[boed]

Hello,

I'm ignorant about the threadripper. Can someone tell me why people don't use threadripper for gaming? Are they slower or more expensive or is there some other reason. I"m curious and thought I'd ask. I've bought far more intel than AMD over the years but am always willing to switch back if there is a good reason that goes beyond emotion.

 

[mattliston]

Have you looked at the price of threadripper?

 

[Redwoodz]

Most games can't even use all of the threads.

 

[NattyKathy]

For gaming, a Threadripper 5000 will perform the same or worse as any other Ryzen 5000-series CPU and will be outclassed by Ryzen 7000 and Intel 12th / 13th Gen. They're not gaming CPUs.

Aside from the super high price and TR giving up a lot in peak clock speeds, games generally don't like being split across multiple CCDs- they'll lose some scaling or even exhibit negative scaling if the thread assignment ends up really bad. Not that most games even use enough threads to require using more than one CCD! The lack of high core count utilization in games also means that the extra memory channels of TR won't really do anything

Spoiler: weird edge case speculation

The only gaming scenario I can conceive of that might benefit from TR is Cyberpunk 2077 with lots of mods, I know from my own testing that game sees positive scaling going from 6 -> 8 -> 12 core Zen3 at same clocks but loses scaling going from 12c-> 16c due to memory bandwidth bottlenecking. So conceivably a 16 or 24-core TR could, in that one specific game, using improbable traffic density levels, see a benefit from running quad or octal-channel memory compared to a Ryzen 5900X / 5950X with "only" dual-channel DDR. Maybe. And even in that one case, Zen4X3D and Raptor Lake would be better choices.

 

[boed]

Have you looked at the price of threadripper?

Years ago - nothing recent. I was hoping to get up to speed quickly on the pluses and minuses.

HOLY SH!!... I just looked up the 5940 - I see now why they aren't discussed!

 

[boed]

Natty - thanks for the detailed answer!

 

[mattliston]

Threadripper is basically the HEDT option that is borderline enterprise only at this point.

It was a great entrance with the TR 19xx chips, and they truly had a performance advantage over the 1st gen Ryzen chips when clocks were matched up. Pitiful ram speed limits were temporarily helped with the extra memory channels, and being able to run slow but tight timing quad channel kept system responsiveness very acceptable.

Heck, the meme PC that LTT built is still funny, and capable, even today. TR 1920 with a GTX 1080, and fantastic, ironically, for 1080p gameplay resolution. Overpriced, but fun.

 

[Blameless]

Are they slower or more expensive

Twelve times the cost for 80% of the gaming performance.

 

[Paradigm Shifter]

Before Zen 4 landed, the Threadripper Pro chips weren't really worse than the desktop chips - below a lower base clock and boost clocks, but they still boost a long way with adequate cooling. They were just really astonishingly expensive. Thing is, what Threadripper Pro was released for was basically those people who need massive memory bandwidth and a ton of PCI-E lanes but don't need the fun and aural assault of having a 2U server with 8,000RPM fans screaming at them in the same room (trust me, it ain't fun). You want to stuff 7 NVMe SSDs and six GPUs into a Fractal Design R7 (XL) with half a terabyte of RAM? Threadripper Pro has you covered. You want to squeak out every last frame-per-second possible in a game where they main loop is single threaded? You're better off looking for an X3D or Zen 4 CPU (if you want AMD).

The fact it was a bit late to actual availability didn't help matters. SARS-CoV-2 and the worldwide response to the same sent prices and availability haywire. Since the 5995WX launched, it's been cheaper for me here to buy a 2U server with dual 32-core Epyc CPUs rather than one 64-core and motherboard... and the 2U server came with... well, the case as well. That only changed a short while ago.

 

[LazyGamer]

To add to what @Paradigm Shifter said above about Threadripper Pro, the issue is that AMD killed Threadripper non-Pro, which was their HEDT line. They pissed off quite a few folks with that move, ranging from vocal enthusiasts all the way up to LTT, who was using the Zen 2 Threadrippers on their workstations and were vocal about AMD promising further releases and then not following through.

That's not to say that AMD couldn't do another Threadripper with Zen 4. Quad-channel DDR5 and likely 40+ PCIe lanes* could be attractive if at least one of the CCDs has 3D V-cache, and given that Threadripper and Epyc are already on LGA sockets, they might even be able to get clockspeeds up to a similar territory seen in the desktop Ryzen SKUs.

Only problem they have is that Intel is bringing HEDT back already, with a similar platform and all P-core CPUs, which will likely be more attractive for anyone interested in gaming in addition to whatever other work that pushed their purchase decision toward HEDT.

(*I have no idea how many PCIe lanes a Zen 4-based Threadripper might have, could be a lot more than 40)

 

[Paradigm Shifter]

Agreed, @LazyGamer.

I just shrugged and assumed that AMD saw the mystical dollar signs in their eyes with their treatment of Threadripper as they release TR Pro.

A Zen 4, 3D VCache Threadripper (even with just quad channel memory) and enough PCI-E lanes for, say, 4 x16 slots and 4 x4 (for NVMe) would be rather nice.

I wouldn't be too worried (if that's the right word) with Intel's return to HEDT. Both the 2400 and 3400 chips require ECC-RDIMM DDR5, and the 2400 chips will only be able to use half the RAM slots according to the Asus W790 manual as each slot is a separate memory channel, of which the 2400 only has four. I dunno what their cheaper CPUs will cost on that platform but it's looking like an expensive buy in regardless of the CPU you drop in the board.

(As an aside, AMD has been on LGA in the server space since socket G34, which was released in 2010 IIRC, so they've had a fair amount of experience).

 

[boed]

Lazy - thanks - I would like a good gaming PC with more PCIE lanes but as you say I don't want to pay crazy prices for the equipment. Prices on things have gone up enough!

 

[ZealotKi11er]

I think because the architecture. Its still just 8 Core CCD. Not sure if the I/O die interconnects are faster than in Ryzen.

 

[ozlay]

(As an aside, AMD has been on LGA in the server space since socket G34, which was released in 2010 IIRC, so they've had a fair amount of experience).

You forgot about socket F. Which was released in 2006.

I believe socket F came out the same year as Socket 771. So AMD has been doing LGA in the server space just as long as intel. However the consumer socket 775 came out in 2004.

 

[GRABibus]

Hello,

I'm ignorant about the threadripper. Can someone tell me why people don't use threadripper for gaming? Are they slower or more expensive or is there some other reason. I"m curious and thought I'd ask. I've bought far more intel than AMD over the years but am always willing to switch back if there is a good reason that goes beyond emotion.

Because it is not a gaming CPU.

 

[LazyGamer]

I wouldn't be too worried (if that's the right word) with Intel's return to HEDT. Both the 2400 and 3400 chips require ECC-RDIMM DDR5, and the 2400 chips will only be able to use half the RAM slots according to the Asus W790 manual as each slot is a separate memory channel, of which the 2400 only has four. I dunno what their cheaper CPUs will cost on that platform but it's looking like an expensive buy in regardless of the CPU you drop in the board.

Honestly, for what gets put on HEDT boards, they just don't seem expensive relative to your average ( /s ) Godlike or Extreme. Less bling, more functionality. Since they're already releasing ECC-RDIMM DDR5 in high speed bins, I don't foresee quad-channel being a limitation either really. We're talking absurd levels of bandwidth here, and if you genuinely need more bandwidth (or more capacity), there's SKUs for that too.

 

[Paradigm Shifter]

You forgot about socket F. Which was released in 2006.

I believe socket F came out the same year as Socket 771. So AMD has been doing LGA in the server space just as long as intel. However the consumer socket 775 came out in 2004.

You're right, I did forget!

Honestly, for what gets put on HEDT boards, they just don't seem expensive relative to your average ( /s ) Godlike or Extreme. Less bling, more functionality. Since they're already releasing ECC-RDIMM DDR5 in high speed bins, I don't foresee quad-channel being a limitation either really. We're talking absurd levels of bandwidth here, and if you genuinely need more bandwidth (or more capacity), there's SKUs for that too.

IMO, that's profiteering on the part of the mobo manufacturers - the top end boards didn't used to be that expensive, but still had what was (at the time) top-end options on integrated components. I remember the sticker shock I got when I bought an X99 Rampage V Extreme...

Comparatively, workstation/server boards have always been crazy prices. When I put together four quad-socket G34 boards, the motherboards were the most expensive part! (Although admittedly I did get the CPUs second hand...)

 

[mattliston]

Dont forget, todays motherboard prices are influenced by chip shortages, and new tech. The licensing fees for PCIE 4.0 and 5.0 are sky high, compared to PCIE 3.0, which has been the longest around.

X99 boards are STILL expensive for the age, and what they can do in comparison. Makes more sense to build dual socket C602 boards versus the consumer side X99 boards. Heck, I paid $100 for a chinese dual socket x99 board, and it runs my pair of 14 core chips pretty darn solid for the price.

 

[LazyGamer]

IMO, that's profiteering on the part of the mobo manufacturers - the top end boards didn't used to be that expensive, but still had what was (at the time) top-end options on integrated components. I remember the sticker shock I got when I bought an X99 Rampage V Extreme...

To wit, I pulled out my last board, a Z390 Taichi Ultimate - and lamented that it has the same (or better) featureset as my Z690 MEG ACE, but at less than half the MSRP. But once you've considered one of the higher-end boards (for whatever reason), well, these 'workstation' SKUs just don't seem that expensive anymore.

 

[fastturtle]

Simply put, TR offers absolutely no benefit over a Basic Epyc Workstation Build. I was able to put together a list from Newegg for a SuperMicro board, 7232P Epyc (8c/16t) along with 256GB of SuperMicro ECC memory for $1000 USD while any of the TR builds would have cost over $5000 USD for the board/cpu/memory.