The 64 Core Threadripper 3990X CPU Review: In The Midst Of Chaos, AMD Seeks Opportunity
by Dr. Ian Cutress & Gavin Bonshor on February 7, 2020 9:00 AM ESTAMD 3990X Against $20k Enterprise CPUs
For those looking at a server replacement CPU, AMD’s big discussion point here is that in order to get 64 cores on Intel hardware is relatively hard. The best way to get there is with a dual socket system, featuring two of its 28-core dies at a hefty $10k a piece. AMD’s argument is that users can consolidate down to a single socket, but also have better memory support, PCIe 4.0, and no cross-memory domain issues.
| AMD 3990X Enterprise Competition | |||
| AnandTech | AMD 3990X |
AMD 7702P |
Intel 2x8280 |
| SEP | $3990 | $4450 | $20018 |
| Cores/Threads | 64 / 128 | 64 / 128 | 56 / 112 |
| Base Frequency | 2900 | 2000 | 2700 |
| Turbo Frequency | 4300 | 3350 | 4000 |
| PCIe | 4.0 x64 | 4.0 x128 | 3.0 x96 |
| DDR4 Frequency | 4x 3200 | 8x 3200 | 12x 2933 |
| Max DDR4 Capacity | 512 GB | 2 TB | 3 TB |
| TDP | 280 W | 200 W | 410 W |
Unfortunately I was unable to get ahold of our Rome CPUs from Johan in time for this review, however I do have data from several dual Intel Xeon setups that I did a few months ago, including the $20k system.
This time with Corona the competition is hot on the heels of AMD's 64-core CPUs, but even $20k of hardware can't match it.
The non-AVX verson of 3DPM puts the Zen 2 hardware out front, with everything else waiting in the wings.
When we add in the AVX-512 hand tuned code, the situation flips: Intel's 56 cores get almost 2.5x the score of AMD, despite having fewer cores.
Blender doesn't seem to like the additional access latency from the 2P systems.
For AES encoding, as the benchmark takes places from memory, it appears that none of Intel's CPUs can match AMD here.
For the 7-zip combined test, there's little difference between AMD's 32-core and 64-core, but there are sizable jumps above Intel hardware.
Verdict
In our tests here (more in our benchmark database), AMD's 3990X would get the crown over Intel's dual socket offerings. The only thing really keeping me back from giving it is the same reason there was hesitation on the previous page: it doesn't do enough to differentiate itself from AMD's own 32-core CPU. Where AMD does win is in that 'money is less of an issue scenario', where using a single socket 64 core CPU can help consolidate systems, save power, and save money. Intel's CPUs have a TDP of 205W each (more if you decide to use the turbo, which we did here), which totals 410W, while AMD maxed out at 280W in our tests. Technically Intel's 2P has access to more PCIe lanes, but AMD's PCIe lanes are PCIe 4.0, not PCIe 3.0, and with the right switch can power many more than Intel (if you're saving 16k, then a switch is peanuts).
We acknowledge that our tests here aren't in any way a comprehensive test of server level workloads, but for the user base that AMD is aiming for, we'd take the 64 core (or even the 32 core) in most circumstances over two Intel 28 core CPUs, and spend the extra money on memory, storage, or a couple of big fat GPUs.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
279 Comments
View All Comments
kramik1 - Friday, February 7, 2020 - link
If I am not mistaken all newer AMD CPUs support ECC. It just depends if the motherboard BIOS will support it and get QA for it. Some users on Reddit were saying that even some B450 boards worked with ECC. I would be surprised if the board you were testing with didn't support it. It is not a feature that AMD sells like Intel.Ian Cutress - Friday, February 7, 2020 - link
ECC might work, but it's not validated. There's a difference there.Mikewind Dale - Saturday, February 8, 2020 - link
I have a Gigabyte X470 Aorus Gaming 7 Wifi with a Ryzen 7 2700X and KingstonKingston KSM26ED8/16ME (DDR 2666 ECC). The Gigabyte specifications page says it supports ECC. And indeed, when I run "cmd /k wmic memphysical get memoryerrorcorrection", the output indicates that ECC is working.
So just check your motherboard's specs, and if it says it supports ECC, you should be good to go.
willis936 - Friday, February 7, 2020 - link
I wonder if a linux host with a 128 thread windows client vm would have higher performance than running windows on bare metal.Ratman6161 - Friday, February 7, 2020 - link
Hmmm. could be interesting to install VMWare ESXi on it then create a VM with all processors assigned to it??Mikewind Dale - Friday, February 7, 2020 - link
Can I suggest you make a test where you run two instances of a given application? In many of these tests, 64 cores barely outperform 32 cores. However, that could mean that one instance of a given application has trouble using more than 32 cores. It may still be that two simultaneous instances of the same application could together use 64 cores effectively.For me at least, this is a realistic use case. I run statistical regressions in Stata, and one script file often contains dozens of different regressions to run. Now, Stata has a multicore version, licensed per core, which parallelizes the underlying linear algebra. But Stata also allows free trivial parallelization, in which each regression is run as a single-thread process, simultaneously. Stata does this by opening additional instances of itself in the background. So the user opens one instance of Stata, and then Stata opens an independent instance of itself in the background. Each regression is run on a different thread, in a different instance of Stata, and all the results are pooled together later.
My suspicion is that even when an application cannot effectively use 64 cores in a single instance, running two instances of the same application at once would be able to use 64 cores. I'd like to see a test of this.
Slash3 - Friday, February 7, 2020 - link
Small note, on page one in your Ryzen chart you list the 3950X as having only 32MB of L3 cache. As a dual chiplet CPU It has 4x16MB = 64MB of L3.Slash3 - Sunday, February 16, 2020 - link
...still not fixed, guys.Scipio Africanus - Friday, February 7, 2020 - link
As others may have said, this is a halo product. If it makes money great, otherwise break-even or even a small loss is fine. Audi doesn't need its R8 to be a cash cow, BMW doesn't need the I8 to make big bucks, or Acura for the NSX to rake in the dough, they have their core offerings for that. But these products exist to give the consumer something to be wowed by for the brand.iAPX - Friday, February 7, 2020 - link
Just to be clear, 3990x is the king but 3970x is the best performance/price option?This is incredible, AMD took the crown and is now the clear leader on some markets.