• Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

AMD Ryzen Threadripper 2970WX

W1zzard

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
May 14, 2004
Messages
27,595 (3.70/day)
Processor Ryzen 7 5700X
Memory 48 GB
Video Card(s) RTX 4080
Storage 2x HDD RAID 1, 3x M.2 NVMe
Display(s) 30" 2560x1600 + 19" 1280x1024
Software Windows 10 64-bit
AMD's Ryzen Threadripper 2970WX comes with a staggering 24-cores and 48-threads, clocked at up to 4.2 GHz. We take a closer look at application and gaming performance in this review, and test the new "Dynamic Local Mode", which automatically prioritizes busy applications.

Show full review
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jul 16, 2014
Messages
8,187 (2.19/day)
Location
SE Michigan
System Name Dumbass
Processor AMD Ryzen 7800X3D
Motherboard ASUS TUF gaming B650
Cooling Artic Liquid Freezer 2 - 420mm
Memory G.Skill Sniper 32gb DDR5 6000
Video Card(s) GreenTeam 4070 ti super 16gb
Storage Samsung EVO 500gb & 1Tb, 2tb HDD, 500gb WD Black
Display(s) 1x Nixeus NX_EDG27, 2x Dell S2440L (16:9)
Case Phanteks Enthoo Primo w/8 140mm SP Fans
Audio Device(s) onboard (realtek?) - SPKRS:Logitech Z623 200w 2.1
Power Supply Corsair HX1000i
Mouse Steeseries Esports Wireless
Keyboard Corsair K100
Software windows 10 H
Benchmark Scores https://i.imgur.com/aoz3vWY.jpg?2
It really shows the difference between 2 dies and 4 dies and explains why the 2950x is better for many things.
 
Joined
Nov 13, 2007
Messages
10,587 (1.72/day)
Location
Austin Texas
System Name Planet Espresso
Processor 13700KF @ 5.4GHZ UV - 220W cap
Motherboard MSI 690-I PRO
Cooling Thermalright Phantom Spirit EVO
Memory 48 GB DDR5 7600 MHZ CL36
Video Card(s) RTX 4090 FE
Storage 2TB WD SN850, 4TB WD SN850X
Display(s) Alienware 32" 4k 240hz OLED
Case Jonsbo Z20
Audio Device(s) Yes
Power Supply Corsair SF750
Mouse Xlite V2
Keyboard 65% HE Keyboard
Software Windows 11
Benchmark Scores They're pretty good, nothing crazy.
needs a correction in the conclusion:

". The reason for that is the memory interface configuration, which was the only choice for these CPUs to fit on the existing X299 platform. " should be x399 no?
 

newtekie1

Semi-Retired Folder
Joined
Nov 22, 2005
Messages
28,473 (4.13/day)
Location
Indiana, USA
Processor Intel Core i7 10850K@5.2GHz
Motherboard AsRock Z470 Taichi
Cooling Corsair H115i Pro w/ Noctua NF-A14 Fans
Memory 32GB DDR4-3600
Video Card(s) RTX 2070 Super
Storage 500GB SX8200 Pro + 8TB with 1TB SSD Cache
Display(s) Acer Nitro VG280K 4K 28"
Case Fractal Design Define S
Audio Device(s) Onboard is good enough for me
Power Supply eVGA SuperNOVA 1000w G3
Software Windows 10 Pro x64
In this review, we present four results for the Ryzen Threadripper 2920X:

Should be 2970WX, on Test Setup page.
 
Joined
Sep 15, 2007
Messages
3,946 (0.63/day)
Location
Police/Nanny State of America
Processor OCed 5800X3D
Motherboard Asucks C6H
Cooling Air
Memory 32GB
Video Card(s) OCed 6800XT
Storage NVMees
Display(s) 32" Dull curved 1440
Case Freebie glass idk
Audio Device(s) Sennheiser
Power Supply Don't even remember
Chiplets FTW next year.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jan 13, 2018
Messages
157 (0.06/day)
System Name N/A
Processor Intel Core i5 3570
Motherboard Gigabyte B75
Cooling Coolermaster Hyper TX3
Memory 12 GB DDR3 1600
Video Card(s) MSI Gaming Z RTX 2060
Storage SSD
Display(s) Samsung 4K HDR 60 Hz TV
Case Eagle Warrior Gaming
Audio Device(s) N/A
Power Supply Coolermaster Elite 460W
Mouse Vorago KM500
Keyboard Vorago KM500
Software Windows 10
Benchmark Scores N/A
@Wizzard some doubts, is PBO Max and OC results in Distributed, Local or Dynamic Mode?

Now I realize why Intel didn't care at all, they knew that TR 24/32 cores will have plenty of bottlenecks and average performance will be worse than TR 12/16 cores. I hope the rendering niche market is worth it to release such an unbalanced product.

After reading this review I believe than Core X won't have price reductions any time soon.
 
Joined
Apr 12, 2013
Messages
7,432 (1.77/day)
@Wizzard some doubts, is PBO Max and OC results in Distributed, Local or Dynamic Mode?

Now I realize why Intel didn't care at all, they knew that TR 24/32 cores will have plenty of bottlenecks and average performance will be worse than TR 12/16 cores. I hope the rendering niche market is worth it to release such an unbalanced product.

After reading this review I believe than Core X won't have price reductions any time soon.
No it's because Intel didn't want to sell their $10k listed part cheaper, the main reason why TR2 WX chips are hobbling is because of 4 mem channels being disabled. That's not applicable to mesh based XCC chips from Intel, 20 cores & above. So like I said Intel cares for profit more than just the performance crown, that's why they've released the now infamous 28 core 5Ghz water chilled part as a $4k Xeon.
 
Joined
Jul 16, 2014
Messages
8,187 (2.19/day)
Location
SE Michigan
System Name Dumbass
Processor AMD Ryzen 7800X3D
Motherboard ASUS TUF gaming B650
Cooling Artic Liquid Freezer 2 - 420mm
Memory G.Skill Sniper 32gb DDR5 6000
Video Card(s) GreenTeam 4070 ti super 16gb
Storage Samsung EVO 500gb & 1Tb, 2tb HDD, 500gb WD Black
Display(s) 1x Nixeus NX_EDG27, 2x Dell S2440L (16:9)
Case Phanteks Enthoo Primo w/8 140mm SP Fans
Audio Device(s) onboard (realtek?) - SPKRS:Logitech Z623 200w 2.1
Power Supply Corsair HX1000i
Mouse Steeseries Esports Wireless
Keyboard Corsair K100
Software windows 10 H
Benchmark Scores https://i.imgur.com/aoz3vWY.jpg?2
@Wizzard some doubts, is PBO Max and OC results in Distributed, Local or Dynamic Mode?

Now I realize why Intel didn't care at all, they knew that TR 24/32 cores will have plenty of bottlenecks and average performance will be worse than TR 12/16 cores. I hope the rendering niche market is worth it to release such an unbalanced product.

After reading this review I believe than Core X won't have price reductions any time soon.

The "average performance" is due to the die count, 4 dies have more latency than 2 dies. Plus, the bottlenecks are software not hardware. As I said on the other review, game selection favors single core performers hance why Intel did better on those charts. AMD just doesnt do well in single core apps and games, which comes back around to lazy or inept programmers not trying to optimize for more cores.
 
Joined
Jan 13, 2018
Messages
157 (0.06/day)
System Name N/A
Processor Intel Core i5 3570
Motherboard Gigabyte B75
Cooling Coolermaster Hyper TX3
Memory 12 GB DDR3 1600
Video Card(s) MSI Gaming Z RTX 2060
Storage SSD
Display(s) Samsung 4K HDR 60 Hz TV
Case Eagle Warrior Gaming
Audio Device(s) N/A
Power Supply Coolermaster Elite 460W
Mouse Vorago KM500
Keyboard Vorago KM500
Software Windows 10
Benchmark Scores N/A
No it's because Intel didn't want to sell their $10k listed part cheaper, the main reason why TR2 WX chips are hobbling is because of 4 mem channels being disabled. That's not applicable to mesh based XCC chips from Intel, 20 cores & above. So like I said Intel cares for profit more than just the performance crown, that's why they've released the now infamous 28 core 5Ghz water chilled part as a $4k Xeon.

Any Skylake X has 4 memory channels connected to the die, instead of 2 or 0 as in TR WX, that is why they are hobbling, even with 8 memory channels it will be just 2 connected to each die.

Of course they care for the performance crown, any Skylake X from 14 cores and above is faster in average than any TR. I think that the new 28 core Xeon will be way faster than 2990WX.

The "average performance" is due to the die count, 4 dies have more latency than 2 dies. Plus, the bottlenecks are software not hardware. As I said on the other review, game selection favors single core performers hance why Intel did better on those charts. AMD just doesnt do well in single core apps and games, which comes back around to lazy or inept programmers not trying to optimize for more cores.

Same as above, any Skylake X has 4 memory channels connected to the die, instead of 2 or 0 as in TR WX, that is why Skylake X parts don't suffer from latency as TR.

If programmers don't want more cores, then AMD should make faster ones and stop sailing against the current.
 
Joined
Apr 12, 2013
Messages
7,432 (1.77/day)
Any Skylake X has 4 memory channels connected to the die, instead of 2 or 0 as in TR WX, that is why they are hobbling, even with 8 memory channels it will be just 2 connected to each die.

Of course they care for the performance crown, any Skylake X from 14 cores and above is faster in average than any TR. I think that the new 28 core Xeon will be way faster than 2990WX.



Same as above, any Skylake X has 4 memory channels connected to the die, instead of 2 or 0 as in TR WX, that is why Skylake X parts don't suffer from latency as TR.

If programmers don't want more cores, then AMD should make faster ones and stop sailing against the current.
The Xeon dies, from which Skylake is derived, has 6 mem channels & ECC among other things. For the consumer platform 2 channels & ECC are disabled across the board i.e. LCC & HCC dies. It's the same as TR & EPYC, AMD chose to disable 4 memory channels probably because 6 mem channels couldn't work with 4 dies.

No it's not, have you looked at reviews? In applications making heavy use of AVX(2 or 512) I expect Intel to come out on top more often than not, elsewhere AMD should win most of the times.




Yet Skylake X has worse latency than Skylake, this is a feature not a bug for higher core count CPUs & Intel will face the same issues as AMD if/when they go with the MCM approach.

Not every programmer wants less cores, are we making assumptions now?
 

HTC

Joined
Apr 1, 2008
Messages
4,656 (0.77/day)
Location
Portugal
System Name HTC's System
Processor Ryzen 5 5800X3D
Motherboard Asrock Taichi X370
Cooling NH-C14, with the AM4 mounting kit
Memory G.Skill Kit 16GB DDR4 F4 - 3200 C16D - 16 GTZB
Video Card(s) Sapphire Pulse 6600 8 GB
Storage 1 Samsung NVMe 960 EVO 250 GB + 1 3.5" Seagate IronWolf Pro 6TB 7200RPM 256MB SATA III
Display(s) LG 27UD58
Case Fractal Design Define R6 USB-C
Audio Device(s) Onboard
Power Supply Corsair TX 850M 80+ Gold
Mouse Razer Deathadder Elite
Software Ubuntu 20.04.6 LTS
Intel and AMD are giants in CPU manufacturing much like Barcelona and Real Madrid are in Spanish Football, and they have completely different "styles":

- Intel is using monolithic die approach while AMD has changed into multi-chip die approach (albeit recently)
- Barcelona uses passing around the ball until they manage to break through opposite defense, as a team or with an individual brilliance, while Real Madrid uses a more "brute force" and counter-attacks much more often

Both approaches have their own merits and their own drawbacks:

- Intel's generally have better latency and single thread performance but have problems with scaling to high core counts while AMD have high core counts but have latency and single thread issues
- Barcelona ability to circulate the ball enables them to frustrate the opposite side into making mistakes and those end up costing the opponents dearly while Real Madrid scores many goals (until recently, LOL) but has issues with defense because of the way they attack and that enables opponents to score goals which sometimes leads ties or even losses.

CPU manufacturing has reached a point where they either change the materials the chips are made of and are finally able to have big leaps in speed or find ways to have more cores. AMD has already gone the more cores route while Intel hasn't, for now.

As @R0H1T has said, unless whatever being run makes heavy use of AVX, doesn't scale well with cores or is heavily taxing on a single thread, then this 2970WX totally beats Intel's current offerings.
 
Joined
Jan 13, 2018
Messages
157 (0.06/day)
System Name N/A
Processor Intel Core i5 3570
Motherboard Gigabyte B75
Cooling Coolermaster Hyper TX3
Memory 12 GB DDR3 1600
Video Card(s) MSI Gaming Z RTX 2060
Storage SSD
Display(s) Samsung 4K HDR 60 Hz TV
Case Eagle Warrior Gaming
Audio Device(s) N/A
Power Supply Coolermaster Elite 460W
Mouse Vorago KM500
Keyboard Vorago KM500
Software Windows 10
Benchmark Scores N/A
The Xeon dies, from which Skylake is derived, has 6 mem channels & ECC among other things. For the consumer platform 2 channels & ECC are disabled across the board i.e. LCC & HCC dies. It's the same as TR & EPYC, AMD chose to disable 4 memory channels probably because 6 mem channels couldn't work with 4 dies.

No it's not, have you looked at reviews? In applications making heavy use of AVX(2 or 512) I expect Intel to come out on top more often than not, elsewhere AMD should win most of the times.

Yet Skylake X has worse latency than Skylake, this is a feature not a bug for higher core count CPUs & Intel will face the same issues as AMD if/when they go with the MCM approach.

Not every programmer wants less cores, are we making assumptions now?

All the benchmarks you posted are rendering (without counting 7-zip) that I already agreed that is where TR shines. But most 95% other apps are slower on TR.
relative-performance-cpu.png

Well I can assume that since 2970WX is slower on average than 2920X or 9900K, yes most programmers prefer less cores but faster ones.

As @R0H1T has said, unless whatever being run makes heavy use of AVX, doesn't scale well with cores or is heavily taxing on a single thread, then this 2970WX totally beats Intel's current offerings.

Which are 95% of apps.
 
Joined
Jul 16, 2014
Messages
8,187 (2.19/day)
Location
SE Michigan
System Name Dumbass
Processor AMD Ryzen 7800X3D
Motherboard ASUS TUF gaming B650
Cooling Artic Liquid Freezer 2 - 420mm
Memory G.Skill Sniper 32gb DDR5 6000
Video Card(s) GreenTeam 4070 ti super 16gb
Storage Samsung EVO 500gb & 1Tb, 2tb HDD, 500gb WD Black
Display(s) 1x Nixeus NX_EDG27, 2x Dell S2440L (16:9)
Case Phanteks Enthoo Primo w/8 140mm SP Fans
Audio Device(s) onboard (realtek?) - SPKRS:Logitech Z623 200w 2.1
Power Supply Corsair HX1000i
Mouse Steeseries Esports Wireless
Keyboard Corsair K100
Software windows 10 H
Benchmark Scores https://i.imgur.com/aoz3vWY.jpg?2
Same as above, any Skylake X has 4 memory channels connected to the die, instead of 2 or 0 as in TR WX, that is why Skylake X parts don't suffer from latency as TR.

If programmers don't want more cores, then AMD should make faster ones and stop sailing against the current.
Thats pretty ignorant.

Since I'm not a fanboi of either side, I will just say all multicore cpus have latency, its different for each chip. AMD is still refining its "magic fabric".
 
Joined
Jan 13, 2018
Messages
157 (0.06/day)
System Name N/A
Processor Intel Core i5 3570
Motherboard Gigabyte B75
Cooling Coolermaster Hyper TX3
Memory 12 GB DDR3 1600
Video Card(s) MSI Gaming Z RTX 2060
Storage SSD
Display(s) Samsung 4K HDR 60 Hz TV
Case Eagle Warrior Gaming
Audio Device(s) N/A
Power Supply Coolermaster Elite 460W
Mouse Vorago KM500
Keyboard Vorago KM500
Software Windows 10
Benchmark Scores N/A
Thats pretty ignorant.

Since I'm not a fanboi of either side, I will just say all multicore cpus have latency, its different for each chip. AMD is still refining its "magic fabric".

Yes that is true, but AMD TR has much more latency than Intel. If you mean Infinity Fabric, they should increase its max transfer rate from 25 G/s to at least 50. Also they should wire all 4 memory channels to each die, instead of 2 or 0. It will be more expensive but some users will be willing to pay for it.
 
Joined
Apr 12, 2013
Messages
7,432 (1.77/day)
All the benchmarks you posted are rendering (without counting 7-zip) that I already agreed that is where TR shines. But most 95% other apps are slower on TR.
View attachment 109640
Well I can assume that since 2970WX is slower on average than 2920X or 9900K, yes most programmers prefer less cores but faster ones.


Which are 95% of apps.
True for ST performance, the exact opposite for AVX.
Yes that is true, but AMD TR has much more latency than Intel. If you mean Infinity Fabric, they should increase its max transfer rate from 25 G/s to at least 50. Also they should wire all 4 memory channels to each die, instead of 2 or 0. It will be more expensive but some users will be willing to pay for it.
Except it's not as simple as that.


 
Joined
Jan 13, 2018
Messages
157 (0.06/day)
System Name N/A
Processor Intel Core i5 3570
Motherboard Gigabyte B75
Cooling Coolermaster Hyper TX3
Memory 12 GB DDR3 1600
Video Card(s) MSI Gaming Z RTX 2060
Storage SSD
Display(s) Samsung 4K HDR 60 Hz TV
Case Eagle Warrior Gaming
Audio Device(s) N/A
Power Supply Coolermaster Elite 460W
Mouse Vorago KM500
Keyboard Vorago KM500
Software Windows 10
Benchmark Scores N/A
True for ST performance, the exact opposite for AVX.

Except it's not as simple as that.

Aren't most AVX apps faster on Intel too?

Sorry, I didn't get your point with the graphs, could you elaborate more please?
 

HTC

Joined
Apr 1, 2008
Messages
4,656 (0.77/day)
Location
Portugal
System Name HTC's System
Processor Ryzen 5 5800X3D
Motherboard Asrock Taichi X370
Cooling NH-C14, with the AM4 mounting kit
Memory G.Skill Kit 16GB DDR4 F4 - 3200 C16D - 16 GTZB
Video Card(s) Sapphire Pulse 6600 8 GB
Storage 1 Samsung NVMe 960 EVO 250 GB + 1 3.5" Seagate IronWolf Pro 6TB 7200RPM 256MB SATA III
Display(s) LG 27UD58
Case Fractal Design Define R6 USB-C
Audio Device(s) Onboard
Power Supply Corsair TX 850M 80+ Gold
Mouse Razer Deathadder Elite
Software Ubuntu 20.04.6 LTS
Aren't most AVX apps faster on Intel too?

Sorry, I didn't get your point with the graphs, could you elaborate more please?
If i understood correctly, he meant AMD's IF uses way more power then Intel's Uncore. It get's worse with more memory channels, as can be seen with the Epyc chart VS TR 2990WX.
 
Joined
Apr 12, 2013
Messages
7,432 (1.77/day)
Aren't most AVX apps faster on Intel too?

Sorry, I didn't get your point with the graphs, could you elaborate more please?
True, but the point I was making is that if 95% of apps are (mostly) single threaded then the opposite is also true wrt AVX i.e. 95% of apps don't make use of AVX including the most popular ones i.e. web browsers.

As you can see from the graphs, with increasing core count the power requirements of uncore shoots up. This is true for AMD & Intel, pretty sure the amount of power used by 28 core Xeon is disproportionately higher for it's uncore wrt their 18 core variant. The case with AMD is a bit different because their dies are limited to 4 core per CCX, so when Intel goes the MCM route you'll probably see the same charts as highlighted by AMD's HEDT.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HTC
Joined
Jan 13, 2018
Messages
157 (0.06/day)
System Name N/A
Processor Intel Core i5 3570
Motherboard Gigabyte B75
Cooling Coolermaster Hyper TX3
Memory 12 GB DDR3 1600
Video Card(s) MSI Gaming Z RTX 2060
Storage SSD
Display(s) Samsung 4K HDR 60 Hz TV
Case Eagle Warrior Gaming
Audio Device(s) N/A
Power Supply Coolermaster Elite 460W
Mouse Vorago KM500
Keyboard Vorago KM500
Software Windows 10
Benchmark Scores N/A
True, but the point I was making is that if 95% of apps are (mostly) single threaded then the opposite is also true wrt AVX i.e. 95% of apps don't make use of AVX including the most popular ones i.e. web browsers.

As you can see from the graphs, with increasing core count the power requirements of uncore shoots up. This is true for AMD & Intel, pretty sure the amount of power used by 28 core Xeon is disproportionately higher for it's uncore wrt their 18 core variant. The case with AMD is a bit different because their dies are limited to 4 core per CCX, so when Intel goes the MCM route you'll probably see the same charts as highlighted by AMD's HEDT.

I think that is why Intel designed the mesh architecture, to avoid going the MCM route, at least for some years, so that 28 core Xeon is still a monolithic 28 core design, instead of 32 core TR or EPYC that are 4 dies of 2 native quad cores each all glued together. AMD can't even produce a true native 8 core. I can see on the charts that the 7980X uncore parts is between 2700X and 2950X, besides having more cores.
 
Joined
Jul 16, 2014
Messages
8,187 (2.19/day)
Location
SE Michigan
System Name Dumbass
Processor AMD Ryzen 7800X3D
Motherboard ASUS TUF gaming B650
Cooling Artic Liquid Freezer 2 - 420mm
Memory G.Skill Sniper 32gb DDR5 6000
Video Card(s) GreenTeam 4070 ti super 16gb
Storage Samsung EVO 500gb & 1Tb, 2tb HDD, 500gb WD Black
Display(s) 1x Nixeus NX_EDG27, 2x Dell S2440L (16:9)
Case Phanteks Enthoo Primo w/8 140mm SP Fans
Audio Device(s) onboard (realtek?) - SPKRS:Logitech Z623 200w 2.1
Power Supply Corsair HX1000i
Mouse Steeseries Esports Wireless
Keyboard Corsair K100
Software windows 10 H
Benchmark Scores https://i.imgur.com/aoz3vWY.jpg?2
Joined
Mar 15, 2017
Messages
193 (0.07/day)
I know this isn't the main point of the review, but I gotta ask - what the hell is Far Cry 5's problem with this CPU? Across the resolutions the different modes trade places, at 1440p the difference between them is absurd, 720p yields 31% FPS less than 1080p on average - it's a mess.

If in every other game the 2970WX does a good enough job for a rendering workhorse - this being the odd exception. If the game has some thread scheduling issue, isn't Dynamic Local Mode supposed to remedy this? Or is it so badly or specifically coded that is just exposes some very rare use case scenario disadvantage, where even Dynamic Local Mode and/or overclocking can't prevent it from fumbling?

FC5_WTF.png
 
Last edited:

W1zzard

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
May 14, 2004
Messages
27,595 (3.70/day)
Processor Ryzen 7 5700X
Memory 48 GB
Video Card(s) RTX 4080
Storage 2x HDD RAID 1, 3x M.2 NVMe
Display(s) 30" 2560x1600 + 19" 1280x1024
Software Windows 10 64-bit
Top