
Best CPUs for Workstations - pulse7
https://www.anandtech.com/show/11891/best-cpus-for-workstations
======
liuliu
Updated to 3970x a few days ago. The performance has been good (llvm compiles
around 5 minutes!) and it is stable (previous 2920x has soft lockups and have
to workaround with idle=halt:
[https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=196683](https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=196683)).
Ubuntu 20.04 installed without much issue (other than NVIDIA driver, that's a
different story).

It is still rough though, mostly around the mobo. The Gigabyte Aorus Xtreme
mobo doesn't work out of the gate:
[https://www.reddit.com/r/gigabyte/comments/enatk1/gigabyte_t...](https://www.reddit.com/r/gigabyte/comments/enatk1/gigabyte_trx40_designare_mobo_4gpu_d4_error/),
[https://www.reddit.com/r/linuxquestions/comments/ankjfx/inte...](https://www.reddit.com/r/linuxquestions/comments/ankjfx/intel_10g_nic_driver_issues/)

Ubuntu 18.04 also has an issue with the dated kernel on 3970x:
[https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=Linux-
Bo...](https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=Linux-Boot-
Threadripper-Zen2MCE) that can be workaround by mce=off. Due to combination of
that and NVIDIA driver, I did 20.04, and it has been stable so far.

~~~
afandian
I want a desktop linux machine that "just works" (is that so unreasonable?).
Is it genrally safe to buy a Ryzen? I've seen so many mixed messages.

~~~
wmf
[https://system76.com/desktops](https://system76.com/desktops)

If you want something that just works, _buy something with Linux preinstalled
and supported_. If no vendor offers the distro you want, buy from a Linux
vendor anyway and install what you want. When people buy Windows hardware then
complain that Linux doesn't work it sends the wrong message to the market.

~~~
rumanator
> If you want something that just works, buy something with Linux preinstalled
> and supported.

System76 is known for simply rebranding cheap Clevo/Sager laptops.

* [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17039414](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17039414)

* [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17049463](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17049463)

~~~
Tuna-Fish
Just because they are not doing their own hardware does not mean that they
don't test their drivers/firmware.

~~~
rumanator
They are buying Clevo gear and slapping their logo on it. A sticker with a 40%
markup does not change hardware support. In fact, if you take the time to read
the links I've presented you'll eventually stumble on comments stating that
they even fail to support basic hardware shipped by Clevo such as fingerprint
readers.

~~~
wmf
The original comment asked about desktops, not laptops.

Figuring out which Clevo laptops can run Linux and which ones can't is work
that is worth money.

------
ckastner
Those are great options, but the 12-core Ryzen 9 3900X sells for less than
$450 now.

Sure, it has half as many cores as the 3960X Threadripper listed, but 12C/24T
is still a lot.

Also, it's much easier to cool -- 105W TDP vs 280W on the Threadrippers.

~~~
jcadam
Just built myself a home dev server based around a R9 3900X. Paired it with
64G of RAM, a 1TB NVMe and an RTX 2060, running CentOS 8. Whole build cost me
a little under $1400. It sits, headless, in the corner of my office crunching
away.

I ssh in from my XPS 13 running Fedora and use X forwarding to do work on it.
It's _so_ much faster than trying to do everything on an ultrabook. Not to
mention quite a bit cheaper than a high-end laptop.

~~~
eximius
An XPS 13 isn't a high end laptop? What are you doing that requires that kind
of power?

It sounds like an amazing build, but definitely not needed for most tasks. The
XPS 13 seems a little wasteful in the setup. You could practically do it with
a chromebook.

~~~
greggyb
Any XPS 13 will be running a -U series low-power CPU. I would not consider any
laptop high-end with regard to compute, unless it is using a -H series part,
at least.

-U series (somehow, magically the same designation between AMD and Intel) will typically run ~15W, though this is configurable by the OEM (sometimes in BIOS?).

-H series (also, magically the same designation) will typically run ~45W, and this is also configurable by the OEM.

The increased power envelope of -H series typically allows higher base clocks.
Turbo can sometimes be close between a 15W and a 45W chip, but a -H series
will be able to maintain higher frequencies for longer, thanks to a superior
thermal solution.

------
onli
Real high end options only. Apart from the 1920X, that is a steal right now,
but the board it needs is not cheap, it's a legacy platform, and Threadripper
1 did not work well for some workloads.

I'd not ignore Ryzen 7 and Ryzen 9. If you can work with 128GB ram (and
especially if you just want a regular strong system with the usual 16GB)
3700X, 3900X and 3950X are really strong processor and apart from the last one
a lot cheaper. Most developers don't even need to go that high, not even on a
workstation, one based on the Ryzen 5 3600 would not be weak.

------
soygul
It's always a good idea to look at the performance/$ charts before jumping in
on workstation CPU wagon:
[https://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu_value_available.html](https://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu_value_available.html)

AMD Ryzen 5 3600 currently rocks 103 CPU-Mark/$ whereas Threadripper 3960X has
40 CPU-Mark/$. You get a lot of power out of Threadrippers but you loose a lot
of value.

~~~
htfy96
A major drawback of CPU benchmark is that it doesn't include second-hand CPU
prices. Actually many older series of Xeon CPUs can have better score/$ ratio.
For example: E5 2695V4 is sold at $199 on AliExpress with ~20000 benchmark
score on cpubenchmark (excluding the last anomaly data point), which suggests
~100 CPU-Mark/$

~~~
soygul
Hm that is actually good point. But newer CPUs will pay off with their energy
efficiency in comparison to older generations.

~~~
htfy96
That makes sense for a single-socket workstation. A main advantage of old
Xeons over R5 3600 is dual socket.

------
pdimitar
Apologies for a tangential side-topic:

I wasted 6h of research trying to find a small machine with R1606G (or any of
the V1000's) with dual 10GbE NICs, and failed. :(

Even Sapphire who promised such a machine retracted their pages and now only
their dual 1GbE NIC offering are being sold[0]. The dual 10GbE NIC variants
only exist in two PDFs[1][2] now.

I went through AMD's official list[3] of embedded offerings based on the
latest R1000/V1000 platforms but exactly zero of the options have the promised
dual 10GbE NICs.

Can somebody point me in the right direction? I need a strong and power-
efficient embedded NAS with 1 or 2 10GbE NICs that covers several other
homelab/server needs and I feel the R1606G is the best compromise in terms of
money, power, wattage expense, form factor and required cooling (ideally I'd
keep that thing in my bedroom or living room and want to never hear its fans
but hey, it can sit in a closet as well).

I am willing to look elsewhere, it's just that the latest R1000/V1000
offerings seem to be so good!

[0] [https://www.sapphiretech.com/en/commercial/ipc-
fp5v-1ge](https://www.sapphiretech.com/en/commercial/ipc-fp5v-1ge)

[1]
[https://www.sapphiretech.com/-/media/sites/sapphire/product/...](https://www.sapphiretech.com/-/media/sites/sapphire/product/embedded/ipc_5p5v_1gbe/sapphireipcfp5vembeddedminiitxplatformdatasheetembeddedworld18f.ashx?v=afd503b2ff8444d8ac1449b4fe70c080)

[2]
[https://www.sapphiretech.com/-/media/sites/sapphire/product/...](https://www.sapphiretech.com/-/media/sites/sapphire/product/embedded/ipc_fp5v/sapphire_ipc_fp5r_embedded_mini_itx_platform_datasheet_27mar19.ashx)

[3] [https://www.amd.com/en/products/embedded-minipc-
solutions](https://www.amd.com/en/products/embedded-minipc-solutions)

~~~
justinclift
Would it be feasible to get a motherboard with a PCIe v8 slot and throw in a
cheap low power 10/40/etc GbE card? eg [0]

[0] [https://www.ebay.com/itm/Mellanox-ConnectX-3-QDR-QSFP-
Infini...](https://www.ebay.com/itm/Mellanox-ConnectX-3-QDR-QSFP-InfiniBand-
CX354A-MCX354A-QCAT/164130634238)

~~~
pdimitar
I don't know. It probably is but I never assembled an embedded machine and I
hear there's a lot I could do wrong and just let the hardware fry.

~~~
justinclift
Hmmm, how about the Gen 10 HP Microserver?

[https://www.servethehome.com/hpe-proliant-microserver-
gen10-...](https://www.servethehome.com/hpe-proliant-microserver-gen10-review)

Depending on how many hdd's you're trying to use, it might be the go. Low
power (energy use wise), but decent cpu, already assembled, etc.

It's not as small as a NUC, but the older generation one I have here is about
1ft x 1ft x 1ft (easily fits on a shelf, under desk, etc), and is pretty much
silent.

~~~
pdimitar
That is actually an amazing recommendation. I don't mind it being small or
large that much to be honest -- I would prioritise it being [almost] silent.
And I don't think I'd need more than 4x 12TB disks for a few years.

Do you use yours as a NAS + media server? That's what I plan to use mine for.

~~~
paulmd
The Asrock Rack X470D4U is pretty nice, and there is a variant with onboard
dual 10GbE (X470D4U2-2T) albeit only 6 onboard SATA ports and loses the middle
x4 slot. The base X470D4U also has the middle slot attached to the "NVMe
lanes" (rather than fed from the chipset like normal) so it actually has 20
CPU-direct lanes.

If you put a Noctua L9a on it, anything will be silent (although you may need
to set fans manually on a server board, or use the included "low noise
adapter" to drop the fan speed). That plus a 3600 (or maybe a 3100/3300X if
you can source one yet) would be a good little NAS build. Has IPMI, which is
nice if you will be running headless.

Or if you don't care about IPMI (if it's not going to be running headless)
then you can use pretty much whatever mITX/mATX board you want.

~~~
pdimitar
This is also a very solid tech, just looked it up.

Trouble is, I can't find it _anywhere_ except in the US Amazon, which will set
me back like 30-40% premium on top of the $450 that the motherboard costs. :(

If I am going for that kind of money then I'll probably just shell out $1000
for some of the extremely good Xeon D mobos.

------
erkken
I have a very cpu intensive application in Rust, that is able to use all cores
given to it.

I am thinking about going for the Epyc 7502p with 32 cores but having a hard
time knowing if the Threadripper counterpart with 32 cores would be better
given its higher frequency.

Guess it is very hard to answer but which one would you go for? Will the
threadripper perform much better?

~~~
littlestymaar
Was the “in Rust” part mandatory? ;)

On HN I still don't know if it's an easy way to get upvotes, or the best way
to get down-voted hell.

~~~
qchris
I sort of figure that got put in there for context, because Rust code so
commonly gets multi-threaded in a serious way because of the borrow checker
and drop-in parallel libraries. It makes it a little bit more clear that, yes,
this person probably will benefit a lot from having those extra cores/threads,
rather than focusing on processors where they could improve performance more
with better memory or clock speed options instead.

------
qubex
I’m really quite dismayed by the purely _x_ 86/ _x_ 64-centric viewpoint.

No mention of POWER9, for example (my own personal favourite), which I’m
running on my workstation
([https://www.raptorcs.com/TALOSII/](https://www.raptorcs.com/TALOSII/))

There’s several other ISAs out there (ARM, obviously, but desktop-, let alone
workstation-class chips are hard at least for now a dicy proposition).

EDIT: Surprised by all the downvotes. Is mentioning anything outside the
domain of _x_ 86 considered controversial nowadays?!

~~~
rajlego
What OS do you run on it? Is it hard to find software that works on it?

~~~
qubex
I’m running Ubuntu 20.04 for POWER9. You start from a server ISO and build up
from there.

[https://ubuntu.com/download/server/power](https://ubuntu.com/download/server/power)

------
madMilo
Just bought a pair of used Intel E5-2673v4 (20C/40T) for $450 each, an E-ATX
ASUS motherboard for 99EUR, and 256GB DDR4 for $700.

A little older (~2017), but the whole system at a lower price than a 3970X,
for similar performance on my embarrassingly parallel workloads, at similar
TDP.

~~~
rubyn00bie
There is no way those even come close to a single 3970x or even the 3960x.
This latest generation of AMD processors made all the old “good deals” pretty
much crap.

Not saying your machine isn’t nice, but the CPUs were probably not worth it.
Each of the 30000 series Threadrippers will be about 50% faster in single core
benchmarks than the 2673v4 and have better multi-core results.

------
theon144
Whoa, it seems that AMD has really blown it out of the water here. Good to
finally see competition!

------
bluedino
This is great. But can I order a pre-built workstation from Dell or HP?
Accounting won't cut a PO to NewEgg for parts.

~~~
jeffbee
You can and should. It's crazy to try to integrate your own workstation, for
the reasons the article states but then ignores: ECC doesn't actually work on
any of the random Ryzen motherboards, and Intel is sending all of their parts
to OEMs instead of retailers. An HP Z4 workstation comes with ECC memory,
actually boots, and all the other stuff you want from a _work_station.

~~~
muro
I have a HP Z440 at home - E5-1680v3 (8 cores, 16 hyperthreaded), reasonably
fast for everything I do. I replaced the GPU (some random Quadro) with a
RTX-2070. Now, 6 months later, I get random beeps on boot (6 beeps = GPU
error). I wish I stayed with the workstation as it was. The faster GPU was not
worth the trouble.

Overall, I am a convert to workstations with ECC. Worth it the peace of mind
that I won't corrupt my files and that it won't randomly crash. Had my share
of those over years.

------
amelius
So there is no reasonably simple way to tell if a specific ECC implementation
actually works?

~~~
greggyb
Simple, yes. Without purchasing hardware and testing, no.

------
ngcc_hk
Need a Zfs with 8 disk nas and on searching for a ECC based Server. Got It
reverse as got the disk, the 10g Ethernet card and Sata card. 1900 seems too
old. Is 3900 good for this?

~~~
zrm
The 3900 seems like massive overkill for that. You might want to look at
something like the 3400G or 3200G, since who wants to buy a separate GPU for a
NAS anyway.

~~~
ngcc_hk
Thanks. I did have quite a few spare Gpu around.

------
gigatexal
It’s not well known but the desktop CPUs support ECC

~~~
betaby
Support is very MB dependent though

~~~
muro
Unfortunately, it's pretty much impossible to have a validation by someone
trustworthy that it actually works. If you really want ECC, going with a
workstation from Dell/HP/Lenovo/Apple seems still the better choice. Shame,
would love to upgrade to one of these.

~~~
gigatexal
You just need the right motherboard. ASRock Rack X470D4U

------
rational_indian
I have a Ryzen 2700X. Is Ryzen 9 3900X going to be a good upgrade for me?

~~~
onli
Depends on what you do. You'd gain 4 cores and 8 threads and also the single
core performance is higher. If have some direct benchmark comparisons under
[https://www.pc-
kombo.com/us/benchmark/apps/cpu/compare?ids%5...](https://www.pc-
kombo.com/us/benchmark/apps/cpu/compare?ids%5B%5D=AMD+Ryzen+9+3900X&ids%5B%5D=AMD+Ryzen+7+2700X).
The blender benchmarks do not show a big difference, but things like 7zip and
AES-Encoding do, so it really depends on the workload.

~~~
zrm
That Blender result is nonsense, they screwed up the test somehow. This is a
better comparison:

[https://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/2125?vs=2519](https://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/2125?vs=2519)

The 3900X has 50% more cores and Blender is embarrassingly parallel, so it's
more than 50% faster, as expected.

That's the real question for whether it's worth it. For single threads the
3900X will be 10-20% faster. For well-threaded applications it's >60% faster.

Keep in mind that the 2700X still has a resale value of over $200, so if
you're selling one and buying the other it's not a very expensive upgrade. But
the value proposition is a lot better if you can use the extra cores. (Of
course, if you can't and you just want the single-thread performance
improvement, there's always the 3700X.)

~~~
onli
It's a presentation issue. The benchmark data agrees with you, the
transformation from "lower is better" to "higher is better" makes the result
misleading. That needs a better solution, showing that the difference is
actually quite high.

~~~
zrm
It's not a presentation issue, the pc-kombo.com site is just a garbage. In one
of the Blender graphs it has the 3900X as "10839" and the 2700X as "10732"
(very close together), but it links to the Anandtech results where the actual
numbers are 161 and 268, not close together at all and completely different
numbers. In another graph it links to a "source" where the 2700X isn't even on
the page.

Their graphs are completely fictional, probably as a result of bad data
scraping code since it looks like they're just pulling results (inaccurately)
from other sites.

~~~
onli
Look at the worst result in the anandtech benchmark. Remember what I said
about converting from "lower is better" to "higher is better". It _is_ a
presentation issue.

If the 2700X is not on the source page that page either got changed or it's a
combined benchmark that was presented in multiple articles. In which benchmark
do you see that?

~~~
zrm
This is that page:

[https://www.pc-
kombo.com/us/benchmark/apps/cpu/compare?ids%5...](https://www.pc-
kombo.com/us/benchmark/apps/cpu/compare?ids%5B%5D=AMD+Ryzen+9+3900X&ids%5B%5D=AMD+Ryzen+7+2700X)

This is the Anandtech benchmark that it links to from the first Blender graph
(you can click on the graph):

[https://www.anandtech.com/bench/CPU-2019/2247](https://www.anandtech.com/bench/CPU-2019/2247)

The numbers on that page for the 3900X and 2700X bear no resemblance to the
ones in the graph that links to it.

Compare to their first 7zip graph which links here and contains the actual
numbers for the 3900X and 2700X, because they evidently scraped that one
correctly:

[https://www.anandtech.com/bench/CPU-2019/2240](https://www.anandtech.com/bench/CPU-2019/2240)

This is the page they link for the second Blender graph:

[https://www.computerbase.de/2019-11/amd-ryzen-
threadripper-3...](https://www.computerbase.de/2019-11/amd-ryzen-
threadripper-3960x-3970x-test/2/#diagramm-test-blender-benchmark)

The numbers in their graph don't match what that page has for the 3900X and
the 2700X doesn't appear on that page at all.

~~~
onli
Computerbase hides some benchmark results by default. Click at the top right
"+29 Einträge" to see 29 processors more, including the 2700X.

I understand that the number in that specific benchmarks is confusing right
now. Again, that's from the conversion done for the "lower is better"
benchmarks. That's why it's not the same number, just the same distance. I
hope a better solution can be used soon.

~~~
zrm
It's not the same distance though. The way to convert "lower is better" to
"higher is better" is to invert the results, e.g. convert seconds per render
to renders per second. You take 1/X where the original number was X. Or do
renders per day if you don't want results as small fractions, which just means
multiplying the inverted results by a constant, e.g. the number of seconds per
day.

For both the Anandtech and Computerbase Blender results, the 2700X takes ~60%
longer in reality, which is ~66% more renders per second (which is the same
percentage more per day), but the difference in the length of the bars on pc-
kombo.com is <10% for Computerbase and ~1% for Anandtech. Something has gone
wrong there.

~~~
onli
It's the same numerical distance. Look how small the bars are at the anandtech
page,
[https://www.anandtech.com/bench/CPU-2019/2247](https://www.anandtech.com/bench/CPU-2019/2247)
also does not show you the one is 66% faster - same problem, just inverted.
But the original is easier to get, and 1/X style comparisons could work - or
in general just "how much faster" bars. Thanks :)

~~~
zrm
> It's the same numerical distance.

...

What people are going to care about is the difference as a percentage. :)

> Look how small the bars are at the anandtech page,
> [https://www.anandtech.com/bench/CPU-2019/2247](https://www.anandtech.com/bench/CPU-2019/2247)
> also does not show you the one is 66% faster - same problem, just inverted.

Actually the bar for the 2700X on the Anandtech page _is_ 66% longer than the
bar for the 3900X, though it's admittedly harder to eyeball when they're both
that short because of the much slower processors at the bottom of the page.
You can imagine how much easier that page would be to see if they didn't
include those two Celerons at the bottom. (You can also imagine how that would
affect the results using the math you were using; if adding or removing a CPU
changes not just the length of the bar but the actual numbers for an entirely
different CPU, something's fishy.)

Doing 1/X for timed benchmarks helps that for the modern processors though,
because it makes it so the bars that are short and hard to eyeball are the
slowest processors rather than the fastest ones.

------
known
I prefer to pick from
[https://www.amazon.com/bestsellers](https://www.amazon.com/bestsellers)

