AMD Threadripper Pro 5000 is now official, plus mainstream Ryzen price cuts

Scorpus

Posts: 2,075   +235
Staff member
The big picture: It’s a really good time to buy a new CPU right now, and with this Threadripper update, we’re finally getting a refresh of the current leader for high performance desktop workstations. There's been plenty of questions over where Zen 3-based Threadripper products have been hiding, especially given the first desktop CPUs using AMD’s latest architecture were released well over a year ago. That’s a long wait for a Threadripper update, but the simple reality comes down to two factors: supply constraints and competition.

AMD’s main focus for their big multi-die chips has been the server market. The demand for Epyc Milan CPUs has been extraordinary and so the majority of CPUs that might become Threadripper parts have been going to servers since the launch of Milan almost exactly one year ago.

It's a conscious business decision, and how could you blame AMD for this? The company has always wanted to steal some of that lucrative server market share away from Intel, and they have finally managed to do it. A top-end 64-core Epyc chip sells for over $7,000 in the server market, compared to $4,000 for the last-gen Threadripper 3990X.

The other factor is competition: Intel simply doesn’t have the parts to compete with the existing Zen 2-based Threadripper line, let alone a Zen 3 model. The X series of enthusiast HEDT parts got stuck in the 10th-gen with Cascade Lake since 2019, which itself wasn’t competitive upon launch, and since then the only real alternatives in Intel’s stack has been Ice Lake-W which launched to little fanfare in mid-2021. Basically, we’re not expecting a proper refresh of Intel’s high-end workstation line until Sapphire Rapids launches later this year.

This is Threadripper Pro 5000

With AMD pumping out Epyc chips and facing little competition, they’ve been able to sit on Threadripper 5000 for some time – but it’s here now, with the launch of the Threadripper Pro 5000 series based on the Zen 3 architecture.

The new line of products is exactly as you’d expect. Threadripper 5000 uses the same chiplet and I/O die design, with a large 14nm I/O die in the center flanked by up to eight CPU chiplets built on 7nm. But instead of Zen 2 chiplets with two CCXes inside and a split L3 cache system, the shift up to Zen 3 gives us all the usual advantages like a unified single CCX with all eight cores able to access the 32MB of L3 with ease. We’re still getting 128 lanes of PCIe 4.0 from the CPU, and given these are Threadripper Pro, all eight DDR4 channels are available for use.

While the primary upgrade here is the shift from Zen 2 to Zen 3 and all the associated IPC benefits, Threadripper Pro 5000 CPUs are also clocked slightly higher in terms of boost frequency: 4.5 GHz vs 4.3 GHz previously. This applies to every Threadripper 5000 chip, so we’re getting either a 200 or 300 MHz clock increase over the previous-gen 3000 series part. The 280W TDP remains the same.

AMD is offering everything from a 12-core chip in the Threadripper Pro 5945WX, right up to a 64-core in the Threadripper Pro 5995WX – including a 24-core model which wasn’t available in the previous generation. This gives buyers options at every budget level.

Threadripper Pro vs Ryzen high core count

Now you might be wondering, why would AMD offer a 12 and 16-core Threadripper CPU when those core counts are already covered by the regular desktop Ryzen line with the Ryzen 9 5900X and 5950X?

There are some benefits for going Threadripper, such as if you need significant amounts of memory bandwidth, but don’t especially need high core counts. The 5945WX has eight-channel DDR4 instead of two-channel like you’d get with the 5900X. The same applies to PCIe connectivity and any of the advanced pro-level features that Threadripper offers.

Then there’s also the upgrade angle, getting a system with the 5945WX allows you to upgrade to a higher-end Threadripper part in the future on the same motherboard if your business and budget continues to grow.

With all of that said, it’s the 64 and 32-core models that will gather the most sales and interest, which was the case with prior generations. It never hurts to have options though, and the inclusion of a 24 core part does balance out the line-up nicely.

Threadripper gen-on-gen improvements? OEM only.

Unfortunately, AMD did not provide any direct comparisons between the Threadripper Pro 5000 series and the previous 3000 series, so we don’t know how much of an upgrade we’re getting gen-on-gen. With that said, reviews for Epyc Milan server chips have shown impressive performance gains thanks to Zen 3’s IPC advantage.

Instead AMD’s performance data focuses exclusively on comparing Threadripper Pro 5000 to Intel’s Xeon W-3300 series, which are Ice Lake workstation CPUs. According to AMD, their new parts are faster than Intel’s parts in many key workstation and productivity applications, whether we’re looking at best vs best, or products in a similar market segment.

The disappointing aspect to the Threadripper Pro 5000 launch is that these CPUs are not available for DIY system builders just yet. At this stage, they will be exclusive to OEM systems, in particular the Lenovo ThinkStation P620, which is the first system announced to use the 5000 series. There will be more OEM configurations coming soon, but this ThinkStation will launch in the coming month packed with Threadripper Pro 5000 chips.

The Threadripper Pro 3000 series was also OEM only, if you wanted to build a Threadripper system you had to get the non-Pro models which cut the number of PCIe lanes and memory channels in half. However it's been possible to buy the Pro variants if you really want to, but you’ll usually need to opt for a “third party” seller at places like Newegg and then source an sWRX8 motherboard which were also OEM only.

AMD hasn’t ruled out launching a Zen 3 Threadripper for the DIY market, but when we asked them about this they said this launch was specifically for OEM systems. So we might see Threadripper 5000 later on, especially if Intel releases a new HEDT series based on Sapphire Rapids. At least for now, we know these Threadripper chips exist and we’re not in a perpetual state of rumors and leaks anymore.

Ryzen 5000 CPU price cuts, not official

Also worth discussing are the price cuts that have started appearing across major retailers for Ryzen 5000 parts. We spoke to AMD about this today, and we confirmed there's been no change to what AMD calls the "SEP" or suggested etailer price – in other words, the MSRP for AM4 processors has not been reduced... officially.

However that hasn’t stopped retailers from adjusting AMD CPU prices to more closely align with current market conditions, where Intel CPUs are typically better value, especially in the mid and lower price tiers. These price drops could be part of “unofficial” price adjustments from AMD, it’s not uncommon for discounts or sales to be accompanied by various agreements between retailers and manufacturers. But typically these deals aren’t made "official" so they can be adjusted or ended at any time; doing this gives a bit more flexibility compared to a permanent price reduction.

The current state of these price reductions are roughly as follows...

The Ryzen 5 5600X has been dropped to $230 from $300, which puts it in a much better position to compete against the excellent Core i5-12400. In our testing, the 12400 was just 6% slower when gaming compared to the 5600X, while it trades blows with AMD’s six-core part in productivity workloads. The 12400F’s current asking price is $200.

The Ryzen 7 5800X has come down from $450 to just $350 which is a sizable price correction, but this makes sense given the 5800X was one of the least well priced parts in AMD’s line-up. This is probably to make room for the upcoming Ryzen 7 5800X3D using AMD’s 3D V-Cache technology, which should be coming to market soon. We don’t have any pricing info yet, but if we had to guess, it’ll probably launch around the original price of the 5800X.

This price adjustment was necessary when the 5800X is going up against Intel’s Core i7-12700 parts, including the 12700F and 12700KF, which can often be found for $350 or less. Even at $350 the 5800X isn’t a hugely competitive part, given the 12700 was typically faster in our testing, let alone the 12700KF (especially for productivity workloads) – but it’s certainly a lot more competitive now.

Then we get the Ryzen 9 5900X which is currently sitting at $449, down from its $550 launch MSRP. This makes it about $100 more expensive than Intel’s Core i7-12700K, but $100 cheaper than the Core i9-12900K. For gaming, it still makes the most sense to go with the 12700K, given it performs very similarly but is cheaper (or ideally go all the way down to the 12700F). But for productivity workloads, depending on the application, the 5900X can sit between Intel’s unlocked Core i7 and Core i9 parts, so it's hard to go wrong with the Ryzen or the Intel CPUs.

The 16-core, 32-thread Ryzen 9 5950X has fallen from $800 to $599 today, which is a huge saving and clearly has been in response to the Core i9-12900K, which is selling for about the same price. But again, the 12900K is typically a little bit faster, depending on what you’re testing, of course. Not a bad price by any means, but also not the clear leader.

When discussing these price points, the main focus is usually on the CPUs, but there are other factors to consider including motherboards and upgrade pathways. These price cuts are great news for existing AM4 owners that might be considering an upgrade to a Zen 3 CPU now or in the future. If you are already in that ecosystem, you probably won't consider switching everything over to Intel 12th-gen, which is why these price cuts aren’t always putting AMD into the leading position – they do capitalize on buyers who will only consider an AMD upgrade though.

But for new system builders, there could be even bigger price cuts. AMD does have a small cost advantage when it comes to motherboards, X570 and B550 boards are usually cheaper than Z690 and B660 boards, respectively, but this doesn’t always give AMD the platform cost advantage.

Other rumors floating around say that AMD might consider releasing new CPUs: names include the likes of a Ryzen 5 5500 and Ryzen 5 5600. These are unconfirmed reports though, and honestly parts like the 5600 aren’t strictly necessary. AMD could just drop the 5600X's price to $200. So we’ll have to wait and see what happens there.

Permalink to story.

 

Dimitriid

Posts: 2,210   +4,248
I'm waiting to see how will the 5995wx will match up against the eventual, fully realized Apple M1 (Or subsequent iteration) as it seems to be down to just Apple vs AMD when it comes to really high end but not quite server workstation chips.

If I had to guess it's very likely that Apple will offer a few more CPU cores but really focus on boosting the GPU side even more as that seems to be where they landed with the pro laptops but now that power isn't a constrain and the super high end workstations could just get dedicated GPUs on either case, can they put 64 cores and 128 threads of ARM cores that still win vs AMD in IPC? I'd be interesting if they do.
 

MaxSmarties

Posts: 518   +298
The reality is, AMD lineup is not that attractive today, new prices or old... if not for upgrade from an existing AM4 platform
 

Goamist

Posts: 51   +87
Just switched from an old i7-6700k to a Ryzen 7 5800X that I found for 330 Eur. Time to give AMD a spin - not that the i7 wasn't more than enough for my needs, but after 6 years or so I felt that David could use a little support in his fight with Goliath. We tend to forget the size difference between these two, with all the attention they both get from the media...
 

Sausagemeat

Posts: 1,597   +1,422
I'm waiting to see how will the 5995wx will match up against the eventual, fully realized Apple M1 (Or subsequent iteration) as it seems to be down to just Apple vs AMD when it comes to really high end but not quite server workstation chips.

If I had to guess it's very likely that Apple will offer a few more CPU cores but really focus on boosting the GPU side even more as that seems to be where they landed with the pro laptops but now that power isn't a constrain and the super high end workstations could just get dedicated GPUs on either case, can they put 64 cores and 128 threads of ARM cores that still win vs AMD in IPC? I'd be interesting if they do.
That’s a really bizarre comparison. The M1 is a very low power mobile chip and the Threadripper is an enormous chip that guzzles power relatively to something like an M1.

A threadripper should rip an M1 apart when it comes to performance. But you won’t be able to install a threadripper in an iPad or even a laptop. And if you could it would use its battery in about 20 minutes.
 

ypsylon

Posts: 507   +512
This move by AMD is completely dumb. First they released TRX40 (without any intention of making it upgradeable, just like X399), then year later WRX80 and now another 6 months later another batch of TRPros only for OEMs. It seems AMD is really on the downhill because there is no logic in what they're doing. TRX40 and WRX80 shouldn't have been 2 separate platforms. They should've been one from the start - WRX80. I jumped on TRX40 only because TRPro was just a pipe dream which AMD paywalled behind ridiculous Lenovo shenanigans (you have no idea how limited is availability of AMD workstation/server hardware in many parts of the World). Then AMD showed HEDT/WS middle finger again and year later TRPros became available on open market which was totally infuriating if you were on TRX40 already.

That's twice AMD ****ed TRX40 platform (or 3 counting X399). Ugh. At least when you buy Intel you know they gonna screw you from the start, but AMD is more insidious. They promise stuff and after a year all promises are worth less than all the horse manure in the Universe.
 

Puiu

Posts: 5,550   +4,518
TechSpot Elite
This move by AMD is completely dumb. First they released TRX40 (without any intention of making it upgradeable, just like X399), then year later WRX80 and now another 6 months later another batch of TRPros only for OEMs. It seems AMD is really on the downhill because there is no logic in what they're doing. TRX40 and WRX80 shouldn't have been 2 separate platforms. They should've been one from the start - WRX80. I jumped on TRX40 only because TRPro was just a pipe dream which AMD paywalled behind ridiculous Lenovo shenanigans (you have no idea how limited is availability of AMD workstation/server hardware in many parts of the World). Then AMD showed HEDT/WS middle finger again and year later TRPros became available on open market which was totally infuriating if you were on TRX40 already.

That's twice AMD ****ed TRX40 platform (or 3 counting X399). Ugh. At least when you buy Intel you know they gonna screw you from the start, but AMD is more insidious. They promise stuff and after a year all promises are worth less than all the horse manure in the Universe.

We don't know yet if they will or will not release non-pro models.
 

yRaz

Posts: 4,424   +5,169
I'm curious if AMD releasing them through Lenovo only has anything to do with locking them to Lenovo hardware and reducing supply on the used market.
 

HardReset

Posts: 1,665   +1,322
This move by AMD is completely dumb. First they released TRX40 (without any intention of making it upgradeable, just like X399), then year later WRX80 and now another 6 months later another batch of TRPros only for OEMs. It seems AMD is really on the downhill because there is no logic in what they're doing. TRX40 and WRX80 shouldn't have been 2 separate platforms. They should've been one from the start - WRX80.
TRX40 is quad channel platform. WRX80 is octa channel platform.

More than enough reason to make different platforms.
I jumped on TRX40 only because TRPro was just a pipe dream which AMD paywalled behind ridiculous Lenovo shenanigans (you have no idea how limited is availability of AMD workstation/server hardware in many parts of the World). Then AMD showed HEDT/WS middle finger again and year later TRPros became available on open market which was totally infuriating if you were on TRX40 already.
You really thought AMD would release CPU's with 8 channel memory support for platform that supports only 4 channels? I doubt it.
That's twice AMD ****ed TRX40 platform (or 3 counting X399). Ugh. At least when you buy Intel you know they gonna screw you from the start, but AMD is more insidious. They promise stuff and after a year all promises are worth less than all the horse manure in the Universe.
Comparing platforms with different memory channel support is apples vs oranges comparison.
 

hahahanoobs

Posts: 4,454   +2,419
I doubt AMD has the luxury of slowing down because of the lack of new Intel chips available.
Intel shipped almost 8M server CPU's in Q4. AMD shipped just over 1M. My guess is AMD simply can't get enough chips made to offer TR as HEDT parts. AMD shipments have been really up and down recently.

"In other words, server buyers, none of you are in the driver’s seat. TSMC and Intel Foundry Services are, and they are calling the tune on pricing and setting the pace on shipments, and if you need a server, you are going to the datacenter with the CPUs that you have."
 
Last edited:

DZillaXx

Posts: 529   +677
I'm waiting to see how will the 5995wx will match up against the eventual, fully realized Apple M1 (Or subsequent iteration) as it seems to be down to just Apple vs AMD when it comes to really high end but not quite server workstation chips.

If I had to guess it's very likely that Apple will offer a few more CPU cores but really focus on boosting the GPU side even more as that seems to be where they landed with the pro laptops but now that power isn't a constrain and the super high end workstations could just get dedicated GPUs on either case, can they put 64 cores and 128 threads of ARM cores that still win vs AMD in IPC? I'd be interesting if they do.

We may see a larger M1 chip, but the Pro and Max are already huge in terms of die space.

If anything the upcoming Mac Pro with M1 is going to be a multi chip setup, with the option for 2-4 M1 Pro or Max chips. Or a version of said chips with a interconnect bus.

I don't expect it to compete with a Thread ripper setup, but it should compete with the Intel setup they had before.

 

NeoMorpheus

Posts: 1,145   +2,303
We tend to forget the size difference between these two, with all the attention they both get from the media...
We dont "tend to forget" we are being force-fed by the bribed media to continue pushing the names intel and nvidia over and over.

And given that todays people are so emotionally empty, they need to "belong" and blindly defend these corporations like little lemmings.

Really weird times that we are living.
 

Sausagemeat

Posts: 1,597   +1,422
We dont "tend to forget" we are being force-fed by the bribed media to continue pushing the names intel and nvidia over and over.

And given that todays people are so emotionally empty, they need to "belong" and blindly defend these corporations like little lemmings.

Really weird times that we are living.
Do you realise how absurd it sounds when you claim Nvidia and Intel are paying Techspot to write positive headlines about them?

And if you do actually believe that then why are you here? Why give this site your time if you don’t trust the source?
 

HardReset

Posts: 1,665   +1,322
Do you realise how absurd it sounds when you claim Nvidia and Intel are paying Techspot to write positive headlines about them?
I could offer many examples of that behaviour. 6500XT was about best example of that. Blaming that laptop GPU lacks features needed on desktop GPU is like wtf am I reading.
 

Sausagemeat

Posts: 1,597   +1,422
I could offer many examples of that behaviour. 6500XT was about best example of that. Blaming that laptop GPU lacks features needed on desktop GPU is like wtf am I reading.
The 6500XT was a dreadful product. Literally every single reviewer said this. Are you seriously suggesting that Nvidia and Intel paid every reviewer?

It’s funny because either there’s a massive global conspiracy against AMD. Or you and Morpheus are delusional AMD fanboys.

Everyone here knows which it is..
 

Mr Majestyk

Posts: 1,217   +1,113
We don't know yet if they will or will not release non-pro models.
We don't know yet if they will or will not release non-pro models.

According to Moore's Law his sources say they won't. We are even lucky to see the Pro models and it is reflected in how long it took to give them the go ahead. AMD won't have much time to gloat though, Intel is also getting into this HEDT market with Sapphire Rapids and will cause AMD some pain. Honestly they should have been planning instead to release Threadripper with Zen 4 in quick succession and skipped this ge given they waited until Zen 4 is only 4-6 months away.. Zen 4 based TR would be a lot more competitive with SR.
 

PEnnn

Posts: 772   +878
Are you seriously suggesting that Nvidia and Intel paid every reviewer?
"Every one" Maybe not. But many, and judging by Intel's history, definitely!!

How soon we forget when Intel paid large retailers not to carry AMD products....in the US and in Europe.

As to them not giving "gifts" to tech writers......yeah, never happens!!
 

HardReset

Posts: 1,665   +1,322
The 6500XT was a dreadful product. Literally every single reviewer said this. Are you seriously suggesting that Nvidia and Intel paid every reviewer?
Yes. Reviewers totally missed the point. Like Techspot did. First, 6500XT gets 20/100. Two weeks later it's recommended as best (yes, The Best) card under $300 category :joy:
It’s funny because either there’s a massive global conspiracy against AMD. Or you and Morpheus are delusional AMD fanboys.

Everyone here knows which it is..
Of course there is. Since AMD launched Zen2, Intel is absolutely obliterated on server CPU's. So AMD's market share on servers (new, sold ones) is higher than Intel's? No. How about desktop? Yes There's the proof about that. Since it's much harder to bribe individual desktop users than few server buyers.
 

Puiu

Posts: 5,550   +4,518
TechSpot Elite
Yes. Reviewers totally missed the point. Like Techspot did. First, 6500XT gets 20/100. Two weeks later it's recommended as best (yes, The Best) card under $300 category :joy:

Of course there is. Since AMD launched Zen2, Intel is absolutely obliterated on server CPU's. So AMD's market share on servers (new, sold ones) is higher than Intel's? No. How about desktop? Yes There's the proof about that. Since it's much harder to bribe individual desktop users than few server buyers.
more like the only card unde 300$ :)
 

Sausagemeat

Posts: 1,597   +1,422
"Every one" Maybe not. But many, and judging by Intel's history, definitely!!

How soon we forget when Intel paid large retailers not to carry AMD products....in the US and in Europe.

As to them not giving "gifts" to tech writers......yeah, never happens!!
That was literally 20 years ago and I believe it was only 4 OEMs. I’m not condoning it but offering customers a discount to exclusively stock your product isn’t illegal in most cases, in this industry it was deemed anti competitive because there are only 2 players. This was done in the days of beige PCs with CRT monitors yet the AMD fandom can’t let it go, however they want us all to forget AMDs much more recent class action where they lied to consumers about the core count of their FX parts that were on sale only 5 years ago.

Intel aren’t paying every reviewer. This is a fantasy employed by desperate and stupid AMD fans who can’t accept the reality that Intel and Nvidia do actually make good products.