Discussion: Threadripper Pro

Notice: Page may contain affiliate links for which we may earn a small commission through services like Amazon Affiliates or Skimlinks.

NablaSquaredG

Layer 1 Magician
Aug 17, 2020
1,320
800
113
Hey,

I was amazed when AMD announced general availability of Threadripper Pro - However after a more detailed analysis, I'm not sure where Threadripper Pro fits into the market.

I find that Threadipper Pro is too close to EPYC. Threadipper Pro is basically a single-socket (-P) version of the EPYC F SKUs with slightly higher clocks (probably binned better than EPYC).
Otherweise I see no real difference between EPYC and Threadripper Pro. AMD has locked the overclocking capabilities of Threadripper Pro, so it can't be considered an "enthusiast platform". The only real difference is that Threadripper Pro allows UDIMMs, while EPYC does not (which shows that AMD could easily unlock UDIMM support on EPYC if they wanted).

If overclocking was enabled, I could imagine it being an amazing and flexible enthusiast platform (you can use UDIMMs if you want the best performance, UDIMM ECC / RDIMM if you need ECC and a medium amount of memory or LRDIMM if you need lots of memory).

IMHO: Threadipper Pro should either get overclocking capabilities or be consolidated with EPYC.


What do you think?
 

i386

Well-Known Member
Mar 18, 2016
4,221
1,540
113
34
Germany
Otherweise I see no real difference between EPYC and Threadripper Pro.
You're looking to close.
Take a step back and look on it at the system level; mainboard features, rackmount vs tower configurations, cooling options/noise.
 

NablaSquaredG

Layer 1 Magician
Aug 17, 2020
1,320
800
113
If they consolidated EPYC and Threadripper Pro: What would prevent motherboard manufacturers to produce EPYC workstation board with the additional features of the Threadipper Pro boards?

And how is rackmount / tower configuration related? All Threadripper Pro boards have the "server orientation" of the socket (just like EPYC boards), opposed the "consumer orientation" of standard Threadripper TRX40 / X399 boards.
 

alex_stief

Well-Known Member
May 31, 2016
884
312
63
38
TR Pro was relevant when it was first announced. But thanks to AMDs big brain move of restricting it to an OEM, it could not gain any traction in the enthusiast space.
And now that it has finally be released for single end user purchase, it is pretty much obsolete thanks to Epyc Milan.
Side-note: by making their own CPU and its "socket" obsolete right after launch, AMD has certainly pissed off some of their motherboard partners. Again. They developed boards specifically for this niche market segment, and now nobody wants them any more. And in my opinion, AMD absolutely can not squander good will with their motherboard partners. The lack of motherboard options is already holding them back in the enthusiast space, AMD can not afford losing the trust of more partners.
 

NablaSquaredG

Layer 1 Magician
Aug 17, 2020
1,320
800
113
Anyone noticed the MASSIVELY overdimensioned VRM on the ASUS Pro WS WRX80E-SAGE SE WIFI?

I've heard rumors that Threadripper Pro was supposed to be released with Overclocking enabled (hence ASUS decided to design the board for overclocking), but there was a last minute decision to lock overclocking.

Threadripper Pro is only really interesting for enthusiasts because it's much cheaper. You can use standard UDIMMs (instead of ECC UDIMMs or (L)RDIMMs) and the SKUs are half the price of their EPYC F-SKU counterparts.
But on the other hand: It's very likely that anyone who really needs the 8 memory channels of Threadripper Pro would also be better off with ECC RAM, so this is kinda obsolete.

I'd say the number of enthusiasts like me (who really need the 8 memory channels AND want to overclock) is very small, so adding overclocking is not really worth the effort (Well, no effort from AMD, because locking or not locking OC does not make a difference to them, but you need proper motherboards for that).

This platform doesn't really make sense. It does increase market segmentation and is a bit cheaper.. But AMD could also bring single-socket F-SKUs, e.g. 75F3-P (which would be the 3975WX successor and the 5975WX equivalent) for the same price as TR Pro, as there is basically no difference between the CPUs. The only thing I could imagine is that Threadripper Pro is binned even better than F SKUs...
 

bayleyw

Active Member
Jan 8, 2014
292
95
28
TR Pro is really a platform solution; the CPUs themselves likely use the same IOD as Epyc but the sockets are pinned out to support a chipset, which is a big PCI-e hub that provides nice things like audio and USB. The VRMs are also designed to support 280W with low/minimal airflow, whereas the VRMs on e.g. Supermicro boards need high-speed front-to-back airflow to meet spec.

I don't see anything wrong with the way things are, TR Pro is priced like an Epyc, supports more features than Epyc, and performs better than one. It would be nice to have overclocking (maybe the engineering samples, if they exist, are unlocked?) but a 3995WX at 4GHz is a serious thermal problem to deal with.