I think Ryan was making a play on words related to the typo above (hole/whole). Also Threadripper was more of an internal/joke name that the team developing it used and it stuck. It's a bit childish but not necessarily bad especially since it's so appropriate. We've been stuck at 8 threads for a decade and in 3 years we have 64+ threads on desktops.
If you were willing to pay $2000 for a processor you've not been stuck at 8 threads. Don't get me wrong, they're cheap for what they're replacing but from a consumer point of view you will pay more than double to get twice the cores with a diminishing gain, it's not exactly a bargain where you get them cheap in bulk. None of these will ever go into a "normal" desktop.
I think you're missing the point. Intel never released anything near competitive in terms of pricing because the whole point was to tell you "putting more cores/threads *has* to cost an arm and a leg". A myth also propagated by many tech journalists who insisted in some of their articles that there's no room left for IPC improvements and you can't get CPU core prices down due to complexity thus justifying Intel's stance.
Most CPUs were stuck at up to 4 cores/8 threads. If you look at Intel's X series until the beginning of 2017 they had one 8 core and one 10 core offerings. Since then they had probably 15+ models from 8 to 18 cores. Something must have happened around that time but what?
Enter AMD with a lot more cores and some IPC improvements to to make the market competitive again across the segments.
For me they will be cheap, as I can do much more work in the same time, so 1 year of use for these things will earn me plenty extra to pay for these things.
Arm and a leg to AMD and kidney to Apple. Nothing much left huh. This looks great for HEDT. Now can they launch Zen2 really soon for laptops as well, it's long overdue! CES hopefully.
The nail in the coffin for Intel would be Apple announcing a transition from Xeon to Threadripper 3990X on the new Mac Pro.
As it stands Apple has updated its specs for Mac Pro to support 8TB NVme SSD, and the Afterburner FPGA now supports 6 8K 30fps real-time processing in it.
Toss in a 3990X instead of the Xeon and Apple could drop pricing considerably allowing for a win/win to AMD and Apple both.
All the Thunderbolt 3 ports are on the custom AMD GPGPUs and the custom Apple motherboard.
Let's see what AMD announces for Zen 3 very soon. If it indeed includes AVX 512 I see Apple dumping Intel in the near future.
You are right with the most part except "Apple could drop pricing considerably". Yes, drop price for Apple, which means increased margins. You will pay the same price or even more, cause...better specs.
"Toss in a 3990X instead of the Xeon and Apple could drop pricing considerably allowing for a win/win to AMD and Apple both." You fundamentally misunderstand Apple if you think that a potential drop in cost will lead to a drop in price of any of their products. When Apple execs see an opportunity to drop cost they never think "Oh, now we can drop prices!". They always think "Sweet! That means higher profit margins and more monies in our bank!".
There is an EPYC 7702P which has an MSRP of $4425. I think this is a more appropriate comparison to the TR 3990X since both are for single socket implementations.
In 2016 the highest core-count desktop processor was ten cores. Amazing how far we've come in a few years (assuming what you do is core-count dependent).
maybe this means AMD stock price shoots up and up as rightfully should be considering the massive ground they have breached since Ryzen first launched to which they have overall gotten better and better at making sure Agesa and such has gotten far far smoother more timely launches.
I hope in this regard as well that they and their various partners go the extra mile to 100% make certain that core/threads are operating at peak speed as much as possible
That and the title ("Time To Open Your Wallet") made me laugh. Dr Cutress certainly has a lovely sense of humor to go with his technical chops! And I particularly enjoyed the fact that neither is succeeded by a "?" symbol... AMD knows it has the crown here and it'll charge whatever it wants to. Absolutely unimaginable turnaround in a few short years.
If I'm paying 3k for a CPU I'd kinda expect 8 channel at that point... Honestly that feature will make or break the CPU for me as 512GB is just about the bare minimum I'd need for my analyses.
Otherwise I'll keep waiting for DDR5 and Zen 4.
I'd like a computer that I can game with and use for my analyses. Currently this doesn't exist.
Supermicro sells Epyc mobos if you need 8 channel ram. Looking at listings on Newegg if you need 2 dimm/channel you'll need to step up from ATX to EEB (rackmount, same physical size as EATX) form factor for your mobo. Without going the SoDimm route an ATX board would have to give up ~4 PCIe slots to cram on 16 dimm slots, which would wipe out the second advantage of Epyc.
There were leaks about 8-channel TRX80 and WRX80 variants of Threadripper 3. They got names like sTRX4 right so it seems likely. And you are far from the only one who has wanted more than quad-channel.
I would be concerned if the 3990 has fewer memory channels than the Epyc equivalent - flashbacks to the gimped memory access of the 2990WX that made it inferior for some workloads.
To low, it's $600 from 24 to 32 cores, assuming that the 3980X would be a 48 core CPU it should be around $2800 to $3000, the 64 core should around $4000 since usually the top model always has a premium price.
As much as "wow, yay, 64 cores", I'd really prefer a cheaper entry price to the TR3 boards. Put out an 8-core with a $100 markup over a 3800X and you'd find more people willing to jump to the TR3 platform.
short of someone making a crippled board that's not likely. All the extra PCIe lanes and DDR slots require more PCB layers to connect everything; PCIe4 needing much more stringent manufacturing to send signals over the length of a mobo only makes things worse (this is the same reason why x570 boards are significantly more expensive than x470).
*A lot of people don't really need Threadripper and their needs are met by 3900X and 3950X. *You could use older Threadrippers. They can't be upgraded to the new ones due to the socket change, and the quad-die variants like 2990WX see massive performance drops in some scenarios. But price drops could make it worth it. *You could use 8-core Epyc. Entry level Epyc 7232P is around $500. I don't know about the motherboards. At least you can get 8-channel memory and a lot of PCIe lanes this way.
I don't think the 8-core 1900X Threadripper was very popular, but I don't have a source for that. If it is true, AMD wants to reduce the overlap to prevent that from happening again (and make more money, of course).
AMD alludes to the one ring to rule them all, and you follow up with "one does not simply." At lease a few people next year are going to be referring to their Threadrippers as My Precious.
Here's hoping that "leg" isn't unreasonable. The TR 3980X - assuming it exists - looks to be the 3900X of the high-core-counts, with disabled cores on its chiplets. $2799 would fit the pattern.
What *isn't* the same as the Ryzen series is the hard TDP limit; we'll have to see what it does.
May I simply say what a comfort to uncover somebody who genuinely understands what they are discussing over the internet. You definitely realize how to bring a problem to light and make it important. More people ought to look at this and understand this side of the story. I was surprised you're not more popular given that you most certainly possess the gift. https://solutioner.pro/kmode-exception-not-handled... https://solutioner.pro/service-host-local/
What the freaking problem with AMD? All their chiplets easily can do 3.5/4.7GHz like in Ryzen 9 3950X for 16 cores at 105W TDP. Why the hell not to allow 64core 3990X to do the same 3.5/4.7GHz at 420W TDP ? Two chips 128 core motherboard consuming 900W is considered too high to handle for more powerful water cooler ?
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.
52 Comments
Back to Article
R0H1T - Monday, November 25, 2019 - link
>TR 3980X is a theorized part due to a whole in AMD's naming.Don't you mean a hole in AMD's naming?
Ryan Smith - Monday, November 25, 2019 - link
Perhaps. Though AMD's naming is quite wholesome, I find.Dr. Swag - Monday, November 25, 2019 - link
I don't know about you, but I don't see anything wholesome in names like "threadripper."close - Monday, November 25, 2019 - link
I think Ryan was making a play on words related to the typo above (hole/whole). Also Threadripper was more of an internal/joke name that the team developing it used and it stuck. It's a bit childish but not necessarily bad especially since it's so appropriate. We've been stuck at 8 threads for a decade and in 3 years we have 64+ threads on desktops.Kjella - Monday, November 25, 2019 - link
If you were willing to pay $2000 for a processor you've not been stuck at 8 threads. Don't get me wrong, they're cheap for what they're replacing but from a consumer point of view you will pay more than double to get twice the cores with a diminishing gain, it's not exactly a bargain where you get them cheap in bulk. None of these will ever go into a "normal" desktop.close - Friday, November 29, 2019 - link
I think you're missing the point. Intel never released anything near competitive in terms of pricing because the whole point was to tell you "putting more cores/threads *has* to cost an arm and a leg". A myth also propagated by many tech journalists who insisted in some of their articles that there's no room left for IPC improvements and you can't get CPU core prices down due to complexity thus justifying Intel's stance.https://ark.intel.com/content/www/us/en/ark/produc...
Most CPUs were stuck at up to 4 cores/8 threads. If you look at Intel's X series until the beginning of 2017 they had one 8 core and one 10 core offerings. Since then they had probably 15+ models from 8 to 18 cores. Something must have happened around that time but what?
Enter AMD with a lot more cores and some IPC improvements to to make the market competitive again across the segments.
Major Giroux - Wednesday, January 22, 2020 - link
The move from 22n to 14n surely allowed to pack more into a die. (that push to 14n occurred in 2014 or 2015 but still)Trikkiedikkie - Saturday, November 30, 2019 - link
Consumers will hardly buy these things.For me they will be cheap, as I can do much more work in the same time, so 1 year of use for these things will earn me plenty extra to pay for these things.
It is an investment.
WaltC - Monday, December 2, 2019 - link
My guesstimation is $3999.boozed - Monday, November 25, 2019 - link
Whoosh...On the topic of naming, threadripper is silly but it's better than quadfather!
waterdog - Monday, November 25, 2019 - link
When you rip threads, you get holes. It all makes sense.ET - Monday, November 25, 2019 - link
Where's the thumbs up here?Alexvrb - Tuesday, November 26, 2019 - link
Not until I get my $20.Teckk - Monday, November 25, 2019 - link
Arm and a leg to AMD and kidney to Apple. Nothing much left huh.This looks great for HEDT. Now can they launch Zen2 really soon for laptops as well, it's long overdue! CES hopefully.
mdriftmeyer - Monday, November 25, 2019 - link
The nail in the coffin for Intel would be Apple announcing a transition from Xeon to Threadripper 3990X on the new Mac Pro.As it stands Apple has updated its specs for Mac Pro to support 8TB NVme SSD, and the Afterburner FPGA now supports 6 8K 30fps real-time processing in it.
Toss in a 3990X instead of the Xeon and Apple could drop pricing considerably allowing for a win/win to AMD and Apple both.
All the Thunderbolt 3 ports are on the custom AMD GPGPUs and the custom Apple motherboard.
Let's see what AMD announces for Zen 3 very soon. If it indeed includes AVX 512 I see Apple dumping Intel in the near future.
Teckk - Tuesday, November 26, 2019 - link
I doubt if price drop is a concern for Apple :)yeeeeman - Tuesday, November 26, 2019 - link
You are right with the most part except "Apple could drop pricing considerably".Yes, drop price for Apple, which means increased margins. You will pay the same price or even more, cause...better specs.
Santoval - Tuesday, November 26, 2019 - link
"Toss in a 3990X instead of the Xeon and Apple could drop pricing considerably allowing for a win/win to AMD and Apple both."You fundamentally misunderstand Apple if you think that a potential drop in cost will lead to a drop in price of any of their products. When Apple execs see an opportunity to drop cost they never think "Oh, now we can drop prices!". They always think "Sweet! That means higher profit margins and more monies in our bank!".
Santoval - Tuesday, November 26, 2019 - link
edit : "...more monies in our bank *account*!".Davenreturns - Monday, November 25, 2019 - link
"The EPYC 7742 has an MSRP of $6950..."There is an EPYC 7702P which has an MSRP of $4425. I think this is a more appropriate comparison to the TR 3990X since both are for single socket implementations.
Chaitanya - Monday, November 25, 2019 - link
AMD is certainly going all in for WS market.ArcadeEngineer - Monday, November 25, 2019 - link
In 2016 the highest core-count desktop processor was ten cores. Amazing how far we've come in a few years (assuming what you do is core-count dependent).Dragonstongue - Monday, November 25, 2019 - link
maybe this means AMD stock price shoots up and up as rightfully should be considering the massive ground they have breached since Ryzen first launched to which they have overall gotten better and better at making sure Agesa and such has gotten far far smoother more timely launches.I hope in this regard as well that they and their various partners go the extra mile to 100% make certain that core/threads are operating at peak speed as much as possible
(note I not complaining as I <3 my 3600 (^.^)_7
lazarpandar - Monday, November 25, 2019 - link
You been under a rock? It's been shooting up!Arnulf - Monday, November 25, 2019 - link
I chuckled at the 'arm' and 'leg' :-) Nice write-up!Carmen00 - Monday, November 25, 2019 - link
That and the title ("Time To Open Your Wallet") made me laugh. Dr Cutress certainly has a lovely sense of humor to go with his technical chops! And I particularly enjoyed the fact that neither is succeeded by a "?" symbol... AMD knows it has the crown here and it'll charge whatever it wants to. Absolutely unimaginable turnaround in a few short years.Thernn - Monday, November 25, 2019 - link
If I'm paying 3k for a CPU I'd kinda expect 8 channel at that point... Honestly that feature will make or break the CPU for me as 512GB is just about the bare minimum I'd need for my analyses.Otherwise I'll keep waiting for DDR5 and Zen 4.
I'd like a computer that I can game with and use for my analyses. Currently this doesn't exist.
DanNeely - Monday, November 25, 2019 - link
Supermicro sells Epyc mobos if you need 8 channel ram. Looking at listings on Newegg if you need 2 dimm/channel you'll need to step up from ATX to EEB (rackmount, same physical size as EATX) form factor for your mobo. Without going the SoDimm route an ATX board would have to give up ~4 PCIe slots to cram on 16 dimm slots, which would wipe out the second advantage of Epyc.nandnandnand - Monday, November 25, 2019 - link
There were leaks about 8-channel TRX80 and WRX80 variants of Threadripper 3. They got names like sTRX4 right so it seems likely. And you are far from the only one who has wanted more than quad-channel.https://wccftech.com/amd-ryzen-threadripper-3000-c...
We should know more by CES, January 7-10.
Waiting for DDR5 and Zen 4 means you might have to wait until late 2021 or mid 2022.
twtech - Tuesday, November 26, 2019 - link
I would be concerned if the 3990 has fewer memory channels than the Epyc equivalent - flashbacks to the gimped memory access of the 2990WX that made it inferior for some workloads.Eastman - Monday, November 25, 2019 - link
Apple has backed the wrong pony for their Mac Pro. They should've gone with AMD. Imagine a Mac Pro with 64 cores...Kishoreshack - Monday, November 25, 2019 - link
How many kidney's do I need to sell?huhwhat? - Monday, November 25, 2019 - link
4Hruodgar - Wednesday, November 27, 2019 - link
LOLextide - Monday, November 25, 2019 - link
I'm calling it at $2499 / $2999 : 3980X / 3990Xris1989 - Tuesday, November 26, 2019 - link
To low, it's $600 from 24 to 32 cores, assuming that the 3980X would be a 48 core CPU it should be around $2800 to $3000, the 64 core should around $4000 since usually the top model always has a premium price.Kishoreshack - Monday, November 25, 2019 - link
Type F to pay respect to IntelRIP INTEL
ilkhan - Monday, November 25, 2019 - link
As much as "wow, yay, 64 cores", I'd really prefer a cheaper entry price to the TR3 boards. Put out an 8-core with a $100 markup over a 3800X and you'd find more people willing to jump to the TR3 platform.DanNeely - Monday, November 25, 2019 - link
short of someone making a crippled board that's not likely. All the extra PCIe lanes and DDR slots require more PCB layers to connect everything; PCIe4 needing much more stringent manufacturing to send signals over the length of a mobo only makes things worse (this is the same reason why x570 boards are significantly more expensive than x470).nandnandnand - Monday, November 25, 2019 - link
It's a delicate balance.*A lot of people don't really need Threadripper and their needs are met by 3900X and 3950X.
*You could use older Threadrippers. They can't be upgraded to the new ones due to the socket change, and the quad-die variants like 2990WX see massive performance drops in some scenarios. But price drops could make it worth it.
*You could use 8-core Epyc. Entry level Epyc 7232P is around $500. I don't know about the motherboards. At least you can get 8-channel memory and a lot of PCIe lanes this way.
I don't think the 8-core 1900X Threadripper was very popular, but I don't have a source for that. If it is true, AMD wants to reduce the overlap to prevent that from happening again (and make more money, of course).
opensourcepirate - Monday, November 25, 2019 - link
AMD alludes to the one ring to rule them all, and you follow up with "one does not simply." At lease a few people next year are going to be referring to their Threadrippers as My Precious.Hul8 - Monday, November 25, 2019 - link
All we need is Sean Bean playing the Intel HEDT platform, for an epic death scene.boozed - Monday, November 25, 2019 - link
My prison wallet?Sychonut - Monday, November 25, 2019 - link
Looking forward to 3999.9X with 2 to the power π number of cores.boozed - Tuesday, November 26, 2019 - link
That's not many coresGreenReaper - Tuesday, November 26, 2019 - link
Here's hoping that "leg" isn't unreasonable. The TR 3980X - assuming it exists - looks to be the 3900X of the high-core-counts, with disabled cores on its chiplets. $2799 would fit the pattern.What *isn't* the same as the Ryzen series is the hard TDP limit; we'll have to see what it does.
tygrus - Tuesday, November 26, 2019 - link
3980X should cost an arm. The 3990X will cost an arm&leg.Samus - Wednesday, November 27, 2019 - link
256MB cache sweet jesus335 GT - Wednesday, November 27, 2019 - link
Damn, they are just trolling Intel now. They can add 32 cores with a click of the fingers.Next will be 2s motherboards. :)
Aran19 - Thursday, November 28, 2019 - link
May I simply say what a comfort to uncover somebody who genuinely understands what they are discussing over the internet. You definitely realize how to bring a problem to light and make it important. More people ought to look at this and understand this side of the story. I was surprised you're not more popular given that you most certainly possess the gift.https://solutioner.pro/kmode-exception-not-handled...
https://solutioner.pro/service-host-local/
Korguz - Thursday, November 28, 2019 - link
more spam, needs to be deleted....SanX - Thursday, November 28, 2019 - link
What the freaking problem with AMD? All their chiplets easily can do 3.5/4.7GHz like in Ryzen 9 3950X for 16 cores at 105W TDP.Why the hell not to allow 64core 3990X to do the same 3.5/4.7GHz at 420W TDP ? Two chips 128 core motherboard consuming 900W is considered too high to handle for more powerful water cooler ?