AMD Rome Second Generation EPYC Review: 2x 64-core Benchmarked

Post by leetcrew » Thu, Aug 08, 2019, 1:33 PM UTC

crazydoggers wrote: post #54

snazz wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'll be interested to see how long it will be before this devastates Intel's business. At the moment, there's literally no reason to buy an Intel desktop or server processor, so how many of the Intel purchases coming from OEMs and big cloud companies are just because of contracts that might let up in a few years?

There’s still a slight performance advantage with gaming. On top of the fact that it’s still hit or miss getting any Ryzen 9s and getting an i9 is easy, anyone who is shelling out for the RTX 2080 GPUs will probably go Intel. On top of which, given the history, those building gaming machines will assume Intel’s next 10nm cpus will still outshine AMDs in gaming for the foreseeable future.

Post by HelloNurse » Thu, Aug 08, 2019, 1:51 PM UTC

TomVDB wrote: post #139

cyphar wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Because there are soft costs to integrating a completely different platform into your environments. What happens when you try to pass a VM from an Intel system over to an Epyc system? Unless they have the same instruction sets you can't pass them between different processors - meaning, you have to go in and manually find the greatest common denominator and disable the rest of the instructions that aren't mutually s…

> That shouldn't be a problem. They are both fundamentally the same architecture (amd64) and any CPU-specific features are already opportunistically handled by the vast majority of software because otherwise you wouldn't be able to run the same code on different versions of Intel's CPUs. A very long time ago, I worked for a then very large company that sold servers. Plain standard 80486 based servers. My job was to d…

Post by magashna » Thu, Aug 08, 2019, 2:09 PM UTC

ken47 wrote: post #40

chx wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a very slight advantage of Intel CPUs in non-GPU constrained games (which means more or less 1080p only...). Very slight. Price/performance falls on Ryzen 3 so hard it's foolish to get an Intel for sure. There's no business reason on desktop or server for Intel for sure but there's so much inertia here which AMD needs to counter, it'll take years. Intel is down on the floor until 2021-2022 when their 7nm (whi…

Disagree. Why would it take years to counter this "inertia?" It's not like you're asking someone to give up a religion they've had from birth. They are being asked to make economic purchasing decisions, and the economics are crystal clear.

Post by onli » Thu, Aug 08, 2019, 2:13 PM UTC

ncmncm wrote: post #157

onli wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Correct me if I'm mixing up the timeline, but that's the moment in history when Intel used illegal market manipulation to keep AMD out of the OEM market, right? So Intel did more than lower their profit margin, they basically bribed their way through that period. An option they are unlikely to have again, and which as a strategy shouldn't even work anymore for the type of data centers existing today.

I am curious why you think it will not work as well as last time. It is not as if law enforcement is more active now. Generally law enforcement at the moment is forbidden to touch the big fish, since the biggest fish sets policy.

Post by crazydoggers » Thu, Aug 08, 2019, 2:15 PM UTC

kilburn wrote: post #113

ivalm wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For desktops gaming still drives a huge market segment where 9700k/9900k still have higher performance (esp if you overclock).

Even for gaming, the advantage is marginal though, and it comes with a price increase that is often better put into a better GPU. Even formerly die-hard intel gaming shops (Linus Tech Tips and similar) are recommending AMD for most gaming rigs nowadays.