AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1900X CPU Review

[PaulAlcorn]

... comments such as, "But 1900X just isn't much more compelling than Ryzen 7 1800X, ...", make no sense at all. Ditto, "... so professionals on the hunt for overall performance may favor Intel's Skylake-X chip.", when there were no relevant use cases even tested. ...

Pretty much this. But, Anandtech to the rescue (kinda) ..

Though - it might be for a good reason. Ryzen DT gives Chipzilla HEDT (KL-X, SL-X, BW-E, HW-E) a good run for the money, and AMD X-399 HEDT blows-up Intel's X-299 price structure and HEDT going forward.

The link to AnandTech includes many of the same tests we ran, in fact, we have every one of those tests. However, their tests don't include the 1900X.

 

[PaulAlcorn]

This site is aimed mainly at gamers, so it makes sense to base the conclusion on gaming performance. ...

Even though the article opens by stating the product isn't aimed at gamers. Without the context of the conclusion itself being solely aimed at gamers, comments such as, "But 1900X just isn't much more compelling than Ryzen 7 1800X, ...", make no sense at all. Ditto, "... so professionals on the hunt for overall performance may favor Intel's Skylake-X chip.", when there were no relevant use cases even tested. Also, "Thus, we aren't particularly attracted to Threadripper 1900X."; who's the "we" here? Gamers? The conclusion section doesn't state this, it reads like an overall conclusion. I note my earlier post had several down votes; anyone care to respond with actual arguments as opposed to an easy page click? There are some very sensible use cases for this CPU, but the article reads like it's a pointless product because it's so focused on gaming, while talking about a product the article intro says isn't aimed at gamers. No 4K, no multi-GPU, no pro tasks that can exploit what the product can really to those for whom it's a very good fit indeed.

Ian.

The article isn't entirely focused on gaming, we ran 3x more application tests than games. Also, we have numerous efficiency charts for applications in the conclusion.

Yes, it would be better if we could test with four GPUs for certain workloads, but unfortunately I don't have four of them to test with.

 

[adhsmith]

The article isn't entirely focused on gaming, we ran 3x more application tests than games. Also, we have numerous efficiency charts for applications in the conclusion.

Yes, it would be better if we could test with four GPUs for certain workloads, but unfortunately I don't have four of them to test with.

chip seems fine for gaming to me, think the article misses a mode that makes more sense than loosing cores on the 1900x

Leaving Legacy mode on for game tests, from my experience is the wrong thing to do for games, I know this is AMDs game mode but having tested in a few games working out where best to leave my TR machine, all cores and local RAM seems the sweet spot, might be different for the 32 thread monster.

Below are some results from my machine, tried to match articles settings when possible and chose similar for other titles, don't have all games unfortunately and only a few have benchmarks.

Averages of 3 test run to try and balance out the super high first run vs when the 1080 has warmed up and reduced clocks, Assetto Corsa game mode was done after I had been out a while so machine quite cold which might have lead to its boost.

 

[mapesdhs]

You really asking for proof that faster RAM is neccessary for Zen? LOL there's like a bagillion of them on the Internet.

Read my post; I asked for proof that RAM speed matters for those use cases where ECC is important, because it really doesn't. Such tasks typically need quantity, not speed.

The article isn't entirely focused on gaming, ...

It mostly is though (indeed the above wording confirms this! ), and as I say the article even starts off by saying the product isn't even aimed at gamers, yet there are lots of gaming test pages, those pages come first, and genuinely relevant use cases for the product are not tested at all. The conclusion is from a gamer's perspective, for a product not aimed at that market. Makes no sense. "isn't entirely focused" = mostly is focused.

Really, this should have been done on the Pro site with more relevant tests.

Ian.