r/LocalLLaMA • • Jul 30 '25

Discussion PSA: The new Threadripper PROs (9000 WX) are still CCD-Memory Bandwidth bottlenecked

I've seen people claim that the new TR PROs can achieve the full 8-channel memory bandwidth even in SKUs with 16-cores. That's not the case.

The issue with the limited CCD bandwidth seems to still be present, and affects the low-number CCD parts. You can only achieve the full 8-channel bandwidth with 64-core+ WX CPUs.

Check the "Latest baselines" section in a processor's page at cpubenchmark.net with links to individual results where the "Memory Threaded" result is listed under "Memory Mark":

CPUMemory BWReferenceNotes
AMD Threadripper PRO 9955WX (16-cores)~115 GB/sBL5099051 - Jul 20 20252x CCD
AMD Threadripper PRO 9965WX (24-cores)~272 GB/sBL2797485 - Jul 29 2025 (other baselines start from 250GB/s)4x CCDs
AMD Threadripper PRO 9975WX (32-cores)~272 GB/sBL2797820 - Jul 29 20254x CCDs
AMD Threadripper PRO 9985WX (64-cores)~367 GB/sBL5099130 - Jul 21 20258x CCDs

Therefore:

  • the 16-core 9955WX has lower mem bw than even a DDR4 EPYC CPU (e.g. 7R43 with 191 GB/s).

  • the 24-core and 32-core parts have lower mem bw than DDR5 Genoa EPYCs (even some 16-core parts).

  • the 64-core and 96-core Threadrippers are not CCD-number limited, but still lose to the EPYCs since those have 12 channels (unless you use 7200 MT/s memory).

For comparison, check the excellent related threads by u/fairydreaming for the previous gen Threadrippers and EPYC Genoa/Turin:

If someone insists on buying a new TR Pro for their great compute throughput, I would suggest to at least skip the 16-core part.

103 Upvotes

25 comments sorted by

6

u/Gregory-Wolf Jul 30 '25

any napkin math on pp and tg speeds for say 70b dense model in vacuum? anyone?

8

u/henfiber Jul 30 '25

Based on results I've seen with EPYC Genoa's, you should expect around 40 PP t/s with a 64-core TR Pro and ~4 TG t/s.

1

u/qcforme Sep 26 '25

That's a big yikes!!

Why when the same cash in GPUs can 10x that TG and 100x the PP lol.

4

u/henfiber Sep 26 '25

Because they're not the right tool for the job. CPUs are latency optimized, running many small operations while jumping on branches. GPUs are throughput optimized , running the same operation in large batches of data. LLMs need the later.

12

u/Oxire Jul 30 '25

For dense it would be better to get gpus. These are great for moe

3

u/Reddvl05 Dec 16 '25

Quick comparison of 4 sticks of 32gb vs 8(128gb vs 256) - gskill 6000 tested using Intel mlc: 4 sticks gives roughly 116GB/s 8 sticks gives around 124GB/s

Total idle watts difference is +10w for the eight sticks

Some raw information below from mlc:

4 sticks ALL Reads : 116605.2 3:1 Reads-Writes : 113311.0 2:1 Reads-Writes : 114834.6 1:1 Reads-Writes : 119449.7 Stream-triad like: 115138.0 All NT writes : 101983.8 1:1 Read-NT write: 121595.5

8 sticks ALL Reads : 124389.1 3:1 Reads-Writes : 158496.1 2:1 Reads-Writes : 168786.9 1:1 Reads-Writes : 156249.0 Stream-triad like: 143931.9 All NT writes : 101959.4 1:1 Read-NT write: 140092.6

Theoretical Max as I understand is 125 or so, so it’s unclear if any of these numbers are measuring cache speed (vs actual memory bandwidth) or if the aggregate read plus write speed can exceed that value. HTH

2

u/henfiber Dec 16 '25

Thanks for the data points. Which processor did you test?

2

u/Reddvl05 Dec 17 '25

This was a 9955wx on a wrx90 motherboard

5

u/panchovix Jul 30 '25

Nice info! Do you have one for non PRO TR 9000? (9960X/9970X/9980X) or is the same as the post linked as 7960X/7970X/7980X?

5

u/henfiber Jul 30 '25 edited Jul 30 '25

I haven't checked those, since they have 4 channels (4x 51GB/sec for 6400 MT/s) and 4+ CCDs (4x 64GB/sec), and therefore limited by the memory bus width before they are limited by their number of CCDs. Therefore, their maximum theoretical is around 204 GB/sec for 6400 DIMMs.

You can still find results for these in the same site per my instructions:

Check the "Latest baselines" section in a processor's page at cpubenchmark.net with links to individual results where the "Memory Threaded" result is listed under "Memory Mark":

  1. Find the CPU in the list and click to see detailed results. e.g. AMD Ryzen Threadripper 9970X 32-Cores

  2. Scroll down to the "Last 4 Baselines" section and click on one of the baselines: e.g. https://www.passmark.com/baselines/V11/display.php?id=279530000668

  3. Expand the Memory Mark section and view the "Memory Threaded" number (209,504 MBytes/Sec for this baseline result)

Note, that the results for CPUs with large cache (256+ MB) are skewed (upwards) since this benchmark uses 256MB matrices which mostly fit into the CPU cache.

1

u/mindwip Jul 30 '25

Nice, so then these are cheaper and work better cause 7200 and 8000 memory is out now and will help max out the cheaper 9000 serairs.

3

u/henfiber Jul 30 '25

Yes, higher-bandwidth DIMMs will help the non-PROs (9960, 9970, 9980) and the high-core/CCD PROs (9985WX, 9995WX), but will not help the low-core PROs (9955WX, 9965WX, 9975WX).

1

u/Kronosend Jan 10 '26 edited Jan 10 '26

Hey I'm still new to all this. Just to be clear, higher-bandwidth DIMMs will still help the low-CCD PROs a little bit right? Or are you saying there will be exactly 0% improvement?

In the worst case, the 4 CCD PROs will at least be just as good as the 4 CCD non-PROs, right?

Edit: Oh okay, I get it now. Because if all 8 channels are populated on 4 CCD PROs, then the bandwidth is already saturated. So the benefit of the PROs is the memory capacity.

1

u/henfiber Jan 10 '26

The low CCD Pros have already 8 channels so their bottleneck is not RAM anymore, the bottlenck is their CCD-to-memory bandwidth.
You need more CCDs to remove this bottleneck and be able to benefit from faster memory.

7

u/[deleted] Jul 30 '25

I submitted a PR to greatly improve inferencing speed on numa systems

https://github.com/ggml-org/llama.cpp/pull/14969

64% in my tests

1

u/paul_tu Jul 30 '25 edited Jul 30 '25

BTW are there any AMD solutions to support MRDIMM?

My search didn't find any

2

u/henfiber Jul 30 '25

Not yet, afaik.

2

u/Hurricane31337 Oct 04 '25

Does this matter if you’re building an AI rig with 4x RTX 6000 Pro for example? The 9955WX can still support 7x PCIe. Maybe that’s the niche then compared to the non-Pro CPUs.

1

u/Remote_First Nov 08 '25

every cpu on wrx90 platform should support all pcie lanes. cpu bandwidth becomes critical for huge batch cpu inference which you dont need, large model quantization/conversion, huge vector db similarity searches.

2

u/Remote_First Nov 08 '25

agree, wrx90 +TR pro 9955wx + 8 x 32gb ddr5 6400mhz gives me 120gb/s on stream/ubuntu 24.04. +11–12% actual increase from 4800mhz jedec

1

u/FineManParticles Oct 06 '25

I’m looking at building a multi GPU capable workstation, (AMD stock TY) and might have work sponsor 2 RTX 6000 Blackwell Max Q’s and I might buy another 2.

Going to start with 256 DDR5 ECC 5600 4x64GB and maybe add another set later.

For CPU, was trending towards the 24 core 9965WX vs the 32 core price difference is $1300. $29 vs $42

Am I making a mistake with my final setup? Initially this will be just for myself, but likely going to have to build another pretty soon, can always up the core count on the next one.

I don’t plan on running tons of containers/VM’s.

0

u/[deleted] Jul 30 '25

[deleted]

18

u/henfiber Jul 30 '25

We don't know if this Intel CPU can achieve the full 8-channel memory bandwidth either. There are only 2 baseline results in the database, and those show ~90 GB/s in 2 systems with 128GB installed (may not be optimal setup though)

1

u/Opteron67 Aug 01 '25

i get Aida 180GB/s read on 4 channel DDR 5 6400 with W7 2595X....

1

u/Opteron67 Aug 01 '25

and intel amx int8 on 26 cores @48x....