4 ms·

Page 4 (https://www.anandtech.com/show/14694/amd-rome-epyc-2nd-gen/4 https://www.anandtech.com/show/14694/amd-rome-epyc-2nd-gen/4) lines up AMD's prices, core c

Page 4 (https://www.anandtech.com/show/14694/amd-rome-epyc-2nd-gen/4 https://www.anandtech.com/show/14694/amd-rome-epyc-2nd-gen/4) lines up AMD's prices, core counts, and frequencies with Intel's. AT says all these have 128 PCIe 4 lanes and support up to 4TB RAM aper socket. Intel's own competitive analysis figured competition in servers "is likely to be the most intense in about a decade" (https://www.techpowerup.com/256842/intel-internal-memo-reveals-that-even-intel-is-impressed-by-amds-progress https://www.techpowerup.com/256842/intel-internal-memo-revea...). Sounds about right. The AMD presentation had announcements from Azure and GCP but not Amazon. How soon Intel gets Ice Lake ready for servers seems pretty relevant here.

lettergram 7y ago
From the article, mid-2020 for the Ice Lake equivalent: > Ice lake promises 18% higher IPC, eight instead of six memory channels and should be able to offer 56 or more cores in reasonable power envelope as it will use Intel's most advanced 10 nm process. The big question will be around the implementation of the design, if it uses chiplets, how the memory works, and the frequencies they can reach.
- twotwotwo 7y ago
  Right, depends on the things AT mentioned, but also on execution: whether the the issues with 10nm are over (now that they've shipped some chips) or if they'll also slow the scale-up to server-sized dies. Intel moving to chiplets could certainly mitigate that risk some, with tradeoffs similar to the ones in EPYC.
  - lettergram 7y ago
    Supposedly, they will only be shipping to select customers initially (and at 28 cores) in 2020.
frankchn 7y ago
Amazon already has 1st generation EPYC servers available: https://aws.amazon.com/ec2/amd/ https://aws.amazon.com/ec2/amd/ so I assume they will follow up as well.
- mktmkr 7y ago
  Yeah but AMD should just beg Amazon to remove that instance type. It's hilariously slow. I don't know if Naples was just the beta of Rome or what but if you use it you won't like it.
  - wahern 7y ago
    Everybody seems to gloss over single-threaded performance. AMD is trading cores for clock rate. I just put together an EPYC (Naples) 3201 (8 cores, no SMT, 2133MHz DDR4) and my circa 2012 Xeon E3-1230v2 (4 cores/8 threads, 1333MHz DDR3) is still faster because of the higher clock rate. More interestingly, the EPYC peaks at 45W at the outlet but the Xeon only hits ~55W. The EPYC advertises a 30W TDP, but IIRC the Xeon advertised a 65W TDP for the chip, so Intel substantially over performs. I don't regret building the 3201, and I'm looking forward to the next generation of EPYC embedded.[1] But Intel still has superior design skills when it comes to power consumption and clock rates. I'd expect Intel to keep pressing this advantage, especially because at this point it's all they've got left. [1] Anybody know when it's coming out? Are they gonna wait for Zen 3?
    - kllrnohj 7y ago
      > Everybody seems to gloss over single-threaded performance. AMD is trading cores for clock rate. No they aren't and no they didn't. Obviously this review of the ultra high end is not focused on single thread performance because that'd be insane. But in segments where it does matter, like consumer, it was not glossed over at all. And if you look at the comparison table AMD didn't really trade cores for clocks. Both the Epyc and the Xeons are all in that mid 2ghz base frequency range. > But Intel still has superior design skills when it comes to power consumption and clock rates. Except no not really. Clock rate yes, but AMD has an IPC advantage now so it's not entirely clear cut. And you only get that clock rate advantage on the consumer chips anyway. Power consumption is not at all in Intel's favor, either.
twotwotwo 7y ago
Two more thoughts: - A slide in AMD's presentation suggested 64C would cost $7k, but that's for the top two-socket-capable version. If you "just" want 64C, not 2x64C, there is a $4.4k single-socket 64C part. Or if the RAM/PCIe capacity of two sockets is useful, you can get two 32C parts, and those start at $2k each. Makes pricing look better at 64 cores. - Since they turned on most everything on the I/O die for all parts, seems possible to build boxes with lots of RAM and I/O but as little as 8C or 16C ($500 or $1k) of CPU. Of course, balance tends to be nice, but the ability to make it as lopsided as you want could be relevant for applications that are very RAM/IO heavy (caching), or if you're running a commercial DB where you pay by the core. Neat.
alimbada 7y ago
Amazon was there, but not in person: https://www.reddit.com/r/AMD_Stock/comments/coly1a/ https://www.reddit.com/r/AMD_Stock/comments/coly1a/

lettergram 7y ago

From the article, mid-2020 for the Ice Lake equivalent: > Ice lake promises 18% higher IPC, eight instead of six memory channels and should be able to offer 56 or more cores in reasonable power envelope as it will use Intel's most advanced 10 nm process. The big question will be around the implementation of the design, if it uses chiplets, how the memory works, and the frequencies they can reach.

twotwotwo 7y ago
Right, depends on the things AT mentioned, but also on execution: whether the the issues with 10nm are over (now that they've shipped some chips) or if they'll also slow the scale-up to server-sized dies. Intel moving to chiplets could certainly mitigate that risk some, with tradeoffs similar to the ones in EPYC.
- lettergram 7y ago
  Supposedly, they will only be shipping to select customers initially (and at 28 cores) in 2020.

frankchn 7y ago

Amazon already has 1st generation EPYC servers available: https://aws.amazon.com/ec2/amd/ https://aws.amazon.com/ec2/amd/ so I assume they will follow up as well.

mktmkr 7y ago
Yeah but AMD should just beg Amazon to remove that instance type. It's hilariously slow. I don't know if Naples was just the beta of Rome or what but if you use it you won't like it.
- wahern 7y ago
  Everybody seems to gloss over single-threaded performance. AMD is trading cores for clock rate. I just put together an EPYC (Naples) 3201 (8 cores, no SMT, 2133MHz DDR4) and my circa 2012 Xeon E3-1230v2 (4 cores/8 threads, 1333MHz DDR3) is still faster because of the higher clock rate. More interestingly, the EPYC peaks at 45W at the outlet but the Xeon only hits ~55W. The EPYC advertises a 30W TDP, but IIRC the Xeon advertised a 65W TDP for the chip, so Intel substantially over performs. I don't regret building the 3201, and I'm looking forward to the next generation of EPYC embedded.[1] But Intel still has superior design skills when it comes to power consumption and clock rates. I'd expect Intel to keep pressing this advantage, especially because at this point it's all they've got left. [1] Anybody know when it's coming out? Are they gonna wait for Zen 3?
  - kllrnohj 7y ago
    > Everybody seems to gloss over single-threaded performance. AMD is trading cores for clock rate. No they aren't and no they didn't. Obviously this review of the ultra high end is not focused on single thread performance because that'd be insane. But in segments where it does matter, like consumer, it was not glossed over at all. And if you look at the comparison table AMD didn't really trade cores for clocks. Both the Epyc and the Xeons are all in that mid 2ghz base frequency range. > But Intel still has superior design skills when it comes to power consumption and clock rates. Except no not really. Clock rate yes, but AMD has an IPC advantage now so it's not entirely clear cut. And you only get that clock rate advantage on the consumer chips anyway. Power consumption is not at all in Intel's favor, either.

twotwotwo 7y ago

Two more thoughts: - A slide in AMD's presentation suggested 64C would cost $7k, but that's for the top two-socket-capable version. If you "just" want 64C, not 2x64C, there is a $4.4k single-socket 64C part. Or if the RAM/PCIe capacity of two sockets is useful, you can get two 32C parts, and those start at $2k each. Makes pricing look better at 64 cores. - Since they turned on most everything on the I/O die for all parts, seems possible to build boxes with lots of RAM and I/O but as little as 8C or 16C ($500 or $1k) of CPU. Of course, balance tends to be nice, but the ability to make it as lopsided as you want could be relevant for applications that are very RAM/IO heavy (caching), or if you're running a commercial DB where you pay by the core. Neat.

alimbada 7y ago

Amazon was there, but not in person: https://www.reddit.com/r/AMD_Stock/comments/coly1a/ https://www.reddit.com/r/AMD_Stock/comments/coly1a/