31–40 of 95 posts
I've weighed up the pros and cons, and my next processor will be the 32 core AMD cpu. This seems much better value than anything Intel has to offer.
If you are gaming however, 32 core is mostly useless and you should probably go with single thread performance. Intel i5 are still the CPUs of choice for gamers, though AMD Ryzen 5 are not bad either.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Case in point: > chips will support up to 3.84 TB of memory per socket ... due to combining 512 GB Optane DIMMs and 128GB DDR4 DIMMs > ... > in a 6 x Optane and 6 x DDR4 configuration, they will provide 3072 GB of 3D XPoint memory and 768 GB of DDR4 RAM for a total of 3.84 TB of memory Optane DIMMs don't really have the performance characteristics of traditional DRAM. It sounds like the real capacity per socket is 12…
But what market are they even trying to hit here? DDR4 prices are insane, but home consumers don't run large NUMA systems. Data center admins are going to be able to get the capitol for real DDR4 over Optane. They'd need to be ordering a lot of servers before the price point becomes significant enough that they'd order an Optane configuration and decide to benchmark them. I'd be curious about the real benchmarking at…
The storage dimms have some notable benefits over pcie nvme ssds - latency to the processor is extremely low, they give extra total storage I/O since they're leveraging a different controller on the cpu with its own bandwidth, while still leaving pcie bandwidth for traditional storage. They can add capacity to a small system (a 1U server can hold 24 such ssds)
As I see it though, these optane dimms are just fast swap drives which do not offer the same consistent throughput as true memory dimms. They are transparent to the OS which is normally in charge of deciding what stays in memory and what goes to swap. Use of an Intel sdk is required to leverage much of the benefits. It's also Intel-only as far as support goes for now. As usual the marketing doesn't mention the throughput or pricing and instead of comparing to memory they compare it to storage.
http://www.admin-magazine.com/HPC/Articles/NVDIMM-Persistent...
https://thessdguy.com/an-nvdimm-primer-part-1-of-2/
https://www.extremetech.com/extreme/270270-intel-announces-n...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They probably felt pressured to release that because the next gen thread rippers are actually going to approach those specs: 32 core 3.8 (base) GHz as per https://www.techradar.com/news/amd-ryzen-threadripper-2nd-ge... supposedly coming out in Q3, i.e. soon
Threadripper may come close in core count, but it cannot use registered memory, which means it's limited to 128 GB of RAM (based on the current maximum UDIMM capacities). That's not competitive in the server space.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
But what market are they even trying to hit here? DDR4 prices are insane, but home consumers don't run large NUMA systems. Data center admins are going to be able to get the capitol for real DDR4 over Optane. They'd need to be ordering a lot of servers before the price point becomes significant enough that they'd order an Optane configuration and decide to benchmark them. I'd be curious about the real benchmarking at…
I thought the real advantage of Optane was bypassing the pcie bus, with much larger bandwidth of dimm: 80GB/s instead of 12GB/s
The advantage here being latency (and thus single queue throughput)
I've weighed up the pros and cons, and my next processor will be the 32 core AMD cpu. This seems much better value than anything Intel has to offer.
It's a beast! I'm not sure if I'd give up single-thread speed, but if you can load those cores, it's an incredible offer.
And, with high core counts, we can start playing with things like dedicating cores (and their L1 caches) to single tasks, kind of specializing them as we do with mainframes.
A few months ago Intel pulled a stunt where they showed a 28 core 5GHz CPU, implying it was a production CPU that would ship this year. They failed to mention that it was attached to an industrial compressor to supply the necessary cooling for the overclocked CPU, and that it was a server socket ( https://www.anandtech.com/show/12932/intel-confirms-some-det... ). Since then, whenever I see a headline with Intel in it…
They have gotten greedy and lazy without any competition.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They probably felt pressured to release that because the next gen thread rippers are actually going to approach those specs: 32 core 3.8 (base) GHz as per https://www.techradar.com/news/amd-ryzen-threadripper-2nd-ge... supposedly coming out in Q3, i.e. soon
Threadripper may come close in core count, but it cannot use registered memory, which means it's limited to 128 GB of RAM (based on the current maximum UDIMM capacities). That's not competitive in the server space.
Edit: emphasis on threadripper, which is a consumer product.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They probably felt pressured to release that because the next gen thread rippers are actually going to approach those specs: 32 core 3.8 (base) GHz as per https://www.techradar.com/news/amd-ryzen-threadripper-2nd-ge... supposedly coming out in Q3, i.e. soon
Threadripper may come close in core count, but it cannot use registered memory, which means it's limited to 128 GB of RAM (based on the current maximum UDIMM capacities). That's not competitive in the server space.
https://www.tweaktown.com/news/58052/amd-epyc-32c-64t-3-2ghz...
A few months ago Intel pulled a stunt where they showed a 28 core 5GHz CPU, implying it was a production CPU that would ship this year. They failed to mention that it was attached to an industrial compressor to supply the necessary cooling for the overclocked CPU, and that it was a server socket ( https://www.anandtech.com/show/12932/intel-confirms-some-det... ). Since then, whenever I see a headline with Intel in it…
Years before that they were interfering with compilers and cheating at benchmarks to screw over AMD which was actual, willful, evil deception, but THIS damaged your trust?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Case in point: > chips will support up to 3.84 TB of memory per socket ... due to combining 512 GB Optane DIMMs and 128GB DDR4 DIMMs > ... > in a 6 x Optane and 6 x DDR4 configuration, they will provide 3072 GB of 3D XPoint memory and 768 GB of DDR4 RAM for a total of 3.84 TB of memory Optane DIMMs don't really have the performance characteristics of traditional DRAM. It sounds like the real capacity per socket is 12…
Yeah, marketing lies. Go AMD go!