[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / g / ic / jp / lit / sci / tg / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports / report a bug ] [ 4plebs / archived.moe / rbt ]

Due to resource constraints, /g/ and /tg/ will no longer be archived or available. Other archivers continue to archive these boards.Become a Patron!

/g/ - Technology

View post   

[ Toggle deleted replies ]
File: 589 KB, 1609x859, 4ghz.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
61675730 No.61675730 [Reply] [Original] [archived.moe] [rbt]

>3277 CB score @4ghz
Xeons and Core i9s BTFO.

>> No.61675741


Will clocklets ever learn?

>> No.61675842


>> No.61675843

>128gb quad channel 3200mhz

>> No.61675915

Yes, that is something you'd expect out of a Threadripper build.

>> No.61677135
File: 112 KB, 691x771, 1497990958532.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]


>> No.61677251

Is CPU-Z reporting your RAM timings wrong? Those are looser than your mum after a night om the town

>> No.61677268
File: 4 KB, 452x523, Mysterious Merchant.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]


>> No.61677333

>top 2% bin

What did AMD mean by this

>> No.61677414

Threadripper platform is x399 - quad channel.

Eypc also supports up to 256GB of memory per socket iirc.

>> No.61677438

I'm wrong, it is actually 2TB RAM per socket on Epyc.

>> No.61677441

EPYC supports up to 2TB of memory per socket (you'll have to use 128GB LR-DIMMS for that, that is).

>> No.61679601

Don't the 32 core EPYC and 28 core Xeon get around 4300?

>> No.61679663



Holy shit, have fun rendering on that. Stick to Photon Map and ditch the entire idea of Irradiance Cache unless you want shitty Xeon tier frame render times.

>> No.61679680

That is prob. just CPU-Z being derpy.

>> No.61680001
File: 32 KB, 877x568, 1500641822221.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

one guy benchmarked dual EPYC 7601s on cinebench and got ~5100, but that was with the initial firmware

>> No.61680027

Cinnebench is broken on really high core counts


>> No.61680107
File: 96 KB, 539x337, Screenshot_20170801-152603.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]


>> No.61680286


I love STH as it really shows how cluless /g/ is when it comes to srs bsns hardware.

>> No.61681757
File: 219 KB, 1536x2048, tr amazon.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>p-pls buy i9 .. pls ..

>> No.61681803
File: 34 KB, 345x363, DF54KANVoAAk-1p.jpg large.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

it has 4.2 GHz XFR BTW (even 1900X).

>> No.61681856


>> No.61681867

threadripper NDA lift when?

>> No.61681928

August 10th

>> No.61682144

Tsk tsk tsk look who's talking shit, it's the corelet! How is that obsolete house fire i7 7700k doing? Don't worry, just buy the (finally) arriving 6 core mainstream parts. But don't forget to buy a new motherboard and delid good goy!

>> No.61682229

if it does 4.2GHz turbo on a sensible amount of cores, there's no reason to overclock it whatsoever

>> No.61682459


>Intel getting its ass whipped by Ryzen and Threadripper in Cinebench
>Release a new driver
>Now Intel is skyrocketing to impossible scores


>> No.61682489

It's a 4 socket system

>> No.61682499


Read the article, the score is scaling beyond anything possible, even if you had 200 cores the score would not go that high in Cinebench.

>> No.61683160

They need to fix Cinebench.

>> No.61683837

Strange, isn't it? Ryzen also whipped Intel in the CPU-Z benchmark and they responded by changing the benchmark so that Intel was ahead again.

Just a (((coincidence))) I'm sure.

>> No.61683864

This is only an issue under insane core counts so it's obviously not something like the bullshit CPU-Z did.

Name (leave empty)
Comment (leave empty)
Password [?]Password used for file deletion.