AMD Ryzen Threadripper Pro 7995WX 96-Core CPU 70% Faster Than 5995WX

wccftech.com

40 points·ashvardanian··10 comments

Terrible journalism, comparing stock performance to special cooling setups.

For example, the only Intel comparison is against the 56-core Xeon W9-3495X, but with liquid nitrogen cooling! Nobody, and I mean nobody runs that kind of rig for actual workloads, it's done only as a hobby for hitting bigger benchmark numbers... for a minute or two.

The quoted multi-thread performance for the Intel CPU is 72.8K, while the real number is more like 40K: https://browser.geekbench.com/search?k=v5_cpu&q=W9-3495X

The AMD chip isn't 12% faster, it's more like twice as fast as the Intel equivalent.

It also compares against a stock Core i9 1300k.

Which is a completely different “class” of processor. The equivalent of the Threadripper is a workstation (“W”-series) Xeon.

...in multithread workloads.

You don't buy a 96-core CPU to run singlethread workloads.

And the GP argument is getting very _very_ tired, the metric is becoming as relevant as dhrystone - it represents an increasingly uncommon workload. Especially in a community such as this, where people might care about things such as compilation performance.

GP? Do you mean Geekbench? If so it literally includes clang performance as one of its benchmarks that it runs. And it scales pretty consistently with the overall score.

GP refers to "grand parent", in the sense of the grand parent comment. Basically 2 comments up the chain.

Geekbench would be OP (the Original Post). GP stands for… Grandparent Post? (No one actually knows)

Anyway they’re referring to the top comment that acted like a high multithreaded score doesn’t matter.

You don't buy a new generation for the same IPC, either. It's a worthwhile distinction

Reply on news.ycombinator.com