Threadripper Thread

[SteelCrysis]

https://www.techpowerup.com/236018/amd-r...ily-binned

AMD revealed that the pair of 8-core "Summit Ridge" dies that make up the Ryzen Threadripper multi-chip module are heavily binned. AMD hand-selects the top-5% highest performing "Summit Ridge" dies for Ryzen Threadripper manufacturing, which makes these chips of a higher grade than even what AMD sets aside for Ryzen 7-series socket AM4 chips.

https://www.techpowerup.com/236017/amd-r...cm-entails

Software needs to be optimized to see Threadripper as featuring two memory allocation modes - Distributed Mode, and Local Mode. In Distributed Mode, all four memory channels are interleaved with a priority of giving the app access to the highest bandwidth. In Local Mode, the an app loads memory controlled by a particular die first, and only then begins to load memory controlled by the neighboring die. The priority here is latency. In its internal tests, the Distributed Mode yields higher memory bandwidth at the expense of latency (not by much, though); while the Local Mode does the opposite (provides the least latency at the expense of bandwidth).

http://www.pcgamer.com/amd-ryzen-threadr...0x-review/

Yesterday, we had a news post where someone claimed to hit 4.1GHz on the 16-core Threadripper 1950X. I have to admit I was highly skeptical, and after seeing the Cinebench result I'm even more doubtful that the overclock was actually stable. The report gave a Cinebench 15 result of 3,337, which is pretty good… except I was able to score 3,336, with my Threadripper 1950X running at just 3.9GHz. Hmmm.
...
As with other Ryzen chips, overclocking was underwhelming. Maybe my 1950X chip isn't as good as others, and it's summertime which means higher ambient temperatures as well, but for the small gains I'd suggest anyone running Threadripper just stick with stock operation. AMD has done a good job of extracting almost all the performance from the chips at stock clocks, and the process as a whole seems to run into a clockspeed wall of around 4.0GHz, unless you use liquid nitrogen.
...
I love that AMD is bringing the fight to Intel, hitting it in the fat HEDT wallet. Enthusiasts have been stuck with only one compelling option for far too long on the CPU side of things. Now, even though Intel has plenty of areas where it can beat Threadripper, for anyone in the market for a high-performance CPU—for software development, content creation, virtualization, and more—AMD is worth a serious look. And the competition will only continue to benefit consumers, as it will mean faster CPUs at lower prices, and hopefully larger performance gains with the next generation of architectures.

Again, Threadripper isn't about playing games. It's complete overkill if that's all you're looking to do. Game developers on the other hand could definitely get some mileage out of the chips. Think about it this way for a moment. Ryzen 5 1500X is a decent CPU that costs around $190. Threadripper 1950X stuffs four of those into a single package, with higher clockspeeds as a bonus. If you can't think of anything useful to do with four PC's worth of power, by all means stick with the AM4 and LGA1151 offerings. But if you've ever wondered what it's like to have a server as your main desktop, Threadripper is basically that—minus the noisy fans.