Just wondering, what are the scenarios that would need a lot of I/O + Memory, but not a lot of cores? I can think of 4-way SLI/Crossfire, but I know there HAS to be other uses that aren't gaming.
In servers many kind of Memcaching / PCI-E SSD / storage servers might not require much CPU, but benefit from plenty of IO / memory as you want to just server as much traffic as possible over multiple 10Gbe / 40Gbe etc. network interfaces from a terabyte or of memory / huge amount of SSD etc.
In workstation environment... I can't think of many situations where such CPU would make much sense.
Well, maybe you want to run multiple PCI-e GPU's doing rendering tasks. But I don't really know if it makes sense to save $250 if you plan to have $2500 worth of GPU's installed.
I want to have some VMs with dedicated PCI-e cards passed through on my workstation. I don't necessarily need 16 cores for my use case.
Also, an important point to note, I believe the 1900X has the highest base clock of any Ryzen processor, and in the big Threadripper package it may have better XFR/overclocking behavior. I believe it will be the single threaded king of the Ryzen chips (for now).
3-4 graphics cards would be useful for every software which offloads most of its work to GPUs: CAD, 3D rendering, video processing, photoshop, "bitcoin" mining... OTOH paying extra $450 for 2x CPU performance sounds reasonable if you are paying for 4 $400-$1000 GPUs anyway.
This will be a great processor for storage boxes running ZFS. You don't need a lot of cores, but the more PCIe lanes for storage expansion, the better. You can stick a lot of x8 HBAs into a motherboard with 60 PCIe lanes available. :) And hang a lot of SATA drives off of them. Sure, you might not break any throughput or IOps records that way, but you can easily get into petabytes of available space.
Transcoding HD video for one. This process requires CPU power, memory, and disk IO, but does not require much GPU power. It will use every available core though. This is one area AMD has always beat Intel, even if by a narrow margin.
The 180 TDP is high but you have to remember this is a TR chip with access to quad channel memory etc. The cpu has to keep parts of itself active that probably uses more power than 1800X doesn't have to worry about.
Yup, it has all the PCIe, all the I/O, all the RAM support, and the higher base clock. In effect, it's the same as two highly clocked Ryzen 3's with the support logic.
You said why this is the one for me (down the road a bit.) Highest base clocks with 4 memory channels and all that I/O.
It is too bad there seems to be some hard clock limit in the design somewhere, with the cores spread so far apart, it otherwise seems excellent for extreme overclocking.
To my understanding, you only need PCIe x16 for high-end gaming. I want a system to put 4 GPUs in at PCIe x8 for video and 3D rendering and transcoding. My 1 box Frameripper.
"accomplish the same thing at $100 less " $549 vs $499 is $50 less.... although if you add the price differences in motherboards, it probably will be $100+
We’ve updated our terms. By continuing to use the site and/or by logging into your account, you agree to the Site’s updated Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
19 Comments
Back to Article
eek2121 - Thursday, August 31, 2017 - link
Are they shipping review samples? I already have a 1950X, but I'm curious as to how the 1900X stacks up against the competition.Manch - Thursday, August 31, 2017 - link
I want to see the 1800x vs the 1900x specificallyRyan Smith - Thursday, August 31, 2017 - link
"Are they shipping review samples?"No, they are not.
MajGenRelativity - Thursday, August 31, 2017 - link
Just wondering, what are the scenarios that would need a lot of I/O + Memory, but not a lot of cores? I can think of 4-way SLI/Crossfire, but I know there HAS to be other uses that aren't gaming.zepi - Thursday, August 31, 2017 - link
In servers many kind of Memcaching / PCI-E SSD / storage servers might not require much CPU, but benefit from plenty of IO / memory as you want to just server as much traffic as possible over multiple 10Gbe / 40Gbe etc. network interfaces from a terabyte or of memory / huge amount of SSD etc.In workstation environment... I can't think of many situations where such CPU would make much sense.
zepi - Thursday, August 31, 2017 - link
Well, maybe you want to run multiple PCI-e GPU's doing rendering tasks. But I don't really know if it makes sense to save $250 if you plan to have $2500 worth of GPU's installed.sor - Thursday, August 31, 2017 - link
I want to have some VMs with dedicated PCI-e cards passed through on my workstation. I don't necessarily need 16 cores for my use case.Also, an important point to note, I believe the 1900X has the highest base clock of any Ryzen processor, and in the big Threadripper package it may have better XFR/overclocking behavior. I believe it will be the single threaded king of the Ryzen chips (for now).
peevee - Thursday, August 31, 2017 - link
3-4 graphics cards would be useful for every software which offloads most of its work to GPUs: CAD, 3D rendering, video processing, photoshop, "bitcoin" mining...OTOH paying extra $450 for 2x CPU performance sounds reasonable if you are paying for 4 $400-$1000 GPUs anyway.
phoenix_rizzen - Thursday, August 31, 2017 - link
This will be a great processor for storage boxes running ZFS. You don't need a lot of cores, but the more PCIe lanes for storage expansion, the better. You can stick a lot of x8 HBAs into a motherboard with 60 PCIe lanes available. :) And hang a lot of SATA drives off of them. Sure, you might not break any throughput or IOps records that way, but you can easily get into petabytes of available space.ddriver - Thursday, August 31, 2017 - link
If you use mostly GPU compute then you only need the CPU to schedule work.Irwin Electronics - Saturday, September 2, 2017 - link
Transcoding HD video for one. This process requires CPU power, memory, and disk IO, but does not require much GPU power. It will use every available core though. This is one area AMD has always beat Intel, even if by a narrow margin.siberian3 - Thursday, August 31, 2017 - link
why 180W cpu is it not alot for an 8 core?Makaveli - Thursday, August 31, 2017 - link
The 180 TDP is high but you have to remember this is a TR chip with access to quad channel memory etc. The cpu has to keep parts of itself active that probably uses more power than 1800X doesn't have to worry about.bill.rookard - Thursday, August 31, 2017 - link
Yup, it has all the PCIe, all the I/O, all the RAM support, and the higher base clock. In effect, it's the same as two highly clocked Ryzen 3's with the support logic.The Hardcard - Thursday, August 31, 2017 - link
You said why this is the one for me (down the road a bit.) Highest base clocks with 4 memory channels and all that I/O.It is too bad there seems to be some hard clock limit in the design somewhere, with the cores spread so far apart, it otherwise seems excellent for extreme overclocking.
To my understanding, you only need PCIe x16 for high-end gaming. I want a system to put 4 GPUs in at PCIe x8 for video and 3D rendering and transcoding. My 1 box Frameripper.
Glock24 - Thursday, August 31, 2017 - link
I'm interested in those Ryzen PRO CPUs ... Now where are those motherboards with remote management and ECC support?nagi603 - Friday, September 1, 2017 - link
"accomplish the same thing at $100 less "$549 vs $499 is $50 less.... although if you add the price differences in motherboards, it probably will be $100+
Endelite - Friday, September 1, 2017 - link
"So why is AMD releasing an 8 core version of Threadripper when one Zeppelin die can accomplish the same thing at $100 less and almost half the TDP?"It should be noted that the Ryzen TR 1900X is only $50 more expensive than the Ryzen 7 1800X.
R7 - Saturday, September 2, 2017 - link
Yes at first glance 1800X seems like a better buy exept with 1900X you get access to 64 PCI-E lanes vs 24, 128GB memory vs 64GB and NVME RAID support.