Threadripper 7000 isn’t dissimilar from the RTX 4090. Professionals who need that extra power for transcoding and rendering will easily make the money back compared to a typical consumer CPU, and you can easily split up the cores into virtual machines to give a high-performance CPU to multiple PCs. That comes at a huge cost, but there are applications for a massive core array in a desktop. They are compatible with TRX50 motherboards, offering up to 96 cores in a desktop that you can build yourself. AMD is even going further by selling its Threadripper 7000 Pro CPUs this way. You can go to a Micro Center or Newegg and just buy the processor like you would an Intel Core or AMD Ryzen CPU, along with the correct motherboard. That’s not the case with Threadripper 7000. If you want to get one directly, to build your own PC as you see fit, you’ll need to get a direct quote, and that’s before we deal with getting a motherboard. They’re only sold through resellers at high markups through marketplaces like Newegg, or relegated to workstations through manufacturers like Lenovo and Dell. Intel has its Xeon chips, and AMD has kept at it with its Epyc CPUs, but you’d have a hard time actually buying either. The fact that Threadripper 7000 is available makes it important. It would happen in the data center, behind closed doors. That core count race wouldn’t happen on a table surrounded by enthusiasts looking to applaud a new Cinebench record. It was a core count race between AMD and Intel, but by the time 2020 rolled around, both companies had lost their mettle. This is the most recent era of HEDT, but the history of the enthusiast desktop goes back to the early 2000s. These are the norm now, but in 2017, you couldn’t get that kind of multi-core muscle outside of enterprise contracts and pricey wholesalers. AMD launched Threadripper in lockstep, promising 16 desktop cores. At the time, you could get a staggering 18 cores in a desktop processor for a clean $2,000. Intel introduced its X-series processors about six years ago. Best by default Jacob Roach / Digital Trends Given what’s available now - what you can go to a retailer or website and actually buy - Threadripper 7000 is still in a league of its own. It’s not a fair fight, but Threadripper 7000 doesn’t need a fair fight. The Threadripper 7970X scales higher than the Threadripper 3995WX here, showing how much faster Zen 4 is than the Zen 2 architecture that chip uses. You can see those performance gains in Geekbench 5’s multi-core test, as well. That 3995WX is a 64-core processor, though, meaning the Threadripper 7970X can achieve the same performance with half of the cores. The Threadripper 7970X matches the Threadripper 3995WX inside the Lenovo Thinkstation P620, which looks disappointing at first glance. In Cinebench R23’s multi-core test, the Threadripper 7970X is 58% faster than the AMD Ryzen 9 7950X, while the Threadripper 7980X is an insane 147% faster. These come with 160MB and 320MB of cache, respectively, a total power draw of 350 watts, and the Zen 4 architecture that shows up in consumer chips like the Ryzen 9 7950X. I tested two parts: the 32-core Threadripper 7970X and the 64-core Threadripper 7980X. You can look at a spec sheet and see that AMD’s Threadripper 7000 CPUs are fast, but it’s important to put those numbers in context. The case for XR at work isn’t going away just yet An expert told me the surprising reason why I’m glad GTA 6 isn’t coming to PC right awayīrighter isn’t better for OLED monitors.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |