In between a Hollywood special effects studio and a PC gamer's lair lies a middle ground of architects, freelance photographers, and many other creative professionals who need PCs that won't rob them of too many billable hours while they wait for their creations to render.
Large Hollywood studios have the budget and IT support for a fleet of Intel Xeon-powered workstations, and hardcore gamers might build their own rigs around a gaming powerhouse like the Intel Core i9-9900K.
But that middle ground has few options.
Luckily, one of them is the new AMD Ryzen Threadripper 2970WX ($1,299).
This elite consumer processor, one of four in the second-generation Threadripper family, offers enough cores, threads, unlocked flexibility, and wallet-friendliness to serve as an excellent brain for digital creators seeking processing muscle for the latest and greatest apps without spending a fortune.
Count 'Em: Two Dozen Cores
With 24 cores and 48 threads, the Threadripper 2970WX is unmistakably intended for multi-threaded workloads like 3D rendering and video encoding.
This is not the chip for you if you want to run just everyday office applications, or older programs that can only take advantage of a single core.
One of the biggest clues to the Threadripper 2970WX's singular focus on highly threaded workflows is its base clock speed of 3GHz, which is actually lower than the Threadripper 2950X's 3.5GHz.
That chip, which is also $400 cheaper, is arguably the gaming sweet spot in the second-generation Threadripper lineup.
Rounding out that lineup are other two chips.
The least expensive of the four is the $649, 12-core Threadripper 2920X, which has the same base clock speed as the Threadripper 2950X but fewer cores and threads.
(A review of that model is in the works.) At the top end, there's the 32-core, 64-thread Threadripper 2990WX.
PC Labs hasn't reviewed it yet, but the 2990WX's specs make it clear that it's only suited for people who want the absolute most cores and threads that Threadripper can offer, regardless of how much it costs.
As a result, it's overkill for most PC-building enthusiasts, both in terms of raw compute power and price.
The Threadripper 2970WX, though, is far more compelling for value-seeking creative pros, both in relation to its Threadripper siblings and similar Intel chips.
In fact, there really isn't a similar Intel chip.
The closest analogue is the 16-core, 32-thread, $1,699 Core i9-7960X.
It's more expensive, and it has fewer cores and threads, as well as a lower base clock speed of 2.8GHz.
While Intel's lineup of high-end desktop (HEDT) chips is a bit more extensive than AMD's four current-generation Threadrippers, the prices and features are clearly out of sync.
Intel's next step up is the $2,000, 18-core Core i9-7980XE Extreme Edition and the spanking-new Core i9-9980XE Extreme Edition.
(PC Labs will be serving up a review of the latter soon.) It's a beastly chip, but it's still "short" on cores compared with the top-of-the-line Threadripper 2990WX.
Ultimately, being short in the specs department doesn't matter all that much if the CPU can hold its own when it comes to how it handles the CPU-intensive workloads that you typically perform.
Since every creative professional has different workflows and apps, a chip's relative strengths and weaknesses are far more important when you're spending more than $1,000 on one as the core of a production workstation or scientific PC versus the $100 or $200 for the CPU that powers a typical consumer desktop PC.
PC Labs' tests indicate that the fewer-core Core i9-7980XE Extreme Edition actually outperforms the Threadripper 2970WX in several key ways, including offering slightly higher performance on older apps that aren't optimized for multiple CPU cores and threads.
(We'd expect the Core i9-9980XE to ring up similar results.) But if you're investing in cutting-edge software to go with your brand-new Threadripper build, the Threadripper 2970WX will likely serve you well, and it's significantly less expensive.
Before we delve into performance benchmark results, it's worth taking a brief side trip into what makes the Threadripper tick to see why it's such a unique chip.
Joining Dies: Threadripper Structure
Part of why the Threadripper 2970WX has an uncommonly high ratio of price to cores and threads is because of the unique architecture it shares with the rest of the Threadripper lineup.
Essentially, AMD fused two ordinary Ryzen CPUs together to form the Threadripper platform.
The result is a giant CPU—far larger than any in Intel's core lineup.
It requires its own chipset, called X399, and there is an expanding ecosystem of motherboards, coolers, and other equipment that support X399.
In fact, we tested the Threadripper 2970WX with the same Asus ROG X399 Zenith Extreme motherboard and Thermaltake Floe Riing RGB 360 liquid cooler that we used to test all other Threadripper chips we've reviewed.
A BIOS update was all the motherboard required to recognize the 2970WX.
Luckily, all X399 boards support USB flashback, which means you can update the BIOS from a file installed on a USB stick, instead of having to boot up with a different CPU first.
As for the chip architecture itself, fusing two ordinary Ryzens together means that the Threadripper chips have a total of four dies fused together, each one supporting an equal number of cores.
How many cores depends on each chip.
The Threadripper 2920X and 2950X have their cores crammed onto two of the four dies, which means in order to take full advantage of the Threadripper's large CPU footprint, you have to step up to the 2970WX or the 2990WX, each of which has all four dies occupied.
Besides cutting down on manufacturing costs, the four-die arrangement results in a unique method for accessing memory.
Two of the dies on the Threadripper 2970WX are directly connected to two memory channels and 32 PCI Express (PCIe) lanes for connecting to add-in cards like graphics cards, Wi-Fi radios, and the like.
The other two dies are present purely to add computing muscle, and must send their memory and PCIe requests to the other dies first using a mesh interface that AMD refers to as "Infinity Fabric."
The Infinity Fabric is capable of passing memory instructions around the die at an impressive 25GBps (with a 1,600MHz memory clock speed), but it's still not ideal if you're running an app that performs best when each of the cores and threads it's running on has direct memory access.
Many games fall into this category, and as a result the 2970WX can thwart some titles at lower screen resolutions, where the CPU performance is most noticeable.
The Threadripper 2920X and 2950X offer a workaround for this problem, since both of their dies have direct memory access.
If you switch them to AMD's alternate Gaming Mode using AMD's Ryzen Master tweaking app (the default mode is known as Creator Mode), you can prevent the operating system from issuing instructions that run on one die but use memory connected to another, essentially forcing each instruction to run on a die directly connected to memory.
This is impossible with the 2970WX, since two of its four dies have no memory directly attached to them.
So AMD has devised another workaround specific to the 2970WX and 2990WX.
A new mode, called Dynamic Local Mode, forces instructions from apps that benefit from local memory access to run on just the parts of the chip directly connected to memory.
Like Gaming Mode, it attempts to keep threads and their memory contents together, but it does not change the operating system's ability to see all the dies.
The silver lining is that it's much easier to activate, since it doesn't require a reboot the way Gaming Mode with local memory access does.
(More on all of this in a bit.)
Threadripper: All the Lanes
Many of the best ancillary features about Threadripper chips can be found on all of them—AMD doesn't limit the most powerful or cutting-edge options to the top-of-the line Threadripper 2990WX.
This means support for basic technologies that every cutting-edge CPU should have, such as USB 3.1 Gen 2 and PCI Express NVMe for lightning-quick storage.
It also means future-proof niceties like 64 PCI Express lanes.
You will probably never use all 64 lanes, but if you plan to install two graphics cards and two PCI Express SSDs, you'll occupy 40 lanes and have plenty of leftovers for future add-ins.
This arrangement would be tighter, or in some cases impossible, on an Intel Core X-Series chip and its current X299 platform.
The lane count can vary with these chips, depending on which one you install.
For example, the Core i9-7960X supports 44 lanes, whereas the Core i7-7820X supports just 28.
All of the Threadripper chips also come with a potentially major downside for videographers and photographers with Thunderbolt 3-compatible external storage.
Since Thunderbolt 3 was until recently an Intel-exclusive technology, Ryzen chips don't support it.
This could result in a significant time bottleneck if you need to offload a lot of 4K footage from an external Thunderbolt 3 drive.
Building a Threadripper PC
Installing a Threadripper CPU is a unique process because of its large size, but it's one we've written about extensively with other Threadripper reviews.
You'll find a detailed installation guide with images in our Threadripper 1950X review.
If you have an older liquid cooler like the Thermaltake one we used, the process is identical.
If not, you'll want to pair our guide with the instructions from your cooler manufacturer.
In addition to the Threadripper 2970WX, Asus X399 Zenith Extreme, and Thermaltake Floe Riing RGB 360, our testbed includes the following components:
| PART/MANUFACTURER | |
| MEMORY | G.Skill Flare X DDR-3200 (two 16GB kits) |
| BOOT DRIVE | Samsung SSD 970 EVO (500GB/M.2) |
| HARD DRIVE | Seagate 4TB Desktop HDD ST4000DM000 |
| CHASSIS | Mean:IT 5pm |
| POWER SUPPLY | Thermaltake Toughpower Grand 1200W |
| VIDEO CARD | Nvidia GeForce GTX 1080 Founders Edition |
Performance Testing
And so, onward to our charts.
On the Intel side, in terms of price, Team Blue's 10-core Intel Core i9-7900X ($999) and 16-core Core i9-7960X ($1,699) are going to be this Threadripper's chief last-generation competition.
(We haven't had the opportunity to test the 12-core Core i9-9920X, the closest Intel price analogue in its current-gen "Skylake X" line, at $1,200.) Of course, we dropped in the luxe-level Core i9-7980XE Extreme Edition ($1,082.81 at Amazon) (Intel's previous-gen flagship 18-core part) and are in the process of testing the Core i9-9980XE Extreme Edition (that chip's ticked-up successor; both are right around $2,000 at this writing) for a look at the top end of the Intel line and, in fact, the entire HEDT market.
Looking back to the previous AMD generation, we're also charting in the Threadripper 1950X (the forebear to the 2950X) and the Threadripper 1920X, AMD's step-down 12-core model.
(The Threadripper 2920X, which we are also testing, is the successor to that one.) There is no direct AMD antecedent to the Threadripper 2970WX.
Finally, we're also looping in the two top-end chips in Intel's and AMD's "mainstream" lines.
The Core i9-9900K is the current head honcho for Team Blue on its mainstream socket, and the AMD Ryzen 7 2700X ($409.99 at Amazon) is the top dog in the new second-generation Ryzen line.
The Core i9-9900K is an eight-core/16-thread chip, as is the top-end Ryzen 7 2700X featured here.
On thread-hungry tests and tasks, the Ryzen 7 2700X and Core i7-9900K won't stand a chance against the 24-core/48-thread Threadripper 2970WX.
The 16-core Core i9-7960X, however, should be in the same league as the Threadripper parts (for the most part) given its pricing, while we expect the 18-core Core i9-7980XE to be the Intel alpha dog here in tasks that gobble up cores and threads.
That said, the Core i9-7980XE (and its successor Core i9-9980XE) both have a suggested price of $1,999, more than twice that of the top Threadripper chip, and the former hasn't budged much from that rarified price spot since its debut in 2017.
That's a lot of extra moolah, and for less cores.
Let's see if it's worth it.
Cinebench R15
First up in our testing regimen: Maxon's CPU-crunching Cinebench R15 test.
Cinebench is a fully threaded test that's one of the best at-a-glance measures of a task making use of all available processor cores and threads.
In practice, many applications, even pro applications, can't leverage all threads as well as Cinebench can, but this horsepower trial shows the top potential of the chip, using the CPU rather than the GPU to render a complex image.
Along with the usual test that makes use of all available cores, we've mapped in the single-core results here, to get a sense of how AMD's new chip fares with single-threaded workloads.
With a score of 4,203, the Threadripper 2970WX blows away the competition on the all-cores test, as it should: It simply has the most cores by far.
All else being equal, this result suggests that any app whose performance scales with the sheer number of cores available to it increases will love this chip.
In the real world, however, all else is rarely equal, and many apps that can accomplish core-dependent tasks like 3D rendering also perform other functions that are more reliant on clock speed, memory, GPU performance, and other factors besides the number of CPU cores.
The Threadripper 2970WX's performance on the single-core Cinebench test is nearly the exact opposite.
Its score of 168 is near the bottom of its peer group, with only the first-generation Threadripper 1950X recording a lower score, by a whisker (167).
Of particular note on the single-core Cinebench test: The Intel chips consistently outperform their AMD competitors.
The Core i7-7960X achieved a score of 191, while the high-clocked Core i9-9900X recorded 218.
iTunes 10.6 Conversion Test
For an example of why the single-core Cinebench test matters in the real world, consider our iTunes conversion test.
It uses an old version of Apple's music management app (10.6) that isn't optimized for many-core CPUs.
As with the single-core Cinebench test, the Threadripper 2970WX took longer than the Core i7-7960X.
Interestingly, the 2970WX's time of 1 minute and 52 seconds was also slightly longer than the Threadripper 2950X's time, due in part to the latter's higher clock speed, which can improve single-thread performance.
Handbrake 0.9.9
This is a time-consuming...
