AMD Launches The Ryzen Threadripper 7000 Series: Up To 96 Cores, DDR5 RDIMMs, PRO & HEDT CPUs

[Hibbelharry]

10 grand for the top of the line 7995WX? Wouldn't even consider it!

I'm pretty sure those are not meant for standard consumer usecases. AMD is not trying to sell you a fancy gaming cpu here, Threadripper is a efficient upperclass workhorse.

At this point i don't see why AMD doesn't just drop the Threadripper name and call everything EPYC.

Because Epyc is the same beast but different nonetheless. Epyc is very much centered around maximum efficiency on workloads, Threadripper is a bit more about performance.

These processors also perfectly illustrate why AMD will never release a true CUDA competitor or why AMD will never release a hardware encoder as good as Nvidia's or Intel's.

Thats simply not true. Their workstation class GPUs and ROCM are pretty solid these days, AMD just doesn't make any ground on consumer hardware grade GPUs.

See for example here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IhlL1_z8mCE

The media encoders also got way better than they used to be. There is a lot of opinions around where people shared their success, see for example:

https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/xg1q9h/amd_encoder_quality/

AMD is not about to cannibalize sales of these high end CPUs by selling video cards at a fraction of the price that are able to outperform their cash cows.

Whatever AMD does they need to be comparable in efficiency for most usecases. A CPU will never be able to do some specific tasks as fast as GPU hardware, so they won't try. You're trying to simplify matters in a obvious wrong way.

Thus is why Nvidia is in many ways the only true game in town for video and AI, they do not have competing interests; there is an old saying that originates in the Bible that says "No one can serve two masters".

I guess you're not very sensitive to things changing in some kind of shorter periods. You're one of those linking to moan and then be even more surprised later, right?

[stesmi]

At this point i don't see why AMD doesn't just drop the Threadripper name and call everything EPYC.

Because Epyc is the same beast but different nonetheless. Epyc is very much centered around maximum efficiency on workloads, Threadripper is a bit more about performance.

The question does make sense. Many are wondering why Threadripper has a different name than EPYC when intel just calls them Xeons - both Workstation and Server ones. They seem to be able to do that just fine.

[fitzie]

i knew that they were going to kill the UDIMM variant. hopefully sTR5 sticks around so there's not a huge gap between epyc and tr releases for the next generation.

[stesmi]

i knew that they were going to kill the UDIMM variant. hopefully sTR5 sticks around so there's not a huge gap between epyc and tr releases for the next generation.

Only time will tell. My guess? Depends on sales. And yeah, not supporting UDIMMs was a no-brainer. the X299 stuff was sorta-kinda between high end gaming and workstation, and it was a shame RDIMM support was scarce, there. I think they want to go deeper into the Workstation mindset with the TR line now.

[fitzie]

I'm pretty sure those are not meant for standard consumer usecases. AMD is not trying to sell you a fancy gaming cpu here, Threadripper is a efficient upperclass workhorse.



Because Epyc is the same beast but different nonetheless. Epyc is very much centered around maximum efficiency on workloads, Threadripper is a bit more about performance.



Thats simply not true. Their workstation class GPUs and ROCM are pretty solid these days, AMD just doesn't make any ground on consumer hardware grade GPUs.

See for example here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IhlL1_z8mCE

The media encoders also got way better than they used to be. There is a lot of opinions around where people shared their success, see for example:

https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/xg1q9h/amd_encoder_quality/

Whatever AMD does they need to be comparable in efficiency for most usecases. A CPU will never be able to do some specific tasks as fast as GPU hardware, so they won't try. You're trying to simplify matters in a obvious wrong way.



I guess you're not very sensitive to things changing in some kind of shorter periods. You're one of those linking to moan and then be even more surprised later, right?

AMD does some things very right, but also does things very wrong. they are keeping pace with intel in the traditional verticals, but they could be totally wiped out when it comes to desktop/mobile. With modern performance and software, x86 isn't a differentiating factor. apple pulled off switching to arm relatively easily, and now they are bringing back x86 translation to start to compete for gaming. It's easy to imagine that sony and microsoft would move to arm for the consoles in the next generation or two, especially as people will want more mobility (either occulus/vision pro style, or switch/steam deck style).

as for their gpu's, is there any ai startup going ROCM or even playing with it? I'm sure their offering is good, and it seems some of the HPC crowd is touching it, but for AI, it seems like CUDA is what people know and expect now, and AMD should be trying to offer full CUDA compatability or as close as possible, to try to grab some of that lucrative market share.

[Hibbelharry]

AMD does some things very right, but also does things very wrong. they are keeping pace with intel in the traditional verticals, but they could be totally wiped out when it comes to desktop/mobile. With modern performance and software, x86 isn't a differentiating factor. apple pulled off switching to arm relatively easily, and now they are bringing back x86 translation to start to compete for gaming. It's easy to imagine that sony and microsoft would move to arm for the consoles in the next generation or two, especially as people will want more mobility (either occulus/vision pro style, or switch/steam deck style).

I think Apple isn't significant for gaming on desktop and I don't see them gaining anywhere in that matter. Valve even removed support for OS X in current Counterstrike...

For consoles it should take a while before we see new generations and AMD has won Playstaton and Xbox multiple times now. PS5 Pro is on the horizon and will (according to leaks) use a Zen2+RDNA3 APU. Everything else is pure speculation.

I personally don't see consoles going ARM anytime soon because I guess x86 has advantages in non mobile usecases and I don't imagine Sony and MS going the Nintendo way.

as for their gpu's, is there any ai startup going ROCM or even playing with it? I'm sure their offering is good, and it seems some of the HPC crowd is touching it, but for AI, it seems like CUDA is what people know and expect now, and AMD should be trying to offer full CUDA compatability or as close as possible, to try to grab some of that lucrative market share.

See https://www.theregister.com/2023/09/...nct_ai_lamini/

[NeoMorpheus]

......

[guglovich]

That's interesting. We buy 24 cores, but the consumption will be the same as 64. Did AMD decide not to cut the tracks?

[aviallon]

10 grand for the top of the line 7995WX? Wouldn't even consider it!

At this point i don't see why AMD doesn't just drop the Threadripper name and call everything EPYC.

These processors also perfectly illustrate why AMD will never release a true CUDA competitor or why AMD will never release a hardware encoder as good as Nvidia's or Intel's.

AMD is not about to cannibalize sales of these high end CPUs by selling video cards at a fraction of the price that are able to outperform their cash cows.

Thus is why Nvidia is in many ways the only true game in town for video and AI, they do not have competing interests; there is an old saying that originates in the Bible that says "No one can serve two masters".

This is a public price.
Pro variants are usually bought by enterprises, and those have highly negociated prices (sometimes more than 50% reduction against the public price). So they may be not that expensive actually.

[bridgman]

That's interesting. We buy 24 cores, but the consumption will be the same as 64. Did AMD decide not to cut the tracks?

I think the 24 core parts have higher clocks... goal is to maximize performance in a given power envelope, not maximize efficiency at a variety of power levels. EPYC parts lean a bit more towards maximizing efficiency.