I don't understand the new ThreadRipper 280W TDP

[TennesseeTony]

I don't understand the new ThreadRipper 280W TDP. The 'consumer' 3950X is 105w TDP. Double the core count and you get the best of the new TR, but instead of 105w x2= 210w TDP, it's way on up there at 280watts. Yes, baseclock is a bit faster. But 70 watts for another 100-200MHz bclk?

Anyone have any insight on this?

 

[Markfw]

I will wait until we get reviews out. I think there is some misinformation going around. Also, it would be that 24 cores@4 ghz or better could be the reason.

 

[ao_ika_red]

Based on Ian's investigation on 3950X core loading, I can only assume that TR 3000 will have more power allowance (probably 10W per core, instead of 7W per core on 3950X). And remember, TR 3000 has different I/O which much larger than Ryzen's. It will be interesting to know TR uncore power.
But as Mark said, we need to wait for the review, especially from AT and Level1Tech.

reference:

AMD Ryzen 9 3950X vs Intel Core i9-9900K: The Battle for Mainstream Supremacy

Intel and AMD's finest mainstream chips go toe-to-toe in a seven-round faceoff.

www.anandtech.com

 

[StefanR5R]

The 'consumer' 3950X is 105w TDP.

What @ao_ika_red said, and linked to.

AMD's TDP is meaningless now too (following Intel's example), since newer AMD processor models have a TDP printed on the box which is pretty far removed from the PPT (package power target). 3950X's PPT is 142 Watt. Multiply by 2, and you arrive at...

Maybe this means that Threadripper's TDP will be closer to its PPT again, unlike the new desktop CPU models.

 

[biodoc]

I finally bought another meter to monitor power from the wall on my 3900X. My other meter is connected to a 3700X. Both computers are running a mixture of MIP1 and MCM tasks from WCG at full load at base clocks. Both computers are running linux.

3900X@ 3.8 GHz (TDP =105 "thermal watts") pulls 212 watts at the wall.
Other details: Gigabyte X570 MB, 2 - 16 GB RAM modules @ 3200, dual 1080 Ti graphics cards (idle), 2 NVME drives, 2 SSD drives, 2 TB spinner and 4 fans. I'm not sure which model of Seasonic PSU is installed.

3700X@3.7 GHz (TDP =65 "thermal watts") pulls 127 watts at the wall.
Other details: Gigabyte X570 MB, 2 - 8 GB RAM modules @ 3200, dual graphics cards (RTX 2700 and 2700 super, idle), 1 NVME drive and a corsair 850 watt PSU (gold+).

I thought the power draw from the wall on both computers was a little high. The MIP1 app is rosetta so I know it is not using sse/avx instruction sets but I'm wondering if the MCM app is optimized to use instruction sets.

Anyway, my fudge factor for these 2 cpus @ base clock is Power at the wall (watts) = 2 x TDP. Obviously it will be app dependent.

If I suspend WCG work on the 3900X, the "idle" power draw is 160 watts. This seems high doesn't it?

 

[StefanR5R]

I thought the power draw from the wall on both computers was a little high. The MIP1 app is rosetta so I know it is not using sse/avx instruction sets but I'm wondering if the MCM app is optimized to use instruction sets.

As a point of comparison, the E5v4s of mine pull a "medium" amount of power when running a mix of MIP and MCM, or MCM only. (And below average power with MIP only, due to RAM I/O starving the processors.) The AVX2 clock offset of the E5v4s does not kick in under these loads.

If I suspend WCG work on the 3900X, the "idle" power draw is 160 watts. This seems high doesn't it?

Does nvidia-smi confirm that the GPUs are in power saving mode? Should be 8 W per each 1080Ti according to board sensors.

 

[StefanR5R]

PS, from the 3700X and 3900X review:

What is curious about the new chip is just how closely it follows its power limitations. The new boosting algorithm on the Ryzen 3 series is a particularly “opportunistic” one that will go as high in frequencies as it can go within its constraints, no matter the amount of CPU cores.

The constraints are as follows:

• Package Power Tracking (PPT): The power threshold that is allowed to be delivered to the socket.
  • This is 88W for 65W TDP processors, and 142W for 105W TDP processors.
• Thermal Design Current (TDC): The maximum amount of current delivered by the motherboard’s voltage regulators when under thermally constrained scenarios (high temperatures)
  • This is 60A for 65W TDP processors, and 95A for 105W TDP processors.
• Electrical Design Current (EDC): This is the maximum amount of current at any instantaneous short period of time that can be delivered by the motherboard’s voltage regulators.
  • This is 90A for 65W TDP processors, and 140A for 105W TDP processors.

 

[biodoc]

Does nvidia-smi confirm that the GPUs are in power saving mode? Should be 8 W per each 1080Ti according to board sensors.

Yes, although this is my main computer so with web browsing a little power draw is expected. I have CPB disabled to achieve base clock frequencies at full load. lscpu reports:

CPU MHz: 3797.998
CPU max MHz: 3800.0000
CPU min MHz: 2200.0000

I wonder if my bios settings prevent CPU min from going below 2200 MHz. I'll have to check if setting bios to optimized defaults and then setting TDP/PPT at 105/105 will give the same results.

 

[biodoc]

f I suspend WCG work on the 3900X, the "idle" power draw is 160 watts. This seems high doesn't it?

Disabling CPB must have an impact on power saving features.

I enabled CPB and then set TDP (105) and PPT (105). The processor now runs at 3.8 GHz full load and total power draw is 218 watts. Idle power draw is now 90-100 watts.

 

[StefanR5R]

@biodoc, a few Watts can be shaved off of the idle power consumption of the X570 chipset, using AGESA 1.0.0.4 and aggressive ASPM settings: post in German, autotranslate. Doesn't look like the big breakthrough in energy savings though which the platform could use.

 

[VirtualLarry]

I thought the power draw from the wall on both computers was a little high.

I posted about this too, before, in CPUs and Overclocking sub-forum:

Question - Ryzen 3000-series rigs, have "high" idle power usage?

80W idle power at the wall, CPU load 4% of a 3600, have RX 5700 GPU (display), GTX 1660 ti 'Gaming X' (secondary), dual NVMe SSD, one SATA SSD, Antec Gold PSU Why is my idle so high? Maybe I need to check my power plan, should have done that before posting this thread, I guess. Edit: Oh, I was...

forums.anandtech.com

 

[biodoc]

But 70 watts for another 100-200MHz bclk?

It's possible I think.

3900X (105 TDP; AGESA 1.0.0.3 ABBA) data running WCG full load:

bios optimized defaults (PLL at 142?): 4.0 GHz pulls 267 watts at the wall <---freq is likely limited by cooling with wraith
TDP/PLL (package power limit) set at 105/105: 3.8 GHz pulls 218 watts at the wall
TDP/PLL set at 65/88: 3.7 GHz pulls 199 watts at the wall
TDP/PLL set at 65/65: 3.0 GHz pulls 167 watts at the wall

3.8 to 4 GHz requires 52 watts
3.7 to 4 GHz requires 68 watts
3.7 -3.8 GHz requires 20 watts
3.0 -3.7 GHz requires 32 watts

Idle power draw is 80-90 watts in all cases.

Note: The latest bios with 1.0.0.4 B does not allow me to underclock using TDP/PLL bios settings.

 

[ao_ika_red]

Anyone have any insight on this?

The AMD Ryzen Threadripper 3960X and 3970X Review: 24 and 32 Cores on 7nm

www.anandtech.com

 

[StefanR5R]

Phoronix has performance-per-watt graphs for:
Threadripper 3970X, 3960X, 2990WX; Core i9 10980XE, Ryzen 9 3900X.
(Sadly, their server CPU reviews don't have the same metrics.)

 

[biodoc]

Phoronix has performance-per-watt graphs for:
Threadripper 3970X, 3960X, 2990WX; Core i9 10980XE, Ryzen 9 3900X.
(Sadly, their server CPU reviews don't have the same metrics.)

For me, those numbers are worst case scenarios since the MB bios is very likely set at optimized defaults. For my 3900X, that's an extra 50 watts to go from 3.8 GHz to 4 GHz full load.

Once again AMD released new processors that would not boot on linux. He had to add MCE=off as a kernel parameter to get them to boot. Oddly enough he had no issues when he tested the new Rome processors.