AMD’s 16-Core Beast Creams Intel, but You Might Be Better Off Without It

I wo n’t lie , when AMD ’s novel 16 - core freak CPU , the Ryzen Threadripper 2950X , get , I ran around the situation show off it and its accompanying atmosphere cooler to anyone who would make eye contact with me . The thing is tremendous — easily double as large as a stock desktop CPU from Intel . The air tank , saddled with the goofy name Wraith Ripper and festoon with light-emitting diode lighting , is larger than most power supply , and if drop , it could do damage to floors , foot , and small woodland creatures . Even people who hump nothing about information processing system were suitably impressed by these tremendous pieces of PC . Then they ’d need how much the Threadripper 2950X price .

And that ’s where I ’d lose them .

For most masses , only two things weigh when it comes to see a processor for a desktop one already owns or for a computer someone else is building . One : How fast is it ? Two : How much is it gon na cost ? AMD ’s solution for the last age has consistently been , “ faster than the other guy , and cheaper too . ” The new Threadripper 2 is no elision — as long as you consider what it ’s up against . With 16 cores and a price ticket of $ 900—$600 less than its Intel competitor — and half the price of its32 - core sib , the AMD Threadripper 2990WX , the 2950X is a steal .

Photo: Alex Cranz (Gizmodo)

Ryzen Threadripper 2950X

What is it ?

AMD ’s late super multi - core CPU .

Photo: Alex Cranz

Photo: Alex Cranz (Gizmodo)

Price

$ 900

Photo: Alex Cranz

Photo: Alex Cranz (Gizmodo)

It ’s loyal in pro program .

No Like

It ’s average in everything else .

Photo: Alex Cranz

Photo: Alex Cranz (Gizmodo)

I imply … if you ’re in the grocery for a processing beast with a price tag to match .

Cheaper mainframe are usable from both AMD and Intel , and for all but the most demanding CPU labor , those processors will be a better pick than the $ 900 Threadripper 2 , even if it ’s cheaper than Intel ’s 16 - core oblation . To that end I approximate its speed compared to the latest8th - gen desktop processor from Intel , andthe newest Ryzen 5 from AMD . C.P.U. that are all a third to half as expensive as the Threadripper 2 .

So who is the Threadripper 2 for ? The received customer for something this pricey : professionals and people who care to brag on Reddit . That ’s not a slight against these people . Rather , the Threadripper ’s openhanded , expensive power boost wo n’t really help with most software we all employ day - to - Clarence Day — and it ’s not really meant to . Those Clarence Shepard Day Jr. - to - Clarence Day applications are n’t plan with the Threadripper ’s primary power hike in mind .

Photo: Alex Cranz

Photo: Alex Cranz (Gizmodo)

That boost is the numeral of cores at its kernel . It has 16 . The middling multi - core processor — the CPUs that power nearly all estimator and telephone set — has just two to eight marrow ( I benchmarked it versus three CPUs that each have six cores ) . Cores are where all the factual processing for your computer fall out , and more cores ordinarily means more focal ratio because your data processor can split up taxing chore , thus taking advantage of those cores .

“ Can ” is the operative Scripture here . Not all programs will take reward of multiple cores . If a web internet browser was optimized for two nucleus , it wo n’t needs know what to do with 16 and could just chug along furiously taxing those first two cores while depart the balance idle .

That is almost precisely what we see when running WebXPRT 2015 , a synthetic benchmark designed to examine how promptly a computing gadget go through a series of internet browser - free-base tasks . The Threadripper 2950X is actually slower than every other C.P.U. we tested it against , admit a six - essence Intel i5 8600 K and a six - core Intel i7 8700K. The remainder is n’t astronomical ( in our experience , any score over 500 will conduce to a snappy and pleasant browsing experience ) , but as you’re able to see from the score below , the AMD chip ache from a want of optimisation that the Intel chips have .

Photo: Alex Cranz

Photo: Alex Cranz (Gizmodo)

It also wo n’t really serve you game quicker , or do minor CPU - demanding processes like resize and converting a series of RAW images in Photoshop . In the benchmark built into the secret plan Rise of the Tomb Raider , all four central processor we tested were much neck and neck opening producing and mediocre 20 frame per secondly . Same for Photoshop , where the stop number of your storage matter more than your processor when converting images .

The only exception to this convention was in the Civilization VI AI bench mark . Unlike the graphics benchmark for that game , the AI benchmark is designed to examine the central processing unit of a gadget , and it does so by seeing how quickly the CPU can process a turn of the biz ’s artificial intelligence . quicker is better in this case , and the Threadripper 2 ’s 16 core helped it eke out a victory … at least against Intel . The $ 225 Ryzen 5 still performed well .

Where we really start to see the actual f number of this CPU is in Geekbench 4 . Geekbench is another synthetic benchmark that impute a scotch base on how quick the information processing system handles a serial of CPU - intensive undertaking . What ’s nerveless about Geekbench is , it gives you a score for a individual essence of a C.P.U. , as well as all the processors scored together , with higher scores generally translate to fast processors .

In WebXPRT a higher score is better, and Intel schools AMD’s offerings thanks to optimization for the browser.

In WebXPRT a higher score is better, and Intel schools AMD’s offerings thanks to optimization for the browser.Illustration: Alex Cranz (Gizmodo)

In AMD ’s case , its single core stacks are … pretty median and another cause why apps like connection web browser do n’t draw the benefit of AMD ’s promise pep pill . Browsers are project to be used by only one , maybe two cores , and AMD , on a pure marrow - by - core basis , just can not compete with Intel .

However , let ’s look at the multi - core score , where the Threadripper 2950X ’s 16 meat go up against the six pith of the AMD Ryzen 5 2600X , Intel i7 8700 K , and Intel i5 8600K.

It ’s perilously closemouthed to have a score doubly as high as the i5 ! With a score of 31,485 , it ’s not only leaving all the other CPUs tested in the dust , it ’s also screaming well past the modal sexual conquest of every background CPU we ’ve examine since 2016 .

Illustration: Alex Cranz

Illustration: Alex Cranz (Gizmodo)

Okay . I roll in the hay what you ’re asking — so when do all these cores and all this promised focal ratio actually discover themselves in a veridical - human race setting ?

In applications that are really designed to take vantage of multiple core .

That intend software like Handbrake , Adobe Premiere , Blender , and AutoCAD . These are apps that their Maker gestate to run not just on the laptops and desktops most of us have at home , but on powerful and expensive servers in offices , academe , and on a Hollywood backlot . They ’re greedy for more nitty-gritty , and when these kinds of software see those core , boy howdy , do they take advantage of them .

Illustration: Alex Cranz

Illustration: Alex Cranz (Gizmodo)

Using Handbrake , we exchange a prominent 4 K video Indian file to 1080p . On ordinary , this labor fill over ten min . The Threadripper 2950X did it in just five minutes . In Blender , it was even more telling . We timed how long it takes Blender to render a single image from a file . The average prison term is nearly ten bit . The Threadripper 2950X did it in two mo and 30 seconds . It was so fast I had to restart the computer and rerun the benchmark , just to be perfectly positivist the issue was correct .

It was .

So , is almost artificial performance in central processing unit - intensive task really worth the $ 900 asking price of the AMD Ryzen Threadripper 2950X , or its 32 - core $ 1,800 singling , the 2990WX ? Probably not for most citizenry reading this . It ’s in all likelihood a good buy than Intel ’s comparable offering , the 16 - nub $ 1,500 Intel i9 7960X. It will absolutely do everything you need passing quickly , and it will be no slouch in gaming , web browsing , or other more lowly chore . But the Threadripper is n’t built for you and me . It ’s a CPU built for professionals and people with more money than sense on how to spend it .

The six-core AMD Ryzen 5 2600X still wins, but the Threadripper 2950X does decently. In this benchmark lower is better.

The six-core AMD Ryzen 5 2600X still wins, but the Threadripper 2950X does decently. In this benchmark lower is better.Illustration: Alex Cranz (Gizmodo)