3 ms·

Good point. Indeed, for DB-only workloads the Xeon appears to be better: https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=intel-xeon-8380-linux&num=6 https:/

Good point. Indeed, for DB-only workloads the Xeon appears to be better: https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=intel-xeon-8380-linux&num=6 https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=intel-xe... Still, this doesn’t mean Epyc is only good for HPC, e.g. this is some enterprise Java-based benchmark where it’s substantially faster: https://www.anandtech.com/show/16594/intel-3rd-gen-xeon-scalable-review/9 https://www.anandtech.com/show/16594/intel-3rd-gen-xeon-scal... BTW, on my job I don’t do databases, but I do quite a lot of HPC stuff.

dragontamer 5y ago
Add to the fact that MariaDB doesn't have AVX512 instructions used yet, and you can see that Intel's unified L3 cache is just better for database-like workloads than AMD's split L3 cache. x265 is more of an AVX512 test scenario, which the Xeon 40-core also is demonstrating proficiency at over and above the EPYC 64 core. ------------ I'm mostly impressed at how well the split "chiplet" strategy is doing in all the other benchmarks however. The AMD "I/O die" is clearly a winner. Its probably not a latency winner, but it is efficiently giving the memory bandwidth and distributing it to all of the dies.