Jump to content
3DCoat Forums

Battle of the Cores: Intel’s Core i9 vs AMD’s Threadripper vs...


 Share

Recommended Posts

AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1950X & Intel Core i9-7960X Processors
Print
by Rob Williams on January 6, 2018 in Processors

It still feels a little hard to believe, but both AMD and Intel offer the enthusiast market their own take on a 16-core chip. Remember when quad-cores seemed overkill for desktops? At the top-end, the CPU you choose can greatly affect your workload for better or for worse. So, let’s see what these beefy chips are made of.

https://techgage.com/article/battle-of-the-16-core-enthusiast-cpus/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Reputable Contributor
19 hours ago, L'Ancien Regime said:

AMD...AMD...AMD

 

Intel can spy on somebody else. Not paying for NSA backdoors.

Intel is still price gouging, too. To get anything near the performance of the 16 core ThreadRipper, you have to pay twice as much, if not more. I'm not gonna let them swindle me anymore.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...
  • Advanced Member

Anyone here using the AMD Ryzen? Any issues with 3DC, Photoshop or other graphic apps?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Can I ask what video card you matted with the Ryzen?

Many thanks for the reply....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Reputable Contributor
16 hours ago, kenmo said:

Can I ask what video card you matted with the Ryzen?

Many thanks for the reply....

It's a GTX 1080. I'm all for AMD CPU's as long as they are competitive, but I'm not yet sold on AMD Graphic cards. Had a bad experience with one about a decade ago (not working properly with some CG software, and updated drivers never fixed the problem). I switched to an NVidia card and had no problems. Haven't touched an AMD card since. It's nice to see them make NVidia have to work for their money, but AMD Graphic Card side of the business seems more focused on Gamers than CG content creators.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • Advanced Member

Stand by for August 2018

 

AMD 2950X is coming then; 30% faster than the 1950X with other extra goodies.

https://wccftech.com/amd-ryzen-2000-ryzen-threadripper-2000-series-cpus-leak/

 

And the NVidia GTX 1180 will arrive about the same time.

 

https://wccftech.com/nvidia-gtx-1180-custom-cards-by-august-september/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Reputable Contributor
6 hours ago, L'Ancien Regime said:

Stand by for August 2018

 

AMD 2950X is coming then; 30% faster than the 1950X with other extra goodies.

https://wccftech.com/amd-ryzen-2000-ryzen-threadripper-2000-series-cpus-leak/

 

And the NVidia GTX 1180 will arrive about the same time.

 

https://wccftech.com/nvidia-gtx-1180-custom-cards-by-august-september/

I was wondering about what was next for ThreadRipper. I figured they would leap ahead of Intel again, by outnumbering their core count...something like 24-32 cores or so. Mainly because their Server CPU's (EPYC series) are already there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
16 hours ago, AbnRanger said:

I was wondering about what was next for ThreadRipper. I figured they would leap ahead of Intel again, by outnumbering their core count...something like 24-32 cores or so. Mainly because their Server CPU's (EPYC series) are already there.

https://www.pcgamer.com/overclocker-delids-an-amd-ryzen-threadripper-chip-and-finds-epyc-inside/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Reputable Contributor
2 hours ago, L'Ancien Regime said:

I had seen something about that on Youtube. That's why I fully expected AMD to come back this time and one-up Intel again, with a ThreadRipper version bigger and faster than what Intel responded with (think they came back months later with an 18 core version costing $2k+).

They are are really sticking it to Intel right now and I'm enjoying every minute of it. A 24-32 core ThreadRipper would indeed be.....EPYC. :D Anything that makes Intel squirm, is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Carlosan changed the title to Battle of the Cores: Intel’s Core i9-7960X vs AMD’s Threadripper 1950X vs...
  • Advanced Member
On 5/21/2018 at 10:42 PM, AbnRanger said:

I had seen something about that on Youtube. That's why I fully expected AMD to come back this time and one-up Intel again, with a ThreadRipper version bigger and faster than what Intel responded with (think they came back months later with an 18 core version costing $2k+).

They are are really sticking it to Intel right now and I'm enjoying every minute of it. A 24-32 core ThreadRipper would indeed be.....EPYC. :D Anything that makes Intel squirm, is.

If you read that article closely you'll see that AMD explains the presence of four units of cores as in the Epyc but two are shut off, inert and are there to be used in heat dissipation. I suppose the EPYC is unable to run at 4ghz because of heat issues. Thus the 1950X runs at 4 ghz with no problems while EPYC is designed to run at only 2 ghz.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • Advanced Member

OH MY GOD....I DIDN'T THINK AMD WOULD GO NUCLEAR...


THEY WENT NUCLEAR!

 

https://wccftech.com/amd-2nd-gen-ryzen-threadripper-32-core-64-thread-flagship-cpu-computex/

 

AMD 2nd Generation Ryzen Threadripper CPUs With Up To 32 Cores and 64 Threads Confirmed – Built on 12nm Zen+ Process, First Demo Shown, Launch in 2H 2018

 

I've been sitting here waiting, biding my time to see what they would do...I AM BUYING THIS !!!

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

And the same day they announce THIS.

 

https://wccftech.com/amd-demos-worlds-first-7nm-gpu/

 

AMD Demos World’s First 7nm GPU: the New Vega Instinct With 32 GB HBM

 

Gentlemen, we are right on the cusp of 4k real time rendering with caustics and everything to the max..and it'll be a brute force solution.

 

 

Edited by L'Ancien Regime
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

I don't know the Vega 56's and 64's fell well short of the mark one would expect them to hit.  Nvidia cards are still top tier.  Although when it comes to production per price AMD seems to be stomping all over intel, so I hope they can give the green monster a run for it's money.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
3 hours ago, AbnRanger said:

I love how AMD is able to take Intel's lunch money twice in about 18mos. It's crazy to think that this 32 core ThreadRipper is effectively 4 Ryzen 7 2700X's.

 

Oh yeah.  It is so good to see AMD slapping around Intel after Intel has spent a decade slapping around all of its own consumers.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Reputable Contributor
18 hours ago, Falconius said:

Oh yeah.  It is so good to see AMD slapping around Intel after Intel has spent a decade slapping around all of its own consumers.

I think AMD really hit Intel where it hurts, this time. Intel panicked (again) and rushed out basically a server chip (that 28-core they announced), with a base clock of 2.7Ghz. They tried to fool everyone by saying it was running at 5Ghz. They didn't mention they used a freezer box at -10C to get that. They would pull off a huge feat just to get it to 4Gz on a consumer level cooling solution, like an All-In-One Water Cooling kit (like a Corsair H110i or so).

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
19 hours ago, AbnRanger said:

I think AMD really hit Intel where it hurts, this time. Intel panicked (again) and rushed out basically a server chip (that 28-core they announced), with a base clock of 2.7Ghz. They tried to fool everyone by saying it was running at 5Ghz. They didn't mention they used a freezer box at -10C to get that. They would pull off a huge feat just to get it to 4Gz on a consumer level cooling solution, like an All-In-One Water Cooling kit (like a Corsair H110i or so).

 

And that 2.7 ghz  server chip will be  twice the price of that 32 core Threadripper.

 

Note that the version they're showing of that 32 core Threadrippre only has a big air cooled 7 copper pipe heat sink on it.  

 

wraith-ripper-cpu-cooler.png.28f5b2f2d6195d29ce05e6fd98e7ec9c.png

Edited by L'Ancien Regime
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Reputable Contributor

If the ThreadRipper 32 core is able to hit 4+Ghz, I will be looking at getting one. Using a 2700X for now and am pretty happy with it. Hard to imagine 4 of those in one CPU. These are making CPU render engines more comparable to GPU render engines, even though there still remains a gap. I'd say that 32 Core ThreadRipper CPU would come mighty close to Cycles in GPU mode, with a GTX 1080.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

My 3 ghz 8 core  Xeon Harpertown did the Benchwell in just under 30 minutes...look at what 64 cores running under 3 ghz did it at. We are approaching real time 4k full ray traced caustics rendering

 

But it's not even the final renders that count for me. My bottleneck is creating and testing new textures. It's so slow that you can waste 8 hours cooking up a single new texture. With a 32 core Threadripper creating and testing and modifying and testing over and over again can become a fluid intensely sensual experience where you can try all sorts of variants in rapid fire instead of the glacially slow crippled chore it is now.

Creating new textures should be like mixing oil paints on a palette that have been turned into a creamy texture with the addition of linseed oil. It should be a pleasure and you should be able to do it as fast as you think of they ideas you're trying to employ to create them.

Benchwell.thumb.JPG.95db0115fdb082cebbaafe62743febcf.JPG

Edited by L'Ancien Regime
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
On 6/8/2018 at 12:25 PM, AbnRanger said:

I think AMD really hit Intel where it hurts, this time. Intel panicked (again) and rushed out basically a server chip (that 28-core they announced), with a base clock of 2.7Ghz. They tried to fool everyone by saying it was running at 5Ghz. They didn't mention they used a freezer box at -10C to get that. They would pull off a huge feat just to get it to 4Gz on a consumer level cooling solution, like an All-In-One Water Cooling kit (like a Corsair H110i or so).

 

Yeah Intel really got egg on their face with that bonehead move.  Debuting an old Chip with a thousand dollar cooling system used for aquariums, and pulling something like 1500 to 2000 watts for the cooler alone.  And it has less cores anyways.  Threadripper is super tempting.  but all their chips give more bang for the buck, the only advantage Intel cpu's have at this moment is higher clock speeds and they had to scramble to get those out when Ryzen dropped.  In addition to that Unless you are buying a very expensive K version chip the Intel stuff is locked out of overclocking, it's not my thing, but all AMD chips are unlocked.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

There is a lot of internal AMD politics going on behind the scenes with all these developments.

 

 

https://wccftech.com/exclusive-amd-navi-gpu-roadmap-cost-zen/

 

 it is essential to understand AMD’s contextual backdrop – both in terms of talent and finances. The company has a market capitalization $15.25 billion and has struggled to turn a profit. In comparison, competitors like NVIDIA and Intel are giants with market capitalizations of $158.2 billion and $254.1 billion respectively and net income in the billions of dollars as well. The same goes for talent as well, it costs money and AMD has a relatively smaller pool of (very) talented engineers that can work on a given project at one time as compared to its much bigger rivals.

Lisa’s dilemma: A CPU comeback with semi-custom centric roadmaps or maintain expensive leadership in graphics for gamers
Pundits that have been following AMD’s progress will almost unanimously agree on one thing – AMD is a company that is cash-starved. With a finite flow of resources, the company has to be very careful of how it allocates the precious pool of R&D and how it does so – usually dictates its performance for the next couple of years.

This is also where our story begins. Kyle Bennet of HardOCP first reported a rift between the now-Radeon Technologies Group department and the company’s CEO Lisa Su quite some time ago. The issue was simple, Raja Koduri (the RTG boss) wanted more autonomy and there were rumors that they wanted to spin off the graphics department completely. Well, we now have the full story in-hand and the issue went much deeper.

It turns out that Lisa Su was focused primarily on bringing back AMD’s CPU side of things, and establishing a strong semi-custom GPU side. Maintaining leadership in the descrete graphics market (gamers) is a costly business and with the finite amount of resources the company had, something had to give.MW-FX126_lisa_s_20171026160018_ZH.thumb.jpg.5e3c9fb383e1d784bff51fded0c6acd7.jpg

Edited by L'Ancien Regime
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Reputable Contributor

I'm pretty much OK with that. As is, their GPU side of things have been highly competitive with Nividia. The CPU side of the business was what was dragging the company down. Smart move for her to put more emphasis on their weakness, rather than what they were already good at. No politics....just common sense, IMO.

I can tell you right now, AMD won't be cash strapped for long. Their stock prices have climbed significantly since they released Ryzen over a year ago. That gave and is giving, them a bug infusion of capital. More and more PC makers are putting Ryzen CPU's in their systems, including laptops.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Reputable Contributor
On 6/6/2018 at 7:23 PM, Falconius said:

I don't know the Vega 56's and 64's fell well short of the mark one would expect them to hit.  Nvidia cards are still top tier.  Although when it comes to production per price AMD seems to be stomping all over intel, so I hope they can give the green monster a run for it's money.

Well, even though I am still an NVidia guy, Vega disappointed only in the sense that everyone expected them to leapfrog the current top consumer models (1080Ti, 1080, 1070). They matched NVidia's top cards, except the 1080Ti, which is basically a TitanX Pascal. The 56 is actually a bit better than the GTX 1070, but the Vega 64 is pretty much neck and neck with the GTX 1080. So, at least they got parity with NVidia. This 7nm and 32GB card sounds like a beast. I just don't know if I'm ready for an AMD card (no CUDA), because that excludes usage of some render engines, like VRay RT GPU (for Modo) and Octane, plus no CUDA for Voxel sculpting...which isn't a huge deal, but I notice a difference when enabling it in 3D Coat.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Carlosan changed the title to Battle of the Cores: Intel’s Core i9 vs AMD’s Threadripper vs...

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...