![]() ![]() The only downside to EPYC is that it can only be used in single socket systems, and the peak memory support is halved (from 4 TB to 2 TB). It has eight channels of memory support, all 128 PCIe 4.0 lanes, and can support ECC. Threadripper Pro has almost all the features of AMD’s EPYC platform, but in a 280W thermal envelope. So enter Threadripper Pro, which sits between Threadripper and EPYC, and in this instance, very much more on the EPYC side. However workstation users noted that while 280 W was great, it lacked official ECC memory support, and compared to EPYC, sometimes the reduced memory channel support and reduced PCIe compared to EPYC stopped Threadripper being adopted. Threadripper sat above Ryzen with 64 PCIe lanes and quad channel memory, enabling mainstream users that wanted a bit more to get a bit more. These offered the same features, at around 200 TDP, losing some performance to the regular non-P versions.ĪMD then launched Threadripper, a high-end desktop version of EPYC that went all the way up to 280 W for peak frequency and performance. For workstation users interested in EPYC, AMD launched single socket ‘P’ versions. These share the same LGA4094 socket, have eight channels of memory, full ECC support, and 128 PCIe lanes (first PCIe 3.0, then PCIe 4.0), with dual-socket support. These mainstream processors were also limited to 105W TDP.Īt the other end of the scale was AMD EPYC, with the first generation EPYC 7601 having 32 cores, and the second generation EPYC 7742 having 64 cores, up to 225W TDP. That Zen 2-based Ryzen 9 3950X was still classified as a ‘mainstream platform’ processor, as it only had 24 PCIe lanes and dual-channel memory, sufficient for mainstream users but not enough for workstation markets. The Zen 2-based portfolio saw the mainstream Ryzen go to 16 cores, pushing past Intel’s best 18-core HEDT processor at the time in most tests. The first generation Ryzen was earmarked for standard consumers, however the top of the line Ryzen 7 1800X, with eight cores, competed against Intel’s high-end desktop market. ![]() When AMD embarked upon its journey with the new Ryzen portfolio, the delineation of where each product sat in the traditional market has not always been entirely clear. In this review, we’re comparing every member of both platforms that is commercially available. There is a 37% price premium from Threadripper to Threadripper Pro, which allows for ECC memory support, double the PCIe lanes, and double the memory bandwidth. Threadripper Pro is effectively a faster version of AMD’s EPYC, limited for single CPU workstation use, but also heralds a full 280 W TDP to match the frequencies of the standard Threadripper line. Supporting the increased compute throughput, architects doubled load-store bandwidth and dialed up dispatch and retire bandwidth to minimize the chances the higher throughput ALUs would be starved of data.Since the launch of AMD’s Threadripper Pro platform, the desire to see what eight channels of memory brings to compute over the regular quad-channel Threadripper has been an intriguing prospect. The former comes primarily by the way of improved branch prediction and pre-fetching, supported by much deeper and broader allocation of cache, while the latter is the result achieved by both doubling the width of the FPU data path and doubling density. With the Threadripper PRO processor's "Zen 2" microarchitecture, improvements are many, but two carry most of the weight, especially where high demand professional computing is concerned: up to 15% faster instructions per cycle (IPC), and an impressive quadrupling of the peak floating point throughput rate. With the unveiling of the first generation of "Zen" CPU technology, AMD disrupted the status quo with a microarchitecture completely rebuilt from the ground up and optimized for modern single and multi-threaded workloads. AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO processor is the first and only professional workstation-caliber CPU to exploit a 7 nm silicon manufacturing process, allowing engineers to double the density and fueling the transistor budget needed to substantially drive-up core throughput.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |