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
Xyler94 - Monday, February 10, 2020 - link
Intel still wins in AVX512 and AI VNNI loads. AMD's got the brute force crown, which brute forcing your way through everything is still great, but if your workload uses 90% AVX512 or AI with VNNI, Intel would be more suited.But that's the great thing about competition, we now have choices, and it's no longer "Just get Intel".
Spunjji - Wednesday, February 12, 2020 - link
A GPU or NPU would be even more suited to those workloads, though. AVX-512 is a weird middle-ground.yetanotherhuman - Monday, February 10, 2020 - link
I don't follow. It's not a gaming processor. It is, however, the fastest workstation/HEDT chip that exists. That's clearly not useless.Spunjji - Monday, February 10, 2020 - link
Another useless comment from timcarp.A moderator, a moderator, my kingdom for a moderator...
babadivad - Tuesday, February 11, 2020 - link
How can you read this and not come away wih the knowledge that this is the most powerful CPU on the planet?kardonn - Tuesday, February 11, 2020 - link
I pre-ordered it, easiest hardware purchase decision of my life. My current fleet of workstations are dual 18C Xeons, they're done very well for me over the last 5-6 years but single core performance is a big deal in workstations...the 3990X really outshines the Xeons on those tasks, and then when it comes to multithreaded tasks it's just an absolute bloodbath.I have never owned AMD hardware in my life before this because Intel was always the best decision to buy if you need raw CPU power the way I do. Now AMD is king though, and I'm no fanboi or brand loyalist...I buy whatever is best.
There's a reason AMD has been picking up a lot of server market share and workstation market share. They're making the CPUs that everyone wants right now.
spicemuthaf - Sunday, June 14, 2020 - link
My friend,everything is useless if you don't know what to do with itedsib1 - Friday, February 7, 2020 - link
If you're going to run server benchmarks - especially with >32 cores, then use Linux/Unix. What self respecting mission critical business runs on windows server?bloinkXP - Friday, February 7, 2020 - link
That's not really an accurate statement. I work for one of the largest insurance companies in the world and we are 99% Windows. The days of Linux having more stability than Windows are long since over. As a matter of fact due to various compliance reporting we have to reboot all servers monthly (for patching) so even the famous "uptime" metric is largely useless. Our Windows platforms are very stable and handle the applications that our business requires (SQL Server/SP/.NET...etc)vanilla_gorilla - Friday, February 7, 2020 - link
> The days of Linux having more stability than Windows are long since over.lol