1. TechSpot is dedicated to computer enthusiasts and power users. Ask a question and give support. Join the community here.
    TechSpot is dedicated to computer enthusiasts and power users.
    Ask a question and give support.
    Join the community here, it only takes a minute.
    Dismiss Notice

AMD launches the $549 Threadripper 1900X

By midian182 ยท 18 replies
Sep 1, 2017
Post New Reply
  1. AMD has released its third and cheapest Ryzen Threadripper CPU. For those who can’t or won’t pay $1000 for the 16-core/32-thread 1950X flagship model, the 1900X offers 8 cores and 16 threads for almost half the price – around $549.

    The newest release is also quite a bit cheaper than the other Threadripper CPU - the 12-core/24-thread 1920X, which costs around $800.

    As we reported back in July, Threadripper 1900X is essentially a Ryzen 7 CPU for the X399 platform that comes with a few upgrades. It operates at a base clock speed of 3.8 GHz, which is slightly faster than a Ryzen 7 1800X, and features a 4 GHz boost speed along with a XFR boost to 4.2GHz.

    The Ryzen 7 1800X chip, which also boasts 8 cores and 16 theads, sells for around $50 cheaper than the Threadripper 1900X and offers similar gaming performance, but AMD claims that Threadripper allows for better overclocking compared to Ryzen 7.

    Another advantage of the 1900X is that, like the rest of the Threadripper lineup, it comes with quad channel memory support (Ryzen 7 has two channels) and 64 PCIe lanes. And when AMD updates its X399 chipset later this month, it will add support for booting from NVMe drives configured in RAID.

    Compared to Intel’s similar offering - the Core i7-7820X – AMD’s 1900X chip has the same number of cores and threads and the same quad-channel memory support. Threadripper does, however, feature 5 percent more cache, more than double the PCIe lanes, and is slightly cheaper.

    Permalink to story.

     
  2. BlackCarT

    BlackCarT TS Rookie

    The final nail in intels coffin ---> NVME RAID
     
  3. andy06shake

    andy06shake TS Evangelist Posts: 481   +156

    Intel really needs to run out some new products that don't require an excessive amount of power or generate ludicrously high thermals.
     
  4. H3llion

    H3llion TechSpot Paladin Posts: 1,530   +350

    Shame that the GPU industry is in the shitter, oh how the tables have turned.

    Also 1700 for 1900x, I doubt any benchmarks are out yet, are they?
     
    Reehahs likes this.
  5. Puiu

    Puiu TS Evangelist Posts: 3,073   +1,493

    from what I've seen, the quad channel memory does help in multithreaded situations making It 10-15% better than the 1800x. gaming should be very similar.
    If you don't need the extra features that come with the HEDT platform (x399) then you are better off buying an R7 1700 and OCing that. You'll get 90% of the performance for half the price.
     
  6. Skidmarksdeluxe

    Skidmarksdeluxe TS Evangelist Posts: 8,647   +3,280

    You're being overly optimistic aren't you? Intel ain't going anywhere anytime soon. Ryzen won't have much impact, if any impact at all on Intel's bottom line but it's got their attention.
     
  7. Uncle Al

    Uncle Al TS Evangelist Posts: 4,200   +2,661

    Hmmmmm ...... I can live without it .....
     
  8. penn919

    penn919 TS Maniac Posts: 236   +117

    The death of intel isn't what we should hope for anyways; that would be against our interests. What we need are competitive CPUs to challenge intel at every segment of the market.
     
  9. texasrattler

    texasrattler TS Evangelist Posts: 428   +149

    Intel isn't worried about AMD. Sure AMD is finally after 2 decades releasing a product that can at least compete with Intel but it wont overtake them, not even close.
    SMT issues are still a problem for gaming with Ryzen. Not sure if there is or will be a issue with Threadripper, I would assume so. AMD has yet to fix that problem. I see ppl all the time complaining over that, that they need to still disable SMT for gaming performance to improve.
    The biggest thing and practically all that matters to mainstream gamers is that Intel is still King and overall better for gaming even though Ryzen is good it still doesn't beat Intel. Intel still wins even when another product is basically just as good but it doesn't beat it so most will still stick with Intel as there's no reason to go with AMD other than it's cheaper but there is still the gaming issue for AMD, SMT.
     
    Skidmarksdeluxe likes this.
  10. ypsylon

    ypsylon TS Booster Posts: 130   +29

    Like TR is very power efficient... It drinks electricity like mad as you need ludicrous voltage to OC it and anything above 4GHz is borderline impossibility.

    On the other side delided S-X trounces TR on thermals. It can easily chop 20C on the core, returning to more normal temps known from H-E/BR-E. Not to mention that 10c 7900x keeps pace with 1950x and in many instances it can easily outperform it. That's statement in itself.

    Anyways, its good that AMD delivered some kick in the nuts for Chipzilla, however I personally sticking with Intel. AMD has to develop advanced ecosystem which is non-existent after 10 years in the wilderness. Intel still keeps 3 aces in its hand out of possible 4. From rumors of people behind the scenes replacement for X299 shapes to be pretty badass. Like I've said before Zen/Ryzen unveiling if it'll be a big success (which it is for the most part), Intel will return with sledgehammer generation after that. It happened before, it'll happen again.
     
  11. andy06shake

    andy06shake TS Evangelist Posts: 481   +156

    I just want the competition, I have an i5 system as well as a newer 1600X rig, so im neither here nor there in the fanboy department.

    Seems to me through sledgehammer blows from both sides in each new iteration of the product is a requirement unless we wish to see a return to being spoon feed minuscule improvements with each new tick, tock of the industry as is plainly evident from Intel's i5/i7 range since the days the 2500K/2600K reigned supreme.
     
  12. HardReset

    HardReset TS Guru Posts: 608   +231

    It's not Ryzen's problem. Intel CPU's with hyper threading has same problems. Heck, ALL CPU's with SMT have problems being sometimes slower with SMT than without SMT. Intel had that problem 2001 already.

    Again, every SMT CPU has same problem.

    TR is not meant to be driven over 4 GHz. Manufacturing process limitation.

    7900X probably scores better on some Intel optimized single thread favoring tasks, and of course on heavy AVX workloads that heats processor to hellish temperatures. Other than those Threadripper is much faster.

    And that x299 "replacement" is what? Intel has never returned with "sledgehammer generation" after Athlon launch 1999. Even Core 2 was simply crap as it missed integrated memory controller. Looked good on benchmarks but generally was slow. Sandy Bridge (2500K) generation was basically little step forward from Lynnfield.
     
  13. andy06shake

    andy06shake TS Evangelist Posts: 481   +156

    Well said CPU can still duke it out with some of the best of them doing the rounds today, to a fashion. ;)

    Sandy Bridge was the bee's knees back in the day, it's the mediocre improvements that Intel released afterward that kind of stuck in my craw.
     
    Last edited: Sep 2, 2017
  14. Boilerhog146

    Boilerhog146 TS Evangelist Posts: 615   +215

    Does it come in that nice packaging?
     
  15. texasrattler

    texasrattler TS Evangelist Posts: 428   +149

    I don't have to turn off HT so it's not all CPUs, yall love to make crap up.

    Go into gaming forums and you will see Ryzen users saying or being advised to turn off SMT.

    I see lil to no one saying that with Intel and I don't have to turn off HT, all of my games work just fine.
     
  16. HardReset

    HardReset TS Guru Posts: 608   +231

    You don't Have To turn off SMT on Ryzen's either.

    That's because SMT on means lower performance on many games.

    Games work just fine too with Ryzen and SMT on. Still probably Ryzen is slightly faster without SMT on many games and that's why it's "recommended" to turn off SMT if only gaming. As you can see there, HT hurts performance with recent Intel CPU too https://www.techpowerup.com/forums/...rks-core-i7-6700k-hyperthreading-test.219417/

    Just like I said on previous post.
     
  17. EClyde

    EClyde TS Evangelist Posts: 1,524   +544

    Threadripper...sounds like what my Uncle would have called a really loud FART
     
  18. wizardB

    wizardB TS Booster Posts: 128   +26

    You do realize that AMD has capture over 50% of the new CPU market in the last month at at least one large European retailer and the trend is continuing worldwide if you check the numbers, so I would guess that yes Intel is worried in a major way.
     
    HardReset likes this.
  19. wiyosaya

    wiyosaya TS Evangelist Posts: 2,918   +1,429

    I am not sure that Intel is not worried about AMDs latest offerings. If you are strictly talking about gaming, then yes, you are likely correct.

    IMO, AMD did not design Zen to go after what is arguably one of the smaller market segments. Where Zen presently shines in comparison to Intel is in server and workstation workloads. Typically, server and workstation workloads command a price premium, and in that market space, it appears that Zen chips are the value buy ATM. It is this market space, IMO, that AMD went after because it offers the greatest returns.

    That said, I highly doubt that Lisa Su has forgotten gamers. My bet is that whatever comes after Zen will compete better in the gamer market. And those improvements will be funded by the profits AMD will get by giving Intel a run for the money in the server and workstation markets.

    There is, too, the recent news mentioned by wizardB that even in the enthusiast space, Zen is outselling Intel at at least one big European retailer. Though AMD for now is not the undisputed king of gaming, it has garnered the eye of many enthusiasts because Zen is a value buy.

    Unless Intel has something up its sleeve, is incredibly arrogant (which with incremental improvements over 10+ years it probably is), or is being led by some business wonk that does not understand the technical competition that AMD is once again giving them, IMO, they should be worried.
     

Similar Topics

Add your comment to this article

You need to be a member to leave a comment. Join thousands of tech enthusiasts and participate.
TechSpot Account You may also...