Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

AMD 16-Core ThreadRipper Enthusiast CPUs to Reportedly Utilize 4094 Pin Socket

hothardware.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 97 posts

Re: AMD 16-Core ThreadRipper Enthusiast CPUs to Reportedly Utilize 4094 Pin Socket

#21

Post by yohui »

013a wrote: post #18
ricw wrote: post #3

Finally it looks like the desktop CPU market could become interesting and competitive again. Intel being pushed to release a new top of the line core i9 processor?! I cannot remember anything like this since the amd64 days more than 10 years ago. Would love to play with one of these setups..

The i9 isn't new. Its a rebranded Skylake-X/KabyLake-X chip. This has been on their roadmap for over a year [1]; they just changed the name to trick consumers into thinking its something new. The hype between here and reddit about i9 is astounding to me. You've been able to get an i7 in a 10 core variant for a year now [2]. Need 6 cores? Take a time machine back to Q3'11 and pick up an i7 3930k [3]. And if you needed…

Mostly agree, but AMD's TDP estimates are slightly optimistic and in reality Ryzen's power usage is much closer to its Intel counterparts.

Re: AMD 16-Core ThreadRipper Enthusiast CPUs to Reportedly Utilize 4094 Pin Socket

#22

Post by izacus »

013a wrote: post #18
ricw wrote: post #3

Finally it looks like the desktop CPU market could become interesting and competitive again. Intel being pushed to release a new top of the line core i9 processor?! I cannot remember anything like this since the amd64 days more than 10 years ago. Would love to play with one of these setups..

The i9 isn't new. Its a rebranded Skylake-X/KabyLake-X chip. This has been on their roadmap for over a year [1]; they just changed the name to trick consumers into thinking its something new. The hype between here and reddit about i9 is astounding to me. You've been able to get an i7 in a 10 core variant for a year now [2]. Need 6 cores? Take a time machine back to Q3'11 and pick up an i7 3930k [3]. And if you needed…

The problem is of course the fact that 6+ i7 chips don't actually fit the consumer motherboards, but you need to go to the server segment where MBs are significantly more expensive and lack a whole slew of additional features nice for desktop machines.

Re: AMD 16-Core ThreadRipper Enthusiast CPUs to Reportedly Utilize 4094 Pin Socket

#24

Post by mtgx »

013a wrote: post #18
ricw wrote: post #3

Finally it looks like the desktop CPU market could become interesting and competitive again. Intel being pushed to release a new top of the line core i9 processor?! I cannot remember anything like this since the amd64 days more than 10 years ago. Would love to play with one of these setups..

The i9 isn't new. Its a rebranded Skylake-X/KabyLake-X chip. This has been on their roadmap for over a year [1]; they just changed the name to trick consumers into thinking its something new. The hype between here and reddit about i9 is astounding to me. You've been able to get an i7 in a 10 core variant for a year now [2]. Need 6 cores? Take a time machine back to Q3'11 and pick up an i7 3930k [3]. And if you needed…

Same with Atom-based Celerons/Pentiums, and Core M-based Core i3's and i5's, and more recently the Skylake "Gold" And "Platinum":

https://semiaccurate.com/2017/05/05/intels-new-scalable-xeon...

It's looking like with Moore's Law dying, Intel has just given up, and is instead trying to "innovate" with how to trick its customers to pay more for the same or weaker stuff.

Re: AMD 16-Core ThreadRipper Enthusiast CPUs to Reportedly Utilize 4094 Pin Socket

#25

Post by paulmd »

jplayer01 wrote: post #16
sp332 wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Top-end Ryzen chips have a TDP of 95W. (Edit: AM4 socket is rated at >140W TDP.) The new sockets are designed for 180W and up, so they will probably run at the same clock frequencies. That means no hit for single-thread performance.

180W!? That thing is a monster.

It'll actually probably be more than 180W given that AMD is lowballing their Ryzen 7 TDPs. Those chips are more in the 120-130W range under a typical (non-Prime95) load - so unless they drop the clocks on the 16C chips a bit (which is very plausible), you can expect something closer to 250W TDP.

https://www.pcper.com/reviews/Processors/AMD-Ryzen-7-1800X-R...

This is pretty much normal for HEDT chips though. Both Ryzen and Broadwell-E/Haswell-E hit ~230W already when you overclock them - and add another 75-100W for Prime95 loads.

I doubt you'll see too many people overclocking the 16C chips even if they're unlocked. You would race right past 300W, probably closer to 400W. You'd need like a 360mm liquid cooler to even think about it.

Re: AMD 16-Core ThreadRipper Enthusiast CPUs to Reportedly Utilize 4094 Pin Socket

#26

Post by paulmd »

m-j-fox wrote: post #13

I wonder why it needs so many pins? It only has 4 DDR channels, which is going to be a bottleneck keeping those cores fed. 8 channels would be more appropriate for 16 cores and it would explain why so many pins.

I would assume that most of the pins are power/ground, like most high-pin-count sockets. They help avoid system noise at really high clock rates.

Re: AMD 16-Core ThreadRipper Enthusiast CPUs to Reportedly Utilize 4094 Pin Socket

#27

Post by Keyframe »

robhu wrote: post #10
dogma1138 wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, Intel's i9 if it exists is a rename of the old HEDT platform. This is also likely unrelated to AMD, with Coffee Lake coming which brings 6-core/6-thread and 6-core/12-thread CPUs to the mainstream (150-300$) Intel likely wants a new tier to relay performance segmentation when even a core i5 will come with 6 cores from Q3 2017 onwards.

Nope. 6 core 12 thread CPUs came to the mainstream a while ago, AMD brought them. The Ryzen 5 1400 is $160. Intel is playing catchup.

I bought 3930K 6C/12HT in 2012 and still rockin' it. AMD was not even on radar back then.

Re: AMD 16-Core ThreadRipper Enthusiast CPUs to Reportedly Utilize 4094 Pin Socket

#28

Post by stolk »

013a wrote: post #18
ricw wrote: post #3

Finally it looks like the desktop CPU market could become interesting and competitive again. Intel being pushed to release a new top of the line core i9 processor?! I cannot remember anything like this since the amd64 days more than 10 years ago. Would love to play with one of these setups..

The i9 isn't new. Its a rebranded Skylake-X/KabyLake-X chip. This has been on their roadmap for over a year [1]; they just changed the name to trick consumers into thinking its something new. The hype between here and reddit about i9 is astounding to me. You've been able to get an i7 in a 10 core variant for a year now [2]. Need 6 cores? Take a time machine back to Q3'11 and pick up an i7 3930k [3]. And if you needed…

The i9 is most definitely something new.

It is the first desktop CPU to bring AVX512. If the code is designed for it, that by itself doubles the perf compared to AVX2 CPUs.

I look forward to porting my algorithms to 16 wide SIMD.

Re: AMD 16-Core ThreadRipper Enthusiast CPUs to Reportedly Utilize 4094 Pin Socket

#29

Post by trueSlav »

Keyframe wrote: post #27
robhu wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nope. 6 core 12 thread CPUs came to the mainstream a while ago, AMD brought them. The Ryzen 5 1400 is $160. Intel is playing catchup.

I bought 3930K 6C/12HT in 2012 and still rockin' it. AMD was not even on radar back then.

My old 1090t from 2010 says hi.

Re: AMD 16-Core ThreadRipper Enthusiast CPUs to Reportedly Utilize 4094 Pin Socket

#30

Post by paulmd »

013a wrote: post #19
robhu wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nope. 6 core 12 thread CPUs came to the mainstream a while ago, AMD brought them. The Ryzen 5 1400 is $160. Intel is playing catchup.

Ever heard of the i7 5820k? It was released Q3'14. 6 cores. 12 threads. i7 name. Around $400. [1] AMD's great revolution was getting the TDP on that core count below 100W, and getting them onto a consumer chipset/socket instead of the enthusiast/server platform. That's it. We keep saying they forced some revolution in price/performance that Intel has had to respond to. Its 80% hype, 20% truth. Intel was complacent on…

Intel did a really shitty job marketing these (maybe the i9 name will help). They are hardly known even amount enthusiasts but they are really good processors for the exact same reasons that people like Ryzen. A moderate tradeoff in gaming for a big gain in productivity tasks.

They are even priced essentially the same as the 4C8T i7s.

I basically had Ryzen performance at Ryzen prices a year ago when I built my 5820K system. Motherboard, processor, and 32 GB of DDR4-3000 CAS15 cost me $600 all together. I hit 4.13 GHz all-core on stock voltage and still run well under the rated TDP.

Ryzen was an incremental improvement at best. 8 core Ryzen is slightly faster (being that it has 33% more cores) but I'm still winning vs the 6-cores.

The real change Intel needs to make is dropping the cost of the 8-core and higher chips, because they're just past any reasonable budget.

Post reply on HN