Live data from Hacker News

AMD Ryzen Threadripper 3000 32-core CPU is more bad news for Intel

zdnet.com

121–130 of 165 posts

Re: AMD Ryzen Threadripper 3000 32-core CPU is more bad news for Intel

#121

I'm ignorant in stock trading, I admit. But I dont understand why AMD stock isn't blowing up. It's done a recovery after a market wide dip, but hasn't all this Intel beating news raised the hype? So many other tech companies are so severly overvalued and hyped daily. Why is AMD a steady 28-32?

With a p/e of 166, there’s a lot of optimism priced in.

Re: AMD Ryzen Threadripper 3000 32-core CPU is more bad news for Intel

#122
post #88
post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pretty much the only numbers in TFA: > The single-core score of 1,275 is pretty much the same as for the current flagship Threadripper 2990WX, ... > But when it comes to multi-core, the Threadripper 3000's score of 23,015 absolutely destroys the Threadripper 2990WX's score of 13,400, ...

2990WX was a weird ultra-NUMA setup where half the dies had no direct memory access at all. Part of the gain will have been fixing that - particularly on Windows where the scheduler did not understand this configuration at all (Linux results have always been much better). Another part is the power consumption and resulting higher clocks. The 2990WX was basically power limited, the new chips are on 7nm which will dras…

Wouldn't the higher clocks impact single-core performance? The article claims that's about the same. I suppose the userbenchmark single-core perf test[1] (the article links to some userbenchmark.com results) could just be a bad test; I'm unfamiliar with it. (It could also be that 2990WX wasn't power/heat limited on a single core, and neither is 3xxx; but say, at 16 core 100% clock, 3xxx can go higher than 2990WX due to a lower power process?)

Anyway, it's still 32 cores. While eliminating the ultra weird NUMA effect and increasing clocks could explain a significant benefit, I'm still really struggling to intuit 72% higher performance. But it is Windows 10, so your remarks about the Windows scheduler may explain the gap.[2]

[1]: https://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Faq/What-is-single-core-intege...

[2]: https://www.userbenchmark.com/UserRun/19698768

Re: AMD Ryzen Threadripper 3000 32-core CPU is more bad news for Intel

#123

I'm ignorant in stock trading, I admit. But I dont understand why AMD stock isn't blowing up. It's done a recovery after a market wide dip, but hasn't all this Intel beating news raised the hype? So many other tech companies are so severly overvalued and hyped daily. Why is AMD a steady 28-32?

[deleted]

Re: AMD Ryzen Threadripper 3000 32-core CPU is more bad news for Intel

#124

I'm ignorant in stock trading, I admit. But I dont understand why AMD stock isn't blowing up. It's done a recovery after a market wide dip, but hasn't all this Intel beating news raised the hype? So many other tech companies are so severly overvalued and hyped daily. Why is AMD a steady 28-32?

[deleted]

Re: AMD Ryzen Threadripper 3000 32-core CPU is more bad news for Intel

#125

As more people move to city cores from rural areas... I think computers are becoming the next generations 'car', in terms of an object to soup up with new parts.

Interesting metaphor. It has been this way since the 1980s. For instance, in 1985/86 it was popular to upgrade your 386sx with an i387 math co-processor which is something like adding a cat back exhaust system on your car. Later on increasing RAM, installing QEMM for boosting available memory for DOS games and over clocking and then add on 3D video accelerator cards. There was even a physics add-on card at one point. Mostly these focused on performance gains. The shift towards LED bling and aesthetics is more recent though.

Re: AMD Ryzen Threadripper 3000 32-core CPU is more bad news for Intel

#126

I'm ignorant in stock trading, I admit. But I dont understand why AMD stock isn't blowing up. It's done a recovery after a market wide dip, but hasn't all this Intel beating news raised the hype? So many other tech companies are so severly overvalued and hyped daily. Why is AMD a steady 28-32?

[deleted]

Re: AMD Ryzen Threadripper 3000 32-core CPU is more bad news for Intel

#127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The main selling point for Intel isn't speed anymore. Intel still has superior performance counters and debugging features. Mozilla's rr (Record and Replay framework) only works on Intel for example, and Intel vTune is a very good tool. AVX512 is also an advantage, as you've noted. There are other instruction set advantages: I think Intel has faster division / modulus operator, and also has single-clock pext / pdep (…

Is AVX512 really an advantage though? Intel is infamous for severely downclocking the processor for these and other AVX/SSE family instructions, to a point where sometimes using them makes the program slower than it would be otherwise, especially if you're constantly provoking frequency switches between them and regular instructions. AMD might not have implemented AVX512 specifically yet (there's nothing legally keep…

I personally run AMD at home, but in all the benchmarks I have seen, Intel wins by a large margin in AVX enabled tasks - often double the speed. Downclocking did not seem to be a factor here.

I think saying that Intel wins in AVX tasks is absolutely fair.

For example, I had a simulation that had to run on the CPU for reasons, but made use of AVX. Intel was consistently faster on any system I tested.

Re: AMD Ryzen Threadripper 3000 32-core CPU is more bad news for Intel

#128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The main selling point for Intel isn't speed anymore. Intel still has superior performance counters and debugging features. Mozilla's rr (Record and Replay framework) only works on Intel for example, and Intel vTune is a very good tool. AVX512 is also an advantage, as you've noted. There are other instruction set advantages: I think Intel has faster division / modulus operator, and also has single-clock pext / pdep (…

Is AVX512 really an advantage though? Intel is infamous for severely downclocking the processor for these and other AVX/SSE family instructions, to a point where sometimes using them makes the program slower than it would be otherwise, especially if you're constantly provoking frequency switches between them and regular instructions. AMD might not have implemented AVX512 specifically yet (there's nothing legally keep…

You can look at binning statistics for non-avx/avx2/avx512 clock speeds: https://siliconlottery.com/pages/statistics

For example, the worst 7980XEs do 4.1/3.8/3.6 GHz for each of these respectively. 0.5 GHz down clock isn't too bad. You can change these settings in your bios however you'd like on the unlocked CPUs (ie, the HEDT lineup + W3175X). I do find those down clocks are necessary; I've passed 100C with a 360mm radiator and roaring fans. AVX2 loads don't get anywhere near that hot.

But for all that, I do see a substantial benefit on many workloads from avx512 -- at least 50% better performance than what I'd get from avx2.

I definitely think it's nice to have, especially if you enjoy vectorizing code and looking at assembly. With much bigger performance wins on the line, it's more rewarding and more fun -- and you have more tools to play with, like vector masking (unfortunately, gather/scatter have been disappointing). Fun or not though, if you offer me avx512 on one hand vs twice the cores with full avx2 for the same price on the other, I'd have a hard time rationalizing avx512.

Re: AMD Ryzen Threadripper 3000 32-core CPU is more bad news for Intel

#129

I'm ignorant in stock trading, I admit. But I dont understand why AMD stock isn't blowing up. It's done a recovery after a market wide dip, but hasn't all this Intel beating news raised the hype? So many other tech companies are so severly overvalued and hyped daily. Why is AMD a steady 28-32?

With a p/e of 166, there’s a lot of optimism priced in.

Even more amazing when you compare it to Intel with a p/e of 11
Post reply on HN