AMD Ryzen Threadripper TR 2990WX CPU processor thread. 32 cores. 64 threads

Just benched my 2990WX. Hope you're happy now

Very. Happy. Thank you very much

>not jpg

gross

Attached: 20180817014354 038.jpg (1024x768, 100K)

Attached: 20180817014400 039.jpg (1024x768, 100K)

Attached: 20180817014404 040.jpg (1024x768, 100K)

Attached: 20180817014407 041.jpg (1024x768, 100K)

Attached: 20180817014412 042.jpg (1024x768, 100K)

Attached: 20180817014414 043.jpg (1024x768, 100K)

Attached: 20180817014700 049.jpg (1024x768, 99K)

Attached: 20180817014708 050.jpg (1024x768, 100K)

Attached: 20180817014725 051.jpg (1024x768, 99K)

Attached: 20180817014749 052.jpg (1024x768, 100K)

Why doesn't AMD just make a CPU with 29 cores. 28 cores of their same process and 1 core that is the size of 4 cores with 10GHz so the single threaded benchmarks are BTFO once and for all, and then it has 28 other cores for BTFOing all of intels chips?

Attached: 20180817014804 053.jpg (1024x768, 99K)

Attached: 20180817014827 054.jpg (1024x768, 99K)

Fine. I'll probably avoid posting JPG for these things next time from now on. But I have a screenshot thing irfanview that automatically keeps my jpg screenshots under 100KB by default. I don't have something like that for PNG. I can make them smaller; But not with a limit; And not uniform. I guess it won't matter when we have like 32TB in the future. Or for a few files. Even if it keeps adding up. Ah well whatever.

I'll probably post the images from the other threads, too. I've been collecting them. Hope you like it.

Attached: kek.png 1534417021916.png (1362x180, 23K)

Attached: LMAO.png 1534417760164.png (1236x777, 251K)

Attached: 1528575394592.jpg (948x747, 74K)

Attached: ryzen.png 1534520511401.png (428x321, 53K)

Attached: 2990wx.png 1534522403059.png (109x204, 3K)

Attached: 1523293491756.png (554x400, 305K)

Attached: Screen Shot 2018-08-19 at 3.41.20 PM.png (1580x1324, 412K)

Attached: i3.png 1534708647527.png (1294x1468, 67K)

Attached: 2990wx_scaling.png (1194x1960, 255K)

Attached: bxuRRhv.png (1920x974, 300K)

Attached: zqmDKoZ.png (1920x974, 309K)

Attached: 1534737506611.png (915x678, 188K)

Attached: 1534640257943.png 1534709475669.png (915x678, 368K)

Attached: Optimal amount of cores and threads. Made by catty internet school girls. To bully eachother. So tha (915x678, 65K)

Attached: 1534737506611.png 1534757067591.png (915x678, 67K)

That's it. I didn't include the stock-market ones because it's sort relevant to that post and irrelevant now. I also included an image that I made in there. I won't say which 1. I'll leave it as an exercise of the audience to figure it out. Hope you liked it.

>File: 1534737506611.png 1534801283308.png (188 KB, 915x678)File: 1534737506611.png (188 KB, 915x678)

This was a misfire. But.
>Error: You cannot delete posts this often.
Sorry.

Thank you !!

Attached: Thank you !!.jpg (500x700, 71K)

I wouldn't know. I think they want their cores to be uniform and all the same. Not something like that. Maybe for stability or something. I don't know why. But. Good idea.

well they already do 1 core turbo that is far higher than other cores, so I figured if you got garbage programs that are single core reliant might as well have a big ass core

screencapping this before the shintelkike mods delid this or push it to the back

thank you. to be honest. i haven't had any trouble with mods so far. may be surprisingly. they were a lot more harsher and abusive in the past. so far. in regards to this. all of the threads i made that got deleted i delete myself. so. no problems so far. but i appreciate you, my back-up. thank you.

oh, that makes sense. again i think it's a matter of making their manufacturing process and everything easier by making them all the same. 1 core turbo should help a lot. having these segments of Ryzen Threadripper WX, Threadripper X, Ryzen 7, Ryzen 5, Ryzen 3 may make sense. same with intel and Core i9 eXtreme Edition, i7, i5, i3. it'll just be more cores and slightly slower speeds vs. less cores and slightly faster speeds. AMD is doing well overall; but everyone's pessimistic towards AMD and sees Intel's win with single-core speed in newer generations as a loss for AMD for some reason. i think AMD and Intel are leap-frogging eachother again. after like a 10 year hiatus. or arguably like a 5 year hiatus. just hope 2950X and 2800X do well in single-core speed anyway. it'll be fine.

yea I have a 1700X and have no issues with anything, it performs with flying colors at 3.7ghz vs my 3570K at 4.6GHz. and of course anything multi threaded like rendering with ffmpeg isn't even comparable.

INTEL FINNA GET DABBED ON

Zen 128 cores when??????????????

Zen 128 cores in 2020.

FINNA

oh i see, that's awesome. being able to do everything at once with room for more is the goal for me.

The 2990wx was overclocked to 6ghz btw.

Are you the one who benchmarked your 2990wx before? If so; All right; Good.

The best 2990WX score has a better single-core core score than the i7-8700K's average score and rank; And i9-7960XE has a lower single-core average score than the i7-8700K; By the way. So they're all close. So. Everyone's probably right about userbenchmark sucking; In that regard. But still shows what the results are like when you have a bunch of random unqualified people putting their average benchmarks together in real-world and real-people settings. So. That's what it is.

yea I'm just curious why single threading performance matters so much to some people. Do they really run garbage programs made 10 years ago? Even browsers (which are all fucking shit, except servo) run everything in separate processes to try and makeup for their bloat

I'd buy a 8c threadripper that overclocks above 5ghz.

All these core counts as meaningless now. It's completely arbitrary if you have 28 or 32 because next year you know there'll be a 36 or something.

Oh.

Yeah. It'd be funny to see a 1-core 1-thread CPU above 8GHz and a 256-core 256-thread CPU at 1GHz. It's the slow yearly improvement. So.

oh; they probably want better single-thread performance for higher FPS in vidoegames. most videogames are single-threaded. i agree web-browsers are all trash; maybe i'll try servo sometime. do they? let's see. oh shoot. new firefox quantum does. that's new. yeah.

yea, vulkan & dx12 don't need 'muh single thread'

yeah; exactly.

vulkan is a big thing now too? i'm really out of it. used to hearing opengl and directx. so the new opengl is vulkan. i guess it's vulkan and dx12 now.

i don't mind single-threaded applications. because i like single-threaded applications. because if i have a lot of cores and threads; then i can just devote an entire application to a single core. and i don't really care about having higher FPS in videogames; and the single core speed is likely high enough. tho; it is somewhat annoying to hear people complaining about how single-core speed isn't fast; due to single cored applications; clearly. so it's sort of bad either way. for me. i guess we can hope that somehow someway we get a lot of cores and amazing single-core performance; which i think we have already. but. they always want more FPS. so. oh well... hopefully multi-threaded performance and multi-threaded applications will actually perform better together than if they were separate single-threaded anyway; which they probably will and hopefully already do. hopefully.

slightly off-topic; but; by the way. there should be a web-browser or a way to turn off html5 in web-browsers. because apparently richard stallman is right again; and html5 is DRM trash used to control the user. you have so many "block adblocker" html5 DRM trash that goes "we understand you hate ads. we hate ad's too. we agree with you. except we don't agree with you. and we force you to close adblocker. give us yo submission and help us get muh money, suckah!!". but if you run firefox legacy 3 -- or firefox portable legacy 3 -- you have absolutely no problem with "block adblocker" html5 DRm; or any html5 DRM; because html5 DRM and "block and blocker" does not exist and function in html4 xhtml and non-html5 programs; it's incompatible. alas. extensions aren't supported for it. and most of those would mostly work with html5 anyway. and a lot is broken. but i think it's worth. and may be slighlty better than the plan of "html5 is shit. everyone let's try to use the gopher browser again; instead of the world wide web" plan; tho we could do that, too, i guess... as long as you don't use html5 drm bullshit right. i don't really think having html5 to compete with progams that run on operating systems is worth it. they can live in their block-adblocker world if they want to; they'll probably eventually destroy themselves; realize it's trash; and come to our world the free world anyway. you could also have something similar to adblock plus where instead of blocking ad's you disable html5 on certain pages; which disables block adblocker; at the cost of the page possibly being broken because it relies too much on html5; but i think that's worth it; and better than nothing. i just think that we should at least try to stop this trash. i know this is unrelated to anything i just wanted to tell someone.

and i know ">userbenchmark uses windows os and you talk about freedom.". i don't think it's that bad relatively to html5 drm. and i would like to say; in my defense; that instead of isolation and ignoring new ideas and good ideas entirely; that i like the idea of userbenchmark in hopes to see alternatives for GNU Linux and FreeBSD etc. for it.

may post some screenshots. but this time it's re-done and they're not jpg due to complaints but now png. hope you enjoy it.

Attached: 20180821035134 20180821033421 045885.png (1024x768, 22K)

Attached: 20180821035134 20180821033432 045886.png (1024x768, 21K)

Attached: 20180821035134 20180821033438 045887.png (1024x768, 20K)

Attached: 20180821035134 20180821033444 045888.png (1024x768, 20K)

Attached: 20180821035134 20180821033451 045889.png (1024x768, 21K)

Attached: 20180821035134 20180821033455 045890.png (1024x768, 20K)

Attached: 20180821035134 20180821033502 045891.png (1024x768, 21K)

Attached: 20180821035134 20180821033504 045892.png (1024x768, 20K)

Attached: 20180821035134 20180821033511 045893.png (1024x768, 20K)

Attached: 20180821035134 20180821033528 045894.png (1024x768, 19K)

Attached: 20180821035134 20180821033549 045895.png (1024x768, 32K)

Attached: 20180821035134 20180821033557 045896.png (1024x768, 22K)

Attached: 20180821035134 20180821033613 045897.png (1024x768, 28K)

Attached: 20180821035134 20180821033625 045898.png (1024x768, 17K)

Attached: 20180821035134 20180821033640 045899.png (1024x768, 31K)

Attached: 20180821035134 20180821033652 045900.png (1024x768, 17K)

hope you enjoyed it. thanks.

>why not 10 GHz
Why not 20?

>Why not 20?
Why not zoidberg?

Attached: image02.png (639x281, 20K)

Gay thread is gay. Learn to use the internet. Faggot.

Gay post is gay. Learn to use the internet. Faggot.

>vulkan
>dx12
I'm laughing at you.

Attached: 1510012739723.jpg (790x837, 115K)

slightly off-topic; but; by the way. there should be a web-browser or a way to turn off html5 in web-browsers. because apparently richard stallman is right again; and html5 is DRM trash used to control the user. you have so many "block adblocker" html5 DRM trash that goes "we understand you hate ads. we hate ad's too. we agree with you. except we don't agree with you. and we force you to close adblocker. give us yo submission and help us get muh money, suckah!!". but if you run firefox legacy 3 -- or firefox portable legacy 3 -- you have absolutely no problem with "block adblocker" html5 DRm; or any html5 DRM; because html5 DRM and "block and blocker" does not exist and function in html4 xhtml and non-html5 programs; it's incompatible. alas. extensions aren't supported for it. and most of those would mostly work with html5 anyway. and a lot is broken. but i think it's worth. and may be slighlty better than the plan of "html5 is shit. everyone let's try to use the gopher browser again; instead of the world wide web" plan; tho we could do that, too, i guess... as long as you don't use html5 drm bullshit right. i don't really think having html5 to compete with progams that run on operating systems is worth it. they can live in their block-adblocker world if they want to; they'll probably eventually destroy themselves; realize it's trash; and come to our world the free world anyway. you could also have something similar to adblock plus where instead of blocking ad's you disable html5 on certain pages; which disables block adblocker; at the cost of the page possibly being broken because it relies too much on html5; but i think that's worth it; and better than nothing. i just think that we should at least try to stop this trash. i know this is unrelated to anything i just wanted to tell someone.

>be me
>see ads saying I should disable adblocker
>disable adblocker
>still no ads because I'm good at least one thing in my life

feels good man

forgot one at and one pepe

Attached: 1533374765065.jpg (705x527, 247K)

same. you disable 1 and you have alternate adblockers that aren't detected? same. but it doesn't work with everything. and i am also able to disable it either way with firefox 3 without html5. but. it's still shit that it happens period. and it should be discouraged. or it may get to the point where it is unblockable. so. can't take it for gratned. but. so. same.

feels good man

less images, combine them into one larger image

normos don't have the patience to click through over 300 confirmed gorilla screenshots

>forgot one at and one pepe

at? alright

Attached: Jellyfish.jpg (1024x768, 98K)

what? that's ridiculous.

i'm not dancing for the idiots. if they don't click it then that's their loss. but. gorilla? what?