EPYC 1S vs Intel Xeon Gold 2S on Linux

>only multithreaded tests

kys poojet

File: JUSTnich.jpg (119KB, 1000x1000px) Image search: [Google]

119KB, 1000x1000px

>>62437003
Oy-vey.
>>62438438
Oy gevalt.

File: AAAAAAAAAAAAAjpg.jpg (190KB, 800x533px) Image search: [Google]

190KB, 800x533px

>>62437003
>64 Zen threads more or less = 80 Intel threads. With less TDP, more I/O, more RAM capacity, and less money.

AMD employees CONSTANTLY post on shitronix, the site is compromised
The EPYC he's using is also sent by AMD and not bought himself, it's always gonna be shown in a good light (with fancy compiler changes and settings)

File: JUSTnich.png (1MB, 1002x1480px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1002x1480px

>>62438518
OY VEY

>>62438490
The definition of holocaust.

Most of those apps don't support dual socket, AMD EPYC is barely faster at 32 cores than Intel's 20 cores

Should I buy 7551p box?
>>62438656
Oy vey to you too, rabbi.

>>62437003
dellid this

>>62438656
>apps don't support dual socket
Intel shills are now really getting desperate

File: 1504560195953.jpg (24KB, 267x297px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 267x297px

>>62438656

>>62438656
And just when i think those apple shill is getting closer, you guys raised the bar again.

>180W AMD vs 120W Intel

>AMD still loses

>$4000 AMD CPU
>vs $2000 Intel CPU

>>62439000
>2S
Oy.
>>62439022
>2S
Vey.

>>62439035
>apps not multi socket aware
>apps effectively run only on one CPU

>>62439047
>apps
>p
>p
>s

>apps

The absolute state of MACACO

File: Inturd.png (971KB, 484x682px) Image search: [Google]

971KB, 484x682px

>>62439047

>>62438518
>>62438518
>>62438518
>>62438518

Slower than Intel at higher TDP, I didn't expect much more, AMD is still a few years behind Intel technologies

>>62439347
Pretty much agree, just look Vega, lower performance at higher power.

I can almost imagine him crying into his pillow after writing the nonsense ITT.

File: 1478644131222.jpg (47KB, 300x334px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 300x334px

>>62439347
>>62439354
its two 125w Intel processors vs a single 180w AMD processor nerds

>>62439449
Unfortunately for you, one doesn't work most of the time due to app incompatibility

So it's really 32 AMD cores vs Intel 20 cores

File: hund.png (199KB, 963x296px) Image search: [Google]

199KB, 963x296px

>tfw

File: 1481958103649.jpg (2MB, 7680x4320px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 7680x4320px

>>62439459
>app incompatibility
lets just do some linear numbers here, I know it doesn't scale like this but it'll show you're full of shit
the E5-2687W v3 is a 10 core 20 thread with 3.1ghz clock
the 6138 there is 20 core 40 thread with 2ghz clock

Skylake is roughly 5% faster per clock than Haswell, so the 6138 should be 35% faster than the 2687W with perfect scaling, while two 6138's would be 171% faster. In real life it'll be lower, than these numbers.

When you do percentage calcs on all the benches, and average the percentage, the dual 6138 system is 131% faster than the 2687W.

Breaking it down into further categories, we can assume if the 2687W is faster then the application does not thread well, but if the 6138 is faster, but not MUCH faster, then it's likely the multiprocessor isn't working as you claim.
So the benchmarks where its not much faster, ie where multiprocessor failed, are Rodina Streamcluster at 21% and Darktable Server at 32%. The benches where it was slow, ie threading didn't benefit as much as clockspeed, are H.264 encoding and Darktable Boat/Masskrug.

Basically you're a shill grasping at straws.

>>62439675
Objectively wrong, you can't compare CPUs with pure numbers off the specsheet

File: 1435865124937.png (148KB, 2500x1645px) Image search: [Google]

148KB, 2500x1645px

>>62439459
>app

>>62439022
Amd suck at marketing, real price high end EPYC is $2100 and $4200 dual socket.

Mostly people believe EPYC single CPU cost $2100, AMD really suck at marketing.

>>62439958
>marketing
>datacenter
>CPUs
?

>>62439536
>better for a bunch of meme shit the average user doesn't care about

>>62439876
then why is the 6138 consistently getting above 100% scaling

>>62439986
>implying average user spends $300+ on a CPU

>>62439958
$3400 per unit for dual socket, $2100 per unit for single socket, same clocks and all. The $4200 unit has faster clocks than the $3400 model.

>>62437003
Now post Epyc vs Xeon gaymen benchmarks, goy

>>62439986
Yeah like not stuttering.

>>62438656
> Most of those apps don't support dual socket

Isn't socket count transparent to software (and to some extent the OS), showing up only as available cores... or am I missing something?

>>62440213
He's a braindead intlel shill.

>>62437003
>on Linux
K.

File: 1489122339460.png (495KB, 1070x601px) Image search: [Google]

495KB, 1070x601px

>>62438438
>>62438656
>>62439000
>>62439022
>>62439047
>>62439347
>>62439459
>>62439958
The current state of shilltel.

>>62440236
>Running windows servers
LUL

AMD is now selling 32c/64t in one single chip.
Starship will feature 48c/96t.
2S starship platform will feature 96c/192t.

>>62440319
Cannonlake is 100% more dense than Skylake.

Skylake = 28 high IPC cores
Cannonlake is 28+100%+10%IPC = 56 cores

>>62440319
>32/64 for $2100
wtf I love AMD now

>>62440376
32 AMD cores = 20 Intel cores

>>62440409
Ugh, it's the opposite. 1 epyc > 2 xeons on non-avx loads.

>>62440428
Basically, 32 AMD cores > 40 Intel cores.

>>62437003
Are we gonna see a sudden surge of AVX optimized program now?

>>62440499
If we suddenly decide doing gpu loads on cpus, yes. Otherwise, nah.

File: 1494161397367.png (369KB, 2880x1620px) Image search: [Google]

369KB, 2880x1620px

>>62440372
Cannonlake server was cancelled, and 10nm has performance regressions.

File: Screenshot from 06-07-2017 19_12_35.png (36KB, 571x556px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 571x556px

>>62440704
And 1.7% (Jensen approves!) yields. And that atrocious mask count.
>>62440499
No since there's two companies capable of producing FP64 capable GPUs.

File: 1486319354474.gif (954KB, 375x211px) Image search: [Google]

954KB, 375x211px

>>62440767
>that 6T SRAM cell size

>>62438777
One of the reasons I decided against a dual xeon pc a while back was because many of the programs I would use don't like dual socket.

>>62440372
Cannonlake is a joke. 7nm will be the real deal.

>>62440844
Yes. 7LP DUV is denser than Intel's 10. 7LP EUV will tear Intel apart.

>>62440213
Nah, there are always programs that refuse to use dual sockets, the video renderer I use/use to use was one of them.

>>62440857
Intel's 7nm is somewhere 2021.
Right when Common Platform *might* get bored and would launch 5nm GAAFETs.

>>62440372
Ugh, that's not how dieshrinks work.

>>62440892
As far as I know, and my knowledge may be a bit out of date, but 6nm was a hard limit due to quantum tunneling. Did they ever figure out a work around?

>>62440924
Yes, they (Common Platform) went back to 2D and started stacking silicon nanosheets on top of each other.
You can also use doped III-V FinFETs.

>>62440916
the 7nm he is talking about will take amds cpus from 3.2-4ghz up to 5gz+ for normal use, as in this is where the cpu is optimally clocked for voltage and power use, where as intel can clock to 5ghz, but fuck me is that a bad idea for power use

Intels 10nm will be behind their current 14nm process for 2 generations by their only predictions, real world may be even less kind in this regard. while gf 10nm is ahead of schedule and on track.

Man IBM selling their fabs along with 16k patents and staff were the golden ticket for GloFo.

>>62440947
when you do that, do you gain anything or is there any performance regression? I could see low power who gives a flying fuck about performance applications jumping at smaller dies, but 5nm at the cost of performance or even just equal performance would be a sidegrade at best, any thing you can tell me in that regard?

>>62440967
I know nothing of node characteristics.
IBM only recently managed to fab a test chip (think of some dieshrunk POWER9) on 5GAA using EUV.

Node discussion is so comfy.
Almost no shitposting.

>>62440964
IBM's research is fantastic but the company is a dumpster fire in terms of doing anything with a good idea.
t. Former IBMer

>>62441033
That's why the only thing they are doing in Common Platform is precisely R&D.

>>62441033
Ibm is more about the long game in terms of their research opposed to short term profits.

>>62438438
This
Where's the 320x240 cs:go bench

>>62438438
3/10 bad bait made me reply

>>62441123
This desu
I want my 32core Epyc vs Xeon Platinum 320x240 gaymen benchmarks.

>>62440319
POWER9 will have 12c/96t.

>>62438518
they're the ones that discovered and publicized the ryzen segfault bug, pretty strange for an AMD shill site

Geez the Intel damage control in here, though understandable. When Intel starts laying people off the shills will be first to go :^)
While EPYC is pretty dam good I think adoption will be slow for the first few quarters while early adopters keep putting it through its paces. Once the good word gets around though by next year, Zen2 servers might be a thing, and that's when the real silicon holocaust begins.