any until AMD's Zen architecture. They're not going to put a lot of money into R&D if they don't have to. Unfortunately for them, AMD caught them with their pants down, and their 10nm process has had nothing but problems. Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now