Ryzen vs i7 (Mainstream); Threadripper vs i9 (HEDT); X299 vs X399/TRX40; Xeon vs Epyc

Discussion in 'Hardware Components and Aftermarket Upgrades' started by ajc9988, Jun 7, 2017.

  1. rlk

    rlk Notebook Evangelist

    Reputations:
    132
    Messages:
    561
    Likes Received:
    292
    Trophy Points:
    76
    Definitely agree about the mains supply.

    If you're after frequency, though, might you do better with a smaller chip? How many VMs do you want hanging off this, anyway? Is it going to be more than 4-8?
     
  2. ajc9988

    ajc9988 Death by a thousand paper cuts

    Reputations:
    1,597
    Messages:
    5,815
    Likes Received:
    8,207
    Trophy Points:
    681
    I'm thinking 7. That covers bedrooms, living room, office, and game room. I've also considered 2x32-core systems, but once again, for the server chips it tops around 3.4GHz boost. The TR would possibly be able to handle that, but...
     
  3. ole!!!

    ole!!! Notebook Prophet

    Reputations:
    2,385
    Messages:
    5,798
    Likes Received:
    3,716
    Trophy Points:
    431
    your chiller setup will beat this anyday. just that i dont wish to deal with any possibility of spill/leaks and this seems to be the best option.
     
    ajc9988 and hmscott like this.
  4. hmscott

    hmscott Notebook Nobel Laureate

    Reputations:
    7,072
    Messages:
    20,418
    Likes Received:
    25,218
    Trophy Points:
    931
    That's the benefit, but even Linus says it's unknown whether the 1/3 re-sized final product will be as efficient or as effective after the design changes.

    Next-level Cooling has Arrived for Gamers and Creators
    Introducing the IceGiant ProSiphon Elite

    Industrial-grade cooling for your CPU
    Engineered in Austin, Texas
    Available Spring 2020
    https://www.icegiantcooling.com/

    Let's see how it pans out over time...I signed up for updates (bottom of that link page)
     
    Last edited: Dec 28, 2019
    ajc9988 likes this.
  5. ole!!!

    ole!!! Notebook Prophet

    Reputations:
    2,385
    Messages:
    5,798
    Likes Received:
    3,716
    Trophy Points:
    431
    i honestly dont mind the thickness and imo higher capacity is a good thing that can give less audible fans. i wish they can make it shorter with smaller fans, like 130mm max height which seems to be too much to ask.

    anyway this area gives a big headache for me cause it seems only way to TR is either go AIO, or wait for super efficient node, which would kill my joy in overclocking of having high frequency. but with this new cooler, 400w at that temp is amazing and i think a 24c TR with new node will probably only use ~300w that will give more room for OC, or less audible fan whichever i choose and i like to have choices.
     
    hmscott likes this.
  6. TANWare

    TANWare Just This Side of Senile, I think. Super Moderator

    Reputations:
    2,530
    Messages:
    9,535
    Likes Received:
    4,939
    Trophy Points:
    431
    If you are setting up a TR then most likely the 24c is the way to go. That unless you have the need of the 32c over the 24c.
     
  7. rlk

    rlk Notebook Evangelist

    Reputations:
    132
    Messages:
    561
    Likes Received:
    292
    Trophy Points:
    76
    I've said it before, but I think all the emphasis on overclocking is misplaced. Overclocking simply means running the processor at a higher frequency than the manufacturer states. If the manufacturer rates the chip for a fast enough clock rate, why does it matter whether it's overclocked or not? Would you prefer a chip rated 4 GHz that you OC to 4.5, or a chip that starts out at 4.5? Because what AMD is doing is essentially dynamically overclocking the chip on the fly to whatever frequency can be supported by the thermals and power delivery.

    I also think the emphasis on specific clock frequency, as opposed to instructions/second or instructions/second/core, is misplaced, but we'll leave that go for now.
     
    hmscott likes this.
  8. ajc9988

    ajc9988 Death by a thousand paper cuts

    Reputations:
    1,597
    Messages:
    5,815
    Likes Received:
    8,207
    Trophy Points:
    681
    Dude, Epyc is CAPPED. It doesn't dynamically go over 3.45GHz on ANY CPU. So unless using the TR series, you are missing a huge point, which part of the appeal of Epyc is the lanes and memory channels. Until we know if the workstation boards overclock, you would need to wait for TR80, and that isn't guaranteed the same support.

    Further, Epyc is capped not be heat but by TDP envelope. By capping it to 250-285W, you slow it way down. If I'm pulling 325W+ on my 16-core doing 4.2, then creating a platform that can handle 1KW is not out of the question, so long as heat is taken care of.

    So you ignoring limitations of the server chips, instead saying it dynamically clocks, then using figures that NO EPYC CPU IS DESIGNED FOR, could also be said to be misplaced or misleading.
     
    tilleroftheearth and Papusan like this.
  9. rlk

    rlk Notebook Evangelist

    Reputations:
    132
    Messages:
    561
    Likes Received:
    292
    Trophy Points:
    76
    I don't see what that has to do with what I said, namely that at most it's actual clock speed, not overclocking, that matters. In reality, I think IPS or IPS/core is more important (and even that's complicated, with different instruction set extensions, instructions aren't all the same number of cycles).
     
    hmscott likes this.
  10. ajc9988

    ajc9988 Death by a thousand paper cuts

    Reputations:
    1,597
    Messages:
    5,815
    Likes Received:
    8,207
    Trophy Points:
    681
    When you are using the chip for replacing gaming PCs around the house, single threaded performance matters. Because IPC*frequency=IPS, having low frequency CAN AND WILL effect gaming performance. Now if playing 4K, the impact may be mitigated, but most still game at 1080p or 1440p for higher frame rates.

    So, going from 3.4 to 4GHz is an almost 20% jump in performance. Going to 4.3GHz, closer to what is seen on mainstream Ryzen, is 26.5% more performance. In other words, closer to what Zen 4 would have at these lower frequencies (Zen 4 may even be ahead of that figure). As such, even with Zen 2 being as good as it is, the CPU can act as a bottleneck for gaming purposes, and having all systems running on that one CPU, that matters.

    If we were purely talking compute workloads, encode and decode, etc., then it doesn't matter as much. Hell, the 64 core Epyc was shown to do near 8K in real-time on the frame rates it can achieve for h.265. That's incredible! But we are NOT talking about those workloads, now are we? Simple browsing tasks, office, etc., it is more than enough. But, because you are replacing all other systems, gaming does matter, and a 26.5% frequency reduction negates the IPC gain seen, if looking at moving individual gaming machines to a centralized system.

    As said, in 2 years, that won't matter. That alone is a crazy thought. And as software better utilizes cores and is less serialized, it also will make it matter less. But, for the moment, it matters.

    Do you yet understand what I'm saying, or do I need to go into more depth?

    Edit: mainstream chips are 26.5% faster, but it is 21% slower than mainstream chips. Not sure I used the correct ratio in all instances, so appending my comment here.
     
Loading...

Share This Page