3 ms·
I assume for intel, they make more server CPUs per year than the entirety of AMDs output.
by bushbaba 6y ago
I assume for intel, they make more server CPUs per year than the entirety of AMDs output.
- ryan_j_naughton 6y agoThere is a slow but seismic shift to AMD within data centers right now.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- mhh__ 6y agoThey still have something like 40% to go to even reach parity with Intel though
- aoeusnth1 6y agoIt’s harder to go from 0.1% to 10% than it is to go from 10% to 50%.
- bushbaba 6y agoYes and no. It’s harder to convince folks to switch going from 0.1% to 10%. But you are also talking about winning the low hanging fruits. once you get those easy wins the rest take a bit to chip away at. while initial growth was 100x, that pace is going to slow down as marketshare increases.
- csunbird 6y agoWhy not ARM? ARM is now penetrating the consumer development devices (M1), why not mirror that in the servers as well?
- dTal 6y agoBecause M1s are light years ahead of anything else, and you can't buy M1s outside of a Mac.
- bayindirh 6y agoIntel has a momentum and some cult following, but they're no match for AMD in certain aspects like PCI lanes, memory channels, and some types of computation which favors AMD's architecture. Day by day, more data centers get AMD systems by choice or by requirement (Oh, you want 8xA100 nVidia made modules with maximum performance. You need an AMD CPU since it has more PCI lanes, for example). You don't see much AMD server CPUs around because first generation and most of the second generation has completely bought by FAANG, Dropbox, et al. As the productions ramps up with newer generation, we can buy the overflowing parts after most of the production is gobbled up by these buyers.
- zepmck 6y agoIn terms of PCI lanes efficiency, there is no competition between Intel and AMD. Intel is much ahead wrt AMD. Don't not be impressed about number of lanes available on the board.
- bayindirh 6y ago> Don't not be impressed about number of lanes available on the board. When you configure the system full-out with GPUs & HBAs, the number of lanes becomes a matter of necessity rather than a spec which you drool over. A PCIe lane is a PCIe lane. Its capacity, latency and speed is fixed, and you need these with minimum number of PCIe switches to saturate the devices and servers you have, at least in our scenario.
- cptskippy 6y agoI can only assume you're referring to Intel's Rocket Lake storage demonstration they tweeted out. This was using PCMark 10's Quick Storage Benchmark which is more CPU bound than anything else. All of the other benchmarks in the PCMark test suite push the bottleneck down to the storage device. One would think Intel might want to build a storage array that could stress the PCIe lanes but then that might show an entirely different picture than the one Intel is portraying.
- COGlory 6y agoWhat is PCI lane efficiency? I thought they were fixed speed and bandwidth.