Finally, 5950x 16 core is back at Amazon for $800, "Sold by Amazon" not third parties!

jmc

Well-known member
So cpus and GPUs are finally getting less scalped.
Third party 5950x (s) were $1100, $1200 or more weeks ago.

No way am I going to trust third party sellers with that much money.
Amazon or Newegg yes. Mine is on the way.

I wanted Zen3 24 core threadripper but still no hint if there will ever be a consumer threadripper again.
So will make do with what I can get.

Next years Zen4 will be new socket and probably DDR5.
So new motherboard and NEW Ram...nope.
 

jmc

Well-known member
Don't you have the 3950, like me? Any reason to buy the 5950x?
I believe the 5950x is around 30% faster then my 3950x.

No Zen3 threadrippers, so getting the fastest Zen3 I can till next gen is "well" out in late 2022-2023.

I've read that any "threadripper" level silicon is going into the BIG money cpus.
 

Danr

Administrator
Staff member
Do you have a specific objective such as faster transcoding or being able to handle more multi-tasks? I bought the 3950 since some users, such as yourself, were having VRD issues when employing lots of physical threads. I was working with another user who helped me build a Linux system that could run a VM that simulated 256 physical cores, but the actual performance was terrible on my 4/8 Core Intel I7. Too slow to actually do anything productive.
 

jmc

Well-known member
It's mainly "muti-tasks". Don't like more then 70-80% cpu used for transcoding. Always want some left for me to play movies or games.
It's so nice to be able to just set the video encode going and keep using the computer for whatever else I wish!

I remember my first dvd burnings...shut down all other programs, get the dvd burning started and walk away until it's finished.

I noticed once that my 16 core cpu was at 98-100% fixing up old faded washed out digitized tapes so thought of the 24 core threadripper.
I just "hope" that will do it. Going to be really, really ticked off if I get the 24 core (someday) and realize that I should have gotten the 32 core.
Guess I'll have to learn the hard way.

I thought video encoding was bad enough (x264 30-50%) but pile on a lot of video filters and they want to eat your cpu.
(don't "video denoise" if you can help it).
I'm only saved by staying at low bit rates of 1.4 megs

Have you run into anyone using 24, 32 core cpus for video? Would love to find out the easy way...don't go 24, go 32 ?
(32 would be painful but 64 is out of the question)

Thanks
jmc
 
Last edited:

Danr

Administrator
Staff member
Most of our transcoder users (VideoReDo Workstation Applications (videoredopro.com) ) with 24-32 cores. In general, I typically suggest 6-8 cores for each MPEG2 encoding, and 8-12 cores for each H264 encoding. Additional cores doesn't seem to buy you much. On systems with 32 cores, they are doing 3-4 transcodes at a time, plus simultaneous FTP and/or Amazon S3 transfers.

I had considered purchasing a 24 or 32 core ThreadRipper, but after looking at the power requirements for the CPU realized that I would be spending a lot of money on electricity as those CPUs run quite hot. I rarely peg all 32 threads on the 3950 even with H264 encoding.
 

jmc

Well-known member
I had considered purchasing a 24 or 32 core ThreadRipper, but after looking at the power requirements for the CPU realized that I would be spending a lot of money on electricity as those CPUs run quite hot. I rarely peg all 32 threads on the 3950 even with H264 encoding.
I too "rarely peg" all 32 threads. But for me that means "need more cores!".
Don't want to worry about having enough cores for everything I might wish to do.

So If I ever see another Threadripper come out (and the stock market keeps playing nice) I will give 32 cores a really hard look
and hope I buy the 24 core one. :)...As you said "the power use". Not going to be overclocking 32 cores at all.

Thanks a lot!
jmc
 
Top Bottom