Live data from Hacker News

Ryzen Threadripper Pro 3995WX Spotted

guru3d.com

141–150 of 170 posts

Re: Ryzen Threadripper Pro 3995WX Spotted

#141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

GPUs are mainly good at doing matrix multiplication and other math with little branching. Compilers have a lot of if/else statements; training neural networks does not. IIRC (and I may be wrong) the architecture is something like many GPU cores share things like the code cache and branch prediction, so if the different cores have to execute different code paths there is a big performance decrease. Edit: another reply…

Also GPUs really like predictable memory access patterns so that they can load the data that'll be needed next ahead of time into registers or dedicated caches explicitly. They don't have cache hierarchy features a CPU has to minimize the average disruption from only partially predictable memory accesses and they don't have out of order windows to paper over the occasional low level cache miss.

Not to counter the main argument but CPU loves it some predictable patterns as well.

pattern like the one below will execute up to 10 times faster if array is sorted due to data locality and branch prediction

  sum: float
  a: float array[some_huge_number] 
  fill_array(a, random(1))
  
  for f in a
      if a[i]>0.5
          sum=sum+f

Re: Ryzen Threadripper Pro 3995WX Spotted

#142
post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The people that use CUDA don't care about the underlying architecture, they need results. Which ever manufacturer will deliver those results will get the $. Raytracing is not an ideal match workload wise for a GPU, too much divergence, but there are plenty of workloads where GPUs will have an edge for along time to come.

It's more than that - NVIDIA invested massively in their software ecosystem and mindshare (e.g. by a huge sponsoring program that saw universities flooded with their hardware). AMD cards offer comparable compute performance and are sometimes even better. What AMD lacks, though, are ready-to-use software packages like CUDA, cuDNN, cuBLAS, and the like. NVIDIA basically bought their way into the research community and…

AMD does have ROCm/HIP, hipDNN and hipBLAS (which mirror their counterparts), but these and the rest of their modern GPGPU stack suffer from a lack of polish, ineffective evangelism and subpar documentation. It's difficult to justify using them unless you work at somewhere like ORNL where folks are building new infrastructure using exclusively AMD GPUs.

Re: Ryzen Threadripper Pro 3995WX Spotted

#143
post #140
post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you look at the Blender benchmarks you see that the 64 core Threadripper is faster than any GPU. But the price is steep for that CPU (almost $4000). So while CPU's can be faster the question is if it is relevant. Because you still need a GPU next to that Threadripper for some graphics (if you need graphics).

That's an interesting benchmark. There's quite considerable variation in the device ranking if you look at each scene render time - the GPU is faster on the quicker-to-render (sub 1 min) scenes, but slower on the slower-to-render scenes (1+ min). I wonder why that is? I see the 3990X is hugely faster than anything at these slow scenes, which is pretty interesting. I'm not familiar with rendering, but in the deep lear…

I am not sure if this is true for the benchmarks but last week they fixed a bug in (I believe) hair rendering. Render times went from 45 to 5 minutes.

So it all depends in what is being rendered and how a render core is optimized for it.

Also things like b-tree calculations and other algorithms might influence this.

Re: Ryzen Threadripper Pro 3995WX Spotted

#144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What a miserable hopeless post - "they're going to fuck us and what can we do????". Answer: quite a lot, if you have even minimal technical understanding (like, enough to use a blocklist or an ad blocker). Are you incapable even of that?

Your ad blocker is going to filter a private web socket link funneling ads and content together? It's going to patch the WASM?

It's your broswer.

If you have any tech chops you can make it what you want. If.

Re: Ryzen Threadripper Pro 3995WX Spotted

#145
post #12

I feel like 64 cores is getting rather close to a tipping point: What workloads are so massively parallel that they can use 64 cores of x86 but can’t use the thousands of CUDA cores on a Quadro card? I’m sure right now there are workloads that just need particular x86 instructions, but that feels like a temporary problem. Am I wrong about that being a temporary problem (that would feel frustrating)? Are these cores j…

> What workloads are so massively parallel that they can use 64 cores of x86 but can’t use the thousands of CUDA cores on a Quadro card?

I'm a bit behind on GPU architecture, but presumably workloads which are branch-heavy, lack coherent execution within a warp (see dragontamer's comment), and don't make use of floating-point.

GPUs are not the equivalent of manycore CPUs.

Re: Ryzen Threadripper Pro 3995WX Spotted

#146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm using a 22 core / 44 thread xeon workstation for development and my primary joy using it is being able to run my pytest test suites in parallel. I went from ~45 minutes to run the test suite to about a minute. It is also pretty sweet to be able replicate our three physical servers for bomquote.com, locally.

Honest question because I'm interested for something similar, why did you go for a Xeon and not an Epyc rig?

I bought the xeon from Ebay at a discount about three years ago, when it was still fairly new. It was some sort of engineering sample and I paid about $3K for it while the list price was at least a multiple higher. We used it for CPU rendering for several years and I've only recently repurposed it for a development workstation, as we moved to software that can utilize GPU rendering. These days I almost certainly buy an AMD Threadripper or Epyc for a development workstation.

Re: Ryzen Threadripper Pro 3995WX Spotted

#147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And as comparison, the 12-core is $500 and the 16-core is $750, both currently available for 10-15% off.

Those are not Threadrippers. IMO AMD misses one market segment where people want workstation CPUs but not so much cores. I would consider 12-16 core Threadripper with 4 memory channels and more PCI-E lanes with adjusted price.

They're not threadrippers but there's not an enormous difference. The equivalent 16-core EPYC has an MSRP that's only 10% more than the desktop chip. The whole stack has similar pricing around core count and performance.

And yeah there is a bit of a gap there. You could always get a low end EPYC but then you miss out on the turbos.

Re: Ryzen Threadripper Pro 3995WX Spotted

#148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Overclock the best numa node to a degree Do you mean the best ccx? Or best chiplet? There aren't any numa nodes here, and the cache & memory architecture are already the same as a 3900x. Per-core & per-ccx overclocking does already exist on ryzen though, should work the same on threadripper.

Interesting, is it already feasible to pin tasks to such OCed cores? It would be interesting to turn the 3990/3995 into a does-it-all chip with best in class single-core performance on certain cores and just lots of a tad slower cores in general.

That's essentially what it's supposed to do out of the box. The chip already communicates to the OS what its "best" and "good" cores are for single- and low-thread count workloads: https://www.anandtech.com/show/15137/amd-clarifies-best-core...

These are the cores that can turbo the highest.

You can attempt to manually OC higher, but that by & large doesn't work without extreme cooling. Typically instead it's about achieving higher all-core frequencies than the built in all-core turbo, typically via higher voltages & power limits (and of course much better-than-stock cooling)

Indeed if you look at single-thread cinebench numbers you'll find the 3960x & 3970x right in the middle of the 3700x, 3800x, and 3900x pack: https://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/amd_ryzen_threadripper...

They all hit around that same 4.5ghz single core turbo mark without any overclocking. And Zen2 by & large doesn't really go much beyond 4.5ghz anyway, so there's not all that much manual overclocking you can do without going sub-ambient cooling anyway.

The only real downside to Threadripper 3rd gen is the price. It's already a pretty killer jack-of-all-trades CPUs otherwise. It's a very competent gaming CPU without any tweaks at all right out of the box. It doesn't at all have the cons of the 1st & 2nd gen Threadrippers, which were actually NUMA and therefore came with huge gaming downsides.

Re: Ryzen Threadripper Pro 3995WX Spotted

#149

64 cores? how much would that cost? around $1k or more? is this for the consumer line or server line of products?

This is commonly referred to as the "HEDT" category, or "High End Desktop"

It's somewhere between the extreme enthusiast market and the workstation market. It's not _truly_ a workstation product as those will instead typically use Xeon or Epyc for things like full official ECC support & other such features. Threadripper muddies this line a bit as it does actually have official ECC support, but motherboard support is not as reliable as you'll find in Epyc boards.

Intel also has products in this category like the i9-10980XE - which is an 18-core product that's essentially the consumer version of a Xeon chip with ECC removed. Intel calls this their X-series line. And then since Intel removes ECC support, you'll again not really find this in workstations.

It's basically "take the server product, remove (some/most) of the server features, jack the power budget to the fucking roof because you can assume water cooling, and allow overclocking" line of products.

Re: Ryzen Threadripper Pro 3995WX Spotted

#150
post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why? Isn't the CPU will cost more than GPU because of more general instruction set?

Not really: the CPU costs more and can handle more workloads because it has more complicated control flow. These days, arithmetic is cheap and control flow is expensive. GPUs and SIMD achieve high throughput by tying a set of arithmetic units together with the same control flow. As soon as you get complicated data-dependent workflows - as soon as you put "if" in your code or a virtual method - the GPU starts getting…

"train vs car" argument - really nice analogy.
Post reply on HN