>3277 CB score @4ghz Xeons and Core i9s BTFO.

>>61675730
>4GHz

Will clocklets ever learn?

>>61675730
Impressive.

>128gb quad channel 3200mhz
Whut

>>61675843
Yes, that is something you'd expect out of a Threadripper build.

File: 1497990958532.jpg (112KB, 691x771px) Image search: [Google]

112KB, 691x771px

>>61675730

Is CPU-Z reporting your RAM timings wrong? Those are looser than your mum after a night om the town

File: Mysterious Merchant.gif (4KB, 452x523px) Image search: [Google]

4KB, 452x523px

>>61677251

>>61675730
>top 2% bin
>1.41v

What did AMD mean by this

>>61675843
Threadripper platform is x399 - quad channel.

Eypc also supports up to 256GB of memory per socket iirc.

>>61677414
I'm wrong, it is actually 2TB RAM per socket on Epyc.

>>61677414
EPYC supports up to 2TB of memory per socket (you'll have to use 128GB LR-DIMMS for that, that is).

Don't the 32 core EPYC and 28 core Xeon get around 4300?

>>61675730

>CL19

Holy shit, have fun rendering on that. Stick to Photon Map and ditch the entire idea of Irradiance Cache unless you want shitty Xeon tier frame render times.

>>61679663
That is prob. just CPU-Z being derpy.

File: 1500641822221.jpg (32KB, 877x568px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 877x568px

>>61679601
one guy benchmarked dual EPYC 7601s on cinebench and got ~5100, but that was with the initial firmware

>>61680001
Cinnebench is broken on really high core counts

https://www.servethehome.com/cinebench-r15-is-now-a-broken-as-a-benchmark-and-11-5k-surpassed/

File: Screenshot_20170801-152603.png (96KB, 539x337px) Image search: [Google]

96KB, 539x337px

>>61680027
Kek

>>61680027

I love STH as it really shows how cluless /g/ is when it comes to srs bsns hardware.

File: tr amazon.jpg (219KB, 1536x2048px) Image search: [Google]

219KB, 1536x2048px

>>61675730
>p-pls buy i9 .. pls ..

File: DF54KANVoAAk-1p.jpg large.jpg (34KB, 345x363px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 345x363px

>>61675730
it has 4.2 GHz XFR BTW (even 1900X).

>>61681757
DELID

threadripper NDA lift when?

>>61681867
August 10th

>>61675741
Tsk tsk tsk look who's talking shit, it's the corelet! How is that obsolete house fire i7 7700k doing? Don't worry, just buy the (finally) arriving 6 core mainstream parts. But don't forget to buy a new motherboard and delid good goy!

>>61681803
if it does 4.2GHz turbo on a sensible amount of cores, there's no reason to overclock it whatsoever

>>61680027

>Intel getting its ass whipped by Ryzen and Threadripper in Cinebench
>Release a new driver
>Now Intel is skyrocketing to impossible scores

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

>>61682459
It's a 4 socket system

>>61682489

Read the article, the score is scaling beyond anything possible, even if you had 200 cores the score would not go that high in Cinebench.

>>61682499
They need to fix Cinebench.

>>61682459
Strange, isn't it? Ryzen also whipped Intel in the CPU-Z benchmark and they responded by changing the benchmark so that Intel was ahead again.

Just a (((coincidence))) I'm sure.

>>61683837
This is only an issue under insane core counts so it's obviously not something like the bullshit CPU-Z did.