21–30 of 134 posts
As an outsider to 'enterprise-grade' computing, I'm curious about situations where a high number of cores in a single processor would be superior to multiple processors with the same total energy draw sitting on a single motherboard? I can understand HPC applications where the high-speed interconnect on the chip would make a big difference. But in business applications where the cores are dedicated to running indepen…
It's awesome that TR2 will be a drop in replacement on existing motherboards! Props to AMD for delivering real value to consumers.
I recall reading that the thread ripper 2 is supposed to use more power so early motherboards with that socket my not be able to handle it. Just something to keep in mind. Regardless damn good on AMD.
I think of AMD's current approach - a microarchitecture with slower cores, but more cores, than Intel - as very similar to what Sun/Oracle tried to do from 2005 to 2010 with the Niagara family (UltraSPARC T1-T3). Each core in those chips was seriously underclocked compared to a Xeon of similar vintage and price point (1-1.67 GHz; compared to 1.6 GHz to 3 or more), and lacked features like out-of-order execution and b…
It's not similar at all. AMD's cores are 10-20% slower while Niagara was 80-90% slower. And AMD isn't intentionally slower; they designed the Zen core for maximum single-thread performance but they just didn't do as good a job as Intel because their budget is vastly smaller.
Wasn't that 10-20% before meltdown? Or is there still some similar disadvantage in clock speed per Watt or IPC?
As an outsider to 'enterprise-grade' computing, I'm curious about situations where a high number of cores in a single processor would be superior to multiple processors with the same total energy draw sitting on a single motherboard? I can understand HPC applications where the high-speed interconnect on the chip would make a big difference. But in business applications where the cores are dedicated to running indepen…
When VMware charges per socket and not per core.
As an outsider to 'enterprise-grade' computing, I'm curious about situations where a high number of cores in a single processor would be superior to multiple processors with the same total energy draw sitting on a single motherboard? I can understand HPC applications where the high-speed interconnect on the chip would make a big difference. But in business applications where the cores are dedicated to running indepen…
Which one of these companies does at better job with free/libre software? I've always had a soft spot for AMD because it's the underdog, but I want to make sure that they are free, too.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The top core i9 costs 2k$ on amazon. The top ryzen cost $799. So, they are cheaper than Xeon, but not cheaper than equivalent AMD's processor.
You should compare the top i9 with threadripper 1950X, which is more expensive, but still less expensive than an i9.
It's awesome that TR2 will be a drop in replacement on existing motherboards! Props to AMD for delivering real value to consumers.
I recall reading that the thread ripper 2 is supposed to use more power so early motherboards with that socket my not be able to handle it. Just something to keep in mind. Regardless damn good on AMD.
As an outsider to 'enterprise-grade' computing, I'm curious about situations where a high number of cores in a single processor would be superior to multiple processors with the same total energy draw sitting on a single motherboard? I can understand HPC applications where the high-speed interconnect on the chip would make a big difference. But in business applications where the cores are dedicated to running indepen…