AMD 64-Core Threadripper 3990X Review: Battle of the Flagships
When you purchase through links on our site, we may earn an affiliate commission. Here’s how it works.
The core wars rage on.
By Paul Alcorn
last updated
Editor’s Choice
(Image: © AMD)
Tom’s Hardware Verdict
The 64-core 128-thread Threadripper 3990X is a highly-specialized processor that provides incredible performance in a narrow cross-section of workloads, but at a very attractive price point given its capabilities.
TODAY’S BEST DEALS
Why you can trust Tom’s Hardware
Our expert reviewers spend hours testing and comparing products and services so you can choose the best for you. Find out more about how we test.
Today’s best AMD Ryzen Threadripper 3990X deals
$3,989.99
View
$4,693
View
$4,874.99
View
AMD says its $3,990 Threadripper 3990X offers more performance than two of Intel’s $10,009 Xeon 8280’s, but in one 64-core package for specialized applications, like Hollywood VFX rendering. Surprisingly, the new chip slots into the familiar high end desktop platform and has enthusiast-class features, like overclockability, that offer a unique value proposition.
We’re breaking out the firepower today, unleashing some of the fastest data center processors in the world to put AMD’s claims to the test, including head-to-head comparisons with a dual-socket Intel Xeon Platinum 8280 server (56C/112T), and both single- and dual-socket AMD EPYC Rome server platforms (128C/256T). We also include the relevant mainstream and HEDT competitors, too.
The first- and second-gen Ryzen chips spurred a slow shift for mainstream desktop PCs, but AMD’s fast move to the 7nm process and Zen 2 with the Ryzen 3000 chips opened up a new level of performance that caught its rival Intel flat-footed, particularly in the high-end desktop market. As a result, Intel recently ceded the upper echelons of the HEDT market to the Threadripper 3000 series and resigned itself to slashing gen-on-gen pricing on its new Cascade Lake-X models to slow AMD’s advance.
But as impressive as AMD’s inaugural third-gen Threadripper processors are, the record-setting 32-core 64-thread 3970X doesn’t represent AMD’s best effort: Today, AMD presses its advantage with the 64-core 128-thread Threadripper 3990X. The 3990X, which is based on the same design of the company’s EPYC Rome data center processors, represents AMD’s crowning achievement on the high end desktop as the company pushes core counts 3.5 times higher than Intel’s finest HEDT silicon.
But even though AMD’s first 64-core x86 processor comes packing an amazing amount of horsepower, it isn’t an enthusiast-focused product. AMD’s goal is to fuse the high core counts of the EPYC Rome processors, which have the lower clock frequencies expected of a server chip, with the relatively high frequencies and enthusiast feature set, like overclockability, of high end desktop (HEDT) parts. AMD made a few other strategic adjustments to the new chips to reduce cost and keep the 3990X from encroaching on its server parts, but the end result is a threaded beast that can manhandle the toughest workloads at a comparatively attractive price point.
However, as we learned from AMD’s journey with the Ryzen processors, today’s software and operating systems still aren’t designed to fully exploit massively parallel x86 architectures, and we’ll see plenty of examples of that in our testing today.
With time and effort, AMD has pushed the industry forward to more fully utilize its silicon, but that effort enters a new stage with the 3990X. As a result of multiple architectural factors, combined with the reluctant software ecosystem, the Threadripper 3990X finds itself as a specialized workhorse for the most demanding of customers in a very narrow field: the visual effects and rendering world. AMD also expects other use-cases to emerge in time, particularly as software evolves to take advantage of the chips’ resources, but the 3990X already represents the best value in what is arguably a new market segment.
- AMD Ryzen Threadripper 3990X (AMD Ryzen Threadripper) at Amazon for $4,693
Threadripper 3990X Specifications and Pricing
Like the other Threadripper 3000 processors, the 3990X is drop-in compatible with existing TRX40 motherboards, but you’ll need to update the BIOS to unlock the best performance.
AMD laid the groundwork for the 3990X during TRX40’s design phase, so all existing motherboards can provide enough power to satiate the 280W TDP chip. As you would expect given the TDP, cooling will play a major role in how well the chip performs. AMD says you can use existing watercoolers for the 3990X, but as we’ll show on the next page, you should invest in a beefy model if you want the best performance.
Swipe to scroll horizontally
| Row 0 — Cell 0 | Cores / Threads | Base / Boost (GHz) | L3 Cache (MB) | PCIe | DRAM | TDP | MSRP/RCP | Price Per Core |
| Threadripper 3990X | 64 / 128 | 2. 9 / 4.3 |
256 | 88 Gen 4 (72 Usable) | Quad DDR4-3200 | 280W | $3,990 | $62.34 |
| EPYC 7702P | 64 / 128 | 2.0 / 3.35 | 256 | 128 Gen 4 | Eight-Channel DDR4-3200 | 200W | $4,425 | $69.14 |
| EPYC 7442 | 64 / 128 | 2.25 / 3.4 | 256 | 128 Gen 4 | Eight-Channel DDR4-3200 | 225W | $6,950 | $108.59 |
| Xeon 8280 | 28 / 56 | 2.7 / 4.0 | 38.5 | 48 Gen 3 | Six-Channel DDR4-2933 | 205W | $10,009 | $357. 46 |
| Intel W-3175X | 28 / 56 | 3.1 / 4.8 | 38.5 | 48 Gen 3 | Six-Channel DDR4-2666 | 255W | $2999 | $107.10 |
| Threadripper 3970X | 32 / 64 | 3.7 / 4.5 | *128 | 88 Gen 4 (72 Usable) | Quad DDR4-3200 | 280W | $1999 | $62.47 |
| Xeon W-3275 | 28 / 56 | 2.5 / 4.6 | 38.5 | 64 Gen3 | Six-Channel DDR4-2933 | 205W | $4,449 | $158.89 |
| Threadripper 2990WX | 32 / 64 | 3. 0 / 4.2 |
64 | 64 (4 to PCH) Gen 3 | Quad DDR4-2933 | 250W | ~$1,700 | $53 |
| Threadripper 3960X | 24 / 48 | 3.8 / 4.5 | *128 | 88 Gen 4 (72 Usable) | Quad DDR4-3200 | 280W | $1,399 | $58.29 |
| Xeon W-3265 | 24 / 48 | 2.7 / 4.6 | 33 | 64 Gen 3 | Six-Channel DDR4-2933 | 205W | $3,349 | $139.54 |
| Threadripper 2970WX | 24 / 48 | 3.0 / 4.2 | 64 | 64 (4 to PCH) Gen 3 | Quad DDR4-2933 | 250W | ~$925 | ~$38. 51 |
| Core i9-10980XE | 18 / 36 | 3.0 / 4.8 | 24.75 | 48 Gen 3 | Quad DDR4-2933 | 165W | $979 | $54.39 |
| Ryzen 9 3950X | 16 / 32 | 3.5 / 4.7 | 64 | 64 | Dual DDR4-3200 | 105W | $749 | $46.81 |
The 3990X is based on the EPYC Rome 7702P that is designed for single-socket servers, so it comes with the same 64 cores and 128 threads paired with an amazing 256MB of L3 and 32MB of L2 cache.
The two processors have plenty of similarities, but the difference between the two largely boils down to clock rates, memory channels, and the number of PCIe 4.0 lanes.
As we can see, the Threadripper 3990X is significantly faster with up to a 2.
9 GHz base and 4.3GHz boost than the EPYC 7702P, an improvement of 900 MHz and ~1 GHz, respectively.
We typically wouldn’t expect boost clock rates to reach that high with such a core-heavy processor, but the jump comes courtesy of AMD’s innovative boost mechanism that extract the most out of the varying maximum frequencies capabilities of each core.
The 3990X’s higher clock rate is a key differentiator over the EPYC Rome processors because it benefits rendering, VFX, and compilation workloads, among others. AMD is very clear that the 3990X is best suited for intense long-duration workloads, like VFX workloads that require 24-36 hours just to render one second of footage. If your render jobs typically finish in a few hours and you aren’t running them 24/7, AMD recommends going with the Threadripper 3970X or 3960X.
There’s a ~$2,000 price gap between the 32-core 3970X and the 64-core 3990X, not to mention the obvious gap of 32 cores. That leaves a middle ground where a 48-core model could make sense, but AMD says it has no plans for a 48-core model at this time.
Like its HEDT counterparts, the 3990X supports up to 256GB of quad-channel DDR4-3200 memory, which is a step back from EPYC’s eight channels of memory support. The memory frequency support matrix varies by DIMM population and rank, and while the processor supports ECC memory, qualification is left to the motherboard vendor.
The Threadripper processors feature the same memory controllers as the Ryzen 3000 chips, so memory overclocking is simple. As per normal, you will encounter limitations with higher-capacity kits.
AMD recommends 1GB to 2GB of memory capacity per thread for optimal performance, particularly for Hollywood VFX artists, and overclocking the memory doesn’t have a big impact on most target workloads, like rendering. In either case, professionals will need to make room in the budget for a capacious memory kit — 256GB is ideal. AMD recommends the eight-channel EPYC Rome platform for workloads that benefit from higher memory throughput, like computational fluid dynamics or brain neuron simulations.
The 3990X also supports 64 lanes of PCIe 4.0, which provides twice the throughput per lane of the PCIe 3.0 interface on Intel processors. Additionally, the TRX40 chipset provides 16 GB/s of throughput between the processor and the chipset, which comes courtesy of eight PCIe 4.0 lanes. In contrast, Intel supports 4 GB/s of throughput over its DMI link through the PCIe 3.0 interface.
TRX40’s extra bandwidth will benefit multiple devices that hang off the TRX40 chipset, like large PCIe SSD arrays, which is also attractive to the professional crowd that often uses separate storage devices for read, write, and scratch operations.
Threadripper 3990X Architecture
The Threadripper 3990X comes packing AMD’s Zen 2 microarchitecture, but AMD spreads the design across 8 eight-core ‘core chiplet die’ (CCD), as opposed to four CCD with the 3970X and 3960X and two with the mainstream Ryzen chips.
AMD ties the compute chiplets together via the Infinity Fabric to a large central 12nm I/O die (IOD) that houses two 32x PCIe Gen4 controllers and two dual-channel DDR4 memory controllers.
However, this IOD is significantly different than the one present in the EPYC Rome 7702P, largely because AMD culled support for eight-channel memory and halved PCIe 4.0 support to 64 lanes.
The 3990X’s IOD is the same as the one in the 3970X and 3960X, but AMD fused off the four additional Infinity Fabric On-Package (IFOP) units, which are used to communicate with the CCDs, on those models because they weren’t needed. As with the previous models, each of the 3990X’s die has its own IFOP connection to the IOD.
Each 7nm compute chiplet features ~3.9 billion transistors, while the 12nm I/O die has ~8.34 billion transistors. For the eight-CCD 3990X that yields a total of ~39.54 billion transistors spread out over an amazing ~1008 square millimeters of silicon.
Image 1 of 6
(Image credit: AMD)(Image credit: AMD)(Image credit: AMD)(Image credit: AMD)(Image credit: AMD)(Image credit: AMD)
The first image in the album above outlines the 3990X SoC, the second image represents the 3970X and 3960X, the third image shows the previous-gen Threadripper design, and the fourth image is of the EPYC Rome SoC design.
Memory throughput per core is a concern with only four channels of memory to spread out among 64 cores, but AMD made architectural accommodations in the Zen 2 microarchitecture to keep data on-chip, like an almost unthinkable 288MB of total cache on the 3990X, a third AGU (Address Generation Unit), and larger opcaches, among other changes, that help keep data close to the execution cores to help overcome memory bandwidth challenges.
MORE: Best CPUs
MORE: Intel & AMD Processor Hierarchy
MORE: All CPUs Content
AMD Ryzen Threadripper 3990X: Price Comparison
$3,989.99
View
$4,693
View
$4,874.99
View
powered by
- 1
Current page:
Castle Peak’s Rarified Air
Next Page Boost Speeds, Power Consumption, Test Setup
Paul Alcorn is the Deputy Managing Editor for Tom’s Hardware US. He writes news and reviews on CPUs, storage and enterprise hardware.
AMD Threadripper 3970X and 3960X Review: Taking Over The High End
When you purchase through links on our site, we may earn an affiliate commission. Here’s how it works.
Threadripper gets a big bump, thanks to 7nm, Zen 2 and PCIe 4.0.
Editor’s Choice
(Image: © AMD)
Tom’s Hardware Verdict
AMD’s Threadripper 3970X is the new uncontested leader in both price and performance on the highest end of the HEDT segment.
TODAY’S BEST DEALS
Why you can trust Tom’s Hardware
Our expert reviewers spend hours testing and comparing products and services so you can choose the best for you. Find out more about how we test.
In an incredible alignment of the silicon stars, AMD’s third-gen Threadripper 3970X and 3960X launch today alongside Intel’s new Cascade Lake-X Core i9-10980XE, giving us a look at the future of the high end desktop all in one go.
Intel surely has its work cut out for it.
Earlier this month, AMD showcased the advantages of its Zen 2 microarchitecture and 7nm process by cramming the 16-core/32-thread Ryzen 9 3950X into its mainstream platforms, doubling the core count of Intel’s competing chips. That created a new tier of threaded performance for mainstream motherboards, one Intel simply can’t match, and upset Intel’s pricing structure for its high-end desktop lineup in the process.
But that wasn’t the full extent of the damage: Intel preemptively slashed the gen-on-gen pricing of its forthcoming Cascade Lake-X chips in half as it braced for the impact of AMD’s Threadripper 3000.
Now they’re here: AMD’s 32-core 64-thread Threadripper 3970X and 24-core 48-thread 3960X have landed in our labs with the same core counts as their predecessors, but instead of a headline achievement like a doubling of core counts, Threadripper’s new architecture serves as the star of the show. The ‘Castle Peak’ design brings a new design that does away with many of the previous-gen Threadrippers’ eccentricities, which equates to massive performance gains across the board.
Add in support for PCIe 4.0, and the Threadripper 3000 series looks like a winner.
Of course, with much more real estate available in the massive sTRX4 socket on TRX40 motherboards (), we also fully expect AMD to bring the density advantages of its 7nm process to bear, and soon it will: The company confirmed it would bring a beastly 64-core 128-thread Threadripper 3990X with an amazing 288MB of total cache and 280W TDP to market in 2020.
But while we await that ludicrously-appointed chip, we have plenty of excitement with the Threadripper 3970X and 3960X. These chips promise a new level of performance for prosumers and creators, and they deliver.
We’ve been busy in our labs testing the processors through our standard test suite of games and applications, but also added an expansive set of workstation tests that expose the benefits of the TRX40 platform, like AMD’s leading support of PCIe 4.0. We also have Intel’s new Core i9-10980XE on the roster, along with the Ryzen 9 3950X, to give you a view of the entire high-end battlefield.
- AMD Ryzen Threadripper 3970X (AMD Ryzen Threadripper) at Newegg for $2,547.98
Threadripper 3970X and 3960X Specifications and Pricing
AMD’s Threadripper 3000 processors debut with much higher pricing than the previous-gen models: At $1,999, the 32-core 3970X debuts for $200 more than its predecessor, and AMD tacked on an extra $100 for the $1,399 24-core 3960X. AMD attributes the increased pricing to the new level of performance and access to Threadripper’s leading-edge support for the PCIe 4.0 interface.
AMD gears the Threadripper 3000 processors for content creators and prosumers, like 3D artists, filmmakers, and software developers. For professionals, any extra time spent completing a task equates to lost revenue, making the higher price a justifiable expense if the premium matches the performance.
You’ll also need a new TRX40 motherboard to support the chips. We’ve tested a couple around the launch of these chips, and our current favorite is ASRock’s TRX40 Taichi.
Due to the higher pricing of Threadripper 3000 models and the requirement for a new motherboard, AMD is leaving the existing second-gen Threadripper processors on the market for the foreseeable future as a ‘value HEDT’ offering for content creators. You can regularly find the 32-core Threadripper 2990WX for roughly $1,700 and the 24-core 2970WX for about $925, and we expect those prices will fall soon.
Swipe to scroll horizontally
| Row 0 — Cell 0 | SEP (USD) | Cores / Threads | TDP (Watts) | Base / Boost Frequency (GHz) | L3 Cache (MB) | PCIe 4.0 Lanes |
| Threadripper 3990X | ? | 64 / 128 | 280W | ? | 256 | ? |
| Threadripper 3970X | $1,999 | 32 / 64 | 280W | 3. 7 / 4.5 |
128 | 64 |
| Threadripper 3960X | $1,399 | 24 / 48 | 280W | 3.8 / 4.5 | 128 | 64 |
| Threadripper 2990WX | ~$1,700 | 32 / 64 | 250W | 3.0 / 4.2 | 64 | 64 Gen3 |
| Threadripper 2970WX | ~$925 | 24 / 48 | 180W | 3.5 / 4.4 | 64 | 64 Gen3 |
| Ryzen 9 3950X | $749 | 16 / 32 | 105W | 3.5 / 4.7 | 64 | 64 |
| Ryzen 9 3900X | $499 | 12 / 24 | 105W | 3. 8 / 4.6 |
64 | 24 |
The Threadripper 3970X weighs in with 32 cores and 64 threads that operate at a 3.7 GHz base and 4.5 GHz boost paired with 144 MB of total cache (128MB L3), while the Threadripper 3960X has 24 cores and 48 threads that run at a 3.8 GHz base and 4.5 GHz boost with 140 MB of total cache.
Both chips expose 88 PCIe 4.0 lanes, but the TRX40 chipset consumes some of those lanes, leaving 64 exposed to the user. The PCIe 4.0 interface is a notable advantage of AMD’s Ryzen desktop lineup, but it is more important in the HEDT space where high-speed storage and networking devices are more likely to find their way into powerful systems.
Both processors support four channels of DDR4-3200 memory, but data transfer rates differ based on DIMM population. The chips support up to eight DIMMs of 32GB memory, totalling 256GB. The processors also support ECC memory, but implementation varies by motherboard. The Threadripper processors feature the same memory controllers as the Ryzen 3000 chips, so memory overclocking is a rather straightforward affair.
Swipe to scroll horizontally
| Row 0 — Cell 0 | Cores / Threads | Base / Boost (GHz) | L3 Cache (MB) | PCIe | DRAM | TDP | MSRP/RCP | Price Per Core |
| Threadripper 3990X | 64 / 128 | ? | 256 | ? | ? | 280W | ? | ? |
| Intel W-3175X | 28 / 56 | 3.1 / 4.8 | 38.5 | 48 Gen 3 | Six-Channel DDR4-2666 | 255W | $2999 | $107.10 |
| Threadripper 3970X | 32 / 64 | 3. 7 / 4.5 |
*128 | 88 Gen 4 (72 Usable) | Quad DDR4-3200 | 280W | $1999 | $62.47 |
| Xeon W-3275 | 28 / 56 | 2.5 / 4.6 | 38.5 | 64 Gen3 | Six-Channel DDR4-2933 | 205W | $4,449 | $158.89 |
| Threadripper 2990WX | 32 / 64 | 3.0 / 4.2 | 64 | 64 (4 to PCH) Gen 3 | Quad DDR4-2933 | 250W | ~$1,700 | $53 |
| Threadripper 3960X | 24 / 48 | 3.8 / 4.5 | *128 | 88 Gen 4 (72 Usable) | Quad DDR4-3200 | 280W | $1,399 | $58. 29 |
| Xeon W-3265 | 24 / 48 | 2.7 / 4.6 | 33 | 64 Gen 3 | Six-Channel DDR4-2933 | 205W | $3,349 | $139.54 |
| Threadripper 2970WX | 24 / 48 | 3.0 / 4.2 | 64 | 64 (4 to PCH) Gen 3 | Quad DDR4-2933 | 250W | ~$925 | ~$38.51 |
| Core i9-10980XE | 18 / 36 | 3.0 / 4.8 | 24.75 | 48 Gen 3 | Quad DDR4-2933 | 165W | $979 | $54.39 |
| Ryzen 9 3950X | 16 / 32 | 3. 5 / 4.7 |
64 | 64 | Dual DDR4-3200 | 105W | $749 | $46.81 |
Intel’s new Cascade Lake-X represents the company’s flagship competitor on the high-end desktop, but it is only $979, which is less than half the price of the previous-gen Core i9-9980XE. That leaves AMD’s Threadripper 3000 largely uncontested in the traditional HEDT space, though Intel does offer its Xeon W processors with the server-derived LGA 3647 socket.
The Xeon W chips slot into a higher workstation tier, top out at 28 cores, and don’t feature unlocked multipliers, meaning they aren’t overclockable like HEDT processors. These processors require expensive motherboards and coolers, and also feature six-channel memory controllers. Given their workstation-class features, the Xeon W chips that compete directly (based on core count) against Threadripper 3000 retail for $3,349 and $4,499 for a 28-core chip, so they aren’t suitable competitors.
Intel also has its Xeon W-3175X, the lone overclockable processor on the LGA 3647 platform, for $3,000. This 28-core 56-thread processor drops into exotic motherboards that carry heart-stopping price tags, so it really isn’t a direct competitor to Threadripper 3000, either.
AMD doesn’t specifically market the Threadripper processors for workstation use, and the significantly lower pricing means Intel has largely ceded the top of the HEDT market to AMD, at least for now.
Third-gen Threadripper Architecture
The Threadripper 3000 series chips come with the TSMC 7nm process, which has density advantages that manifest as higher performance, better power efficiency, more cores, and more cache packed into a smaller die area than the first- and second-gen Threadripper models.
Like the mainstream Ryzen parts, Threadripper 3000 comes packing AMD’s Zen 2 microarchitecture that brings a notable IPC improvement, but AMD spreads the design across four eight-core ‘core chiplet die’ (CCD), as opposed to two with the mainstream chips.
AMD ties the compute chiplets together via the Infinity Fabric to a large central 12nm I/O die that houses two 32x PCIe Gen4 controllers and two dual-channel DDR4 memory controllers.
Each 7nm compute chiplet features ~3.9 billion transistors, while the 12nm I/O die has ~8.34 billion transistors, yielding a total of ~23.94 billion transistors in the Threadripper 3970X and 3960X spread over 712 square millimeters of silicon.
As we can see in the last image in the album below, the new design stands in contrast to the distributed design in the first- and second-gen Threadripper models, which had up to four die connected directly to each other. Unfortunately, AMD fused off the PCIe and memory controllers on two of those die, which led to increased latency when the die needed to access far memory banks and I/O devices.
Image 1 of 4
(Image credit: AMD)(Image credit: AMD)(Image credit: AMD)(Image credit: AMD)
Threadripper 3000’s I/O die provides the compute chiplets with uniform access to the PCIe and memory controllers, thus reducing a layer of latency and ensuring a smooth quality of service.
AMD also reduced the Infinity Fabric On-Package’s (IFOP) power consumption by 27%, which the SoC now allocates to provide extra compute horsepower.
Like all modern processors, AMD’s 3000-series processors and dies come with a mix of faster and slower cores. However, as we discovered, AMD programs maximum boost frequencies on a per-core basis. That stands in contrast to the previous industry status-quo of delivering a uniform boost capability across all cores, but the technique extracts the maximum performance and power efficiency out of each die.
As a result, each core and die has different boost capabilities, so AMD chooses a premium die and places it in the CCD4 position inside the SoC. The company then uses an innovative mix of the Windows scheduler, drivers, and motherboard firmware to target the fastest two cores with lightly-threaded workloads, which allows it to execute at the highest possible frequency.
The Windows scheduler, which interfaces with CPPC2 (aka ‘preferred core), rotates the lightly-threaded work between the two fastest cores on CCD4 to reduce current and thermal density, which fosters more frequent and longer-duration boosts.
AMD has weathered plenty of criticism for its early missteps when implementing the CPPC2 functionality, but has fixed the lion’s share of the issues. As we’ll show on the following page, our Threadripper chips had no issues reaching their rated boost speeds, and even exceeded the rating on rare occasions.
TRX40 Motherboards
AMD’s new TRX40 platform features a new sTRX4 socket that isn’t backward compatible with existing Threadripper processors, and the 3000 series isn’t backward compatible with X399 boards, either. The sockets are mechanically compatible, so you use a cooler designed for previous-gen Threadripper chips with the 3000-series models, and AMD says that any cooling solution capable of handling 1000- and 2000-series processors should suffice for the 3970X and 3960X.
The sTRX4 socket features the same 4094 pins as the previous-gen sTR4 socket, but AMD changed the electrical layout of the new socket to accommodate the PCIe 4.0 interface. The company hasn’t committed to compatibility with future Threadripper processors, but says the socket is designed with scalability in mind.
That will obviously come in handy when the 64-core Threadripper 3990X lands next year.
Image 1 of 5
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
The TRX40 chipset features 16 GB/s of throughput between the processor and the chipset, which comes courtesy of 8 PCIe 4.0 lanes. In contrast, Intel supports 4 GB/s of throughput over its DMI link through the PCIe 3.0 interface. TRX40’s extra bandwidth will benefit multiple devices that hang off the TRX40 chipset, like large PCIe SSD arrays.
Threadripper 3000 also offers up to 133GB/s of concurrent bandwidth to connected devices, while Intel only offers 52 GB/s, which is another significant advantage.
MSI, Gigabyte, ASUS and ASRock have all announced leading-edge TRX40 motherboards, and we expect more to follow in the coming months.
MORE: Best CPUs
MORE: Intel & AMD Processor Hierarchy
MORE: All CPUs Content
AMD Ryzen Threadripper 3970X: Price Comparison
255 Amazon customer reviews
☆☆☆☆☆
$2,547.
98
View
No price information
Check Amazon
powered by
- 1
Current page:
Climbing Castle Peak
Next Page Boost Speeds, Power Consumption, Test Setup
Paul Alcorn is the Deputy Managing Editor for Tom’s Hardware US. He writes news and reviews on CPUs, storage and enterprise hardware.
|
3DNews Technologies and IT market. News processors Ryzen Threadripper Pro 5000WX benchmarks: on … The most interesting in the reviews
06/25/2022 [01:37], Nikolai Khizhnyak Puget Systems, a manufacturer of high-performance PCs, workstations and servers, has tested the Ryzen Threadripper Pro 5000WX HEDT processors in several professional applications. The new series of chips, which debuted in March in Lenovo P620 workstations and recently appeared in retail, turned out to be much faster than its predecessors Ryzen Threadripper 3000, as well as competitors in the face of Intel Xeon W-3300.
Image source: AMD AMD itself has promised a 19% increase in IPC (the number of instructions executed per clock) for the Ryzen Threadripper Pro 5000WX, but in some tests the performance of new products turned out to be up to 35% higher than the chips of past generations. Credit goes to the new Zen 3 cores, unified L3 cache, and higher clock speeds, as the number of cores remains the same as the previous Zen 2-based series. Image source here and below: Puget Systems
Despite the same number of cores, the multi-threaded performance of the Ryzen Threadripper Pro 5000WX has improved significantly compared to the previous generation. The 64-core Ryzen Threadripper Pro 5995WX, 32-core 5975WX, 24-core 5965WX, 64-core Ryzen Threadripper 3995WX, 32-core 3975WX and 16-core 3955WX took part in the tests. From Intel came the 24-core Xeon W-3365 and W-3345, the 16-core W-3335, and the 16-core consumer flagship Core i9-12900K (Alder Lake). In Adobe Premiere Pro, the Ryzen Threadripper Pro 5995WX, 5975WX, and 5965WX were 10-20% faster than all Xeons in the comparison and also outperformed the previous generation Ryzen Threadripper by 7-23%. The exception was the consumer Core i9-12900K, which scored the highest score in the test. All thanks to more powerful video encoding and decoding capabilities. However, AMD chips are only a few percent behind. The leadership of the Ryzen Threadripper Pro 5000WX returned in the Adobe After Effects test, ahead of all Intel chips and its own 3000-series predecessors. The situation has not changed in Davinci Resolve. However, the difference between processor performance has been reduced. Despite this, all Ryzen Threadripper Pro 5000WX models were ahead. The Adobe Photoshop test ended up behind the Core i9-12900K again. It outperformed everyone, including the 64-core flagship Ryzen Threadripper Pro 5995WX. The 24-core 5965WX came in second, followed by the 32-core 5975WX, 47 points behind. The results of the Adobe Lightroom Classic test can be considered a real anomaly. The 24-core 5965WX easily outperformed all competitors in this test. Even the 64-core Ryzen Threadripper Pro 5995WX took only 5th place here and unexpectedly lost out to the 32-core Ryzen Threadripper Pro 3975WX and the 16-core Core i9-12900K. It’s possible that Lightroom’s algorithms don’t work well with 64-core chips, as there were no oddities in this test with models with fewer cores. Cinebench R23 results almost do not need additional comments. In the single-threaded test, the Core i9 expectedly won here due to the higher frequency and architecture, and in the multi-threaded test, the flagship Ryzen Threadripper Pro 5995WX was not equal — it was about 10 thousand points ahead of its predecessor. Unreal Engine and Blender were other landmark tests. The Ryzen Threadripper 5000WX series of HEDT processors can be confidently called the best among its kind. Its representatives are definitely faster than the Xeon W-3000 and Ryzen Threadripper 3000 models. The advantage of the new processors ranged from 15 to 45 percent, depending on a particular test and competitor model. This makes the Ryzen Threadripper 5000WX series of chips a very smart choice as a base for workstations. They are able to surpass everything that Intel is ready to offer in this segment. The exception is, as mentioned above, the consumer Core i9-12900K, which was found to be faster in some Adobe applications. But here it is already necessary to look at the needs of the user. Source:
If you notice an error, select it with the mouse and press CTRL+ENTER. Related materials Permanent URL: Headings: Tags: ← В |
This is all due to Photoshop not being able to load all the Ryzen Threadripper cores, and the Alder Lake chip with the higher frequency and IPC level wins here. 
Both rely on multithreading. In general, the Ryzen Threadripper Pro 5000 was 12-15% faster than the previous generation models. Intel solutions lost by 35-45%. Even the 32-core Xeon W-3365 couldn’t catch up with the 24-core Ryzen Threadripper Pro 5965WX. 
Test and review: AMD Ryzen Threadripper 2990WX and 2950X — a new blow to Intel
Just in time for the first birthday of Ryzen Threadripper processors, AMD decided to release the second generation. As in the spring when we switched from Ryzen 1 to Ryzen 2, the new generation captivates with two features: a significant number of cores and a low price. Both factors should help AMD bite off the high-end desktop market (HEDT) from perpetual competitor Intel. And the tests of the new flagship Ryzen Threadripper 29The 90WX with 32 cores and the Ryzen Threadripper 2950X will show how difficult or easy AMD will make this. However, the conversation will be not only about the performance and efficiency of new CPUs, but also about their positioning.
According to AMD, the first generation Ryzen Threadripper processors were not planned at all. But some AMD specialists came up with a proposal to expand the capabilities of the existing range of CPUs based on the Zen architecture. The results were so impressive that the employees were given the green light. Of course, it is quite difficult to verify this legend. In any case, AMD’s pressure on Intel has increased significantly, and the first three first-generation HEDT chips have won sympathy among users. Therefore, the ground for the second generation was prepared. Intel seems to be frozen in place, the company still can’t compete with Ryzen Threadripper processors on price and performance. But still, for the second generation, it is not enough to increase the number of cores in order to get more performance. Single-threaded performance remains a key factor as well.
But let’s take a look at the four new CPUs and compare them with the three first generation processors.
The difference is quite significant. If you compare the Ryzen Threadripper 2950X with its predecessor, the Ryzen Threadripper 1950X, you will notice a higher Turbo frequency for single cores. The same goes for the Ryzen Threadripper 2920X processor, which will be released at a later date. It is also faster than the Ryzen Threadripper 1920X when loaded with single cores.
| Model | Cores/ Threads |
Base/ Turbo Speed |
L3 Cache 9 0094 | Memory Clock | TDP | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ryzen Threadripper 2990WX |
Ryzen Threadripper 29 70WX |
24/48 | 3.0/4.2GHz | 64MB | DDR4-2933 | 250W |
| Ryzen Threadripper 2950X |
3.5/4.4 GHz | 32 MB | DDR4-2933 | 180W | ||
| Ryzen Threadripper 1950X |
16/32 | 3. 5/4.2GHz |
DDR4-2666 | 180W | ||
| Ryzen Threadripper 2920X |
12/24 | 3.5/4.3 GHz | 32MB | DDR4-2933 | 180W | |
| Ryzen Threadripper 1920X |
12/24 | 3.5/4.2GHz | 32MB | DDR4-2666 | 180W | |
| Ryzen Threadripper 1900X |
8/16 | 3.8/4.2GHz | 16MB | DDR4-2666 |
The two WX processors stand apart as the predecessors of the first generation Ryzen Threadripper is not for them. Entry level Ryzen Threadripper 19 processor00X can also be dropped, so far AMD has no plans to release a successor. Probably the reason lies in the proximity to the Ryzen 7 2700X processor (test).
AMD first decided to release two Ryzen Threadripper 2990WX and 2950X processors. According to AMD, the top model will compete with the Intel Core i9-7980XE, while the Ryzen Threadripper 2950X processor, aimed at «gamers and enthusiasts», will compete with the Core i9-7900X.