AMD Ryzen Threadripper Entry Level 16 Core, 32 Thread Processor

Hopefully Vega is a catastrophe so I can direct trolling off Intel

Those 16 cores are nowhere near the performance of Intel's 16 core

>>60709366
And no where near the price. Sorry bud.

>>60709366
Intel 16 cores will cost like what, $1 500?

>>60709407
I think you missed a zero there.

>>60709220
besides the 16c/32t, what else are they releasing?

>>60709407
It's 1700 imo

>>60709624
10c/20t
12c/24t
14c/28t
16c/32t
AFAIK they are going to have a x and a none x version of each

File: my sides.png (173KB, 640x400px) Image search: [Google]

173KB, 640x400px

>>60709366
>He doesn't know how poorly Intel's ringbus scales
>He doesn't know how well Zen scales
>He thinks only the price will be worse and not the performace as well

>>60709220
>850
>entry level
That's the price of an entire PC. Call me when it's $200 or less.

>>60709751
How about you take your poor ass outta here?

>>60709751
Welcome to HEDT. Leave your wallet at the door, we'll be emptying it for you.

It's still a helluva lot cheaper than Intel, even after they slashed prices.

>>60709220
more bingbus :DDDDDD

>>60709220
wait, wan't the entry level of threadripper the 10c/20t and the 16c/32t the top line? that would mean the 16/32 would go above 1k

>>60709873
There are several tiers (X and non-X) within the lineup. https://www.techpowerup.com/233945/amd-readies-nine-ryzen-threadripper-models

>>60709220
I don't care if it's Intel or AMD but who the fuck here on /g/ is buying such pricey processors and to do what? Tell me why you shelled out $200+ for a CPU.

File: 1455182476078 shitpost and masturbate.jpg (56KB, 1137x640px) Image search: [Google]

56KB, 1137x640px

>>60709900

>>60709900
3D rendering.

File: Muhammad-1.jpg (29KB, 477x360px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 477x360px

>>60709220
>where you the day when intel lost

>>60709900
m-muh gaymes

>>60709220
>BASED AMD releases Kikeripper
>Intel on suicide watch
What a time to be alive

>>60709220
>Rumored
I'll believe it when AMD confirms it. $849 is just too good to be true.

>>60709900
To support AMD.

>>60709900
Nobody except for 2.5 guys doing rendering. This threads are basically bus riding teenagers on /o/ discussing $200k supercars.

>>60710009
Considering how unbelievably high their yields are <1000$ for 16 core is more than possible.

>>60710009
According to BitsAndChips it costs $100-$120 for a Threadripper 16 core.

https://twitter.com/BitsAndChipsEng/status/870388109812355072

>>60710072
Still, less than twice the price for twice the cores is just giving shit away. I know Intel jews better than AMD, but that's just blue-eyed.

>>60710097
What the fuck do you think AMD has the mindshare or reputation to overprice?

>>60710097
AMD has to clean up all the shit reputation it got for Faildozer.
Selling superior product for lower price while having manufacturing process set up so well that you won't even lose any money doing so is a great strategy in a long run.

>>60709381
>Proven
Where is your proof you blatant Intel shill fag

>>60709366
>3.5 GHz base clock
>2.9~3.1 GHz base clock
hmmm

>>60710182
A bunch of blinged out top of the line RGBullshit motherboards at Computex. Apparently they're the only x399 motherboards that will ever exist, according to retarded shitposting shills.

>>60710203
>turbo 4.5

>>60709751
>reading comprehension

>>60710217
Wow 2 core turbo on an 18 core CPU, that's totally worth $2000.

>>60710217
>1 core turbo or chernobyl 2.0

>>60710228
Oops guess that's 16 core CPU at $1700, still not worth it though. Also jizz TIM lol.

>>60710217
>on 1 core

>>60710245
intel jew jizz (tm)

>>60709407
At least 2200$

>>60709751
Go back to >>>/v/ you massive faggot

>>60709220
> Threadripper to cost $850 USD.
> cost $850 USD.
> $850 USD

Damn, that's one expensive CPU.

Then again.. that's 16 cores and 32 threads, not the usual 4 core CPU's I'm used to buying.

>>60709366
That's likely, but the obvious questions are: What's the actual performance per dollar and what's the performance per watt?

>>60710136
You obviously missed AMD's financial presentation. They really are primarily targeting the high-margin high-end market segments on both the CPU and the GPU side. They really are trying to move away from their "budget brand" reputation. Just look at what they are offering right now, a $400-ish Ryzen R7 line-up and some R5's that are just comparable to Intel's i5's in price/performance. We're not talking bang-for-the-buck chips that will give you twice the performance for half the price.

>>60711107
>We're not talking bang-for-the-buck chips that will give you twice the performance for half the price.
Yeah, more like the same performance at 1/3 the price

See 1700 vs 6900k

>>60709366
You're right, they will be way above Intel's garbage cores and architecture.

>>60709900
>/g/ board

File: 1489122339460.png (495KB, 1070x601px) Image search: [Google]

495KB, 1070x601px

>>60709220
THIS CAN'T BE HAPPENING

>>60711107
>Then again.. that's 16 cores and 32 threads, not the usual 4 core CPU's I'm used to buying.
This is another world compared to corelet normie shit

A Broadwell-EP Xeon costs almost three times this rumoured AMD price and even the new Skylake-X 16 core is set at $1700

If this shit's true, $850 would be a fucking steal.

Kikeripper is going to be great, and if the price is true, then they're essentially giving us 2 1800Xs glued together without an increase in price with nearly perfect scaling. I guess infinity fabric wasn't a meme.

>>60709366
I wonder who could be behind this post.

>>60709220
850$ vs 320$ for the 7700k delivering the same performance all around, beating it in single core.

nothanks.png

File: RYZEN7-1800X-46.jpg (108KB, 614x407px) Image search: [Google]

108KB, 614x407px

>>60711375

>>60711375
You aren't the target market if your first reaction is to compare HEDT to a 7700K buddy.

>>60711395
Not a valid benchmark

>>60709900
watch chinese cartoons

File: RYZEN7-1800X-51.jpg (101KB, 614x401px) Image search: [Google]

101KB, 614x401px

>>60711430
That's always the case when the corelets get demolished :)

>>60711448
>Adobe Software
>can barely use 6 cores

Why is this company not dead yet.

>>60711448
1800X has 600mhz higher base clock and better ram timings and lost?

>>60711474
Near monopoly on the creative industry. They don't even have to try, and they haven't for close to a decade now. I'm still using CS3 because it's the last version that wasn't a total nightmare with their awful custom interface on everything.

>>60711486
2666MHz is used on all setups there, and what 600MHz? No chips runs at base clock, all core turbo of the 6900k is 3.6IIRC, and the 1800X uses less power.

@60711467 (You)

>>60711474
>>Adobe Software
This is a piece of software where CPU benchmarks, quite frankly, barely matter at all. I'm not sure why anyone would even bother CPU-benchmarking it.

>Why is this company not dead yet.
Because the Adobe Premier product line has great GPU-support and everyone actually using it professionally have a high-end GPU or four.

>>60711576
>have a high-end GPU or four.
Is that what Nvidia's Tesla/Quadro which is around 15 times less of Intel's revenue tell you?

Lel, GPU acceleration, fucking retards.

>>60711592
Fuck off retard, you don't know what your'e talking about

>>60711704
These are publicly available numbers in each company' ER, enjoy your irrelevant GPGPU market that constant driver fuckery while Intel makes 10 times as much money from the same market.

>>60711746
b-but GPGPU will replace CPUs any second now .. I swear on me mum.

>>60711761
If GPUs cannot actually branch without a context switch and if they're not plug-and-play(even Xeon Phi was not PnP and it was x86) they'll forever remain as third or fourth place in the datacenter hierarchy.
Only fucking idiots without a clue how this market operates thinks GPGPU is in any kind of notable way a big market.

File: Laughing Tsuruya.jpg (59KB, 300x300px) Image search: [Google]

59KB, 300x300px

>>60711375
Holy shit, you really caught me off guard there.

>>60711825
What are the first three?

>>60711846
CPU, memory, I/O(compute) or
I/O, memory, CPU(storage/cloud)

>>60711837
cute

>>60711862
GPUs are faster in compute than CPUs

>>60711936
And ASICs/FPGAs are faster in compute than GPUs, guess why any of the three barely have any widespread use in compute, moron?

File: pHrnT.jpg (184KB, 980x602px) Image search: [Google]

184KB, 980x602px

>>60709366
L M A O
M
A
O

>>60710094
>https://twitter.com/BitsAndChipsEng/status/870388109812355072
That is some extreme judaism if those margins are true. 700%? What the fuck.

>>60711990
the worst is that their 10 core processor doesn't even scale at 10:1 while an 1800X does

File: fecfd7229cb4cf7ac80d0a77ed823436d21406ef4424268faecba6f52014b110.gif (127KB, 600x600px) Image search: [Google]

127KB, 600x600px

>>60709220

>>60712007
Just hope prices drop even more.
Imagine 16 cores at $600

>>60712007
Why do you think AMD wants piece HEDT market so much? It would just print money for them

So right now AMD has around 20%(?) of market.
Who is willing to guess how much they'll have by this time next year?

>>60712007
AMD needs money. It's still cheaper and better than Intel's HEDT, stop complaining and open up your damn wallet.

>>60712091
Unknown, depends on the success of mobile chips.

>>60711375
>Being this retarded.

>>60711990
>1.764V
That can't be real, are they trying to make a nuclear reactor?

File: IMG_5041.jpg (339KB, 777x728px) Image search: [Google]

339KB, 777x728px

>>60709220
Let's see... Ryzen 1700 is $300, so two dies crammed into one chip is basically $600, now the yield on the 16-core parts is said to be 80%, so we can assume a 20% "lottery tax" for the production of these chips, which amounts to $720. In other words we have some $130 unaccounted for, but I guess it's just a much more complex assembly in general. Either way, that's a really good price for what you get,

>>60712133
the yield on the 8 core parts is 80%, so basically the yield of everything above that is 80% too

>>60712133
See
>>60710094

>>60709900
Upgrade my dual Xeon Sandy-Bridge server for my private VPS, virtual hosted applications, and other virtualized services on a single machine.

>>60711474

You think that's bad? Photoshop barely uses 2
>>60711534 is pretty much right

File: 1458872885076.jpg (20KB, 258x245px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 258x245px

>>60709220
>paying $850 for AMD

>>60712209
Dumb frogposter.

File: lisa_su_smug.png (123KB, 240x286px) Image search: [Google]

123KB, 240x286px

>>60709900
>>60710037
>WAH! STOP CARING ABOUT MARKET SEGMENTS WHERE INTEL IS GETTING BTFO'D THE FUCK OUT!

File: wgl-2017-lisa-su.jpg (282KB, 840x485px) Image search: [Google]

282KB, 840x485px

>>60710140

Bless Dr. Su.

>>60712209
>paying $1600 for lower clockspeeds and shitty build quality than AMD's

Can't wait for the benchmark. Prepare for Intel fanboys tears.

>>60709220
>Threadripper to cost $850 USD
>$850
>for a fucking AMD
No thanks
More coars != Better value for money when a cheaper 8 or 10-core Skylake-X can beat it in multithreaded apps

>>60712209
THIS.
People with that kinna money (read:not broke) do not even buy AMD on principle lmao
To that target demographic 500$ +/- for the same component literally doesnt register

AMD is the leper of the pc world

File: hedtlol2.png (67KB, 1427x575px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 1427x575px

>>60712243
You know nobody bought Intel's HEDT platform, right?

>>60712007
you need to fund that R&D

File: 6ee.jpg (55KB, 600x600px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 600x600px

This thread really shows you that there are a few people who spend all day on /g/ relentlessly and unrepentantly shitposting about AMD no matter the context or evidence.

Why the fuck are the mods allowing these people to spam literally every CPU or GPU thread with HUNDREDS of complete shitposts about AMD a day? They've literally resorted to blue bubbles nonsense now.

>>60712299

What R&D? Proprietary Optane memes?

>>60712359
He means AMD RnD

>>60712359
AMD R&D that gave us stuff like x86-64, HT-like interconnects, two graphical memory types and some other small shit.

It's a good price for the cores. But we aren't clear on what the performance numbers will be from either AMD or Intel. Especially true for Intel, with Skylake-X's modified cache hierarchy.

AMD HEDT may also be weak in terms of product line simply due what segment HEDT targets in the first place. It's fair to say that the dip in people buying the 6950X from the 6900K probably wasn't nearly as deep as the gulf between the 6850K and 6900K, simply because if you have the money to burn, why go for second-best?

File: sad juden.jpg (24KB, 186x230px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 186x230px

heh

>>60711936
Yes, for the three or four algorithms where you can actually use them, they're totally awesome. For the vast majority of workloads, not so much.

>>60712007
You have to factor in the supply chain too; the retailers swallow the vast majority of that margin, and then there's also the Zen R&D to recoup.

>>60712505
You got both CPU-z and cinnebench scores for 10 core Skylake(at 4.5GHz), both are best case scaling and use all cores.

>>60711534
Can't wait for non-destructive editing in Gimp 3.2.

>>60712505
>But we aren't clear on what the performance numbers will be from either AMD or Intel

AMD's Zen scales near linearly with core count and clockspeed. Safe to say it will be almost 2x the performance of current Ryzen CPUs.

Intel's ringbus scales poorly. Anything above 12 cores, it really starts to hurt them badly. At 16 cores, they will just flat out lose to AMD on price and performance. It's even possible their 18 core will lose despite costing $2000 and Intel cherrypicking like mad.

>>60709366
Considering AMD's Ryzen 1700x 8-core is faster than intel's 6900k in IPC and multithreading I don't really see what you are saying. It is literally better in every conceivable way. Intel is fucked.

File: hnnng-3.jpg (23KB, 450x337px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 450x337px

>>60712222
C-cute.

File: ss.png (14KB, 1305x144px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 1305x144px

>>60710037
Sure thing, corelet. :^)

>>60712772
>You got both CPU-z and cinnebench scores for 10 core Skylake(at 4.5GHz)
I'm not running tests on them, in my conditions, under my rules. I don't care about what company puts out what information, or of the best-funded guesswork of mice and men. You don't know. I don't know. Fine to speculate, but anyone claiming certainty or near-certainty over performance, one way or another, hasn't got on what to stand.

>>60712787
>At 16 cores, they will just flat out lose to AMD on price and performance
Pure extrapolation and conjecture on a subject with a hundred and one variables. Guessing isn't necessary since surety is a matter of very finite time. This isn't Unified Field Theory speculation. When websites have the chips in their hands, and put them through all their paces, we'll see what's what.
You could be right. And I'd still be right on you grasping in the dark as of June 2nd.

>>60712797

BUT MUH GAMES

>>60712797
>It is literally better in every conceivable way. Intel is fucked.
Sure begs the question why it then wins in eg >>60711448 and >>60711395.

File: ryzen-r7-1800x-blender-benchmark.png (101KB, 806x546px) Image search: [Google]

101KB, 806x546px

>>60712241
>being this delusional
delid yourself

>>60713112
There are some tasks the 6900K wins, and some tasks the 1800X wins. Really depends on the application. But the fact that a CPU half the cost is even rubbing shoulders with the 6900K should tell you a lot. http://imgur.com/a/wMm1C

>>60710233
>>60710253
Two cores actually but well.

File: 1475211353488.jpg (108KB, 782x782px) Image search: [Google]

108KB, 782x782px

>>60713473
DELETE

>>60713024
The "muh scaling on 16 cores" was actually two things. One was trying to keep wattage in the 140w range and the low all core speeds, the other was a carryover from Haswell to BWL where perfect throughput would saturate the memory controller past twelve cores. SKLX shouldn't have either of these problems since they're apparently now willing to go to 160w and have made improvements to the memory issues. I still expect TR to demolish the 18c offering in highly parallel workloads though simply because Zen uses less energy.

>>60713501
>Really depends on the application. But the fact that a CPU half the cost is even rubbing shoulders with the 6900K should tell you a lot.
Definitely, but that's a different thing from "literally better in every conceivable way".

>>60712243
Exactly. If you can afford an $850 CPU you wouldn't even consider buying from a budget brand like AMD. With this kind of pricing, they will hit the empty gap between the peasants who want an affordable CPU and the rich folks who don't mind paying extra for quality.

>>60713619
Yeah "literally better in every conceivable way" is pretty fanboy. Unless you factor in price/performance, then it's pointless to ever reccomend the 6900K. It might not even be worth reccomending the 7820X (Skylake-X 8 core) at $600+$200 X299 motherboard over 1800X $480+$100 motherboard, unless you really need HEDT features.

If Threadripper 10 cores start at $560, and the mobos cost $200 as well, it will also be very competitive with the new 7820X, if you need HEDT features, as Threadripper has 64 PCIe lanes.

>>60713726
So you're going to pay $1000 for a 10 core CPU that has toothpaste under the lid, requires you to delid it to OC it, and has worse performance than a $850 16 core Threadripper?

>>60713473
>FX 8370 nearly losing to an i3
Bulldozer was a fucking mistake.

>>60713839
X399 Z-E is going to cost 599

>>60713856
It really was. Must feel pretty good to be AMD right now though, what with such sweet, sweet redemption.

>>60713856
the CEO AMD had at that time was fired because of bulldozer. I think that'll give you some perspective of how much bulldozers was a mistake

>>60713839
>has toothpaste under the lid
>requires you to delid it to OC it
lol hahaHAAAAA i memed mom look!! xDDD

>has worse performance than a $850 16 core Threadripper
proof?

>>60713978
It will be more expensive than X299 for sure, not sure by how much, though. Doubt it's going to cost $600.

>>60713980
>>60713996
Makes me feel bad for owning and still using a FX 8300, but fuck, it was $90 shipped.

>>60713734
Price/Performance, Power consumption, Motherboard costs all factor in my "literally better in every conceivable way" statement. Ryzen is AMD's bottom of the barrel chips and they make intel's lineup pretty much obsolete aside from the low end budget choices. Threadripper and EPYC are fucking monster's with 80% yields that are about to kick intel in the teeth for the next five years as they rush to push out a new architecture. I'm not a fanboy, I just buy whats' best for me.

>>60714065
You'd probably have been better served by a $50 Pentium.

>>60714080
Honestly, but I didn't want to give Intel my money.

>>60714068
>Price/Performance, Power consumption, Motherboard costs all factor in my "literally better in every conceivable way" statement.
"Every conceivable way" would include factoring them out, too.

>>60713856
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tZzLPOWoVbU
https://hardforum.com/threads/supermicro-h8qgi-6-and-h8qgl-next-generation-oc-bios.1677395/

>>60714033
The 8 core 1800X stands up against the 6900K pretty well already, and 16 core Threadripper is going to be close to 2x the performance. Just due to how well Zen scales with core count. You can take whatever result from an 1800X and double it, pretty much. Even if you OC the hell out of a 10 core Intel to 4.5 GHz, it's still going to lose.

>>60712007
That margin is actually pretty normal.
Do you know what floors, carpets, clothes, furniture, and every other everyday stuff you have/use cost to make? We are talking from x10 up to x100 in margins easily.

>>60709220
Wait, really? Wow this looks impressive. But the main important reason why I chose to go with intel is because I run with sys-kernel/hardened-sources and I dont want to have to deal with graphics drivers fucking thigns up. I have a Haswell i7 system which can emerge libreoffice in 42 minutes, firefox in 11 minutes, gcc in 11 minutes, and I'm pretty happy with that. I havent really seriously started thinking what I may upgrade to in the future but I may go with AMD, assuming that the graphics drivers situation doesnt suck.

>>60714122
You are aware that Mesa has fully open source AMD drivers, right?

>>60713734
>the mobos cost $200 as well
AMD mobos will probably be cheaper, or rather intels mobos will probably be more expensive.

>>60714153
This was a few years ago but iirc, seemed like back when I was making buying decisions I read some stuff (I think it may have been on reddit) suggesting that the amd drivers didnt work right with grsec and that to make it work right I'd have to turn a bunch of the hardening features off.

>>60714227
Wouldn't know about that, actually. I've been using nVidia since forever since AMD's Linux drivers have been historically sucky. I've been tempted to get an AMD card lately since I've started hearing nice things about the current Mesa drivers.

>>60714177
The complexity and materials for AMD boards are higher.

>>60714248
I would be more interested if I know that grsec and amd graphics play nice together with multiple 4k monitors..or actually by the time I decide to upgrade maybe something more than 4K.

Why the heck do you people think X399 mobos will cost so much? Yeah, the socket is bigger, but most of the controllers are on the CPU itself and AMD basically gives the x370/X399 chipset for free while Intel charges $50 for their HEDT chipset

File: AMDRyzen1800XIntel6950X1_0.png (29KB, 617x837px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 617x837px

>>60714033
The 6950X is less than 30% faster than the 1800X, the 7900X is only 10% faster than the 6950X and Zen has way better than 50% scaling, therefore a 16-core Threadripper is inevitably going to utterly crush the 7900X.

Even if the 7900X was 30% faster than the 6950X it's still not enough given what we already know about how Zen scales. Don't forget Threadripper has the 2:1 infinity fabric so it will have better IPC than the 1800x.

>>60710034
Same desu

File: received_10212708745972212.jpg (117KB, 960x686px) Image search: [Google]

117KB, 960x686px

>>60712007
>some extreme judaism
I think you meant Intel

File: Ryzen.jpg (153KB, 960x686px) Image search: [Google]

153KB, 960x686px

>>60714715
>The jew goes up with the numbers
doesn't really work that well

Is it just me or did shintel fangays start shilling hard recently?

This is shameful. Almost hasbara-level screeching going on, at the mere mention of Advanced Micro Devices.

>>60714907
>intel shilling
>threadripper, epyc, Ryzen, Vega threads daily
>delid this posts constantly
Yeah sure bud

>>60714907
>Is it just me or did shintel fangays start shilling hard recently?
No, they actually gave up. Jewripper is about to finish them.

>>60714944
>Vega threads daily
You know 90% of those are "just wait lol" or "it's going to be worse than a 1070 lol" shitposting threads, right?

And just as I type this .. >>60714952

File: this ugly son of a bitch is fabbing super hot chips and basically, you are fucking stupid.jpg (27KB, 570x340px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 570x340px

Apologize. Now.

>>60714944
>4.8 GHz on all 18 cores
>4.5 GHz on all 10 cores
>amd half cores
>AYYMD HOUSEFIRES
>THANK YOU BASED INTEL, AYYMD IS FINISHED AND BANKRUPT, HOW WILL THEY EVER RECOVER?
>Just Wait™
>It's a feature!™

>not intel and nvidia shilling

right

File: mayo inside.jpg (231KB, 1000x1000px) Image search: [Google]

231KB, 1000x1000px

>>60714944
It's big news that was revealed at Computex, of course there are going to be threads about it. That includes Intel deciding to use mayo under the heatspreaders.

>>60715008
>>60715032
There are AMD shill everywhere there are Intel shills everywhere
Stop pretending it's all one sided, you literally are commenting this is an AMD shill thread

>>60714907
It's been months. There are a small number of dedicated anti-AMD trolls who literally make HUNDREDS of evidence free anti-AMD shitposts a day on every CPU and GPU thread.

>>60709900
C++ development and mathematics

>>60709900
to set up VM labs to practice systems administration

File: Screenshot_20170602-182431-01.jpg (282KB, 1080x1519px) Image search: [Google]

282KB, 1080x1519px

what's your excuse now amdrone? BTFOD

>>60714944
>There is no difference between discussion of new AMD products and evidence free shillposting
|
|>
|
|3
|

File: 1492476909558.png (245KB, 595x842px) Image search: [Google]

245KB, 595x842px

>>60715332
>gaymers
>idiot-proof

This is going to end well. And by well, I mean hysterically.

>>60715332

>I-It's a f-f-feature! Rub some t-toothpaste on it.

Fucking shintelfags bitched about "muh convenience" but now is still hopelessly talking about delidding.

File: 1421136595643.jpg (222KB, 852x939px) Image search: [Google]

222KB, 852x939px

>>60715076
>Discussion = Shilling
Yes, yes schlomo, discussions with links and evidence are TOTALLY the same thing as evidence free shitposting.

File: 1432724106451.jpg (51KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 1280x720px

>>60715332
>Having to void your warranty and risk destroying your CPU to correct shitty factory TIM is totally normal!
No.

File: intel ceo JUST.jpg (119KB, 1000x1000px) Image search: [Google]

119KB, 1000x1000px

>>60715332
The worst thing anyone can try and do is normalize this shit. The backlash will be immense. They're already getting a lot of heat for the toothpaste TIM in the first place. Oh well, more "Good publicity" for Intel, I guess.

>>60709220
>intel $1999
>housefire
>slow
intel on suicide watch.

>>60715531
>The worst thing anyone can try and do is normalize this shit.

I wish they do that. Infact, I wish they stick to their "don't OC" and "rub some toothpaste on it" bullshit and double down on it. About high time shintel felt threatened.

>>60713726
protip: you are not the target market and the targets are literally jews that pinch every cent including running costs.

>>60714999
why?
i believed from the very beginning.

>>60709366
for $2k i can get two of them and still have $300 left for electricity bills

>>60709751
Don't wait up lmao

>>60715491
>the same fag from the VEGA wait threads saying that discussion of intel is shilling but discussion of AMD is discussion
Gotta grow up man

>>60715506
Intel has actually always covered delids in their warranty
My friend sent in his 4790k and got a new one back, took a long time though. You just have to specify on the paperwork that the processor has a "detached heatspreader" as delid is not a checkbox

>>60715914
intel shills straight up lying and being cynical IS shilling though

>>60715964
But when AMD shills do it they aren't lying they are just "speculating"

File: delid this right now.png (325KB, 680x461px) Image search: [Google]

325KB, 680x461px

>>60715945
First I've heard of this and googling "detached heatspreader" doesn't bring up jack shit. Calling shenanigans especially since https://communities.intel.com/message/471425#471425 this guy who works for Intel says

>We do not recommend running outside the processor specifications, such as by exceeding processor frequency or voltage specifications, or removing of the integrated heat spreader (sometimes called “de-lidding”). These actions will void the processor warranty.

Really, what company would honor the warranty after you did THIS to it?

>>60715970
intel shills straight up claiming delusional stuff and not providing source is not speculating

>>60715914
There's a small number of extremely virluent shitposters that are just constantly shitting up threads with "AYYMD POO IN LOO POOGA" spam etc. He's not referring to anything remotely resembling actual discussion.

The mods take care of it. Sometimes. Usually it just gets archived with threads spammed to the bump limit with shitposting and the mods do nothing. Like this thread from yesterday. >>60694500

>>60715997
If you send in a delidded processor they will replace it
as simple as that
http://www.overclock.net/t/1313179/official-delidded-club-guide/21390
This guy did it too, gluing the heatspreader back on helps as well

>>60709220
I fucking love how well AMD is fucking jewtel in the ass. Now they just need to work on their mobile side to really cut into intels profits.
I want to snip circumcise schlomos nose when AYYMD brings out threadripper.

>>60716045
Exactly. I don't mean people arguing about stuff, I mean the couple of people who have been shitting up every CPU and GPU discussion on here for months with spammed anti-AMD shitposts. Several of their posts have been deleted by the mods in this very thread.

>>60716073
but the largest intel profit is at the server market anon

>>60716027
However AMD shills straight up lying is?
>>60716045
>he posts in a thread where the OP picture is a "DELID THIS" wojak
>>60716046
Surprise everyone shitposts, AMADs call people indians too for some reason oh look here are some jew memes
>>60715491
>>60714715
>>60713541
>>60712513
>>60712352
You guys are fucking idiots, you turn a blind eye when AMD does it, this is why brand allegiance is teenager-tier

>>60716068
Ok, first off this is from 2013. Second off, maybe he just got lucky, because I've not heard of anyone else having this kind of success, and the post I linked to from the Intel rep is much more recent.

>>60716109
>mine is more legit that yours
they will replace it, there is nothing you can say that changes that

>>60716104
>However AMD shills straight up lying is?
no one (who is talking seriously) is claiming anything outside what we already know about both the leaks and overall zen architecture

>>60716142
Give me a more recent example, even one, and I'll reconsider that your friend just got lucky.

>>60712055
It doesn't scale 10:1 because it turbos to 4.5GHz on the single threaded benchmark

>>60716168
the 1800x gets a boost to 4.1GHz on single threaded benchmark and it still has 10:1 scaling

Is this meaningful whatsoever for high end gaymer/single person workstations or is this just all server shit. Will the architecture scale down to standard consumer level PC's?

>>60716144
Not about the people claiming VEGA ran PREY at 180+ fps and that it will be 1080ti performance for under 500$

>>60716104
>>oh look here are some jew memes

>jewtelfag triggered by Advance Micro Devices thread

What else is new? topkek

>>60711486
Intel compiler... It's been proven even when other chips support instructions only Intel chips will get the program using the correct and fastest instructions. You can spoof this with bulldozer and gain up to 20%performance in garbage software like all adobe products

>>60716210
Threadripper is HEDT which is for consumers. Epyc is the server shit.

>>60716231
>WAHHHHHH INTEL SHILLS JUST SHOUT POO POO POO
>posts merchants
>triggered :^)?
Fucking retard lmao

>>60710094
>$100-$120 for a Threadripper 16 core
Sounds realistic. From what I hear, 100mm^2 in a modern 1xnm FF process cost between $10 to $20. So two times about 200nn^2 with good yields + packaging and testing should result in costs somewhere in this region.

>>60716237
I ran the Intel Compiler Patcher and it didn't detect my Adobe software. Only a few "supporting DLLs" in After Effects CS3.

>>60716250

What are the functional implications of threadripper 16 core at sub 900 dollars? What does one do with a super high end processor like that? Upload stuff? Compiling? Running minecraft at 6 trillion fps?

>>60716320
Anything that requires fuckloads of cores and scales with them perfectly.

So here's a serious question: is it possible to calculate what the maximum power draw from the socket that x399 motherboards will handle? It might give a useful indication of how much overclocking of Threadripper will be possible without melting the socket.

>>60716320
people who do video encoding/mess around with virtual machines/do scientific computations will love it

basically any workload that supports high thread count or just doing a lot of multitasking

>>60712007
Well you have to pay for R&D and AMD isn't the last one to profit in the chain from the fab to the customer.

>>60716341
well, x399 boards have 1x 8pin cpu connector and 1x 4 pin

it's probably possible to overclock TR to 4 GHz with that power delivery. And because TR has 2 separate dies, it will be a lot easier to cool down too, because that's a massive surface area

>>60716349
Make moar bingbus tho :---------DDDDDDDDDD
EBYN
:-------DDDDDDDDDDD

>>60709900

>buy R7 1700X to avoid silicon lottery + 1080Ti
>push 6600K + 780 into HTPC
>push i3 6300 + HD 5850 into new case --> this becomes my new pfsense box that also will run Sirucata

I did it so that I can ride the gravy train of Zen's 8c/16t goodness for the next 3 years, and then I can upgrade again at least for the GPU while revisiting CPU factor. If the 8c/16t still has a ton of headroom left over, I'll ride that train for another 2 years into 2022 and then upgrade then to like a 24c/48t chip.

There's literally ZERO reason to get an Intel CPU now. Zen's IPC matches Kabylake in most cases, and only falls short by 5-7% at most. Next iteration of Zen will remove that gap by simply allowing for higher base clocks and overclocks. Add in C steppings AND improvements that AMD will make to tackle the low hanging fruit + any features that they couldn't design into Zen by launch date, and that 5-7% loss, will probably turn into a 10-15% gain beyond Skylake/Cannonlake architectures or what have you.

ON TOP OF THAT, Zen APUs in the low end are going to rape Intel's IGP stranglehold. The only market Intel will really be worth it, moving forward, is custom silicon HPC.

With an 80%+ yield PER wafer with Zen, AMD is can massively undercut Intel on price, with nearly matching to equal performance today and equal to superior performance next year, while continuing to undercut on price, I/O, and core/thread volume.

>>60712750
Why not go One Plus route and sell it yourself if the middle man steals so much money?

File: 1494833564236.webm (1MB, 720x1280px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 720x1280px

>>60709220
AMD shit is actually looking ok. I still have a Core2 Quad desktop and I'm looking to build a new one. What AMD CPU should I buy? Needs to have at least 6 cores for muh virtual machines.

>>60716984
1600 if you want to OC/play the silicon lottery, 1600X if not.

>>60716984
even if you get one of the 8c/16t you'll see an absurd performance improvement in singlethreaded workloads and an unbelievable one on multithreaded

if you like to mess around with VMs both the r5 1600/1600x or r7 1700 are great choices

>>60714999
>filename
Nice.
I don't need to apologize, I always believed even if it wasn't entirely his baby. I'm sure he could have done something even more amazing. Does anyone have details on the process AMD is using right now? Isn't it used for mobile first?

>>60716210
It already does, its called Ryzen. Thread Ripper is just two well binned ryzen on an interposer. EPYC is four.

>>60714404
Are we looking at the same image? Less than half of those are at or close to 100%

>>60716755
>>60716755
You think they just run off with the money as pure profit? Running a retailing operation isn't cheap, what with customer contact and support, RMA handling and what not that I don't even have any idea about. While the retailers take a vast chunk of the margin, they don't really run all that much of a profit.

>>60717496
Yeah, because they must have shops, clerks in them, pay CEOs, managers, etc.
Mailing your product yourself is very cheap, see all those Chinese companies on eBay with free international shipping for 10USD shit.
Obviously it still costs a bit but they could make a shitton just by introducing mail delivery with lower prices than retail (to make it worth for people to wait a week).

>>60717573
>Yeah, because they must have shops, clerks in them, pay CEOs, managers, etc.
Yes, but they sell more because of it. Also, isolating yourself from your end customers is a generally good idea if you don't want to deal with all the crap of retailing on your own. If it were as simply as just mailing the CPUs out themselves, do you really think AMD wouldn't have thunk of it already?

>>60709220
>people think AMD will ever own a competitive portion of the market share
That's up there with thinking insurance companies will lower their plans' costs to pre-obama states now that Trump is president. Companies will always pay more for the more reliable and trusted product.
Prove me wrong.

>>60717625
People in management are old, retarded and stuck in the past. But seriously people are used to buying shit online by that point. If they added an option to buy it online straight from them for 20% lower price than the street price they would get a shitload of customers. Even my 60 years old uncle can use eBay. If they had the cheapest offer on all the price comparators a shitton of people would go for it, especially since 'AMD certified mumbo jumbo' would seem more trustworthy than some random retailer.

>>60717462
Maybe you should try reading what I said before replying.

>>60717727
cont
also nothing stopping them from doing it while continuing to sell to retailers

>>60716405
>a lot easier to cool down too
Cooling two CPUs with one heatsink isn't easier to cool down.

Will all those feminists and trannys Intel wastes billions on be able to design a better core than Zen?

>>60717719
>prove me wrong
Otellini pls fucking die already.

>>60711990
My fx-8320 scores 6900. 1000 single thread. k

>>60717756
No. Like really, AMD need another Faildozer-tier fuck up for Intel to be competitive in anything but mindshare again.

File: ThreadRipper.png (36KB, 749x406px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 749x406px

>14 cores and 28 threads@ 4.1ghz

Honestly that should be pretty quick on highly threaded applications

>>60717786
It would be pretty quick at fucking everything.

>>60717786
This cant be right since Threadripper has 64 PCI-E lanes

>>60717786
Those clockspeeds what in the actual fuck.

>>60717883
B2 stepping, good binning and Zen being extremely efficient.

>>60717882
I think that's the only thing wrong about the chart.

>>60717743
>also nothing stopping them from doing it while continuing to sell to retailers
Exactly, don't you think they'd be doing that already if it were worth it? Dealing directly with customers is a royal pain, and if I were AMD I'd happily leave it to someone else.

File: 1495956279975.webm (3MB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1280x720px

>>60717786
>155w

>>60717906
>B2 stepping
What stepping is R5/R7?

>>60717973
B1.

>>60717973
B1

>>60717945
They really are just sticking to the old ways. Don't overthink it, companies like One Plus are doing OK.
>Dealing directly with customers is a royal pain
I know, you get returns, etc. Still, with how cheap they manufacture is and how cheap shipping is nowadays and how few people actually return things it's not such a big problem.

You are one of those retards who think 'if nobody does it it can't be done' (and once again there ARE companies who do it, most are just behind the times).

>>60717970
Those TDPs are actually really impressive for 16 cores at those clockspeeds. And Threadripper's massive contact plate plus seperate, soldered dies means cooling isn't a big issue.

>>60718031
It's not just that, though, they need a presence and legal compliance in many different nations and whatnot. When all is said and done, they'd have to replicate many of the structures and expenses that the retailers already have. Maybe they'd make a little more money that way, but most of it isn't cheaper just because they do it in-house. You speak of managers and sales clerks, but with an in-house sales division, AMD would need those same positions.

File: Screen Shot 2017-06-02 at 4.20.30 PM.png (224KB, 1011x600px) Image search: [Google]

224KB, 1011x600px

Leaning toward the MSI Tomahawk, recommendations?

1700x is currently the same price after bundle as 1700 at MC right now

>>60715032
kek

>>60712226
M..mommy??? Milkies mommy!

>>60718094
No, not really for internet sales. One Plus doesn't even have anything in my country, they just ship from overseas.

>>60718097
Get the Tomahawk.

>>60709900

To be able to run visual studio without it lagging

>>60718094
It's literally as easy as hiring one guy to make a site you can buy directly from and also add their offer to different price comparators, eBay, Amazon, etc. People will naturally buy cheapest shit.
Then also maybe keeping a few warehouses so shipping will be cheaper. Still with how cheap shipping from China to EU is they could just do away with if it really was too much bother.

>>60709220

16 times as useless

i7 Sandy Vaginas the thread

@60718196 (You)

>Intel
"Oh fuck, we actually have to make something now. Quick, let's try to get this out as quick as we can -- it doesn't matter the price, they'll fucking pay it."

>>60709873
The cheapest 16C Threadripper is going to cost $850. The cheapest Threadripper overall (a 10C model) is going to cost less than that. The most expensive Threadripper (another 16C model) is going to cost more.

>tfw I used to be intel all the way
>tfw finally got on the AMD train with Ryzen
Feels good, but wtf is up with these mobos?

>>60718363
Yeah I dunno, there's always blinged out shit shown off at trade shows.

>>60714227
I think you're confusing the AMD GPU with the AMD CPU, anon.

File: FO02-NPC-Harold-N-png.png (513KB, 803x414px) Image search: [Google]

513KB, 803x414px

>>60709900
my i7-4930k is OC to 4.2ghz on water, 6c/12t, cost me $640 in 2014 and has been worth every penny.

I run virtual machines, game, and develop software. I still want one of these faster processors to compile programs quicker because it still takes 5-10 minutes to compile most cryptocurrency wallets, which can be a pain in the ass when youre testing things. But they're too much $$ so ill be waiting

>>60709331
It probably will I don't see Vega being exponentially too powerful.

>>60709366
You're right. AMD 16 core outperforms Intel's 16c

>>60709220
2017 is the year the cpu market finally moves

has been stagnant for too long, no more $2000 16 cores Intel

File: 1490413781291.jpg (21KB, 218x265px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 218x265px

>>60709220
>$850 AMD CPU

>>60718097
Shit so expensive,my motherboard is 30$
What is point of budget cpu while you buy most expensive mb on the planet.

>>60709220
There's no reason to buy any Intel CPU except for the poorfag Pentium.

>>60720293
1700X is not a budget CPU. The i3 obsolete failures are budget CPUs.

>>60720856
sill you mobo shouldent be more than 2/3 the price of your cpu

>>60709366
They'll actually be better because Intel's HCC CPUs are clocked low due to thermal limitations.

>>60721363
Says you.

>>60712226
>>60718112
She makes my penis Ryzen

>>60712209
>paying $1700 for a CPU that isn't even soldered

>>60709407
1999$ they set prices at computex for their high end i9

>>60721815
1999 for 18/36.

File: 1492127495787.png (871KB, 801x1500px) Image search: [Google]

871KB, 801x1500px

>>60718278

>>60720293
It's the bundle price, the mobo is like $100

So why is Ryzen capable of scaling up while keeping all core clocks pretty much the same? Is it purely because Intel cores use much more power such that trying to keep the 4 core's insane overclocks on something like a 10 or 12 core would make their consumption ridiculous?

>>60723082
They just slap together 2 Zeppelin dies, each 8 cores. They use less power than comparable intel parts and also have less problems with heat dissipation as they have some space between the dies. Overall ZEN is designed for low power and scalability while intel is something from 20 years ago & bingbus :----DDD reliant.

>>60723082
>infinnity fabric
>big ass heat spredder
>solderd (instead of using intel jw jizz)

INTEL ON SUICIDE WATCH

>>60723082
It uses less power per core so it's easier to fit more clockspeed and cores

Basic stuff

>>60717786
Those clockspeeds..
Can't wait to see the benchmarks.

File: lol-13.jpg (56KB, 231x208px) Image search: [Google]

56KB, 231x208px

>>60720234
>$2000 Intel CPU

Intel on suicide watch. Goodby monopoly.

File: wccftech.jpg (52KB, 400x400px) Image search: [Google]

52KB, 400x400px

>>60709220
More than anyone else, I support competitiveness and consumer-benefiting price wars.

But WCCFtech is a rumour aggregator.

>>60723682
It was started by BitsAndChips, who usually aren't wrong about this sort of thing.

>>60723694
OP can post a link to that then.

This rumor is shit.

While >>60723694 is correct that Bits n Chips is usually correct with their rumors, this one is just really unbelievable.
If the 16 core, even at low clocks, is $850, where the hell do you think the 12 core is going to fall?
There isn't a lot of room between the $470 top of the line 8 core and $850 to place the 12 core.
Okay I guess maybe the 12 core will be $650 because they want everyone to get the 16 core.
But that's stupid. I'd rather have the 12 core at 4GHz. It'll be harder to cool 16 cores.

But idk. I guess it's likely so long as they still have higher end models that are $1200+, since the prosumer market doesn't overclock. I guess they really don't want people to buy the 12 cores because yields are so good.

>>60723830
There's still two versions of each (X and non-X), so the 16 core X model could be $950 or $1000 still.

>>60709751
Being a manchildren should be a banable offense here.

>>60723841
Yeah the pricing could be 2x and add $200 I guess.

$220*2+$200 = ~$650 for the 12 core that's 2 1600s put together.
$320*2+$200 = ~$850 for the 16 core that's 2 1700s put together
$470*2+$200 = ~$1150 for the 16 core that's 2 1800Xs put together.

I mean yeah I guess that makes sense. when you factor in the extra motherboard cost putting more distance between the 1800X and the cheapest 12 core.

You see the same thing with the 1500X and 1600 pricing. Yields are good and AMD really wants people to buy the higher end ones.
This is why I've said I think it's unlikely there will be a 10 core model at all. But I still find it a bit hard to believe because they could charge more "just because".

>>60723907
>But I still find it a bit hard to believe because they could charge more "just because".
They're broke. Give AMD moneys plz.

>>60723921
They can charge more based on the performance and competition.

The Threadripper 16 core may be faster than the i9x 18 core. It will almost surely have higher clocks as it cools much better.
The 18core all core clocks are likely in the 2.9-3.1 range. The top end Ryzen may have a 3.4-3.6 all core clock.
And then you have Intel's 25% worse SMT on top of that.

>>60721363
see
>>60722797

>>60709331
To my knowledge there's much better money in CPUs than GPUs

>>60718278
MOAR BINGBUS LOL

>>60709220
Great so now at least 12 cores will barely be used by demanding processes, and they will each perform worse on single thread than the quad cores.

Yay

>>60724654
HEDT is not for you, dipshit.

>>60724654
You don't have to buy these models just because they're the most expensive, you know.

>>60724687
HEDT is, but throwing a bunch of cores at me isnt satisfying my needs. Higher single threaded performance is the only thing.

Or AT LEAST the same single threaded performance with more cores. But often even that is asking too much

>>60709220
Who cares, it's just going to be inferior like the rest of Ryzen anyway

>hurrdurr but it's cheap

AMD is shit
t. AMD user

>>60724749
I think you're full of shit, nobody buys HEDT for single core performance, and even Intel's single core performance on their 6+ cores sucks compared to their 4 cores. Anyway, 4.1 GHz XFR isn't enough for you? Intel's Turboboost 3.0 only goes up to 4.5 GHz, and that's with nothing else going on. That's barely that far off.

@60724758 (You)

>>60724788
Intel core is 40% faster per core

File: muhsinglecore.png (454KB, 1920x1200px) Image search: [Google]

454KB, 1920x1200px

>>60724893
2011 called, they want their memes back.

>>60717747
It IS easier to cool down 2 8 core cpus than 1 16 core at the same clockspeeds though

File: Geekbench3.png (74KB, 1190x742px) Image search: [Google]

74KB, 1190x742px

>>60709220
But how much will the board cost?

>>60724893
And then you woke up.

>>60717786
there won't be 14 core cpus damn it, this is a really retarded number of cores to have

>>60717747
They're under the same heatspreader, they're soldered, it has a massive contact plate. I'd be surprised if there were any problems at all cooling Threadripper.

>>60724960
This is how they're set up

https://www.techpowerup.com/233945/amd-readies-nine-ryzen-threadripper-models

>This includes 10-core (3+2+3+2), 12-core (3+3+3+3), 14-core (4+3+4+3), and 16-core (4+4+4+4) models, all of which have SMT enabled, resulting in 20, 24, 28, and 32 threads, respectively

>>60724947
>t-the motherboard will be s-super expensive
explain why then

>>60709220
are there any x399 mitx boards?
I really want a portable computer that I could take to a convention or to a friends house.

>>60725016
>are there any motherboards with the socket being bigger than the motherboard

No

>>60725045
x299 has mitx, senpai

File: Gigabyte-X399-AORUS-Gaming-7-AMD-Ryzen-Threadripper-Motherboard_5[1].jpg (102KB, 800x534px) Image search: [Google]

102KB, 800x534px

>>60725054
and x399 socket is almost double the size of x299

>>60709751
That's for the entry level 16 core model though. The cheapest 12 core will probably be around $600. Intel's 16 will be how much? $1600?

>>60725054
And X299 is a midget compared to X399

File: 1496151689318[1].jpg (193KB, 938x903px) Image search: [Google]

193KB, 938x903px

>>60725077
>>60725054

>>60709366
even if the IPC was 20% lower, you're getting 80% better price/performance

>>60725077
that's unfortunate.

I'm going to use the asrock x370 mitx board with a 1700x.

>>60725092
That motherboard looks disgusting.

>>60725100
even if that IPC, AMDs 16 cores can clock way higher than intels

>>60725125
No, that's actually great, while ITX boards might be possible due to crazy engineering, a socket of this size makes it piss easy to cool and ensures compatibility for chips in the next 4 years due to extra pins.

>>60725127
what did you expect from anus and republic of goymers?

File: Girls.png (490KB, 449x401px) Image search: [Google]

490KB, 449x401px

>>60724654
>Not knowing that Threadripper will have higher single-threaded performance than Ryzen 7 due to the 2:1 infinity fabric speed
>Not knowing that Threadripper will have the same clocks as the 1800x
>Not knowing that Threadripper is the b2 stepping like Epyc and therefore should be better at overclocking than Ryzen 5 and 7

How much cpu power would it take to record gaming at 4k 60fps using x264?

I'm guessing 16c/32t cpu

>>60725218
Why not HEVC?
Also, 20+ cores most probably unless you want your game to look like a powerpoint slide

>>60725228
HEVC would require hardware acceleration to be feasible.

>>60725228
>HEVC
>now I need a 64 core cpu with 7700k levels of single threaded performance because x265 hates cpus

also
>implying that 8~12 cores reserved for recording while the rest for gayming isn't enough

>>60725244
GPU encoding is fucking junk, HEVC is heavy but not that much heavy than x264

>>60709220
>>60709331
They must fire the poo in the loo and get Keller to design GPU. He never did design GPUs but he will do better than the loo.

>>60725266
it's like 2-3x slower.

4k is going to be 2.25 times slower than 1440p on encoding.

>>60725382
Thankfully it scales with threads so 32 cores should do nicely!

>>60725228
Because all HEVC implemetantions are still worse than x264 for high quality content.

>>60725535
Just shit out more bitrate bro

>>60725564
It will still look worse than x264 at similar size but encoded much faster.