Overclock.net banner

1 - 20 of 42 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
73 Posts
Discussion Starter #1 (Edited)


https://www.techpowerup.com/258739/amd-readies-three-hedt-chipsets-trx40-trx80-and-wrx80

AMD is preparing to surprise Intel with its 3rd generation Ryzen Threadripper processors derived from the "Rome" MCM (codenamed "Castle Peak" for the client-platform), that features up to 64 CPU cores, a monolithic 8-channel DDR4 memory interface, and 128 PCIe gen 4.0 lanes. For the HEDT platform, AMD could reconfigure the I/O controller die for two distinct sub-platforms within HEDT - one targeting gamers/enthusiasts, and another targeting the demographic that buys Xeon W processors, including the W-3175X.
Welp. If Intel doesn't counter with a reasonably priced Socket A LGA 3647 16 or 24 core (not a $3000+ 28 core), I might really go AMD this round.

:drool:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
539 Posts
It would be absolutely crazy if there going to be both cpus and motherboards for trx40 that cost the same or maybe slightly less than the upper end of x570 system.

Say a 12 core threadripper 3920x with a $300 trx40 board. Will that be possible?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
217 Posts
It would be absolutely crazy if there going to be both cpus and motherboards for trx40 that cost the same or maybe slightly less than the upper end of x570 system.

Say a 12 core threadripper 3920x with a $300 trx40 board. Will that be possible?
I think that TRX40 might just be exactly that. So low end boards for around $300 should be possible, like x299 really.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
73 Posts
Discussion Starter #4 (Edited)
TRX80 with 8 channels of memory and 128 pie lanes is crazy. I wonder if the 32 core version will perform good in games without having to enable game mode. similar to the current 2950x vs 2990wx.
 

·
Overclocking Enthusiast
Joined
·
5,970 Posts
Well I can't find a 3900x... I guess ill wait for Threadripper.
 

·
Hey I get one of these!
Joined
·
7,510 Posts
TRX80 with 8 channels of memory and 128 pie lanes is crazy. I wonder if the 32 core version will perform good in games without having to enable game mode. similar to the current 2950x vs 2990wx.
The issue with the 2990WX was that two of the dies did not have direct access to memory. Zen 2 chips (Ryzen 3000, Epyc 7002, and TR3) do not have this limitation due to the IO die design. A CPU with insanely high core counts will not be the best for gaming for many reasons, but it will not be crippled like the 2990WX was.

In theory, the only thing stopping a 32 or 64-core TR3 chip from performing exactly the same in games as a 3700X is power and thermal concerns.

--------------------------

....... X399 was insane. TRX40 is still insane.

TRX80 is.... wow. AMD wants intel to simply not exist in any segment. Jesus christ.

Also thank you for noting that the new chips will work in my X399 board, I don't need PCI-e 4.0 right now and 3200 14-14-14 should be fine, I'll just take the higher clocks and lower power consumption. Please still make a 16-core for us lowly plebs that can not afford a 64-core. (wow what a sentence to type! :D )
 
  • Rep+
Reactions: The Pook

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
6,587 Posts
It would be absolutely crazy if there going to be both cpus and motherboards for trx40 that cost the same or maybe slightly less than the upper end of x570 system.

Say a 12 core threadripper 3920x with a $300 trx40 board. Will that be possible?



Given the package size and inherent cost of it along with the larger IO die, I would not expect any CPU under 16 cores for the new threadrippers. I would bet the TRX40 platform will have 16, 24, 32 count processors available, while the TRX80 would support the same as well as 40, 48 56, and 64 count processors (or possibly removing the 40 and 56 count models to cut down on SKUs). Going in groups of 8 since each die is 8 cores, and all defective dies with less functional cores are most likely used for Ryzen processors.
I would also expect barebones base price MBs for this to start around $300-350, given the huge socket cost, the extra memory traces needed, and the extra routing of PCIE traces for additional lanes. Typical middle of the road boards will probably be $500-600 given the prices we are seeing for the 4.0 compatible boards already.
 

·
Debian Dude
Joined
·
2,184 Posts
The issue with the 2990WX was that two of the dies did not have direct access to memory. Zen 2 chips (Ryzen 3000, Epyc 7002, and TR3) do not have this limitation due to the IO die design. A CPU with insanely high core counts will not be the best for gaming for many reasons, but it will not be crippled like the 2990WX was.

In theory, the only thing stopping a 32 or 64-core TR3 chip from performing exactly the same in games as a 3700X is power and thermal concerns.

--------------------------

....... X399 was insane. TRX40 is still insane.

TRX80 is.... wow. AMD wants intel to simply not exist in any segment. Jesus christ.

Also thank you for noting that the new chips will work in my X399 board, I don't need PCI-e 4.0 right now and 3200 14-14-14 should be fine, I'll just take the higher clocks and lower power consumption. Please still make a 16-core for us lowly plebs that can not afford a 64-core. (wow what a sentence to type! :D )
This isn't an argument about anything you've said, but just for clarity: The sockets are SP3 (server) and TR4 (HEDT).
 

·
Hey I get one of these!
Joined
·
7,510 Posts
Given the package size and inherent cost of it along with the larger IO die, I would not expect any CPU under 16 cores for the new threadrippers. I would bet the TRX40 platform will have 16, 24, 32 count processors available, while the TRX80 would support the same as well as 40, 48 56, and 64 count processors (or possibly removing the 40 and 56 count models to cut down on SKUs). Going in groups of 8 since each die is 8 cores, and all defective dies with less functional cores are most likely used for Ryzen processors.
I would also expect barebones base price MBs for this to start around $300-350, given the huge socket cost, the extra memory traces needed, and the extra routing of PCIE traces for additional lanes. Typical middle of the road boards will probably be $500-600 given the prices we are seeing for the 4.0 compatible boards already.
Just so you are aware, not all Epyc 2 chips have all eight dies on them, or at least not all eight active.

https://wccftech.com/amd-epyc-rome-7nm-server-cpu-official-launch-64-core-128-thread-128-pcie-gen4/

256MB L3 is 8 die, 192MB is 6 die, 128MB is 4 die, and 64MB is 2 die. You'll also notice that EPYC 2 is available all the way down to 8 cores, and that they have several different configurations for the same core counts, like the $450 1P 8c/16t/64MB vs the $575 2P 8c/16t/128MB.

Either way they can still only operate at a minimum of a core disabled per CCX, NOT per CCD. In a 8-die chip they can only operate in 16/32/48/64, so a 40 or 56-core chip would not be possible. Same with the 6-die chips running in 12/24/48.

-------------

I dunno if I want a 2die or 4 die version of TR3's 16/32t chip.

On the one hand, 4 die (like the 7302P) is much less thermal density, more cache, and possibly better bined cores. On the other hand, more cores enabled per CCX (like the 7282) would be better for latency if all else is equal and lower power over all.

Clearly AMD believes that more dies and cache is better as they do charge more for them, but my desktop workload doesn't overlap much with my server workloads. Hmm...

This isn't an argument about anything you've said, but just for clarity: The sockets are SP3 (server) and TR4 (HEDT).
Yup.

To clarify my post; TR3 = Threadripper 3000 series.

AMD did not make this easy on us. Ryzen vs Zen, TR4 for the TR socket, "Ryzen 3" vs Ryzen 3/5/7. Confusion everywhere.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,440 Posts
i cant wait for my computer to blow up so i have to buy a new computer
 
  • Rep+
Reactions: ozlay

·
Invalid Media
Joined
·
2,162 Posts
Oh dear...upgrading my current 2950X is going to be an interesting question if I decide to do so, as I really like it the way it is. I went for the 16c 2950X because of the memory access config in the (current) 32c 2990 WX. A next-gen 32c - as far as I understand it - would not have the same issues, and fit perfectly into my existing X399 (sig) rig after a Bios / driver update. Or would it, re X399 and memory config ?

The 32c (= 4x highly binned 3700/3800x) could be the sweet-spot re. power and thermals...if/when there is a core count (ie 64c) coming for 'Pro-sumers', apart from the need for the t/wrx chipset mobo, providing enough power (w/ 2x GPUs) and cooling for such a monster even with a modest oc might be quite a challenge.
 

·
Overclocking Enthusiast
Joined
·
5,970 Posts
Why can't they mix die sizes? So 2x 4c dies and 2x 6c dies 20c/40t?
 

·
LTSC for life crew
Joined
·
2,890 Posts
TRX80 is wow.... just bonkers in the best way possible. 32 or more cores of sweet dominating goodness. I may have to pick one up for myself.

And those PCIe lanes are going up, up, up. Nothing wrong with that :D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,968 Posts
Intel is game over.


And probably so in the next 24 months.
 

·
mfw
Joined
·
8,641 Posts
TRX80 is wow.... just bonkers in the best way possible. 32 or more cores of sweet dominating goodness. I may have to pick one up for myself.

And those PCIe lanes are going up, up, up. Nothing wrong with that :D
I wouldn't mind seeing gaming benchmarks on these, just out of curiosity. Probably no different from a 3900X, but it would be funny to see thrown at games such an overkill core count with 8 channel memory.
 

·
FinsUp!
Joined
·
2,227 Posts
TRX80 does look insane. These board prices will be out of this world for AMD. Still looking forward to it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
808 Posts
Castle Peak, great name. Much better than Cascade Lake. Intel needs some new naming conventions.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,330 Posts
Intel is game over.


And probably so in the next 24 months.
No, but I can't wait to upgrade my 1950x :D

Competition is good, so hoping for cheaper high end hardware :)
 

·
Linux Lobbyist
Joined
·
3,743 Posts
@thread

One area where AMD really needs to step up is in its marketing of Threadripper. People are/were building EPYC-based workstations for professional use, when they could have been using Threadripper instead, but I suspect it's because

a) The "gaming" look of marketed Threadripper solutions e.g. Alienware
b) Uncertainty of ECC memory support
c) failure to get the likes of Dell, HP and Lenovo on-board with more serious-looking solutions.

I have no idea if these issues have all been ironed out, but to my mind they were very damaging to the Threadripper marketing image.
 

·
Hey I get one of these!
Joined
·
7,510 Posts
@thread

One area where AMD really needs to step up is in its marketing of Threadripper. People are/were building EPYC-based workstations for professional use, when they could have been using Threadripper instead, but I suspect it's because

a) The "gaming" look of marketed Threadripper solutions e.g. Alienware
b) Uncertainty of ECC memory support
c) failure to get the likes of Dell, HP and Lenovo on-board with more serious-looking solutions.

I have no idea if these issues have all been ironed out, but to my mind they were very damaging to the Threadripper marketing image.
Why would AMD want people to buy Threadripper instead of Epyc? If they buy AMD at all, AMD is happy.
 
1 - 20 of 42 Posts
Top