AMD Threadripper 1950X Trounces Core I9-7900X In Multithreading Benchmark (pcper.com)

dryriver writes: The Cinebench R15 benchmark is a popular tool for measuring how well CPUs cope with multithreaded compute loads. AMD's Threadripper 1950X 16 core CPU, priced at $999 according to AMD, benchmarks 41% faster in Cinebench R15 than Intel's also $999 10 core Core i9-7900X CPU. While Intel's Core i9-7900X scores 2186 points on Cinebench, AMD's Threadripper 1950X scores 3046 points. Even the cheaper 12 core $799 Threadripper 1920X is over 200 points faster in Cinebench R15 than Intel's Core i9-7900X. Intel has its own 16 core Core i9-7960X in the works, performance yet unknown, priced at $1,699, but AMD's 16 core part currently appears to be a full $700 cheaper than Intel's MSRP. It remaines to be seen who is faster in single-threaded performance -- Intel may take that crown --and what the power consumption of a fully loaded Threadripper looks like compared to its Core i9 counterpart.

Comments

Re:What is the target for these?

[ckatko]

> We're not even fully loading down 2-8 core machines now. Gaming performance has and still is a single core endeavor, and even now, most of my stuff has trouble pegging any cores to 100% for any length of time.

1 - I load up my 8 core machine every day.

2 - Gaming is not single threaded unless you're an idiot or living in 1993. At the very least, physics can run separate from display, and every modern game on the planet runs at least 1 frame lag for that same reason.

3 - Vulkan is designed from the ground up to utilize ALL cpu cores as well as multiple GPUs.

Just because YOU can't use your computer while playing Farmville, doesn't mean everyone else on the planet is incapable of doing so. I literally just finished playing a game that uses 100% GPU, 6 cores, and the other 2 I used for encoding the video recording. But nah, fuck it. 640k is enough for everyone, amirite?

Re: What is the target for these?

[red_dragon]

"I won't get into any pros or cons of that aspect, but just mention it to explain the significance of the quad channel DDR4. The way AMD has designed these smaller "packages" to work together as one CPU is, to put it very simply, to have them communicate through the DDR4 bus." Wait... no, that's not right. The cores talk to each other via Infinity Fabric. To talk to cores on a separate module or to access memory managed by a different memory controller (Threadripper has two, Epyc has four), Infinity Fabric uses PCIe inside the package. Epyc dedicated 64 lanes for this purpose, so I assume that Threadripper uses 32 lanes. The memory buses never come into it.