INTEL IS BANKRUPT AND FINISH

File: amadaexciteULTRA.png (210KB, 422x537px) Image search: [Google]

210KB, 422x537px

>>60995873

>Up to 3.2 GHz

File: 1fx2km.jpg (71KB, 888x499px) Image search: [Google]

71KB, 888x499px

https://www.servethehome.com/amd-epyc-7601-dual-socket-early-power-consumption-observations/

>>60995964

being compared to an intel chip with 3.6ghz turbo

;^)

>>60995980
kek

File: 1497565895125.jpg (112KB, 691x771px) Image search: [Google]

112KB, 691x771px

>>60995873

IT'S OVER!

ATTENTION ANONS, IT'S OVER!

File: 1494518058002.png (234KB, 882x758px) Image search: [Google]

234KB, 882x758px

>>60995873
>>60995909
>>60995932
>>60995990
>>60996014
>>60996034
>>60996063
>>60996082

Stop, you piece of shit!

File: 10int.png (165KB, 303x311px) Image search: [Google]

165KB, 303x311px

>>60996000
>single core turbo speeds relevant on servers

>>60996150
b-b-but what if.. one query is big for 1 of the 100000 hits per second you get?

File: 1484010279918.jpg (12KB, 474x473px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 474x473px

>>60996082
>21% more integer performance from one EPYC than 2 (TWO) Xeons

>>60996150

Can it run crysis?

>>60996204
this will be huge for thermal performance.
Intel deserves this for sitting on their heels when AMD was working on APUs post-bulldozer

>>60996242
Yes, since it's literally four R7 1800X on one socket

File: BTFO9.jpg (3MB, 3968x2976px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 3968x2976px

HOLY SHIT

File: 1494810817461.jpg (69KB, 518x571px) Image search: [Google]

69KB, 518x571px

>>60996411
>2TB
>per socket
>of encrypted-on-the-fly
>DDR4 ECC

Kikes are dead.

Where are you getting this OP? Are you in the audience? If so godspeed you beautiful bastard, thanks for making /g/ great again

tfw u will never have an ebyn chip

>>60996517
Anand's live blog.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/11562/amd-epyc-launch-event-live-blog-starts-4pm-et-

File: 1494436316791.jpg (14KB, 340x320px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 340x320px

HOW MUCH FOR AN 8 CORE EPYC
I NEED PRICES
I NEED THAT CPU FOR A HOMESERVER

File: ebin.png (36KB, 300x279px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 300x279px

>>60996522

holy shit intel is dead and finished

>>60996569
$400.

>>60996569

http://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-epyc-processor-models-pricing,34833.html

File: 1497954316527.jpg (134KB, 768x1024px) Image search: [Google]

134KB, 768x1024px

>>60996598
Jesus christ that's like a 1700x at launch
THEY CAN'T KEEP GETTING AWAY WITH THIS

File: 1496048529533.png (98KB, 400x347px) Image search: [Google]

98KB, 400x347px

>>60996598
>Unironically cheaper than consumer i7s with less cores

>>60996626
You need to buy one before OEMs do, anon.

File: BTFO10.png (232KB, 788x405px) Image search: [Google]

232KB, 788x405px

PRICE BRACKETS

>>60996082
>one epyc draws 17% less power than two xeons
lol fuck

>>60996697
FORREST LOOKS TOO FUCKING SMUG RIGHT NOW HOLY SHIT

>>60996672
>>60996697
Oh fuck.

File: BTFO12.png (269KB, 783x401px) Image search: [Google]

269KB, 783x401px

INFINITY FABRIC

File: BTFO13.png (294KB, 778x399px) Image search: [Google]

294KB, 778x399px

POWER CONSUMPTION

File: the_nut.jpg (45KB, 480x480px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 480x480px

>>60996626
post yfw Intel got irreversibly btfo'd

It bears mentioning that Intel publicly posts its SPEC benchmark data, and AMD's endnotes indicates that it reduced the scores used for these calculations by 46%. AMD justified this adjustment because they feel the Intel C++ compiler provides an unfair advantage in the benchmark. There is a notable advantage to the compiler, but most predict it is in the 20% range, so AMD's adjustments appear aggressive. - See more at: http://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-epyc-processor-models-pricing,34833.html#sthash.g0rZEfUC.dpuf

File: 1-2 graph.jpg (102KB, 967x1080px) Image search: [Google]

102KB, 967x1080px

>>60996729
Bad graph aside, this is honestly very impressive.

>>60996796
wait intel fucking cheats with their compiler and they STILL got btfo??

>>60996796
It'll still be ahead of Xeons even at 20%.

>>60996819
From what I gather AMD presented comparisons to Intel specs that THEY had modified to how they considered fair. So no

$15 per stock by tomorrow.
BUY BUY BUY BUY

>>60996863
https://www.servethehome.com/amd-epyc-7601-dual-socket-early-power-consumption-observations/

>With the level of power/ performance of the new systems, you can essentially replace four Intel Xeon E5-2600 (V1) servers with a single dual socket EPYC node and get more performance (in most cases) in a single node that uses half the power. That is absolutely stellar.
>The AMD EPYC platform is still seeing major updates to BIOS for power and performance which is why we are calling these preliminary results. At the same time, we are already seeing some impressive figures.

>>60996632
And the best part is?

For AMD, they are getting rid of 4 bottom of the barrel, throwaway dies for $400.

>>60996815
Actually the graph makes sense if you DON'T expect 1 × 2 to be 2 (ie, inefficiencies at scaling). They're showing off that they have very close to perfect scaling. It would be better if they contrasted an Intel scaling graph that obly went to 1.7 or 1.8x

>>60996926
Imagine if a 32-core Xeon die was so badly damaged only 8 cores worked. Intel would have to throw it out. The multi-chip shenanigans are what let AMD bin this low.

>>60996760
>50% more perf/watt

ded
DED

DEEED

>>60996926
I really do want an official statement on what their yields are. I imagine with all of this binning it's a major exception to have to throw out a die.

File: Fig_29.png (428KB, 499x509px) Image search: [Google]

428KB, 499x509px

>>60997049
post yfw AMD will have entire wafers where every chip can be sold

>>60997049

Ryzen is 80% so I would expect this as a minimum.

File: 1497861724154.jpg (193KB, 681x768px) Image search: [Google]

193KB, 681x768px

>>60997081

>>60997081
In 2010 Intel had its first perfect wafer, it was a Nehalem wafer.

>>60997100
>Nehalem
god tier

>>60997049
It would have to have less than 4 useable cores across the entire die. Or maybe 2+ dead cores per CCX.

File: amazaryzen.png (68KB, 766x668px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 766x668px

>>60997081

File: yamero.gif (211KB, 183x232px) Image search: [Google]

211KB, 183x232px

>>60997081

>>60996082
>17% less power consumption than two CPUs
That's a lot of power.

>>60997439
YAMEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEROOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

File: skylakex.jpg (124KB, 400x625px) Image search: [Google]

124KB, 400x625px

AYmeD has completely shat on intel
how long until bankruptcy

>>60997499
WEEKS IF THEY'RE LUCKY

File: Revenge_of_the_jedi_poster.jpg (286KB, 992x1500px) Image search: [Google]

286KB, 992x1500px

>>60997478

>>60997439
>The Power Of Simplicity
>that direct shot at Intel
lol holy fuck AMD is on fire

next cpu will be named AMD DYCK

>>60997613
128 cores
16 dies
6 gorillion dead

File: 1462351581888.png (29KB, 324x256px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 324x256px

>>60997651

Again, AMD lying: https://techreport.com/review/32125/amd-epyc-7000-series-cpus-revealed/2

Intel will be back and genocide all poojets and chinks.

DAMAGE CONTROL
DAMAGE
CONTROL

>>60997697
>With Intel's compiler results adjusted this way, two-socket Broadwell systems generally come out slightly behind to moderately behind versus Epyc parts when running SPECint_base_rate2006, especially at the lower end of the market. AMD's systems still win out, but the differences in performance seem closer to our real-world examinations of Zen and Broadwell performance.

AMD still wins, faggot.

>>60997697
>chinks and poojets lie
That's a shocker.

>>60997718
GCC for AMD and ICC for Intel

What's the fucking problem, you're not gonna run a 3 billion grid array using a compiler that's worse performing, is this guy a fucking idiot?

>>60996598
Jesus Fucking Christ, Should've waited for EBIC

>>60995873
>3.2 GHz

>>60997750
It's not the ICC is more efficient on Intel, it's that ICC INTENTIONALLY disables certain instruction sets on "Non genuine" Intel CPUs.
This has been known for years now.

>>60996014
can't wait till 256 dimm mobo lole....

>>60997780
ICC cheats in benchmarks, anon.

>>60997775
are you retarded?

>>60995873
still gets rekt by my i7 7700k@ 5hgz in games

Repostan:
It doesn't matter if Intel delivers 32 core Xeons now. If they don't have full AES-128 across the entire 2-4TB memory pool, AMD is better. If they can't deliver 128 PCI-E lanes across ALL CPUs regardless of price, AMD is better.

If they can't deliver 8 channel memory across ALL CPU ranges regardless of price, AMD is better.

Intel basically has to sell $6-8,000 chips now at $2-4,000 pricing if they want to be able to compete with AMD. Further more, they'll need to drop their original $2-4,000 chips into the $400-1,000 price range in order to be able to compete.

AND AND AND, on top of that, ALL THESE chips, need to offer the same feature set across the stack on a unified motherboard, socket, and chipset.

IF INTEL CANNOT DO ALL OF THE ABOVE, ACROSS THE ENTIRE STACK, THEY'RE FUCKED.

Because AMD can, for less, while delivering more, with less power, heat; better performance, availability. Its god damn black magic up in this bitch.

Intel has to pull black magic out of its ass, OR;

IT

CANNOT

WIN

>>60997802
he's just grasping at the last straw he has

>>60997750
>>60997780
>>60997794
http://www.agner.org/optimize/blog/read.php?i=49

Itt Muslims from reddit

>>60997014
https://ark.intel.com/products/93791/Intel-Xeon-Processor-E7-8893-v4-60M-Cache-3_20-GHz

>it's INTEL IS FINISHED thread #59250250235
>it's lel Intel are JEWS thread #50443503534 when AMD also has extensive facilities here in Israel

*yawn*

>>60997831
Lets not pretend i do not read Agner.

Lexis nexis is now on board with epyc

File: 1492905306769.gif (3MB, 377x372px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 377x372px

>>60996063
lol @ those base clocks

AYMMD fanbois BTFO with their bs about scaling

underwhelming desu

>>60995980
>With the level of power/ performance of the new systems, you can essentially replace four Intel Xeon E5-2600 (V1) servers with a single dual socket EPYC node and get more performance (in most cases) in a single node that uses half the power.

Holy shit, the absolute state of Intel

>>60997860
Can't tell if trolling or just retarded.

>>60996411
looking forward to a writeup on this one and it's benefits and how it do dis

>>60997875
Yes you're really retarded.

>>60997875
both anon, no one can defend intel otherwise

>>60997870
Too weak

I'm waiting for my KIKERIPPER

>>60997875
check this retard
>>60997888

File: 1490073563875.gif (2MB, 498x378px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 498x378px

>>60995873
>8 Channel Memory
>8 Channel
>8
I'm fucking wet.

>>60997888
are you that abortion that got two 1080tis?

>>60996034
House fires

File: 0bbfddc9c03fc4bd3a3e23af32ea82fc7add863410095522d433d8c3fe46b60e.gif (365KB, 2000x1153px) Image search: [Google]

365KB, 2000x1153px

>>60995873
SHUT IT DOWN

BEGIN THE SHILLING NOW

IT'S TIME TO ACTIVATE THE FALSE AMD RUMOR BOTS

>>60996729
How? What sort of arcane rituals AMD used to create this?

File: 1469025743348.jpg (31KB, 318x322px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 318x322px

>>60997860

>>60997775
>>60997823
>>60997860
>>60997934
And cue the retards that have no clue how server CPUs work or compare to one another. Back to /v/ now, dipshits.

>>60997924
>per CPU
>128 PCIe
>2 TBs of RAM per CPU
>inline whole RAM encryption
>VMs can each have a unique encryption key

>>60997954
photoshop

>>60995980
REPLACE 4 WITH ONE AND GET MORE PERFORMANCE WITH HALF THE POWER? WHAT THE FUCK IS THIS DEMONIC SORCERY?

>>60997954

Jew killer got the contract

File: 1492450672601.png (134KB, 659x609px) Image search: [Google]

134KB, 659x609px

>>60997954
it's called cheating on the benchmarks anon

MAKE
MOAR
CORES

>>60998022
>cheating on SPECINT2006 core scaling benchmark
Wut.

>>60998022
>>60998024
maximum damage control or else mr. shekelstein won't give you food heh?

>>60997932
No. I have quadros.
Are you the retard that was confirmed retard by trips?

>>60998024
except the server market is literally about moar coars

File: 1492816510390.jpg (308KB, 712x1134px) Image search: [Google]

308KB, 712x1134px

is there an added latency with the AES engine?
and are the encryption keys unique per cpu or can you change them?

>>60998045
And more I/O, and more memory etc etc

>>60998024

Just make the ringbus a "mesh"

File: Mysterious Merchant.gif (4KB, 452x523px) Image search: [Google]

4KB, 452x523px

DELET

>>60998047
1% performance loss from what they said

File: came here to laugh at you.png (138KB, 375x375px) Image search: [Google]

138KB, 375x375px

>>60997860
>muh clocks
I feel like it's the P4 Extreme Edition again.
Ran at 3.73GHz and got fucked by Athlon64 FX-55 at 2.6GHz

>>60998047
from less than 1% to 4% on peformance.

File: 1497720481919.jpg (59KB, 306x306px) Image search: [Google]

59KB, 306x306px

>>60998022
>Cheating on a benchmark

That's like cheating on the fitness gram pacer test, anon, it's impossible

>>60997697
>n-no! AMD lied, they can't possibly have a better product!
Yeah, I'm sure Microsoft didn't do any of their due diligence and were tricked by marketing slides.

>>60998073
no, 4% is the ECC memory loss

>>60998073
4% is ECC memory loss. Actual performance loss with AES engine is <1%.

>>60997499
>>60997545
He thinks people in server business switch to new platforms like gamersit will take a year or more to shift sides, if you already invested in a platform, you won't switch will nilly you got wait and see if the rumor is the news and it ain't pure hype.

File: 1496952128607.png (110KB, 500x358px) Image search: [Google]

110KB, 500x358px

>>60998061
Who's that Pokemon?

It's not a Pokemon, it's ash!

>>60998047
Less than 1%.

are 8-core epycs able to be overclocked beyond what a regular 32 variant will be?

I assume the larger surface area will be good for cooling.

>>60998081
the AMD benchmark test is a multicore CPU capacity test that gets progressively more difficult as it kills jews

>>60998071

You likely replied to an underage poster that was in diapers when the P4 shit show was occurring

>>60998108
The presentation literally had TWO hyperscaleres and parade of OEMs. Baidu and Microshits are deploying EPYCs 2H 2017.

File: 1494830091136.gif (1MB, 500x280px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 500x280px

>>60998065
>>60998073
>>60998119
thats really neat
have they said anything about being able to disable it or change the keys for encryption?

File: 1489630211594.png (207KB, 640x400px) Image search: [Google]

207KB, 640x400px

>mfw AMD just seized the entire fucking enterprise market

>>60998090
MS is run by retarded poojet. He's the one behind botnet 10. Go figure.

File: C8G_lNjX0AE_61v.jpg (73KB, 749x745px) Image search: [Google]

73KB, 749x745px

>>60998108
this.
By the time a significant segment of the mkt has moved to AYMD, intel counter offer will be avaliable and hopefully competitive

AYMD is lucky if they can even make a dent into intel's monopoly desu

>>60997823
>in games
so does infernolake-x
is that what jewtel shill are reduced to? talk about maximum damage control, jej

A lot of amd "fans" today.

>>60996082

>E5-2650v4
>https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=9SIA24G5HG7913&cm_re=E5-2650_v4-_-9SIA24G5HG7913-_-Product
>$1550/per
>$3100

>can be BTFO'd by a $2000 E7551, and still have $1100 left over for buying the motherboard, RAM, and other elements of the machine

Intel is kill.

>>60998108
AMD basically had THE industry on that stage.
>Vmware
VM standard.
>Xilinix
FPGA/ASIC standard
>redhat
OS standard, runs the US military.

Samsung and MS need no mention
>Mellanox
Switch standard

AMD has taken everything.

ON DAY 1

>>60998129
They didn't go into specifics, but did say if you're running multiple VMs each VM can use it's own key for encryption.

>>60998129
Like
>every VM gets own encryption key
?

File: 1496594105084.png (464KB, 1304x849px) Image search: [Google]

464KB, 1304x849px

>>60997870
WHAT THE FUCK!

IT'S LITERALLY ANOTHER SHOAH!

>>60998129
they said individual encryption keys per vm i think

File: 1497991985337837419059_575px[1].jpg (49KB, 678x508px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 678x508px

>>60998129
By the looks it can be disabled from a management dashboard, yes.

>>60998160
IT'S ANOTHER HOLOCAUST

File: 1490576383462.png (651KB, 600x601px) Image search: [Google]

651KB, 600x601px

>>60998138
pajeets sticking together and fucking meritocracy and the free market up right the arse, who would have though

>>60998091

not him, what is ECC memory loss? Does this mean 4% chance of bitflipping ram?

>>60998150

What kind of "deals" will Intel offer to retain market share?

A few weeks ago some anon was talking about Intel reps that came to his data center and were offering steep discounts for placing an order immediately

>>60998183
>(((freeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee))) market
>Intel quietly sells SKL-EP Xeons to jewgle while fucking over amazon and microdicks
WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOW COMPETITION.

>>60998147
>Hopefully be competitive
Fanboy spotted. Are you ok with Intel raping your wallet and monopolising the market or something?

File: shilling.png (192KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

192KB, 500x500px

>>60998152
>posting the same pasta in every thread
I wonder who operates in this manner.

File: 42.jpg (280KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

280KB, 1280x720px

>>60997991
Wao.

And I only wanted 1 cpu.

>>60998205
>What kind of "deals" will Intel offer to retain market share?
No deals will help them after today's OEM parade.

File: kyouko.png (358KB, 443x550px) Image search: [Google]

358KB, 443x550px

>>60998154
>>60998159
>>60998162
im satisfied with that, thanks
i guess we will have to wait and see how secure it is, im guessing quite but you never know with those backdoors and shit

>>60998174
sweet
amd ran a fucking truck through intel

>>60998199
no, performance hit by using ECC since it needs to do all it's memory werror checking things

>>60998237
That's from previous thread.

>>60998199
performcance loss

File: C8hqpa2VYAAv8nh.jpg (36KB, 742x732px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 742x732px

>>60998226
I'm an happy customer of intel and have been for close to a decade now.
I'm thankful for all the endless hours of entertainment and productivity I got from their products.
I may or may not own any stock.

Is the kike mad AMD didn't use ICC for its own bench run instead of GCC? AHAHAAHHA OH WOW, they even left ICC on the Xeon instead of making it equal, and Intel still got stomped.

>>60998152
>We got these guy help use support you needs guys


Fuck off they show slides and shill all they want,but until Thursday sliders become true they haven't done shit they may got eyes watching,but people don't switch ecosystems over night you got to show they can put money where third mouth is

>>60998308
It doesn't matter, it's pure damage control from Tom's, both AMD and Intel numbers are at their best with ICC(Intel) and AMD(GCC)

There's no reason for AMD to use ICC for itself and gimp its performance considering ICC's background.
And no one fucking deploying AMD products would even use fucking ICC

>>60998303
I'm just here to tell you that we don't care

>>60998315

Faggot, this is the fucking server ecosystem throwing their support behind Epyc. This is literally every leading company in the IT world giving AMD a Saikerei bow.

They are already putting their money where their mouth is.

File: 1493601209333.png (1MB, 1054x1500px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1054x1500px

EPYC being server chips and all, will they still have unlocked multipliers? I already have my r7-1700X for my main PC. I game and encode 1080p/4k video (simultaneously) paired with 32GB of ram. However I was looking to upgrade my server as it's currently a pentium dual core and 4GB of ddr3.

140w for their 8c/16t is heavy for me so I'd like to be able to downclock it and use the server as a VM host and secondary encoding machine on the network. Is AMD making a sub 100w 16c/32t? Or does Ryzen accept ECC?

16 channel ram when


>meanwhile in the Intel Macbook: throttling CPUs and 1866MHz DDR3 RAM for $1200-2200

>>60997842
>4 cores
>Recommended Customer Price$6841.00

Jewtel wow

>>60998407
Maybe five years from now.

>>60998407
>16 channel ram when
Whatever succeeds Zen will probably have bigger socket and 4 memory channels per die.

>>60998395
get and underclock a 10 core threadripper, you don't need 8 channel ram nor 128 pci lanes, and TR will support ECC

>>60998365
I know that all you care about is finding a vacant designated street.

heh

>>60998407
right now on EPYC dual socket configurations, basically impossible on 16 channels per socket because there isn't enough space

File: 1495942895503.jpg (47KB, 394x480px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 394x480px

>>60998431
holy fuck I got so hype about EPYC I completely forgot about threadripper! Fuck me.

I didn't watch the live stream. What is the cheapest threadipper looking like? I'm looking simply for at least 32GB of ECC RAM and higher core count. Not to mention a motherboard with 10+ Sata ports would be nice too.

>>60998226
> Are you ok with Intel raping your wallet and monopolising the market or something
Yeah cause if AMD ever gets the lead they'll be super moral and will never do anything unfair cause they're the good guys.

>>60998469
Stockholm syndrome.

>>60998468
16 cores with 64 PCIe lanes, $899

/r/homelab is having a collective orgasm

>>60998469
no, they'll follow exactly the steps that sent intel to its demise right?

>>60996000
Intel pajeets on suicide watch!

>>60998518
you have to go back

Bitcoin fags will drive all the prices of this shit to the moon.

File: 1497051516267.png (185KB, 915x487px) Image search: [Google]

185KB, 915x487px

>>60998022
like this?

>>60998528
last time amd was ahead we got bulldozer when intel slapped their shit

Haha epyc

Epc for the win

>>60996672
It probably means we get kikerippers in the 500-800$ range. If so Intel is totally fucked. I'm in gimme those sweet kikerippers

Hello netburst my old friend
I've come to stoke your flames again
Because market share is slowly leaking
Ryzen was released while I was sleeping
And the pipelines that were burned in my brain
Still remain
Within the flames
Of netburst

>>60998407
EPYC is 8 channels per socket, meaning dual socket configurations technically have 16 channels and a maximum of 4 TBs of RAM.

>>60998561
Beautiful.

>>60996697
is that Old green anonymous?

>>60997823
>games
Will Intel make its own console to sell all the CPUs which suddenly nobody is stupid enough to buy?

Stay tuned!

>>60998610
Fuck you now I'm sad. ;_;7

>>60998468
No confirmation yet, but mid-tier 16-core EPYC is in the $750 ballpark. That's with 4 dies though, Threadripper only uses 2. Top-tier Threadripper could reasonably be <$1000.

>>60998614
>consoles
kill yourself

>>60998629
4 dies, this means 64MB of L3 cache, and fucktons of I/O

top tier TR is surely less than $1000

File: HNI_0009.jpg (93KB, 400x240px) Image search: [Google]

93KB, 400x240px

>>60998647
im not the only one that thinks shes kinda attractive for and older lady

File: 1497689967244.jpg (123KB, 638x599px) Image search: [Google]

123KB, 638x599px

>>60998561

>>60998508
There will be a cheaper Kikeripper, right?

>>60998701
there will be some skus with less cores/clocks too

>>60998508
Those are tr or epyc prices? Also there are already tr prices out?

>>60998724
Epyc

>>60998205

>Intel offers deep discounts

Is Intel going to pay for the electricity too? Because a fucking four socket Xeon config got BTFO'd by a high end, single socket Naples config; which draws 17% less power while offering 21% better performance AND I/O.

Intel would literally have to shell out tens of billions to companies around the world, offering to pick up electricity, coffee, and blowjob tabs to compete against this kind of availability.

>>60998724
64 lanes, so threadripper

all EPYC cpus have 128 lanes

>>60998219

Amazon and Microdicks would still reject it, because the performance is not worth it due to a lack of equivalent I/O compared to Naples. Plus the power efficiency is significant per socket, that when you scale up to several hundred if not thousand cores, you're looking at hourly electricity use in equivalence of another batch of new servers.

>>60998647
Is this Hirohiko Araki?

>>60998543

>18 threads

nigger, if you're gonna shitpost; do it right.

>>60998629
God if tr goes same trend skylakex is dead.
12 core CPU less than 800$ kicks Intel in the ass

File: big_intel-xeon-platinum-8176-cinebench-r15-benchmark.jpg.jpg (281KB, 980x942px) Image search: [Google]

281KB, 980x942px

meanwhile pic related is a 2S system of the new xeon flagship

>>60998855
It scores like two threadrippers?
Lmao

>>60996696
>mfw Apple could have put a underclocked Epyc in his retarded iMac Pro and would still beating the fucking Xeon without the throttling
Is official: Intel has Apple grabbed by the balls.

>>60998855
AMD is finished.

>>60998881
Or thunderbolt is more likely, and EPYC is still a fresh platform.

>>60998886
That's two CPUs, numbnuts.

>>60998561

add me in the screen cap.

>>60998872
yeah, and accounting for clockspeeds, one EPYC 32/64 should get ~4500cb

>>60998899
Intel said they were making TB a royalty-free standard by next year

IT ISN'T FUCKING FAIR AMD SHOULDN'T BE ALLOWED TO EMBARRASS INTEL LIKE THIS AGAIN

>>60998913
More like middle of next year, so not happening in time for launch of Apple's crap much less validation time of Apple's crap

>>60996283
>sitting on their heels
you mean resting on their laurels

i can't be the only one who lurks company wars threads without having a clue what's actually going on

>>60998855
Even with ebin mesh it scales like shit.

>>60998973
It's a mesh made of ringbuses, what'd you expect?

>>60998943
intel has an insane CEO
amd has an insanely fuckable CEO

its pretty clear whats going on here.

>>60998986
Well its more bingbus and according to Intel (and their hatred for crossbars) it's better. Absolutely ebin my jewish friends.

>>60998899
Thunderbolt isn't CPU dependent as far I know. I bet that intel is refusing to sell TB controllers to Apple if they don't buy also Intel CPUs

File: 1482868481908.jpg (100KB, 750x937px) Image search: [Google]

100KB, 750x937px

>>60999002
>amd has an insanely fuckable CEO
are you crazy ??

>>60997707
>AMD is an American company
I understand the the chinks and poojeets meme, but still.

>>60998855
Is this record time that AMD gets BTFO?

>>60999050
well duh, it stands for American Digital

>>60999027
AMDtards would fuck anything. That's common among niggers and poojets.

>>60999027
Clearly you haven't been to /g/ before. It's literally sponsored by AMD.

>>60999051
Anon it's 56goarz only delivering 4.5k cinebench pts. It scales like absolute ass. Their ebin mesh is not working.

>>60999054
kill yourself retard

>>60998855
Thanks. I was just about to buy AMD stock.

>>60999067
it seems to be scaling hella fine to me

>>60999092
>6k pts on 56goarz
Looks shit shlomo.

>>60999051
>>60999091
>>60999092
That is a dual socket workstation, dumbass.

>>60995873
Is This AMD's Final Solution?

File: Intelshillforces.png (234KB, 800x612px) Image search: [Google]

234KB, 800x612px

>>60998886
>>60999051
>>60999091
>He doesn't know there will be 2 socket ebyn boards

>>60999136
>2 socket ebyn boards

Just Wait™

>>60999153
>literally available right now
>le herp derp wait tm

>being this retarded

>>60999153
https://www.supermicro.com/products/nfo/AMD_SP3.cfm?pg=SS

Daily reminder that if you don't have Intel stock and are legitimately upset about all these happenings then you are unironically retarded.

>>60999153
Skylake Xeons aren't even released yet you fucking retard, AMD released EPYC an hour ago.

File: 1392100729337.png (73KB, 744x1340px) Image search: [Google]

73KB, 744x1340px

>>60999153

>In responses, Intel said through a spokesperson,
>We take all competitors seriously, and while AMD is trying to re-enter the server market segment, Intel continues to deliver 20+ years of uninterrupted data center innovations while maintaining broad ecosystem investments. Our Xeon CPU architecture is proven and battle tested, delivering outstanding performance on a wide range of workloads and specifically designed to maximize data center performance, capabilities, reliability, and manageability. With our next-generation Xeon Scalable processors, we expect to continue offering the highest core and system performance versus AMD. AMD’s approach of stitching together 4 desktop die in a processor is expected to lead to inconsistent performance and other deployment complexities in the data center.

Don't buy our competitor!
Our competitor is bad!
In the future we'll top it!
We promise!
Please don't abandon us!

So was intel the only supplier of x86 cpu's in the server market?

>>60999287
>intel complaining that AMD didn't use a monolithic die
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

File: Australian_48d075_5975673.jpg (156KB, 834x979px) Image search: [Google]

156KB, 834x979px

>>60999287
can someone do a version of pic related with that intel statement?

>>60999287
I know u just made that up, but the fictional spokeperson is spot on desu
why would any sane company switch to some new untested and possibly problem-prone solution is beyond me

File: 1475211353488.jpg (108KB, 782x782px) Image search: [Google]

108KB, 782x782px

>>60995873
DELETE

>>60999359
basically what microsoft, amazon and dropbox did?

>>60999372
Also chinks.

>>60999359
>I know u just made that up
http://www.barrons.com/articles/amd-reveals-epyc-details-intel-vows-to-top-it-1497997334

File: 1449901103024.jpg (32KB, 304x368px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 304x368px

>>60999287
oh there's no doubt they'll top EPYC somehow. But the question that we must ask ourselves, and intel themselves most of all... [spoiler]At what cost?[/spoiler]

File: fmUzOw8.png (479KB, 640x640px) Image search: [Google]

479KB, 640x640px

>>60999065
im fine with poojets, there are a billion of them, some of them are fuckable.

If AMD can make a better CPU for how I use my PC then I am all for it.

What bothers me, is that both sides seem to think it has to be AMD or Intel all the way, like AMD up and down the price range and nothing else.

Is there room for both of them ? probably.
Can each one be a better value at different price points ? Sure

>>60999400
their new $12000 flagship that wasn't even released yet is not enough, and with amd going to 7nm next year, intel will have no chances

>>60999377
>It's real
What in the actual hell intel.

>>60999287
Intel, you should have kept quiet.

File: my sides.png (173KB, 640x400px) Image search: [Google]

173KB, 640x400px

>>60999287
>AMD’s approach of stitching together 4 desktop die in a processor is expected to lead to inconsistent performance and other deployment complexities in the data center.

Intel literally resorting to the kind of arguments a retarded /g/ troll would use. And their ringbus mesh garbage is even worse.

>>60998943
Basically:

> AMD and Intel is competitive
> Suddenly AMD takes over and is the "best" choice
> Suddenly Intel takes over and is the "best" choice
> AMD releases new chip, gets beaten into the ground by Intel
> AMD releases new chip, gets beaten into the ground by Intel
> AMD releases new chip, gets beaten into the ground by Intel
> Intel realizes they have no competition and gets lazy and greedy, releases minimal improvements for maximum price
> Suddenly AMD stops being shit, releases chip that beats Intel for half the price
> Intel panics and releases factory-overlocked chip that uses 3x more power and produces 3x more heat
> The entire internet laughs at the new i9 that is more or less permanently locked at 1°C below emergency thermal shutdown
> AMD teases in-progress CPU that has loads more cores than anything Intel has to offer, for lower price
> Intel starts sweating
> AMD holds press conference where they announce their enterprise server processor lineup
> Beats the shit out of anything Intel has to offer, while using less power, while costing 50% less.
> (You are here)

I'm happy AMD finally got their shit together.
Maybe now that competition is back, we can start having actual improvements every release.

>>60999121
they'll use intel i9 to dispose of the evidence.

>>60999287
Considering $AMD is up and $INTC is down, this damage control is about as effective as Intel's ringbus over 20 cores.

>>60999451
maybe it's the other way around and intel were the ones using retarded troll arguments here?

>tfw they really were paid shills

>>60999287
Going straight for the FUD.

File: 1491102738152.png (13KB, 420x420px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 420x420px

>>60995873
>mfw 32 cores
intelets just cant compete with AMD's BBC cores.

>>60999465
It's a mesh of ringbuses actually. Performance is as good as you'd expect.

>>60999487
I can see it

>>60999051


Looks absolutely terrible

>>60998855
>those pathetic clocks

It has less cores, far less I/O and less channels than Naples and it still ties with it in clockspeed?

Absolutely hilarious

>>60999526
well, epyc has 2.7GHz all core turbo, take that into consideration too

>>60999424
12k flagship?

Can someone here with an r7 underclock it to 2.7 GHz and post cinebench scores pls?

>>60999579
Just get a stock 1700 score and decrease it by 15%, CB scales linearly with clocks

>>60999601
>>60999579
4831 for 32 core Naples at 2.7GHz, assuming 100% scaling.

>>60999287
>intel resorts to autistic screeching
Weeeeeeeew.

KARACHAN GET

>>60999626
make that 97% for "realism", and then calculate dual socket

>>60999626
It's 3.95 scaling for 4 dies.

>>60999626
7.90 for 2 sockets scaling

File: Ryzen_vs_Skylake_core_detail_small.jpg (387KB, 1200x833px) Image search: [Google]

387KB, 1200x833px

>neat, evenly spaced components for ideal heat dispersion

>ugly clusterfuck ready to burn your house down

what is intel doing?

>>60998855
I like it how this piece of shit can't even keep all cores under turbo in fucking cinnebench, much less anything AVX,
It's hitting TDP limits with half the cores turbod, fucking joke.

>>60999667
what it has been doing for the last 20 years, reusing the same design

>>60999667
If this was accurate the dies would be split up ..

>>60999711
yeah, that's misleading as fuck

>>60999681
"remember and never forget"
Literally putting in practice a old kike saying

>>60999287
>is expected to lead to inconsistent performance and other deployment complexities in the data center.

Translation: AMD will be worse in gaming

>>60999729
they're clutching at straws just like the shills here were

>>60999729
They also forgot to mention that the CCX design makes Zen perfect for VMs, due to the CCX being fast as fuck by itself, while meshring has shit latencies all around.

>>60999781
can't i just stick a game to a ccx and the rest f my shit in another?

>>60999822
That's the deal, you can make a really fast VM using 1-4 cores from a CCX, or you can go full retard using core4 and core5, each from different CCX killing performance.

This isn't a problem for VMs because most VMs are ran with 1 or 2 cores.

>>60999822
you'd have to do this manually, seeing that windows loves to throw the processes around

just set core affinity on task manager, I don't know which ones are the ones on the same CCX, but it can't be too hard to find out

>>60999822
Yes.

Tell me what the fuck I'm supposed to do with 32 cores?

>>60999842
oh look, this argument again

>>60996411
does this mean a server host cant steal your encryption keys from ram?

>>60999842
Server shit.

>>60999861
yep (?)

>>60999842
Ask Microsoft.

>>60999842
Server porn pages.

>>60999842
Allocate 60 of your threads to an AVX2 miner. Use the profits in order to purchase a 3D printer, print a gun, and kill yourself faggot.

>>60999834
they should have some software-based identification shit so this could be easier.

>Workstation Vega GPUs are $1,200
>EPYC CPUs are $3,400 at the top end
>can have a small supercomputer inside your house for $10,000

The amount of performance they're offering at this price point is super disruptive.

>>60999842
If you don't know, you don't need it. I however have 16 machines in a data center. I could replace those machines with four machines costing the same price and improve performance.

File: intel_ceo.jpg (171KB, 743x891px) Image search: [Google]

171KB, 743x891px

What do you delusional AyyyMDrones not understand? No one is going to buy this shit because of INTEL brand loyalty. Go slay the toilet witch instead of shitting on this board.

File: confused-cuckbert.png (565KB, 1190x595px) Image search: [Google]

565KB, 1190x595px

how could this have happened!?!?!
>just a year ago amd was a shitstorm poo in loo house fire pajeet street shitter

hold be bros...

>>60999908
>brand loyalty
>on enterprise market, where performance per watt is king

nice try mr. shekelstein

>>60999400
>http://www.barrons.com/articles/amd-reveals-epyc-details-intel-vows-to-top-it-1497997334

Top how? In the game of performance x consumption x cost, there is no way intel can win unless with massive price cuts

>>60999898
I'm honestly in shock by this comeback. I've always liked AMD and was hoping that they would introduce some much needed competition back into the market but this is insanity. Keller is the real fucking deal.

and vega?

>>60998881
>>60998913
the problem for amd now isn't that it's royalty free but that their cpus simply dont have the silicone to run TB and requiring additional chips is a meme
it'll take some time to make it's way onto amd's chips

>>60999950
>price cuts
>while maintaining 60% margins
impossible with monolithic dies

File: 1462225515545.jpg (16KB, 268x265px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 268x265px

>>60999898
Is Vega out yet? I'm considering a frontier edition for my new build if it outclasses a 1080ti in gaming. Gotta mine those alt-coins.

>>61000010
No, Vega FE is on 27th of June.

>>60999995
i guess they might as well make their own standard, over usb-c to maintain some degree of adoption

File: 1475875119112.jpg (48KB, 600x600px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 600x600px

AMaDa my KoKoRo

>>61000006
That is the crux of the matter.
AMD made the whole arch scalable, from high yield to mounting several high yield and maintaing performance consistency. Since the dies are so small, you can reap almost everything, even one ccx defective goes as r3 products. They can cut even more agressively the prices and do a great margin on it.

On the other front, even if let say, intel would consider 30% markup over, it wouldnt be acceptable by the board, with the excuse that intel holds the market. They will not cut prices in a sensible way and still resort to jew schemes like 7820X with 28 pcie lanes until they market share starts to leak.

File: 1462211737707.jpg (573KB, 959x1374px) Image search: [Google]

573KB, 959x1374px

>>61000029
Is there any chance that it outperforms a 1080ti in gaming? Theoretically it at least has more tflops. Also something I've been wondering: Couldn't the driver just truncate all 32 bit floats into 16 bit floats and effectively double the performance? I would assume that most real-time shaders not need the entire range in the first place.

>>61000085
No, the game itself should use FP16 shaders. Vega is about pushing pixels, we'll see how beefier front-end behaves in games.

>>60996569
>>60996604
>>60996598
>8c/16t
>2.1 base clock, 2.9 boost
>120w tdp
>$400
You're better off with ryzen

>>61000106
IT HAS 8 MEMORY CHANNELS AND 128 LANES YOU NIGGER
Also it's 2S only.

>>61000106
Not if he needs 8 channel memory and 128 PCIe lanes. Probably better off with Threadripper anyway, though.

>>61000123
it's 1S only anon

>>61000106
It still has all the uncore, you get all the memory channels, and the full 128 PCI-E 3.0 lanes.

>>61000134
8core is 2S only, anon.

>>61000137
may i ask what is an uncore

>>61000104
>No, the game itself should use FP16 shaders.
But what if the driver just does it? Nothing would happen aside from a few overflows, which doesn't matter as long as it's just video games. I wish their drivers were open source so I could implement shit like that.

>>61000141
huh, I didn't read that sku list right then

>>60996242
fuck you man itll run 20 instances of crysis 3

>>61000143
Things that are not core logic.

>>61000123
>>61000126
>>61000137
You're better off buying the 16c/32t ebin7281 for $600 than the 8c/16t for $400

>>61000195
8/16 ebin is 2S only anyway.

>>61000208
can be used at 2S and 1S, it's not locked to ONLY 2S

File: file.png (198KB, 600x450px) Image search: [Google]

198KB, 600x450px

>>61000208
Wrong
>ebin 7251

>>61000228
>>61000230
Well yeah but you're better with 16/32 one.

>>61000256
if he only needs a fuckton of ram and lanes, the 8c/16t is perfectly alright