Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Linus Torvalds Switches To AMD Ryzen Threadripper After 15 Years Of Intel Systems

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

  • herman
    replied
    Originally posted by coder View Post
    From what to what? "i7" means different things, depending on the market and generation.

    Have you tried disabling mitigations? Depending on what you do with your PC, this could be worth the risk and provide an easy performance boost.
    I had a Core 2 Duo, and I loved that thing. It was miles ahead of the Pentium 4 it replaced (despite the P4 having a primitive form of hyper-threading, lol). Remember when single-core computers used to hang and you couldn't move the mouse for a minute? Dual cores wiped that out for good. Anyway, it lasted nearly 10 years before I got an i-7. I'm sure disabling the mitigations would speed things up, but personally, I wouldn't trade security for speed. I guess it's just because I waited 10 years from the dual core processor that I expected things to get much better. It also didn't help that my CPU was nerfed after I bought it. It's enough to sour me on x86 processors in general. I'd love to see ARM take over.

    Leave a comment:


  • coder
    replied
    Originally posted by herman View Post
    I moved up to an i7 recently and I was very disappointed with the performance -- it's not slow but it's just not fast.
    From what to what? "i7" means different things, depending on the market and generation.

    Have you tried disabling mitigations? Depending on what you do with your PC, this could be worth the risk and provide an easy performance boost.

    Leave a comment:


  • herman
    replied
    I moved up to an i7 recently and I was very disappointed with the performance -- it's not slow but it's just not fast. Intel got lazy and it shows. Now AMD is eating their lunch in the desktop market while ARM is taking up the mobile market. Intel better get their act together or they will get left behind for good.

    Leave a comment:


  • starshipeleven
    replied
    Originally posted by coder View Post
    The memory controller is in-package - not in the chipset. Still, I wonder if that die isn't really the same one that's also used in Epyc.
    you mean "IO chiplet"? Because it really probably is using the same IO chiplet as Epyc given it has the same features. I mean it's either that or they made a new one that does the same job, which is kind of weird.

    Leave a comment:


  • coder
    replied
    Originally posted by zyxxel View Post
    And the toy/gaming chipset for the Threadripper family seems to be explained by this:https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pa...pper-pro&num=1
    The memory controller is in-package - not in the chipset. Still, I wonder if that die isn't really the same one that's also used in Epyc.
    Last edited by coder; 17 July 2020, 09:36 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • starshipeleven
    replied
    Originally posted by zyxxel View Post
    I have never said the Threadripper processors are toys. I have said the chipset has a high focus on gaming and misses out a number of things important for workstations.
    I'm saying it really isn't missing a whole lot for most workstations, and that it has no focus whatsoever on gaming, at any level.
    Also I'm confused by your mention of chipset. PCIe and RAM controllers and all "businness features" are in the Threadripper "CPU" thing, not in the chipset.

    That said, what does a Threadripper system offer to a gamer? It's beyond overkill in all parameters. Too much cores, too much RAM, too much PCIe lanes (SLI/CRossfire are dead and were dead years ago too, so there is no point for 4 PCIe slots), too much USB 3.0, too much SSD slots and storage ports.

    It is clearly aimed at workstations, but it cannot be used for high end ones because it does not have enough RAM. Does not make the other workstations any less workstation than high end ones.

    And my post about the Threadripper Pro was about why AMD for some reason decided to made the previously released chipsets in a way that misses out for the workstation market.
    Oh I can tell you the reason they did this.
    Back then they didn't want to lose any bit of Epyc sales, square and simple. Since this "Threadripper pro" is clearly a rebadged Epyc, it's pretty much certain they were more interested in keeping all possible parts for their initial assault of the server market (which is the main moneymaker for these kinds of processors, no doubts about it).
    They provided a segmented product for the midrange workstation and enthusiast, (Threadripper) but went to great lengths to keep it NOT APPEALING for server use.

    Now, a couple of years later and in a much better position than back then, they feel like they can afford to not 100% target servers only with their high end CPUs and make these vanity products (that still drive sales, but aren't main moneymakers themselves).

    Leave a comment:


  • zyxxel
    replied
    Originally posted by starshipeleven View Post
    A 64-core CPU that can mount 256GB of RAM isn't a toy, and is completely pointless for gaming.

    The Threadripper Pro is literally an Epyc with a different name, feature set is 100% the same. There is no real benefit over buying an Epyc and a board for it.

    That said, the fact that they have not partnered with consumer motherboard OEMs and don't plan to do so (as said here https://www.anandtech.com/show/15910...-for-oems-only ), means this will be limited to prebuilt workstations like the Lenovo one, which is great for businnesses I guess.

    It's neat that it's available in multiple forms in a way to lower licensing costs of workstation software.
    Not sure if you misread or felt like hitting strawmen.

    I have never said the Threadripper processors are toys. I have said the chipset has a high focus on gaming and misses out a number of things important for workstations.

    And my post about the Threadripper Pro was about why AMD for some reason decided to made the previously released chipsets in a way that misses out for the workstation market.

    Leave a comment:


  • starshipeleven
    replied
    Originally posted by zyxxel View Post
    And the toy/gaming chipset for the Threadripper family seems to be explained by this:

    https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pa...pper-pro&num=1
    A 64-core CPU that can mount 256GB of RAM isn't a toy, and is completely pointless for gaming.

    The Threadripper Pro is literally an Epyc with a different name, feature set is 100% the same. There is no real benefit over buying an Epyc and a board for it.

    That said, the fact that they have not partnered with consumer motherboard OEMs and don't plan to do so (as said here https://www.anandtech.com/show/15910...-for-oems-only ), means this will be limited to prebuilt workstations like the Lenovo one, which is great for businnesses I guess.

    It's neat that it's available in multiple forms in a way to lower licensing costs of workstation software.

    Leave a comment:


  • zyxxel
    replied
    And the toy/gaming chipset for the Threadripper family seems to be explained by this:

    https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pa...pper-pro&num=1

    Leave a comment:


  • zyxxel
    replied
    Originally posted by starshipeleven View Post
    I'm clarifying some stuff because it's unclear, it's not necessarily disagreeing.

    Yeah but you said "faster" which is unclear, speed is usually bandwith, while latency is latency.

    intersting

    yeah, the Samsung DIMMS, I also use them. https://www.samsung.com/semiconducto...8A4G43MB1-CTD/

    I said needing more than that is uncommon outside of some fields like research.
    What is your field? What are you filling your RAM with?

    Most workstations greatly benefit from having a GPU with CUDA inside even if they aren't doing 3D work, since most work applications do have some way of offloading calculations or filters or simulations or whatever to a GPU.

    How about getting a Epyc workstation board, as I mentioned above? It's a bit more expensive, but not by that much for the price of a complete system, and it's definitely better than the price of two full systems.
    https://www.asrockrack.com/general/p...Specifications
    https://www.asrockrack.com/general/p...Specifications
    https://www.gigabyte.com/Server-Motherboard?fid=2301
    I haven't double-checked the part number, but it was Samsung memory I bought. I started with 128 GB since I couldn't find any reference to someone who had used them with the 39xx series motherboard and they weren't in the motherboard list of compatible memory. 256 GB costs too much to buy just on a whim.

    On one hand, I run lots of virtual machines. Some could be run on a server, but they often have some form of pass-through of hardware so they own graphics card, USB devices etc. So I end up with a single physical machine used as multiple workstations.

    But lots of other virtualizations too, for different environments etc. Some could be automatically packaged and sent over to server machines, but it's often practical to run it directly on the machine in front of me. Especially since that gives extra bandwidth to pick up debug/trace information when doing simulations.

    In some situations, I work with larger in-memory databases. In some situations, I set up simulated systems with millions of networked clients hammering on a server while supervising both sides to look at latencies etc. In memory access gives way better bandwidth than having to add a separate network interface to stream out data - and the 3970 has enough cores that it can directly process the debug data while leaving enough cores for simulated clients and simulated server.

    So for me, the Threadripper processors runs rings around my Xeon chips. While my Xeon-based motherboards can do tricks that the more gaming-optimized Threadripper motherboards can't. Life would have been wonderful if I could have had 7 or 8 PCIe slots and registered RAM.

    I haven't kept up to speed - if any newer motherboards have arrived that would motivate me to rebuild.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X