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

First 96-Core AMD Zen 4 Threadripper Tests Show Utter Domination over Intel

extremetech.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 108 posts

Re: First 96-Core AMD Zen 4 Threadripper Tests Show Utter Domination over Intel

#31

Post by jacquesm »

tedunangst wrote: post #13
coder543 wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Single threaded tasks should never run at the base clock. The base clock can pretty much be thought of as the minimum clock speed you should see when all cores are maxed out and the thermal solution is only just meeting the spec.

I still want my computer to remain responsive even when I'm rendering in the background.

That's more of a software thing than hardware. You could do that in the 80's with the right software, but most modern operating systems suck at realtime stuff (and ui is realtime).

Re: First 96-Core AMD Zen 4 Threadripper Tests Show Utter Domination over Intel

#32

Post by Racing0461 »

tedunangst wrote: post #13
coder543 wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Single threaded tasks should never run at the base clock. The base clock can pretty much be thought of as the minimum clock speed you should see when all cores are maxed out and the thermal solution is only just meeting the spec.

I still want my computer to remain responsive even when I'm rendering in the background.

+1. it's great that it compiles code faster, but i would also like when i'm writing code and hit enter, a newline is added and all lines under it goes down by 1 without any "lag".

That's why i decided to go with a 5950x + 3090 rtx + gamer ram for my current "workstation" instead of a 5995wx + rtx 6000 + ecc ram for my current machine. even tho its not workstation rated, it seemed like the better way to go for quality of life feel.

When the next generation of cpu/gpu/ram drops in the next couple eyars, i can re-evaluate the gamer vs professional offering to see if it matters.

Re: First 96-Core AMD Zen 4 Threadripper Tests Show Utter Domination over Intel

#33

Post by jacquesm »

dralley wrote: post #17
tedunangst wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I still want my computer to remain responsive even when I'm rendering in the background.

I doubt 2.5ghz vs 4.2ghz is going to make any real difference to "responsiveness". The more pressing concern would be making sure the kernel actually schedules foreground workloads promptly.

Typical desktop OS's don't have proper prioritization and terrible schedulers. It's definitely not the hardware.

Re: First 96-Core AMD Zen 4 Threadripper Tests Show Utter Domination over Intel

#34

Post by pshirshov »

mrichman wrote: post #25

What use cases is this CPU ideal for? It's not a GPU, so gaming, ML model training, and crypto mining are out.

It's ideal for building big things, like Chromium or AOSP.

> not a GPU

Well, 3970x is able to soft-render DotA in 4k with 8-11 fps...

Re: First 96-Core AMD Zen 4 Threadripper Tests Show Utter Domination over Intel

#35

Post by stingraycharles »

mrichman wrote: post #25

What use cases is this CPU ideal for? It's not a GPU, so gaming, ML model training, and crypto mining are out.

I’m using it to still feel productive while working on our massive, TMP-heavy C++ codebase.

Re: First 96-Core AMD Zen 4 Threadripper Tests Show Utter Domination over Intel

#36

Post by cmrdporcupine »

KiranRao0 wrote: post #26
mrichman wrote: post #25

What use cases is this CPU ideal for? It's not a GPU, so gaming, ML model training, and crypto mining are out.

Shoving somewhere in a datacenter and virtualizing so that 96 different clients can use it at once.

But ThreadRipper is a workstation-targeted product, not server, isn't it?

Re: First 96-Core AMD Zen 4 Threadripper Tests Show Utter Domination over Intel

#37

Post by Racing0461 »

dralley wrote: post #17
tedunangst wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I still want my computer to remain responsive even when I'm rendering in the background.

I doubt 2.5ghz vs 4.2ghz is going to make any real difference to "responsiveness". The more pressing concern would be making sure the kernel actually schedules foreground workloads promptly.

Maybe i'm missing why it doesn't matter. Ryzen runs at 4.5 base clock, TR Pro runs at 2.5 base clock, upon booting up nothing is happening so each cpu runs at their base clock. I open something like visual studio that isn't too intensive so each cpu doesn't realize it needs to boost. Won't the ryzen with 4.5 base clock feel snappier than the 2.5 one when vs loads?

When a pretty big task (compiling, rendering) activates the scheduler and causes the cpu to boost to their respective 5 ghz or w/e, then yeah the numbers would be the same, but they don't be at the beginning when i'm dragging windows around and right clicking on stuff in visual studio. I don't believe this feeling is reflected in the scores.

Re: First 96-Core AMD Zen 4 Threadripper Tests Show Utter Domination over Intel

#40

Post by [deleted] »

ahahahahah wrote: post #20
_joel wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They're testing CPU performance, not memory capacity. They need that much for the channels.

It just seems so incredibly sloppy to not have that be consistent. Do they expect all of their readers to then audit the code of the benchmarking that they are doing to ensure that it cannot possibly be bound by this?

[deleted]
Post reply on HN