10 ms·
64 Core Threadripper 3990X CPU Review
- pella 7y ago+ "AMD Ryzen Threadripper 3990X Review Roundup" https://videocardz.com/84697/amd-ryzen-threadripper-3990x-review-roundup https://videocardz.com/84697/amd-ryzen-threadripper-3990x-re...
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- pella 7y agoPhoronix: AMD Ryzen Threadripper 3990X Offers Incredible Linux Performance https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=3990x-threadripper-linux&num=1 https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=3990x-th... "When taking the geometric mean of the benchmarks for this article today, The Threadripper 3990X came out overall 26% faster than the dual Xeon Platinum 8280, which is a very nice accomplishment since such a configuration currently retails for $20,000 USD worth of processors alone."
- amluto 7y agoLooking at Linux performance seems like a good idea. Linux doesn’t have all of Windows’ hangups about core count.
- anonsivalley652 7y agoYep. From user-land, numactl FTW https://manpages.ubuntu.com/manpages/bionic/man8/numactl.8.html https://manpages.ubuntu.com/manpages/bionic/man8/numactl.8.h...
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- amluto 7y agoThis isn't a NUMA issue per se. The Windows kernel has some kind of hangup about scheduling across more than 64 logical CPUs. See https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/win32/procthread/processor-groups https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/win32/procthread/pr...
- matsz 7y agoLooking at Linux performance is a great idea since those CPUs probably will be utilized in Linux machines as well (lots of render farms run on Linux).
- rbanffy 7y agoI would assume render farms would rely much more on GPUs than on CPUs.
- nicoburns 7y agoI think some do, some don't. I think some of the more complex models used in animations can't be easily parallelised.
- Arnavion 7y agoSee https://stackoverflow.com/questions/38029698/why-do-we-use-cpus-for-ray-tracing-instead-of-gpus https://stackoverflow.com/questions/38029698/why-do-we-use-c... from a few years ago. The gist is CPUs are more versatile in the work they can do, support larger scenes, and the render doesn't have to be in real-time so it's not a make-or-break comparison as video games would be.
- rbanffy 7y agoI'm not thinking on the specialized GPU parts for shading and mapping, but pure floating point hardware. With 3D you are doing lots and lots of floating point ops that should map easily to what GPUs do best. OTOH, GPUs are still harder to program than CPUs and I can only imagine what the SFX crew would hear when they have to explain the movie can't be released in summer because the GPUs are too hard to write software for.
- swalsh 7y agoAs Linux becomes more competitive with Windows from a user experience point of view, I wonder if superior support for these new crazy AMD processors might help give it a boost. I'm sure many graphics people would move (if only Linux had good support for applications like Photoshop).
- willis936 7y agoI'm curious what performance would be like on a linux hosting a 128 thread windows VM. I expect it to be worse than running windows on the bare metal, but maybe not. I could see a series of deficiencies in windows being eliminated with the linux host -> windows client topology.
- dfox 7y agoI assume that the issue with processor groups on windows is that something somewhere is hardcoded to represent some kind of per-CPU state as bits in machine word. Having some kind of hypervisor as an additional layer will not help with that.
- anonsivalley652 7y agoI'm waiting to see if/when EPYC Milan are released for price cuts to Rome. I already have an SP3 board and dual-CPU + VRM watercooling block. Some other bits on order are delayed because of Coronavirus, which is fine because I'd rather people be safe than fill orders for material stuff.
- ekianjo 7y agoMmm, nothing about performance on Linux? That's lacking.
- michaellarabel 7y agoLinux data here - https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=3990x-threadripper-linux&num=1 https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=3990x-th...
- friedman23 7y agoI feel an intense desire to learn high performance computing to take advantage of this thing.
- melling 7y agoWithin 5 to 7 years, it’ll be an under $500 part, and no longer just for high-performance computing. 32 cores will be half that in price. What computer language will be using to take advantage of that?
- friedman23 7y agoelixir, golang, java, c++ I'm relearning c++ right now just because I am building a poker solver for a toy project. You are right btw, if 32 core cpus become common because of a race to the bottom in prices I imagine there will be a massive increase in demand for programmers with the experience to program massively parallel systems. edit: and rust :)
- solotronics 7y agoeven python with asyncio and multithreading / multiprocessing
- armitron 7y agoPython with asyncio and multithreading doesn't take good advantage of multiple cores due to the global interpreter lock. With multiprocessing, one pays big costs in IPC. Python is not at all suitable today for parallelism. Which is one reason why languages like Go and Elixir are gaining so much traction.
- no_wizard 7y agoThey’re actively working on a neat angle at solving this problem via much cleaner IPC through spawning sub interpreters https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0554/ https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0554/ This just may be the way forward in the Python ecosystem
- ehonda 7y agoSay you created 32 dual vcore VMs with this, each with 2GB of RAM. How would they perform simultaneously together, vs a separate dual core PC (like a core2duo)? I don't know very much about the performance differences or if its even possible to compare such a thing.
- kadoban 7y agoProbably not near as well, if they're all actually doing anything. You'd hit bottlenecks moving data around, the bus used to fetch memory isn't 32 times as wide, and the memory isn't 32 times as fast, same with other resources. You could in practice run quite a few VMs before you'd run into trouble, especially if most of them are idle at any given point.
- AstralStorm 7y agoIt's still much faster than any Core 2. It's faster than 2 cores of Sandy Bridge on my older 2950x, so I'd expect 39z0x to be even faster, probably beating older Skylake.
- kadoban 7y agoYeah, I'm sure it's going to depend a lot on workload. If each one is in some crazy tight loop, CPU bound without using much working set of memory at all, it should be faster. Or more realistically if they're usual VMs and idle the vast majority of the time, that should be faster too.
- anon73044 7y agoThat's some data I'd love to see. 32 1u servers all connected with fiber or 10gig vs 32 VMs on the same host vs 32 k8s pods on the same node. I'm wondering if the same test would scale from 4 hosts/VMs/pods I don't even think there's a benchmark out there for such a test.
- ajross 7y agoThe VMs, in addition to dealing with the normal VM overhead we all already understand, would have much lower (like an order of magnitude) bandwidth to main memory and a similarly smaller share of L3 cache, in both cases because the resources are shared across all 32 devices. So the answer to the question depends heavily on how cache-resident the problem you are throwing at them is. They'd do great mining bitcoin and be a total disaster as memcached hosts. More typical workloads will be somewhere in the middle.
- batmansmk 7y agoWith 128 threads, this CPU will even be able to beat some GPUs on a few parallel tasks. Like Cinebench.
- randyzwitch 7y agoI have the 3970X and use it with Ubuntu. It's fun to have a lot of cores, but in the beginning it's highlighted some areas where open-source programs aren't assuming you're going to use that many cores (similar to what they talk about for Windows). So you see OOM errors with make, see program crashes from defaults being too low (such as creating too many Postgres connections), things like that. Not taking away from those developers, just sharing my experience. When you do get something that works really well (the newest version of Julia makes it easy to write multithreaded code), it's hilarious running htop and seeing 64 threads of green running.
- clSTophEjUdRanu 7y agoThat is definitely not the CPUs problem to worry about. Operating systems need to catch up.
- randyzwitch 7y agoYes, that was generally my point. Even if available code already took advantage of multiple cores, my experience has shown that currently these chips bring out some latent assumptions on what hardware the code will be running on (whether that's OOM or UX or whatever)
- rbanffy 7y agoThat's why we have things like Rust - so we can write multi-threaded apps without shooting ourselves on the foot.
- zeotroph 7y ago> htop / 64 threads It sure is fun to see the entire top half of htop being taken up by individual CPU bars, but this is another program whose assumptions have been overtaken by the current silicon: At some point it is not that helpful anymore and makes looking at the processes themselves harder. Sadly the development of htop seems to have stalled, patches/PRs for that and many other issues remain unmerged and unanswered.
- 7y ago
- frabert 7y agoWow, we're getting close to the amount of cores/threads that Xeon Phis boasted, but with actual per-core performance. And on an (almost) mainstream platform!
- LarryDarrell 7y agoSuddenly I feel like a wimp with my TR 1950X.
- yellowapple 7y agoRight? I feel like it's the 90's all over again and I'm loving every bit of it.
- zozbot234 7y agoExcept that in the 90's you didn't have hardware from 15 years prior that was still generally usable for baseline tasks. Nobody was running Linux on their old ZX Spectrums or Commodore PET's! In fact, running an up-to-date Linux with mainstream features (GUI) was only for relatively high-class hardware.
- yellowapple 7y agoUnfortunately, I'd be hesitant to call a whole lot of hardware from 15 years ago "generally usable for baseline tasks", either. Even running just a web browser, a 2005-era machine is gonna struggle quite a bit on modern websites with a modern browser and underlying OS.
- bitL 7y agoAnandTech mentions 512GB RAM limit for 3990X - that would mean there are 64GB ECC UDIMM modules somewhere? All I could find were rare 32GB UDIMM modules at best, capping RAM to 256GB instead...
- lunixbochs 7y agoLRDIMM modules go up to at least 128GB.
- bitL 7y agoTRX40 doesn't support LRDIMMs, only UDIMMs.
- binarycrusader 7y agoThey're supposed to be coming to market "soon", but 32GB is the largest you can generally get right now as far as I can tell. However, what I really care about right now is higher speed ECC UDIMMs. It's really hard to get ECC UDIMMs at speeds higher than the JEDEC standard.
- drewg123 7y agoWere these configured for NUMA, or non-NUMA? I've not gotten my hands on a TR3. But rome gives you the option of 1, 2 or 3 Nodes Per Socket. Various benchmarks (eg, stream) published by vendors such as Dell show better performance in 4NPS mode. My own testing on Netflix workloads shows a similar speedup. I run my dekstop (2990WX) in numa mode, exposing the real topology to the scheduler, and I find that it seems to help compilation times.
- stagger87 7y agoThe issues surrounding NUMA are addressed extensively in the article.
- drewg123 7y agoNo, not really. They're discussing windows "processor groups" which seem to be arbitrarily created for chips with 64 or more SMT threads. That's why i'm wondering if 2-NPS or 4-NPS is available with TR3, and what impact it would have.
- bitL 7y agoIn general, in Linux it's best to run TR1 and TR2 in NUMA mode. Not sure about TR3.
- ksec 7y agoWhile most of us nerds may be geeking out at the 64 Core CPU all running 3.4Ghz+ priced at $4K and beating the Intel $20K counterpart [0], The reality is that the market for these seems to be very small. If we look at recent AMD [1] and Intel [2] results, it is clear AMD isn't gaining much. 70% of the PC market are Laptops, and majority of the 30% Desktop market are Business uses which generally prefer Intel. The Server market is extremely slow because of long term contract and other reason. I just wish they could better market themselves to CIO / CTO / CEO rather than prosumer, enthusiast market. Or they could try and convince Apple to use it on Mac, I am very certain the rest will follow. [0] https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=3990x-threadripper-linux&num=1 https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=3990x-th... [1] https://www.anandtech.com/show/15445/amds-fy2019-financial-report https://www.anandtech.com/show/15445/amds-fy2019-financial-r... [2] https://www.anandtech.com/show/15433/intel-q4-fy-2019-results-record-quarter-record-year https://www.anandtech.com/show/15433/intel-q4-fy-2019-result...
- ckastner 7y ago> If we look at recent AMD [1] and Intel [2] results, it is clear AMD isn't gaining much. This surprised me as well, but your explanation makes sense. I'm curious as to how the new Ryzen 4000s will affect laptop market share. Because offering 8C/16T at 15W is just terrific.
- bitL 7y agoIf they stuff them only into laptops with 8GB RAM, 1080p displays and no Thunderbolt, it won't change much either (see Lenovo).
- ksec 7y agoHP, Dell, Lenovo, Apple, ASUS, just these 5 vendor alone represent 70%+ of the market. And if you start adding smaller ( Comparatively Speaking in unit shipment ) brands Such as Samsung, Microsoft, Sony, Acer, Toshiba, you are now edging close to 90% of the Market. Those top 5 vendors has long term relationship with Intel. So their AMD offering seems to be very lacking or purely as a play to have more bargaining power with Intel. Not to mention Intel's consumer marketing is far better than AMD. Unless consumer ( not us, but average consumer ) reacts favourably, I dont think it will make much of a difference in terms of volume and unit shipment. It might do well in Gaming Laptop, but it seems most gamers prefer Nvidia.
- fulafel 7y agoWhy are they testing this on Windows?
- rbanffy 7y agoThe 8 memory channels of the EPYC against the 4 of the Threadripper that the article mentions is not just about how much memory you can install, but memory bandwidth. An L3 cache miss should be roughly twice as expensive on the desktop platform than on the server one.
- dana321 7y agoThis, to me is a turning point. Its all about cores from now on. Well, it has been for the last 10 years, but things are going to get silly from now on. What happened with graphics cores will happen with CPUs now. https://gist.github.com/cavinsmith/ed92fee35d44ef91e09eaa8775e3284e https://gist.github.com/cavinsmith/ed92fee35d44ef91e09eaa877...