Question What are the advantages of Threadripper CPU's over Ryzen CPUs?

[Terabyte 11]

I was researching CPU's recently and noticed that in many CPU comaparisions, Threadripper CPU's have lower performance than Ryzen CPUs of similar core counts, even though my understanding has always been that Threadrippers are AMDs premium line of CPUs. So what are the advantages of Threadripper CPU's over Ryzens with similar core counts, for example the Threadripper 2950X vs the Ryzen 9 3950X, or are there any advantages at all?

 

[Markfw]

Well, the big points are.... They have twice the number of memory channels. They have a lot more PCIE lanes, and they have up to 32 cores (up to 64 cores next year)

The only reason Ryzen beats them in some bencgmarks, are that for those that can not use all the cores, the Ryzens are clocked higher..

Someone fill in what I may have left out.

 

[Atari2600]

So what are the advantages of Threadripper CPU's over Ryzens with similar core counts, for example the Threadripper 2950X vs the Ryzen 9 3950X, or are there any advantages at all?

You are comparing across generations there.

The 2950X is based on Zen+, the 3950X on Zen2. With Zen2 having both better IPC and higher clock speeds - its no surprise that in any non-memory-bandwidth sensitive benchmarks, the 3950X would outpace the 2950X.

However, if your workload was memory-bandwidth-sensitive, (i.e. CFD) you'd find the 2950X would be approximately twice as quick as the 3950X.



As Mark mentions - the X399 platform (for 2950X) would take twice as much DRAM as AM4 and do it across twice the memory channels, it'd also have many, many more PCIe lanes and other odds-and-ends.

 

[Terabyte 11]

You are comparing across generations there.

I know but there isn't a third gen 16 core Threadripper to compare with.

 

[Markfw]

I know but there isn't a third gen 16 core Threadripper to compare with.

Nope, gen 1 and gen2 threadripper ha a 16 core. But for gen 3, the AM4 stops at 16 cores, and threadripper starts at 24 cores.

 

[ClockHound]

Nope, gen 1 and gen2 threadripper ha a 16 core. But for gen 3, the AM4 stops at 16 cores, and threadripper starts at 24 cores.

Not to be...I was holding out for a TR3 with 19 cores, but I'm odd that way.

 

[Atari2600]

I know but there isn't a third gen 16 core Threadripper to compare with.

Point accepted - but then is it so surprising of the two equal core CPUs you are comparing, the older one is slower? (when its platform memory bandwidth advantage isn't a factor)

 

[Kedas]

Someone fill in what I may have left out.

- You can brag about them.


The platform allows for more memory RAM (and more fast storage) if that would be needed. (consequences of more mem channels and more PCIe lanes)

 

[Nereus77]

Threadripper is overkill for most people, but then again that's the point.

Ryzen is for gamers and Joe Soaps (like me). It's the workhorse. It's the gaming PC. Its what's recommended for most people.

Threadripper is the beast that warrants quad channel RAM and 64 PCI-E lanes. If you have heavy workloads that makes most CPUs cry (like video rendering, intense multitasking, running 10+ VMs at once, etc), then Threadripper is for you. If not, most of us will recommend Ryzen.

 

[Soulkeeper]

Threadripper is basically two am4 systems in one.
The biggest plus is the added pcie and more of everything.
But you pay for it.