4 ms·
Cavium ThunderX2 and Ampere eMAG are definitely no worse, probably better.
by floatboth 8y ago
Cavium ThunderX2 and Ampere eMAG are definitely no worse, probably better.
- rwmj 8y agoThunderX2 is great. It's a shame that ThunderX (ie. v1) had pretty terrible performance because I think that put some people off looking at the current range of Caviums.
- ac29 8y agoAmpere looks particularly promising. Their first release is based on the AppliedMicro X-Gene 3 IP, which they acquired [0]. The first product is a 16nm chip with 32 ARMv8 cores @ 3.3GHz, with 8x 72-bit DDR4-2667 channels (with ECC), and 42 lanes of PCIe Gen 3, in a 125W TDP at a cost under $1000 [1]. They supposedly have a pretty aggressive roadmap, with 7nm parts available next year [2]. They have a pretty solid looking team, lots of former Intel folks [3]. I seem to recall reading they had several hundred employees in total, and at least several hundred million in funding, though I can't remember where I read that. It would have been far more impressive for Amazon to launch with a product like this, or Cavium's ThunderX2. [0] https://fuse.wikichip.org/news/776/x-gene-3-gets-a-second-chance-at-ampere-with-a-new-32-core-16nm-arm-processor/ https://fuse.wikichip.org/news/776/x-gene-3-gets-a-second-ch... [1] https://cdn.amperecomputing.com/documentation/hardware/eMAG/eMAG8180_PB_v0.5_20180914.pdf https://cdn.amperecomputing.com/documentation/hardware/eMAG/... [2] https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/09/18/ampere_shipping/ https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/09/18/ampere_shipping/ [3] https://amperecomputing.com/leadership-team/ https://amperecomputing.com/leadership-team/