Cheapest I've seen this processor and will no doubt be cheaper than the upcoming Ryzen 3950X so if you're interested in a 16C/32T CPU this is definitely viable.
Works out to be about $66 per core and about $33 per thread.
Don't forgot cashback rewards too.
CamelCamelCamel.
should we work out $/FLOPS or $/IPC too?
What motherboard to use with this?
X399
This is terrible advice but grab the Asus Zenith Extreme Alpha, that is one delicious looking motherboard.
It's terrible advice though as it's very expensive and we don't know (or maybe it's even been confirmed not to be the case?) if the new Threadripper's are compatible with X399 or not which are expected to be announced in the next couple of months.
I am personally holding out on upgrading my CPU/Mobo until we see the new Threadripper range, AMD was really appealing to me with their Ryzen's this year but I need the extra PCI lanes Threadripper can offer, exciting time to jump camps!
who needs 16 cores unless you want to future proof but a total waste of electricity imo.
Plenty of people for productivity, beyond gaming. Your not just focusing on the Threadripper cores but the whole platform. X399 also provides 64 PCIE lanes. A lot more than 24 PCIE lanes available on the main stream platforms. It's more than enough for multiple graphics cards and NVME storage drives. Intel, 8 core 9900k, consumes more power, 255w than the 225W of the, 16 core, 2950x in Handbrake. So it is a more efficient processor.
Hi! PC user who actually has PCIE lane requirements here as I run multiple graphics cards and NVME storage. Completely agree with shellshocked, in fact, I care more about the platforms PCIE lanes than the cores of the CPU.
I cAnT tHiNk Of A rEaSoN sO tHeReFoRe ItS tRaSh.
The same people who need an 8 core, 10 core, 12 core etc etc. People use applications that scale well with more cores, and odds are for those apps the time saved would be money saved.
3900x is probably a better deal unless you really need the extra pcie lanes.
16 Cores but on benchmark it is similar to a 8 Core 3700X or a OCed 3600 which only costs about $250
Guess not all cores are stressed, good for server /rendering machine / virtualization not for gamers or average user
This is definitely not for gaming and your average user
I'm actually hardcore overclocker / servers :)
yeah its not competitive for games compared to cheaper cpus but works AMAZING with VM/rendering. Got 3 VMs (Win10, Win10, Mac) running and PC still smooth as. ;)
Compared to 16 core 2nd generation threadripper , I'd rather go with the $720 3rd generation Ryzen 12 core 3900X , it costs less, motherboard costs less, 30% faster on the numbers. And quads CrossFirex rarely gives you more compared to dual
who cares what you rather go for
this cpu is not for you
you don't need 64 pcie lanes
you don't do rendering
why even consider this cpu
Keep calm
you don't need 64 pcie lanes
Subjective as all hell.
They were talking about that specific user, not in general.
Working out $/core; cents/GB. What a time to be alive