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

AMD's Turin: 5th Gen EPYC Launched

chipsandcheese.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 175 posts

Re: AMD's Turin: 5th Gen EPYC Launched

#101

Post by heraldgeezer »

smolder wrote: post #77

The weirdest one of the bunch is the AMD EPYC 9175F: 16 cores with 512MB of L3 cache! Presumably this is for customers trying to minimize software costs that are based on "per-core" licensing. It really doesn't make much sense to have so few cores at such an expense, otherwise. Does Oracle still use this style of licensing? If so, they need to knock it off. The only other thing I can think of is some purpose like HFT…

Windows server and MSSQL is per core now. A lot of enterprise software is. They are switching to core because before they had it based on CPU sockets. Not just Oracle.

Re: AMD's Turin: 5th Gen EPYC Launched

#102

Post by [deleted] »

dragontamer wrote: post #5

ChipsAndCheese is one of the few new tech publications that really knows what they are talking about, especially with these deep dive benchmarks. With the loss of Anandtech, TechReport, HardCOP and other old technical sites, I'm glad to see a new publisher who can keep up with the older style stuff.

[deleted]

Re: AMD's Turin: 5th Gen EPYC Launched

#103

Post by kombine »

smolder wrote: post #85
kombine wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks for pointing out, it's still up there for £253 - I might consider upgrading my 8 core 5800X3D.

Whether that's an upgrade depends on your use case, as the X3D has more cache.

I don't play games so the X3D's cache doesn't really benefit me. 5950X should speed up compilation, but then, I mostly do Python at the moment :)

Re: AMD's Turin: 5th Gen EPYC Launched

#104

Post by 1f60c »

formerly_proven wrote: post #72
abenga wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm sure each of the products has a numeric identifier. One can use that if they feel pressed by the "childish" names.

AMD CPUs have pretty small numbers for that, e.g. 100-000000651 or 100-000000789. They almost look wrong with so many zeroes. Zen/+/2 parts have part numbers like YD160XBCM6IAE (which is similar to the part numbers of much older AMD CPUs, which is apparently the AMD Ordering Part Number, OPN, scheme, and every digit codes information about the CPU). Zen 3 started with the new scheme, which just seem to be sequential…

Just use scientific notation. :-)

Re: AMD's Turin: 5th Gen EPYC Launched

#105

Post by TacticalCoder »

> The system we had access to was running 6000MT/s for its memory, and DDR5-6000 MT/s is what most systems will support in a 1 DIMM per channel configuration. Should you want to run 2 DIMMs per channel, then your memory speeds drop to 4400 MT/s; and if you run 1 DIMM per channel in a motherboard with 2 DIMMs per channel then expect 5200 MT/s for your memory speed.

Is this all ECC memory at these speeds?

Re: AMD's Turin: 5th Gen EPYC Launched

#106

Post by kderbe »

dragontamer wrote: post #5

ChipsAndCheese is one of the few new tech publications that really knows what they are talking about, especially with these deep dive benchmarks. With the loss of Anandtech, TechReport, HardCOP and other old technical sites, I'm glad to see a new publisher who can keep up with the older style stuff.

Chips and Cheese most reminds me of the long gone LostCircuts. Most tech sites focus on the slate of application benchmarks, but C&C writes, and LC wrote, long form articles about architecture, combined with subsystem micro-benchmarks.

Re: AMD's Turin: 5th Gen EPYC Launched

#107

Post by cubefox »

deaddodo wrote: post #23
cubefox wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's the usual case when vid3o g4mes are "CPU limited". One has to just look whether the game does anything high-level that other games didn't do 10 years ago. Reasonable hardware limitations related to the CPU have normally to do with complex physics effects or unusually large crowds of NPCs. (Many games are CPU limited even for fairly small crowds because their engine isn't optimized for that purpose.)

> vid3o g4mes Why do you type it like that?

Old habit. I'm a kid of the 1990s, and we were convinced there wasn't anything cooler than a) video games and b) replacing letters with numbers. It retrospect, we might have been a little biased.

Re: AMD's Turin: 5th Gen EPYC Launched

#108

Post by aurareturn »

Phoronix recently reviewed the 196 core Turin Dense against the AmpereOne 192 core.

* Ampere MSRP $5.5K vs $15K for the EPYC.

* Turin 196 had 1.6x better performance

* Ampere had 1.2x better energy consumption

In terms of actual $/perf, Ampere 192 core is 1.7x better than Turin Dense 196 core based on Phoronix's review.

So for $5.5k, you can either buy an AmpereOne 192 core CPU (274w) or a Turin Dense 48 core CPU (300w).

Ampere has a 256 core, 3nm, 12 memory channel shipping next year that is likely to better challenge Turin Dense and Sierra Forest in terms of raw performance. For now, their value proposition is $/perf.

Anyway, I'm very interested in how Qualcomm's Nuvia-based server chips will perform. Also, if ARM's client core improvements are any indication, I will be very interested in how in-house chips like AWS Graviton, Google Axion, Microsoft Cobalt, Nvidia Grace, Alibaba Yitian will compete with better Neoverse cores. Nuvia vs ARM vs AmpereOne.

This is probably the golden age of server CPUs. 7 years ago, it was only Intel's Xeon. Now you have numerous options.

Re: AMD's Turin: 5th Gen EPYC Launched

#109

Post by Tuna-Fish »

dajonker wrote: post #57
phonon wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oracle can charge $40-$100k+ for EE including options per core (times .5)...and some workloads are very cache sensitive. So a high cache, high bandwidth, high frequency, high memory capacity 16 core CPU[1] (x2 socket) might be the best bang for their buck for that million dollar+ license. [1] https://www.amd.com/en/products/processors/server/epyc/9005-...

Surely that's a good reason for Oracle to increase their prices even more, leading to a cat-and-mouse game between CPU makers and software license sellers.

Oh yes, this cat-and-mouse game has been going on for more than a decade. But despite that, for any given time and license terms, there is a type of CPU that is optimal for performance/licensing costs, and when the license is as expensive and widely used as it is, it makes sense to sell CPUs for that specific purpose.

Re: AMD's Turin: 5th Gen EPYC Launched

#110

Post by kolbe »

thelastparadise wrote: post #100

I wonder how LLM performance is on the higher core counts? With recent DDR generations and many core CPUs, perhaps CPUs will give GPUs a run for their money.

The H100 has 16,000 cuda cores at 1.2ghz. My rough calculation is it can handle 230k concurrent calculations. Whereas a 192 core avx512 chip (assuming it calculates on 16 bit data) can handle 6k concurrent calculations at 4x the frequency. So, about a 10x difference just on compute, not to mention that memory is an even stronger advantage for GPUs.
Post reply on HN