Thursday, October 17th 2019
AMD Ryzen Threadripper 3960X a 24-core Chip the Range Starts With
With its 3rd generation Ryzen Threadripper "Castle Peak" HEDT processor family, AMD isn't bothering with 16-core models as the company's mainstream desktop socket AM4 platform already offers those many cores with the upcoming Ryzen 9 3950X. The lineup will begin with the Ryzen Threadripper 3960X, which is the 24-core/48-thread part. The model number "3950X" is already taken up by the 16-core socket AM4 chip. Confirmation of this came from an "Ashes of the Singularity" screenshot that references an "AMD Ryzen Threadripper 3960X 24-core Processor."
AMD's decision to start the lineup at 24 cores is interesting, as it looks to keep up its competitiveness against Intel, which recently launched its 10th generation "Cascade Lake-X" Core i9 HEDT processor series, with all parts priced under $1000, including the range-topping 18-core/36-thread one. It remains to be seen if the Threadripper 3960X can beat it while holding onto a sub-$1,000 price. The previous-generation 24-core 2970WX beat the i9-9980XE in some rendering and simulation tests that scaled with cores and which weren't too heavy on memory bandwidth. With its 3rd generation Threadripper series, AMD is eliminating a key memory bottleneck, giving each core on the chip an equal access to the processor's monolithic quad-channel memory interface.
The 3rd generation Ryzen Threadripper processor is expected to launch alongside the new AMD TRX40 chipset this November. Many reports suggest that the platform will herald a new socket based on the "SP3r3" specification. Older Threadrippers won't work on TRX40 motherboards, and 3rd gen chips won't work on older X399 boards. The TRX40 chipset will extensively implement PCI-Express gen 4.0, offering more x16 slots, M.2 slots, and x1 slots running at gen 4.0 speeds.
Source:
TUM_APISAK (Twitter)
AMD's decision to start the lineup at 24 cores is interesting, as it looks to keep up its competitiveness against Intel, which recently launched its 10th generation "Cascade Lake-X" Core i9 HEDT processor series, with all parts priced under $1000, including the range-topping 18-core/36-thread one. It remains to be seen if the Threadripper 3960X can beat it while holding onto a sub-$1,000 price. The previous-generation 24-core 2970WX beat the i9-9980XE in some rendering and simulation tests that scaled with cores and which weren't too heavy on memory bandwidth. With its 3rd generation Threadripper series, AMD is eliminating a key memory bottleneck, giving each core on the chip an equal access to the processor's monolithic quad-channel memory interface.
34 Comments on AMD Ryzen Threadripper 3960X a 24-core Chip the Range Starts With
Source: wccftech.com/amd-ryzen-threadripper-3960x-24-core-48-thread-7nm-zen-2-cpu-confirmed/
AMD 3rd Gen Ryzen Threadripper Processor SKUs (Rumored):
what if someone likes the platform's connectivity but wants a 16 or even a 12 core CPU?
How do you name those? did AMD screw themselves by naming the 24 core 3960X?
Maybe 3955X and 3905X? idk...
3700x 8 core
3800x 8 core but "more overclockable"
3900x 12 cores
39...50?x 16 cores...
should have been 3700x - 3750x - 3800x - 3900x
anywho, screwed themselves? who says they are planning to launch a 12 or 16 core cpu for the new TR platform?
And yeah guess according to your comment those 2990WX and X399 board's resale value also gonna drop. :(
TBH I was hoping for more from AMD.
Good luck.
The 2990WX was a nice marketing trick. It's value was questionable the day it came out and it's value was going to drop anyway with the new AMD series of CPUs. Intel's desision to drop it's "new" HEDT line at half the price, also didn't helped with 2990WX's valuation.
Think the main problem is they've squeezed the numbers together too much. It "feels" too "squished" in my head, like they're implying there's little difference between a 12-core 3900X and a 24-core 3960X.
Sure you can just learn it, you can just accept it as it is, but that does not mean it makes a ton of sense.
Why does the 3800 warrant the 100 number jump over the 3700?
Its both 8 cores, all the 3800 is suppose to do is clock a bit higher (though in practice that does not seem to be the case but whatever)
3600(x) 6 cores
3700(x) 8 cores
3800(x) still 8 cores?
3900(x) 12 cores
39...50?(x) 16 cores?
So we do a 100 jump for the same cores but "more overclockablity"
and later for an actual increase in cores we just jump the name up by 50?
Thats why it makes more sense to have that reversed:
3600 6 cores
3700 8 cores
3750 8 cores but more overclockable
3800 12 cores
3900 16 cores.considering that number is completely made up by both parties it might as well have a low tdp
EPYC 1S 48c has no SKU
EPYC 1S 64 is $4300.
There's no way 32, 48 and 64-core TR will cost $1300, $1500 and $1800. That's crazy thinking
TR 32c will be around $1800
TR 48c will be around $2500
TR 64c will be around $3300
AMD isn't crazy to sell 64c TR at a third of the price of EPYC. 32,48 and 64c TR's will be aimed at workstation CPUs, competing with Xeon-W 3000 which are priced at $7500 for the top 28-core model.
There is no AMD 3600 or 2950X.
It's not just about core counts. TR also offers other benefits.
Ryzen 3000 work on first-gen AM4 motherboards, so there's no reason why TR 3000 wouldn't work on first-gen TR4 motherboards.
AMD is doing the exact same thing that Intel's being so criticized all the time for on this forum.
Seriously, some people here should just practice self-respect. :o