AMD Ryzen Threadripper 7000 Series Lineup Revealed

Lakados said:
...I just fear the price tag on the memory modules that sits along side them.
Click to expand...

You can say that again.

My "home production server" has 256GB of Registered DDR3 in it right now which I got a good deal on years ago, and I dobt think I can use less thab that for my application now.

Memory cost is the biggest reason why I've stayed on Xeon v2's for my server for years, rather than upgrading. The price tag for 256+GB of Registered DDR4 was, well, off-putting....

If not for memory, I probably would have upgraded the server 5 years ago.
 
Zarathustra[H] said:
You can say that again.

My "home production server" has 256GB of Registered DDR3 in it right now which I got a good deal on years ago, and I dobt think I can use less thab that for my application now.

Memory cost is the biggest reason why I've stayed on Xeon v2's for my server for years, rather than upgrading. The price tag for 256+GB of Registered DDR4 was, well, off-putting....

If not for memory, I probably would have upgraded the server 5 years ago.
Click to expand...

On Ebay 4x 32 GB DDR4 ECC registered cost about $110 in auctions now.
 
uOpt said:
On Ebay 4x 32 GB DDR4 ECC registered cost about $110 in auctions now.
Click to expand...

I guess I haven't actually checked in about a year now. That is a lot more reasonable than it used to be.

Maybe now is the time.

Of course, then there is the question if buying a metric ton of DDR4 is the thing to do in a world that has moved on to DDR5 :p
 
Second hand DDR4 isn’t terrible at the moment. DDR5 on the other hand…
Is actually better than I feared.
 
Lakados said:
Second hand DDR4 isn’t terrible at the moment. DDR5 on the other hand…
Is actually better than I feared.
Click to expand...

Well, DDR4 unbuffered ECC is still expensive, at least 2x of registered. That is one reason why I am excited that non-Pro Threadripper is using registered RAM. When that RAM hits the used market it will probably be as cheap as DDR4 registered now.
 
uOpt said:
Well, DDR4 unbuffered ECC is still expensive, at least 2x of registered. That is one reason why I am excited that non-Pro Threadripper is using registered RAM. When that RAM hits the used market it will probably be as cheap as DDR4 registered now.
Click to expand...

Are they able to also use unbuffered RAM? If not, I suspect you might find mixed opinions on this. Many who buy these chips as a god mode desktop might be annoyed at the extra latency (and thus performance drop) that registered RAM implies. Though, IMHO that is more than made up for by the fact that it is quad channel rather than dual channel like the consumer stuff.

Personally, when I see what availability of parts, motherboards and pricing look like, I am considering a 24 core or lower Threadripper PRO, then loading it with 8x channels of Registered ECC RAM. Should still provide WAY more RAM bandwidth than unbuffered non-ECC dual channel does :p
 
Zarathustra[H] said:
Are they able to also use unbuffered RAM? If not, I suspect you might find mixed opinions on this. Many who buy these chips as a god mode desktop might be annoyed at the extra latency (and thus performance drop) that registered RAM implies. Though, IMHO that is more than made up for by the fact that it is quad channel rather than dual channel like the consumer stuff.
Click to expand...

In the DDR5 world registered and unbuffered RAM are not compatible anymore, they don't physically fit. So high-speed or gaming RAM in a Threadripper is not going to happen anymore. Sorry.

But supposedly there is (registered) RAM overclocking in the new Xeons and I guess in Threadripper, too.

8 modules of DDR5 registered will be pretty expensive for now.
 
uOpt said:
In the DDR5 world registered and unbuffered RAM are not compatible anymore, they don't physically fit. So high-speed or gaming RAM in a Threadripper is not going to happen anymore. Sorry.

But supposedly there is (registered) RAM overclocking in the new Xeons and I guess in Threadripper, too.
Click to expand...


Well, that's a shame.

It feels like at every turn modern tech is breaking more and more of the universal compatibility we take for granted, and that is a huge leap backwards.

I guess the only positive side of this is that my server can inherit my Desktop RAM 6 years down the road when it makes the move to DDR5 :p (but at that point, 128GB will likely be wholly inadequate anyway)

There is no winning at this game.
 
Last edited:
uOpt said:
8 modules of DDR5 registered will be pretty expensive for now.
Click to expand...

I was looking up just how expensive this might be, and it appears the price is being artificially increased by the fact that the smallest module size (at least right now) is 16GB.

I wouldn't need more than 64GB. A 4x16GB kit can be had for ~$320,, but that is for some really slow DDR5-4800. A 4x16GB kit at a more reasonable DDR5-6400 seems to run about $500. If 8GB modules existed, I bet I could get 8x8GB for about $600 - $650, but instead, since they don't, you have to jump all the way to 128GB (8x16GB) in order to use all channels, and the cheapest one on Newegg right now, again DDR5-4800, is $639. Want something closer to desktop speeds, and that is going to be a grand or more.

That said, you might be able to get away with the slower stuff, since you have four times the RAM channels. I have no idea how real world performance will be impacted by trading off RAM latency and lower individual clock speeds for more channels though. If I had to guess, pretty good for highly threaded loads. Probably less so for less threaded loads.

I wonder if 8GB registered DDR5 modules will ever become a thing, or if they just decided they would never be needed.
 
Last edited:
uOpt said:
I built a Xeon v4 (DDR4) system because of this. 384 GB on the cheap :)
Click to expand...
I actually bought/traded for 768 GB worth of DDR4 RDIMMs packed in a Lenovo x3650 M5, and since said server has now bricked itself, I'm contemplating a move to another dual LGA2011-3 system with 24 DIMM slots just so I can keep all of that RAM, never mind that the CPUs get trounced by modern ones.

Seriously, that 768 GB worth of 32 GB RDIMMs cost less than it would for me to max out my Threadripper 1950X build with 256 GB ECC UDIMMs, while including a whole 2U server at that - that's just how absurd the price disparity is when you can't use server RAM and insist on ECC.

At least that won't be a problem with the new sTR5 Threadripper systems, given enough time for DDR5 RDIMMs to drop in price.
 
pututu said:
theFPSreview on Threadripper Pro 7995WX 96-core system. https://www.thefpsreview.com/2023/1...-hits-over-100000-in-cinebench-r23-benchmark/
Click to expand...
So now when Cinebench starts, you can see your lights in the room dim, no different when the fuser heaters of the giant HP 8 series workgroup laser come to life when it wakes up! 🙃

Pretty soon even modest homes normally served with 200A service now need 800A service to accommodate high powered gaming systems, HEDT systems, multi thousand watt HT systems, and level 2 EV chargers! ;-)
 
Threadripper Pro 7995WX and windows task manager with 192 threads

AMD-Ryzen-Threadripper-Pro-7995WX-Windows-Task-Manager-1536x921.png
 
cpufrost said:
you can see your lights in the room dim
Click to expand...
Not sure if it is respected, but it has an extremely reasonable 350w TDP, not that different than a RTX 3080 or 6800xt playing a game (or a 13900ks running cinebench)
 
The you can put pro threadripper in the non-pro motherboard make a lot of sense technological wise but I am not sure how attractive it will be. At least if you buy the TRX50 it does augment the chance that you will be able one day to get a cpu upgrade by a lot (make it virtually certain this time).
 
LukeTbk said:
The you can put pro threadripper in the non-pro motherboard make a lot of sense technological wise but I am not sure how attractive it will be. At least if you buy the TRX50 it does augment the chance that you will be able one day to get a cpu upgrade by a lot (make it virtually certain this time).
Click to expand...
Attractive from a technical standpoint not really but a financial one hell yeah it is.
These boards are already low volume high cost parts that they will sell exceedingly few of, in comparison to other ranges. Imagine the AIB’s distain if they had to separate both Pro and non-Pro alike, they’d bench it or price it so badly that nobody would pay for it.
I’m honestly surprised as many AIBs are launching boards as they are, MSI not putting one out is not a shock at all though, they went all in on the previous Threadripper launch and got hung out to dry.
 
Lakados said:
Attractive from a technical standpoint not really but a financial one hell yeah it is.
Click to expand...
Not so sure there a lot of I want 96 core but not the 8 channel of ram scenario out there (or paying the big price for a 64 core pro threadripper instead of the 64 core non pro to put it in a 4 ram channel board...).

Lakados said:
Imagine the AIB’s distain if they had to separate both Pro and non-Pro alike
Click to expand...
They are 2 different socket and the pro board will only work with the pro threadripper cpu, maybe I am missing what you are saying here.
 
LukeTbk said:
Not so sure there a lot of I want 96 core but not the 8 channel of ram scenario out there (or paying the big price for a 64 core pro threadripper instead of the 64 core non pro to put it in a 4 ram channel board...).
Click to expand...

I will be watching for benchmarks running a Pro CPU in 8-channel and 4-channel mode.

There will be plenty of applications with little difference.
 
Last edited:
LukeTbk said:
Not so sure there a lot of I want 96 core but not the 8 channel of ram scenario out there (or paying the big price for a 64 core pro threadripper instead of the 64 core non pro to put it in a 4 ram channel board...).


They are 2 different socket and the pro board will only work with the pro threadripper cpu, maybe I am missing what you are saying here.
Click to expand...
Yea I didn’t phrase it well.
I suspect there are as many 96 core/4 channel users as there 16 core/8 channel users.
I thought it was the same socket just different chipsets, the Pro’s just have some additional pins or maybe the non pro’s have dead pins not sure.
this platform is just weird to me.
I don’t like how they separated pro and non pro, the non pro should just be Threadripper and the Pro should have been a tier of Epyc. Maybe Epyc-W and borrow one of the less insane naming conventions from Intel.

At least it’s no longer a Lenovo only thing for OEMs
 
uOpt said:
I will be watching for benchmarks running a Pro CPU in 8-channel and 4-channel mode.

There will be plenty of applications with little difference.
Click to expand...

I will not be watching for benchmarks as I do not need any of these.

Unfortunately I am also an idiot and I will be purchasing one of these for my research into being an idiot.
 
uOpt said:
I will be watching for benchmarks running a Pro CPU in 8-channel and 4-channel mode.

There will be plenty of applications with little difference.
Click to expand...

My understanding is that with DDR5 you can no longer integrate fully buffered and unregistered DIMM's on the same board, so non-pro models will be unregistered, and Pro models will be registered only. So with 8 channel you'll also have to factor in buffer/ECC latency. I don't know enough about how latency vs bandwidth will play out, but it will be interesting.

Another side effect of this is that populating all 8 channels with registered memory will be pricy, and probably give most folks more RAM than they really need or want on the desktop.
 
Zarathustra[H] said:
My understanding is that with DDR5 you can no longer integrate fully buffered and unregistered DIMM's on the same board, so non-pro models will be unregistered, and Pro models will be registered only. So with 8 channel you'll also have to factor in buffer/ECC latency. I don't know enough about how latency vs bandwidth will play out, but it will be interesting.

Another side effect of this is that populating all 8 channels with registered memory will be pricy, and probably give most folks more RAM than they really need or want on the desktop.
Click to expand...

My understanding was they are all going to be RDIMM. It’s just 4 channel vs 8 channel support.
 
Zarathustra[H] said:
My understanding is that with DDR5 you can no longer integrate fully buffered and unregistered DIMM's on the same board, so non-pro models will be unregistered, and Pro models will be registered only. So with 8 channel you'll also have to factor in buffer/ECC latency. I don't know enough about how latency vs bandwidth will play out, but it will be interesting.

Another side effect of this is that populating all 8 channels with registered memory will be pricy, and probably give most folks more RAM than they really need or want on the desktop.
Click to expand...

No, the non-Pro are using registered RAM.

The DIMM sockets are physically different now between RDIMM and UDIMM, so you cannot make one mainboard that can take either.
 
What I want to know is given the clock speed of a 7970x you think it could game?
 
MrCaffeineX said:
New CPU or a new-to-me used car? Decisions, decisions...
Click to expand...
I'm considering to drop $76K on a mini Excavator. AMD can keep thier CPU. Get a car. Screw a stupid cpu. Unless it makes you money. Them you're in a pickle of a decision
 
uOpt said:
The DIMM sockets are physically different now between RDIMM and UDIMM, so you cannot make one mainboard that can take either.
Click to expand...
This sounds like the kind of thing someone with access to CAD software and a commercial PCB fab would see as a challenge.
 
Lakados said:
What I want to know is given the clock speed of a 7970x you think it could game?
Click to expand...

I bet it will do just fine. It says it boosts up to 5.3 Ghz. With a game that will only really heat up a small number of cores, I bet it will boost those cores just fine (as long as you aren't running too much shit in the background) I'm thinking it would compare to a 7800x3d. I mean, the Threadrippers have a huge L3 cache, so there is at least some comparison there. And the 7800x3d only boosts up to 5.0. Heck, if it hits full boost, it may even outperform the 7800x3d, as long as it doesn't choke on all the different chiplets and interconnects.
 
uOpt said:
No, the non-Pro are using registered RAM.

The DIMM sockets are physically different now between RDIMM and UDIMM, so you cannot make one mainboard that can take either.
Click to expand...

Oh, they are both registered. Scratch that then.
 
1_rick said:
This sounds like the kind of thing someone with access to CAD software and a commercial PCB fab would see as a challenge.
Click to expand...
I'm sure Nick at Asrock was playing around with it lol, he did get lrdimms to work on x299.
 
staknhalo said:
I like cores 👍
Click to expand...

85w0e6.jpg


No way I need something like this. I would never take advantage of it. But, I really want it. I'd be running so many things that I didn't need or would even utilize, but I'd have a real kick ass virtualization box with dozens of VM's just sitting there idle. :)

I do see some old 10+ year old Xeons and such for affordable prices. Maybe in a decade I'll pick one of these up from a surplus shop getting rid of old servers... Won't be as useful then, and efficiency will probably be crap compared to 2034 CPU's, but it'd still be fun to play with.

I wish I could recommend them for our work. Get 6 or so machines going to ditch our outdated Cisco UCS stuff. :)
 
staknhalo said:
I like cores 👍
Click to expand...

For me it's all about the PCIe lanes.

I don't need more than at most 8 cores on my desktop. I'd probably go for 12-16 just to have room to grow, but these beastly high cure count models are just wasted on me.

Give me all these PCIe lanes on a 7800x3D and If be happy :p
 
Zarathustra[H] said:
For me it's all about the PCIe lanes.

I don't need more than at most 8 cores on my desktop. I'd probably go for 12-16 just to have room to grow, but these beastly high cure count models are just wasted on me.

Give me all these PCIe lanes on a 7800x3D and If be happy :p
Click to expand...
I need memory channels, 3 maybe 4 of the 7975wx units would cover my needs nicely.
I need to look more into switch less networking though, I would need each of them direct connected, the aggregator switches to cover the load of 4 of them would not be something I’d want to pay for.
 
uOpt said:
What is this "need" thing you speak of?
Click to expand...
In my case I have a good dozen VMs running at any time that require dedicated CPU cores, not because their workloads are heavy but because you can't over-provision VMs that have heavy networking requirements because it can cause packet collision and for say a telephone system or a network monitor that is just a bad day in the making.
So my current EPYCs have the VM's CPU and Memory at ~80% consumption respectively (52 cores assigned of 64, and 216GB of 256GB RAM assigned), but average something like 15% CPU load... It's very sad.

For that reason, I would love an all Zen-C core EPYC (or Threadripper Pro) that gave me the 64 cores/threads I need in each rig and the memory channels but was small and not overly power-hungry.
I would go with the Xeon all E-core systems that are available as that would also do the job, but I have 2 systems that would be stupidly expensive to transfer to a different hardware set, I can move it from AMD to AMD and not relicense it because I can spoof what I need to spoof, but if I go from AMD to Intel I will need to relicense it and that is a cool $100K by the time I have it all back online.
 
Yeah, VMs are a good use case.

In my case it is compiling (open source) software. Compiling all of FreeBSD with itself or compiling the Linux kernel often can really use cores. I will not fork out my own money for a brand new TR system, though.

Many slow cores I have in an 48-core system, but it isn't quite good for me. In between all that compilation there are fat linking processes going single core. I don't want to wait for those, especially not when I do incremental changes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top