Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

AMD Threadripper 2950X Offers Great Linux Performance At $900 USD

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • AMD Threadripper 2950X Offers Great Linux Performance At $900 USD

    Phoronix: AMD Threadripper 2950X Offers Great Linux Performance At $900 USD

    The embargo has expired now for talking about Threadripper 2 performance figures... First up are our initial Threadripper 2950X Linux benchmarks. In this article are the most interesting metrics for this 16-core / 32-thread processor while in the just-published AMD Threadripper 2990WX Linux Benchmarks are a lot more figures complemented by the 2950X and other CPUs plus power consumption numbers, etc. This article is most useful if specifically focused on the performance of the Threadripper 2950X that comes in at $899 USD.

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=26687

  • #2
    A multithreaded FLAC encoding test would be nice. If you really care about the speed, the encoding should be parallelized. I think even basic desktop software such as Asunder use multiple threads. Using one core for encoding makes no sense.

    Comment


    • #3
      Can you run some Linux power benchmarks? I'd really like to see completely idle numbers with a linux desktop up *(i.e. Ubuntu booted and logged in).

      Additionally I'd love to see performance per dollar and performance per watt numbers.

      I'm considering getting a 2950x for a plex server/workstation that does over the air recording and transcoding, and I'd really love to see how much power it would suck down in it's typical state while transcoding, and then idle *(I'd guess that most workstations are idle 95% of the time, and that often gets ignored).

      Comment


      • #4
        What is the all core turbo on 2950X? I haven't seen been mentioned anywhere. I know it varies based on cooling system etc, but would like to see a figure. 2990WX seems to be around 3300. Is 2950X 3700/3800 or 3900?

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by npoc View Post
          Can you run some Linux power benchmarks? I'd really like to see completely idle numbers with a linux desktop up *(i.e. Ubuntu booted and logged in).

          Additionally I'd love to see performance per dollar and performance per watt numbers.

          I'm considering getting a 2950x for a plex server/workstation that does over the air recording and transcoding, and I'd really love to see how much power it would suck down in it's typical state while transcoding, and then idle *(I'd guess that most workstations are idle 95% of the time, and that often gets ignored).
          Did you miss the perf-per-Watt and power numbers? They are towards the end of the article. The minimum power numbers are basically idle.
          Michael Larabel
          http://www.michaellarabel.com/

          Comment


          • #6
            Typos:

            Originally posted by phoronix View Post
            Lots of M.2 NVMe storage potential thanks to 60 PCI Express lanes on these Threadripper processors.
            Sorry? I thought there were 64?

            Originally posted by phoronix View Post
            Like the Threadripper 2950X, the MSI MEG X33 CREATION has been working out
            Originally posted by phoronix View Post
            With the Threadripper 1950X at its $899 USD launch-price,
            The 1950X's launch price was $999.

            You did drop x264...
            Last edited by tildearrow; 08-13-2018, 12:34 PM.

            Comment


            • #7
              For performance per dollar, could we take into account the average price for the rest of the computer (motherboard + memory + case + PSU)?
              This will mostly add a fixed offset to each CPU, giving higher-end CPUs less of a disadvantage.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by gyscos View Post
                For performance per dollar, could we take into account the average price for the rest of the computer (motherboard + memory + case + PSU)?
                This will mostly add a fixed offset to each CPU, giving higher-end CPUs less of a disadvantage.
                high-end motherboards cost more
                high-end cpus use more memory

                Comment


                • #9
                  usb 3.1 gen1 is euphemism for usb 3.0, it is not modern. modern is usb 3.2

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by pal666 View Post
                    high-end motherboards cost more
                    high-end cpus use more memory
                    It's still worth considering. If the threadripper CPU is twice as fast as an intel i7 CPU, would it be worth buying 2 intel-based computers instead? This would be a real-world performance/dollar comparison.

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X