4 ms·
I think the title is misleading - it is not a server performance comparison, it is just a comparison on a single application using a single kind of workload on
by dis-sys 4y ago
I think the title is misleading - it is not a server performance comparison, it is just a comparison on a single application using a single kind of workload on a fixed dual core setup.
It also lacks basic insights into the results, e.g., when both AWS and GCP are using ARM's Neoverse V1 design, why those two servers are having such significant performance gap? Maybe it was just caused by some bad software configuration in the stack which can void all relevant results?
When there are up to 64 cores available, why only 2 cores were used? Surely other 62 cores are relevant, right?
- cherioo 4y agoAWS c7g uses V1 design; GCP and Azure are N1.
- adrian_b 4y agoOnly Amazon, i.e. AWS uses Neoverse V1. Google uses Neoverse N1. Neoverse N1 is a much older and slower CPU, derived from Cortex-A76. Neoverse V1 has a performance similar to Cortex-X1, but it also implements SVE (vector extension), which allows improved performance for floating-point applications. The big ARM cores from the Cortex-X and Neoverse V series have more execution units, up to a double number, in comparison with the medium-size ARM cores from the Cortex-A and Neoverse N series. For applications without much floating-point or large integer computations (where the Intel/AMD CPUs are the best), the Cortex-A/Neoverse N cores have a performance intermediate between a thread and a core of the Intel/AMD CPUs, so you need an 128-core Neoverse N CPU to beat a 64-core AMD CPU (which has 128 threads). For the same kind of applications, the Neoverse V cores have a performance similar to (slightly older) Intel/AMD cores, so a 64-core Neoverse V CPU can match a (previous generation) 64-core AMD CPU.
- dis-sys 4y agoAh, good to know that, thanks a lot!