3 ms·

"Semiconductor industry watcher David Schor shared SciMark and C-Ray benchmarks for the 16-core Graviton. In the SciMark testing, the AWS system-on-chip was twi

by Zenst 8y ago

"Semiconductor industry watcher David Schor shared SciMark and C-Ray benchmarks for the 16-core Graviton. In the SciMark testing, the AWS system-on-chip was twice as fast as a Raspberry Pi 3 Model B+ on Linux 4.14." Yip, at 4x the core count it is only 2x as fast. I also suspect that 2x RPi's would be less power usage than one of these platforms. But then this is it's first generation dip into this area and they will be seeing what people actually want to run and will fine-tune their custom silicon from that for version 2. As for pricing, they need to make this more tempting so they can get the metrics they need to see what version 2 should focus upon. What I'm wondering is would such a chip marry up with an FPGA and present a more flexible and appealing option. [EDIT ADD] It would appear this set of tests are heavy on single threaded usage and with that, fair results and like many, got taken in on the jonalistic spin. So it's in this test effectively comparing a single core, so mentioning it is a 16 core cpu compared to a RPi, does twist how the results are viewed.

vardump 8y ago
> Yip, at 4x the core count it is only 2x as fast. I also suspect that 2x RPi's would be less power usage than one of these platforms. That's almost certainly wrong information. Cortex A72 is an out-of-order CPU unlike Cortex A53 in RPI3. Also Graviton is running at 2.3 GHz vs 1.4 GHz for RPI 3b+. You'd expect 16 core Graviton to outperform RPI3b's 4 core A53 by about 8-15x.
- Zenst 8y ago
  A little digging and it would appear this set of benchmarks are single threaded, so a 2x speed improvement given the clock speeds makes sense. I have looked at some other benchmarks, and it looks like this offering only pays off on certain tests (N-Queens being one), how that pans out with real-world usage is what we will find out over time. Though the aspect that even in a few tests that this stands out, makes it viable for some real-world usage. Time will tell and at least even if it pays of in 1 out of 10 tests, those tests will translate into real usage. But one shoes does not fit everybody, but always good to have a choice and for that, this is good.

by Zenst 8y ago

vardump 8y ago

> Yip, at 4x the core count it is only 2x as fast. I also suspect that 2x RPi's would be less power usage than one of these platforms. That's almost certainly wrong information. Cortex A72 is an out-of-order CPU unlike Cortex A53 in RPI3. Also Graviton is running at 2.3 GHz vs 1.4 GHz for RPI 3b+. You'd expect 16 core Graviton to outperform RPI3b's 4 core A53 by about 8-15x.

Zenst 8y ago
A little digging and it would appear this set of benchmarks are single threaded, so a 2x speed improvement given the clock speeds makes sense. I have looked at some other benchmarks, and it looks like this offering only pays off on certain tests (N-Queens being one), how that pans out with real-world usage is what we will find out over time. Though the aspect that even in a few tests that this stands out, makes it viable for some real-world usage. Time will tell and at least even if it pays of in 1 out of 10 tests, those tests will translate into real usage. But one shoes does not fit everybody, but always good to have a choice and for that, this is good.