
AMD Lists Threadripper 3000 CPU with 32 Cores, Possible New Socket - rbanffy
https://www.tomshardware.com/news/threadripper-3000-cpu-listed-with-32-cores-possible-new-socket
======
vbezhenar
I wonder what's the good core count for development workstation. While it's
obvious that increase from 4 cores to 12 cores is useful, for me it's not
obvious that increase from 12 cores to 32 cores is similarly useful.

Sure, if I'm compiling huge project from the scratch, every core will be
loaded, but that's more suitable for CI machine.

For everyday development people usually use incremental compilation and in my
experience it's few files. So for me something like 12 cores looks like a
golden balance between single core performance and multi core performance
(because usually those high-core processors come with low frequency).

~~~
bluedino
I wish core counts hadn't gone crazy. Our developers are using PHP, Python,
and Visual Basic so none of it gets used.

A 6-core system is perfect. However, we end up buying 12, 14, 16 cores.

And to make it worse, we buy dual CPU's on the servers. The buyer has
determined core count > *

Give me 8 cores and all the clockspeed I can get (for our workloads)

~~~
ahbyb
That's the trick: they can't make single cores faster so they just throw more
cores at the problem and call it a day. Obviously that doesn't work but who
cares? It looks good in benchmarks.

~~~
plopz
Thats why they should sell cpus that sacrifice security for speed. I'll take a
cpu thats vulnerable to spectre/meltdown if its 20% faster.

~~~
vbezhenar
Are you sure that they sacrifice speed for security? It's not obvious to me.
Hardware fixes are supposed to be fast. That 20% slowdown comes from software
implementation (and you can actually disable it).

~~~
plopz
I wasn't aware that the fixes for spectre and meltdown had no impact on
performance.

------
vkaku
Yes. Yes!! The gap on memory channels should get closed.

------
rubbingalcohol
I'm curious about the 280 watt TDP, especially for the 16 core part. The 16
core Threadripper 2 had a 180 watt TDP, so what are they doing with the extra
hundred watts on a smaller process? Could these chips be running at much
higher frequencies?

We might really be at the brink of no-compromise super high end workstation
computing!

~~~
alecmg
Ryzen 3900X (and probably 3950X) would agressively limit all core boost to fit
in the TDP.

A Threadripper with a higher TDP limit (and better cooling) will be able to
boost all core to same levels as single core, ideal for workstation workloads.

Some of that TDP is also spent on driving additional memory channels and PCIE
4.0 lanes. There were rumors of TR having 8 channels now. And judging from
active cooling on X570 chipsets, PCIE 4.0 is hot.

~~~
stingraycharles
As a Threadripper user, this makes me happy. I don't care about the TDP too
much, as long as I can compile large C++ codebases as fast as possible (for
which short-term, all-core boosts is very useful).

