Workstation: Quad Channel (1900x+X399) vs. Dual Channel (1800x+X370).

t_and

Junior Member
Sep 4, 2017
11
2
41
Hi all,

I've setting up a Workstation and with the arrival of Threadripper I asked my self a new question: Would the Quad channel Ram from the X399 chipset suppose a big difference vs dual channel?

I had in mind a 1800x + X370 AORUS Gaming 5 with dual channel RAM, but now I'm wondering if the setup 1900x + X399 AORUS Gaming 7 would make a difference: 64 PCIE + Quadchannel RAM.

The overprice is about 240€ (Mobo: 330 vs 190, CPU: 460 vs 360), but the 1900x has 32MB (vs16MB from the 1800x) and 3,8GHz (vs 3,6 from the 1800x), and it allows Quadchannel.

Im wondering if this overprice would really make a difference when using 4x8GB Corsair 3200 Led RAM, when rendering with 3DSMax, big photoshop files, big CAD files...

Thanks for your help.
 

Topweasel

Diamond Member
Oct 19, 2000
5,326
1,521
136
Depends, but I don't think CAD is very bandwidth dependant. You would have better luck making sure the files are on an NVME drive. That said one of the other benefits of Threadripper is more than 1 CPU connected PCIe 3.0 4x drive. On top of that you could even raid them now. Getting TR would really give you the option of having both more NVME and more memory bandwidth, so you are covered either way.
 

t_and

Junior Member
Sep 4, 2017
11
2
41
Hello and thanks for your reply.

Yes, I also thought of this, I was considering a 960 EVO M2 SSD. I guess that would make quite a difference.

Question is if it's worth the price spending the extra money on the Threadripper platform, or if it would just be a few extra power feeling.

Thanks
 

nickmania

Member
Aug 11, 2016
41
11
51
3D render usually have no impact on memory bandwidth because the calculations inside the CPU are slow, same for video and music editing. Memory speed is important only if you calculate physics data. Do not know about photoshop, but do not think it would be important. So IMHO select the cheaper.
 

Topweasel

Diamond Member
Oct 19, 2000
5,326
1,521
136
Hello and thanks for your reply.

Yes, I also thought of this, I was considering a 960 EVO M2 SSD. I guess that would make quite a difference.

Question is if it's worth the price spending the extra money on the Threadripper platform, or if it would just be a few extra power feeling.

Thanks
It really depends on what you are looking for in the future. Multiple NVME, go with Threadripper. 8 sticks of memory, go with Threadripper. Ability to dramatically increase core count in the future go with Threadripper. 4 channel memory bandwidth go with Threadripper.

X370 gives you 1 NVME full speed drive. 2 Channel memory. 4 memory slots. Possibly an upgrade to 12 cores later. X370 is no slouch but it's a compromised solution meant for general usage. It's great if it's all you need, but not so great if you get it and realize or decide you need more later. When getting a system for actual productivity I recommend going a little overboard. Compared to a 1800X system you are looking at an extra $150 to $200, for the board and CPU. I would spend that to get the flexibility it would provide you if you need more grunt.
 

t_and

Junior Member
Sep 4, 2017
11
2
41
I'm looking for a machine that can last a few years. I use files that use lots of memory, like heavy 3dmax models with plenty of volumes and also heavy CAD files. But I guess 32GB should be enough for this. (I've read though that Corsairs LED Ram isn't the best for Ryzen? I've read that samsung modules like in the G.Skill ones, work much better with TR). But I guess it's always good to have the possibilty to be able to aim for 64GB.

So I've correctly understood, the performance between the 2 options we're talking here aren't huge, but the second one has a lot more room for improvement (more ram and better cpu's) in the future, right?

Thanks alot
 

R0H1T

Platinum Member
Jan 12, 2013
2,566
141
106
I'm looking for a machine that can last a few years. I use files that use lots of memory, like heavy 3dmax models with plenty of volumes and also heavy CAD files. But I guess 32GB should be enough for this. (I've read though that Corsairs LED Ram isn't the best for Ryzen? I've read that samsung modules like in the G.Skill ones, work much better with TR). But I guess it's always good to have the possibilty to be able to aim for 64GB.

So I've correctly understood, the performance between the 2 options we're talking here aren't huge, but the second one has a lot more room for improvement (more ram and better cpu's) in the future, right?

Thanks alot
This being TR? It has better I/O options, more PCIe lanes, quad channel memory & also the possibility of more (Zen) cores released in the future. It's also possible that Zen2 based HEDT might share the same socket, but don't count on that.
 

Topweasel

Diamond Member
Oct 19, 2000
5,326
1,521
136
This being TR? It has better I/O options, more PCIe lanes, quad channel memory & also the possibility of more (Zen) cores released in the future. It's also possible that Zen2 based HEDT might share the same socket, but don't count on that.
It will AMD has already stated that both sockets will last till 2020 unless they feel absolutely forced to go to either DDR5 or PCIe 4.0/5.0.

Intel might be able to release a 4.0 platform next year but unlikely and Zen 2 should almost be finished for a late 2018 production with 2019 for retail. There is almost zero chance that Zen 2 doesn't work on AM4 and TR4. Zen 2 is also when AMD is likely to up the core count to 24.
 

t_and

Junior Member
Sep 4, 2017
11
2
41
Thats good news then. You are talking about both sockets or specifically TR4?

For the price difference I might really consider the TR4 looking at this.
 

Topweasel

Diamond Member
Oct 19, 2000
5,326
1,521
136
Thats good news then. You are talking about both sockets or specifically TR4?

For the price difference I might really consider the TR4 looking at this.
Both Sockets really. Actually all 3 (EPYC). They are all tied together. The only reason AMD would have to replace any of them is memory or PCIe 4.0-5.0 support. Both would require a design change to the CPU/Die. Since all of them share the same die they have to either A.) Not update one or more of the product lines, or B.) update them all. EPYC is going to be the anchor here, it's unlikely AMD wants to change that socket till at least 2022. It's probably unreasonable, but that's why they stated that they saw them using the same socket through 2020.

Now I noted that AMD could withhold a version update. This might even happen next year. When the 14nm+ refresh hits (Zen+), they may not update TR and EPYC for that since the extra speed within their power limits might not be worth the extra qualification. It's unlikely they would do the same with a major refresh like Zen 2, but if it gets them another year on the platform you might see AMD hold steady in the later years on TR and EPYC to match any OEM requirements.
 

t_and

Junior Member
Sep 4, 2017
11
2
41
Thanks for your info.

I didn't know Intel had a similar CPU (cores/price/quad channel) as the 1900x, the 7820x. Performance wise looks like they are quite close when testing them in renderings ( http://blog.logicalincrements.com/2017/07/intel-core-i7-7820x-vs-i7-6900k-vs-amd-ryzen-7/ ). Not sure I would benefit from the extra PCI-L from Threadripper. when only using a GTX1070?

But still, looks like TR as you said, has a longer live forecast.
 

Topweasel

Diamond Member
Oct 19, 2000
5,326
1,521
136
Thanks for your info.

I didn't know Intel had a similar CPU (cores/price/quad channel) as the 1900x, the 7820x. Performance wise looks like they are quite close when testing them in renderings ( http://blog.logicalincrements.com/2017/07/intel-core-i7-7820x-vs-i7-6900k-vs-amd-ryzen-7/ ). Not sure I would benefit from the extra PCI-L from Threadripper. when only using a GTX1070?

But still, looks like TR as you said, has a longer live forecast.
And it might not see an update until a new socket. Least not a significant update. Looking at the outlook for X299, you have to look at the Core arch. Right now it's SL-X. Knowing Skylake and what you have after that is Kabylake, a minimally changed arch (very very very minimally changed arch) on a slightly better process leading to a faster CPU, but pretty much same arch. Then we have Coffee Lake which is going to be Kaby Lake with 2 new cores. Skylake-X on top of that was a major redesign of the Sky Lake arch for the sake of better Server CPU performance. So Kabylake and Coffee lake don't have a direct translation and some of the changes made for Skylake-X are from Kaby Lake. So unless Intel decided a year or two ago that they needed a 2018-2019 refresh of SL-X (when using SL-X I am talking about all SL Xeon implementations and not just X299) with more cores, it's unlikely they will do a refresh till 10nm with a new arch. The chances of them using a compatible socket for a new Arch and die size (even though they could) is highly unlikely. Just look at what they are doing with Coffee Lake and forcing a new chipset just because.

There may be a Coffee Lake-X (like the current Kabylake-X). But if they do have an upgrade for X299 it will only really be a small clock upgrade with 2 more cores at the high end. Not something you would upgrade a SL-X CPU for.
 
  • Like
Reactions: t_and
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
O Motherboards 0

ASK THE COMMUNITY