3 ms·
The Intel top x-series (that competes with Threadripper) only has 36 cores (not 70+), is limited to a single socket, and it's not shipping yet. Even with dual
by sliken 9y ago
The Intel top x-series (that competes with Threadripper) only has 36 cores (not 70+), is limited to a single socket, and it's not shipping yet.
Even with dual sockets 70+ cores is not easy (or cheap) and other things like memory performance become more important than core count. AMD has a bandwidth advantage with single and dual sockets having 8 channels per socket instead of Intel's 6.
Intel doesn't have competition with 4 or more socket systems, but that topic drifting pretty far from a thread discussing Threadripper.
- redtuesday 9y agoWhich Intel part has 36 cores? Do you mean threads, or is there a Knights Landing card with so few cores I'm not aware of?
- frozenport 9y agoI scale my CAD-like software to high core counts. Memory performance from the hardware side isn't a tunable parameter. If you need the performance, AMD has no product in this space.
- sliken 9y agoMemory performance is just as tunable as core count. Ryzen = 2 channels, Threadripper = 4 channels, and Epyc is 8 channels per socket for 1 or 2 sockets. So there's a factor of 8 to pick from. I'd be surprised that a CAD program prefers cores over memory bandwidth. Generally if you have a complicated 3D object doing anything with that object isn't going to be cache friendly. Have you tried your CAD-like software on two platforms with the same core count but double the memory channels?
- frozenport 9y agoYeah, so a large part of my optimization is to move from memory to compute bound. But things like matrix inversion, for example, thanks to the hard work of library authors can scale pretty well. This happens on the CPU because the data typically exceeds GPU memory. So, you can get out the box scaling for much of your code. The 3D rendering is taken care by the GPU.
- CyberDildonics 9y agoCAD 'needs' 70 cores and CAD is VR? Let's not get carried away.