Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Intel publishes misleading benchmarks against AMD

servethehome.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 209 posts

Re: Intel publishes misleading benchmarks against AMD

#71

Post by NicoJuicy »

chaosbutters314 wrote: post #70
NicoJuicy wrote: post #65

And if anyone from AMD is reading this. I'm truelly awaiting AMD's NUC in multiple price ranges of 150-700€, if possible :)! I'm currently building a DIY RPi 4 cluster for microservices/kubernetes setup and would like to replace my DIY home streaming setup. http://www.fanlesstech.com/2019/10/exclusive-amds-nuc-is-com...

Can I ask for anyone from AMD to sell a 4 socket, epyc mobo. Im looking for 256 (4*64) core desktop PC.

Offtopic:

I was looking for a decent AMD replacement for a Intel NUC and didn't found it then, wanted to suggest a new niche in the previous comment ( looked for it a month or so ago). I only found out after my comment it was coming and didn't want to remove my comment ;). As i'm truelly interested in a AMD replacement for my current slow ( and cheap ) Intel NUC

:)

And euh, looking at the top comments. I'm not alone, sarcasms aside

Ontopic:

If you order enough of them. They can address a custom team for you! You could earn money like hell launching this on the market!

https://www.amd.com/en/products/semi-custom-solutions

Build your dream!

Re: Intel publishes misleading benchmarks against AMD

#72

Post by reacharavindh »

computerex wrote: post #56
seminatl wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You just leaped to the unfounded conclusion that every computer needs to run untrusted JavaScript. The vast majority of computers have no such need. Especially in a performance-sensitive contest like buying CPU for your database server that lives in a datacenter and never runs a web browser you will certainly disable these security things.

Disabling Spectre/Meltdown mitigations on a server especially would be the dumbest thing imaginable. These attacks are not restricted to JavaScript, they are side-channel attacks and have a huge exploitable surface. Just look at the number of patches for the MS SQL server needed to mitigate: https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/help/4073225/guidance-pr...

No, it is NOT the dumbest thing imaginable!

If your server is not reachable from untrusted sources, and you are running only what you trust, it is prudent to disable mitigation’s and make use of the extra performance.

Example, I run many compute nodes (only private network) in my HPC cluster with mitigation’s off. If an attacker could reach the compute nodes over the network to push the attack payload, I’ve already been heavily compromised that these attacks are just insult to the injury.

If you run a database server that can never be reached directly by an attacker. You may spend your time watching your application server and let the DB server use the extra oomph.

Re: Intel publishes misleading benchmarks against AMD

#73

Post by mattmar96 »

chaosbutters314 wrote: post #70
NicoJuicy wrote: post #65

And if anyone from AMD is reading this. I'm truelly awaiting AMD's NUC in multiple price ranges of 150-700€, if possible :)! I'm currently building a DIY RPi 4 cluster for microservices/kubernetes setup and would like to replace my DIY home streaming setup. http://www.fanlesstech.com/2019/10/exclusive-amds-nuc-is-com...

Can I ask for anyone from AMD to sell a 4 socket, epyc mobo. Im looking for 256 (4*64) core desktop PC.

What will you use that many cores for?

Re: Intel publishes misleading benchmarks against AMD

#74

Post by deaddodo »

pkaye wrote: post #63
computerex wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You absolutely need Spectre/Meltdown mitigation otherwise someone could attack you with JavaScript running in your web browser. https://linuxreviews.org/HOWTO_make_Linux_run_blazing_fast_(... noibrs - We don't need no restricted indirect branch speculation noibpb - We don't need no indirect branch prediction barrier either nospectre_v1 and nospectre_v2: Don't care if some program can get data from some other program…

Is there a working JavaScript exploit for Spectre/Meltdown? I though it was just hypothetical.

There was a proof-of-concept included in the whitepaper:

https://spectreattack.com/spectre.pdf

That's a working exploit, not a hypothetical.

Re: Intel publishes misleading benchmarks against AMD

#75

Post by vkaku »

NicoJuicy wrote: post #65

And if anyone from AMD is reading this. I'm truelly awaiting AMD's NUC in multiple price ranges of 150-700€, if possible :)! I'm currently building a DIY RPi 4 cluster for microservices/kubernetes setup and would like to replace my DIY home streaming setup. http://www.fanlesstech.com/2019/10/exclusive-amds-nuc-is-com...

And if you're reading this, I'm waiting for a very decent mATX PCIe4 board for EPYC, please make it happen!

Re: Intel publishes misleading benchmarks against AMD

#76

Post by vxxzy »

vkaku wrote: post #75
NicoJuicy wrote: post #65

And if anyone from AMD is reading this. I'm truelly awaiting AMD's NUC in multiple price ranges of 150-700€, if possible :)! I'm currently building a DIY RPi 4 cluster for microservices/kubernetes setup and would like to replace my DIY home streaming setup. http://www.fanlesstech.com/2019/10/exclusive-amds-nuc-is-com...

And if you're reading this, I'm waiting for a very decent mATX PCIe4 board for EPYC, please make it happen!

Checkout EPYC 3251. Getting ready to do a home buildout with kvm vms.

Re: Intel publishes misleading benchmarks against AMD

#77

Post by LinuxBender »

NicoJuicy wrote: post #65

And if anyone from AMD is reading this. I'm truelly awaiting AMD's NUC in multiple price ranges of 150-700€, if possible :)! I'm currently building a DIY RPi 4 cluster for microservices/kubernetes setup and would like to replace my DIY home streaming setup. http://www.fanlesstech.com/2019/10/exclusive-amds-nuc-is-com...

And please have at least two server quality 1gb nics. :-) My home router needs an upgrade.
Post reply on HN