• Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!

FEATURED AMD ZEN Discussion (Previous Rumor Thread)

Overclockers is supported by our readers. When you click a link to make a purchase, we may earn a commission. Learn More.
Just put AGESA 1.0.0.6a bios on X370 Pro and B350M-A. In process of testing now. No change with Corsair LPX 3000 at 2933 on the X370 so far. I tried G.Skill Ripjaws 4 3333 on the B350M-A, no boot down to 2933 and I gave up at that point. Not a panacea on the high end. The Crucial 2666 seems fine but that's not challenging anyway.
 
Biostar is starting to release 1.0.0.6a BIOSes so there is a hope that I will see one for my board soon :)
 
No one talking ThreadRipper yet? Well, we have pricing with top part at $999 and it was good to see the base clocks don't suck. Not the CPU for me, but some must be getting excited right now?
 
It's not the core quantity, but the throughput I'm looking at. For example, I'd rather buy two 1700 systems than a single 1950X as my workloads are spreadable across systems, and going low to mid range ($100-300 ball park) is the sweet spot. There is some cost impact from separate systems, but I can't see TR overcoming that for me.

Edit: thinking more, there was rumour of a non-X 16 core part, and that might swing things over... but for now, it still doesn't exist.
 
Last edited:
There are diminishing returns with a lot of software with more than 10 cores. What software shows noticeable increased production with more than 10 cores?
 
There are diminishing returns with a lot of software with more than 10 cores. What software shows noticeable increased production with more than 10 cores?
Doesn't virtualization software eat as many cores as you can throw at it?

 
There are diminishing returns with a lot of software with more than 10 cores. What software shows noticeable increased production with more than 10 cores?

Adobe Premiere, Adobe Media Encoder, and Lightwave to name a few that are of interest to me. Also as mentioned virtualization eats all the cores you can throw at it. Typical workflow for me sees several cores devoted to VMs and the remainder to encoding/editing/rendering tasks.

I'll be watching threadripper's launch closely to potentially replace my current opty dual socket rig. If the memory controller can provide a compelling bandwidth boost with quad channel dual rank dimms then I'll be all over it. If not, then I'll probably just replace my current 12 core chips with faster 16 core silicon and wait for more RyZen refinements or reasonably priced mega chip monsters from team blue.

OT: Nice to see some familiar faces around here after all these years. Cheers.
 
Adobe Premiere, Adobe Media Encoder, and Lightwave to name a few that are of interest to me. Also as mentioned virtualization eats all the cores you can throw at it. Typical workflow for me sees several cores devoted to VMs and the remainder to encoding/editing/rendering tasks.

I'll be watching threadripper's launch closely to potentially replace my current opty dual socket rig. If the memory controller can provide a compelling bandwidth boost with quad channel dual rank dimms then I'll be all over it. If not, then I'll probably just replace my current 12 core chips with faster 16 core silicon and wait for more RyZen refinements or reasonably priced mega chip monsters from team blue.

OT: Nice to see some familiar faces around here after all these years. Cheers.

How much productivity does one gain with more than 10 cores and the programs you mentioned?
 
How much productivity does one gain with more than 10 cores and the programs you mentioned?

I wouldn't know where to begin to quantify the gains above x number of cores for any given program or group of programs. Processor usage varies wildly based on codecs in use & programs loaded at any given time. For Premiere for instance MPEG exports tend to use lots of GPU power with the mercury engine enabled while more common(for me) exports into h.264 & h.265(HEVC) tend to be almost entirely CPU based. I can tell you definitively that with just a couple VMs running(approximately 30% load on 24 cores) that Premiere pro is capable of utilizing the remaining 70% of available processing power on my workstation while executing a single export...depending on the subject material & codecs in question.

I tend to run numerous programs at once...often working on different aspects of the same project simultaneously. Since heat is not an issue on the opterons I often just open a taskman window and ensure that all cores are continuously loaded. Sometimes that means running multiple instances of the same program via VMs, but whatever gets the job done fastest is generally the right answer.

Attempts to quantify scaling with more cores on these programs tends to end around 10 cores since that's the current state of the art for commonly available single socket desktop workstations atm, though that's obviously going to change in the next few weeks so hopefully by this time next year we'll have more readily available data on what happens when 16 cores are applied to single tasks in some of these high end applications. Perhaps when I build a replacement for this aging WS I'll have a chance to run some tests of my own to quantify how particular programs scale with more cores.

https://www.pugetsystems.com/labs/a...7700K-i5-7600K-Performance-884/#ExporttoH_264
 
Last edited:
Also not to forget that several encoding programs have interesting settings like "run a project on each core" instead of one at a time.
 
Back