Personal computing discussed
Moderators: renee, Flying Fox, morphine
Waco wrote:I was looking more at the power savings and IPC improvements versus raw performance. The 24 core Zen 2 is likely about 50% faster than my 1950X and would use substantially less power in normal workloads.
Krogoth wrote:Unless you are pulling the CPU hard for other workloads and/or are doing insane I/O throughput. I doubt you'll get much power savings from going to Threadripper 3.
Waco wrote:Krogoth wrote:Unless you are pulling the CPU hard for other workloads and/or are doing insane I/O throughput. I doubt you'll get much power savings from going to Threadripper 3.
Given I have a few Rome servers in my testbeds at work already, I'm pretty confident I'd see a pretty substantial drop in average power use for almost every workload I tend to stress it with. Idle power drops significantly too.
Further - this is a segmentation move (or they broke consumer TR3 more than the server version) because Rome chips drop right into first-generation Naples boards with a BIOS update. Obviously PCIe4 doesn't work, but everything else does.
Krogoth wrote:Unless the NAS is doing heavy-duty I/O throughput or other stuff it isn't going to be taxing the CPU at all especially in a home setting. Modern CPUs are extremely easy on the power under light loads. The node advantage in power consumption doesn't manifest much here. FYI, my personal NAS barely uses one of the 3570K's cores with a modest 4 HDD setup (XFS, mirrored volumes striped) when scrubbing. I doubt your setup taxes that X1950.
Further, the node advantage and better power management matters quite a bit in light loading scenarios (heck, even gen 2 TR chopped 10-15 watts off of idle power).
Waco wrote:https://techreport.com/forums/viewtopic ... 0#p1414670 A 30 PB array of flash drives should be capable of fairly high I/O rates, I would expect.Krogoth wrote:I'm glad you know my use case better than I do.... I don't know what your definition of "heavy-duty I/O throughput" is, but I bet my definition differs significantly.Unless the NAS is doing heavy-duty I/O throughput or other stuff it isn't going to be taxing the CPU...
Waco wrote:Krogoth wrote:Unless the NAS is doing heavy-duty I/O throughput or other stuff it isn't going to be taxing the CPU at all especially in a home setting. Modern CPUs are extremely easy on the power under light loads. The node advantage in power consumption doesn't manifest much here. FYI, my personal NAS barely uses one of the 3570K's cores with a modest 4 HDD setup (XFS, mirrored volumes striped) when scrubbing. I doubt your setup taxes that X1950.
I'm glad you know my use case better than I do.
I don't know what your definition of "heavy-duty I/O throughput" is, but I bet my definition differs significantly.
Waco wrote:I'm not sure what point you're trying to make. I'll note that my day job is HPC storage. I do run a few GB/s of throughput on my NAS in the SSD pool pretty routinely, not that IO even remotely stresses even the 1950X. Encoding and transcoding, however, do.
Waco wrote:No, it's a NAS. Headless.
Regardless, TR3 does use the same IO chip. The wider paths to the chipset are the reason for rewiring the socket. I'm willing to bet after a few months a vendor will figure out how to get Rome working on the older socket (assuming it doesn't work out of the box, just "unsupported"). SP2 and TR4 only differ in memory channel wiring out from the socket. They're otherwise identical.
Krogoth wrote:They are electrical differences as well which is why TR cannot POST with a SP2 board and likewise Epyc chips cannot POST with a Socket TR4 board.
AnandTech's Dr. Ian Cutress wrote:I have never used the word ‘bloodbath’ in a review before. It seems messy, violent, and a little bit gruesome. But when we look at the results from the new AMD Threadripper processors, it seems more than appropriate. AMD has scored wins across almost all of our benchmark suite. In anything embarrassingly parallel it rules the roost by a large margin (except for our one AVX-512 benchmark). Single threaded performance trails the high-frequency mainstream parts, but it is still very close. Even in memory sensitive workloads, an issue for the previous generation Threadripper parts, the new chiplet design has pushed performance to the next level. These new Threadripper processors win on core count, on high IPC, on high frequency, and on fast memory.
If you had told me three years ago that AMD were going to be ruling the roost in the HEDT market with high-performance 32-core processors on a leading-edge manufacturing node, I would have told you to lay off the heavy stuff. But here we are, and AMD isn’t done yet, teasing a 64-core version for next year. This is a crazy time we live in, and I’m glad to be a part of it.
Price no object, the new Threadripper processors are breathing new life into the high-end desktop market. AMD is going to have to work hard to top this one. Intel is going to have to have a shift its design strategy to compete.
Hot Hardware's Marco Chiappetta wrote:With the launch of these 3rd Generation Threadripper 3000 series processors, AMD turns the high-end desktop processor market on its head. For creative professionals that use applications that will leverage the massive core resources available in these CPUs, the latest Threadrippers cannot be touched. Performance is on another level versus virtually all other desktop platforms, thanks to the Zen 2 architecture, massive amounts of cache, and a new chiplet topology that allows every CPU core to connect to main system memory.
These new Threadrippers and the companion TRX40 chipset support PCI Express 4.0 and the platform as a whole offers a massive amount of usable IO. Keep in mind that not only do these Threadrippers offer more usable PCIe lanes than other platforms, but they’re double the bandwidth of PCI Express 3.0 solutions as well.
Intel’s new pricing strategy makes Cascade Lake X the more affordable solution, while 3rd Gen Threadripper is now the premium king-of-the-hill.
In the end, we can’t help but be impressed with what AMD has done with these new 3rd Gen Threadrippers. They are incredibly high performers and offer features (like PCI Express 4.0) not available elsewhere. If you’re a creative professional looking for the most powerful many-core platform out there, look no further.
JustAnEngineer wrote:https://www.anandtech.com/show/15044/the-amd-ryzen-threadripper-3960x-and-3970x-review-24-and-32-cores-on-7nm
AnandTech's Dr. Ian Cutress wrote:I have never used the word ‘bloodbath’ in a review before. It seems messy, violent, and a little bit gruesome. But when we look at the results from the new AMD Threadripper processors, it seems more than appropriate. AMD has scored wins across almost all of our benchmark suite. In anything embarrassingly parallel it rules the roost by a large margin (except for our one AVX-512 benchmark). Single threaded performance trails the high-frequency mainstream parts, but it is still very close. Even in memory sensitive workloads, an issue for the previous generation Threadripper parts, the new chiplet design has pushed performance to the next level. These new Threadripper processors win on core count, on high IPC, on high frequency, and on fast memory.
If you had told me three years ago that AMD were going to be ruling the roost in the HEDT market with high-performance 32-core processors on a leading-edge manufacturing node, I would have told you to lay off the heavy stuff. But here we are, and AMD isn’t done yet, teasing a 64-core version for next year. This is a crazy time we live in, and I’m glad to be a part of it.
Price no object, the new Threadripper processors are breathing new life into the high-end desktop market. AMD is going to have to work hard to top this one. Intel is going to have to have a shift its design strategy to compete.
