Re:AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1950X and 1920X Review
by paulmd on Thursday August 10, 2017 @04:25PM
(#14983833)
AMD is already making a big marketing push about "you need 32 lanes for SLI/CrossFire!".
Which is utterly false, at 3.0 speeds x8x8 only costs you a few percent at most. Strangely x16x16 can actually hurt you in a few titles, which suggests we may just be seeing some other kind of variation/noise anyway.
Threadripper is no better than a Ryzen 7 at gaming, and in fact is often worse (often closer to a Ryzen 5). If you really buy into the need for x16x16 then getting a 6850K is really the obvious answer, it competes with Ryzen core-for-core in both performance and efficiency and since it's a HEDT product you get the 40 PCIe lanes as well as quad-channel RAM. Somewhat pricier than Ryzen, given, but actually much cheaper than Threadripper.
Which is utterly false, at 3.0 speeds x8x8 only costs you a few percent at most. Strangely x16x16 can actually hurt you in a few titles, which suggests we may just be seeing some other kind of variation/noise anyway.
http://www.gamersnexus.net/guides/2488-pci-e-3-x8-vs-x16-per...
https://www.pugetsystems.com/labs/articles/Titan-X-Performan...
Threadripper is no better than a Ryzen 7 at gaming, and in fact is often worse (often closer to a Ryzen 5). If you really buy into the need for x16x16 then getting a 6850K is really the obvious answer, it competes with Ryzen core-for-core in both performance and efficiency and since it's a HEDT product you get the 40 PCIe lanes as well as quad-channel RAM. Somewhat pricier than Ryzen, given, but actually much cheaper than Threadripper.