AMD's EPYC CPU'S with Benchmarks & Pricing!

[Misanthrope]

5 hours ago, leadeater said:

Having more lanes helps motherboard manufactures design simpler and cheaper boards with less PCIe switching and caveats on how slots are populated, in the case of PCIe lanes more is better even if you can't utilize the full bandwidth. 

 

Ask the X299 board partners about PCIe lane configuration issues 

Precisely: Even if the target audience are professionals you still don't want this mess to happen:

 

Spoiler

 

 

[captain cactus]

Can I just say that a 16c32t Epyc starts at like $650-$700?

 

This bodes really well for Threadripper pricing. Like, REALLY well.

[Taf the Ghost]

4 minutes ago, lots of unexplainable lag said:

Can I just say that a 16c32t Epyc starts at like $650-$700?

 

This bodes really well for Threadripper pricing. Like, REALLY well.

I don't think Threadripper is going to be quite that low.  There's still market segment interactions to deal with.

 

http://ark.intel.com/products/92986/Intel-Xeon-Processor-E5-2620-v4-20M-Cache-2_10-GHz

 

Is roughly the part they were comparing the relevant part against, which are normally used in 2x configurations.  The corresponding X99 part was the 6900k.  So Desktop was more.  But the lowest speed 16c at $849 could be very real.

[VanayadGaming]

11 hours ago, DXMember said:

take 8 kits of that per CPU on two CPUs on motherboard and you get 2TB - it checks out

2 CPUs (16 channel) support up to 4tb btw  But considering each CPU has 16 slots, that's 32 in total ... so 128gb/stick should be fine.

[You_are_a_cunt]

I need dis... for a friend.

 

@manikyath time to upgrade Stacy(?) (or at least that's what I remember you calling your server o,.,o)

[samcool55]

AMD: it supports up to 2TB ram

Chrome: HMB

 

Linus should get one of these and see if he can fill up the RAM with his daily chrome browser useage

[leadeater]

13 minutes ago, VanayadGaming said:

2 CPUs (16 channel) support up to 4tb btw  so there has to be a 256 gb stick for this to work

You can do it with 128GB modules, 16 channels isn't 16 ram slots. The Supermicro motherboards that support 4TB of ram have 32 ram slots.

[VanayadGaming]

30 minutes ago, leadeater said:

You can do it with 128GB modules, 16 channels isn't 16 ram slots. The Supermicro motherboards that support 4TB of ram have 32 ram slots.

yup, edited my post. Misread that 16 slots sorry.

[THE_maverick]

12 hours ago, PCGuy_5960 said:

>Server CPUs

>Best for your wallet

Wut? Who buys 32 core CPUs for desktop use?

*raises hand* those of us that use our computers for real WORK 

[suicidalfranco]

this makes me excited for threadripper

[TheRandomness]

12 hours ago, AnonymousGuy said:

Good as place as any to insert: One of the limitations of Epyc is it doesn't support 4S or 8S configurations.

But what servers actually need 4 or 8 sockets when you already have 4 Ryzen 7 CPUs per.. well, CPU?

[Valentyn]

6 hours ago, Jito463 said:

Intel is still doing that?  I remember when that all transpired.  It had nothing to do with optimizations for Intel processors, and everything to do with Intel crippling any CPU that didn't respond with "Intel (R)" (or something to that affect).  If that's true, why does anyone still use the Intel compiler?

Look at Anandtech's Office Chromium compile test in the 7900X review. You can pick the Intel compiler with a few clicks, and the performance there shows Ryzen 1800X below the Ivy-bridge 6 core.

In fact the 1600X and 1800X are essentially identical in that test.

Yet when similar tests are run using GCC in Linux Ryzen is ahead of the 5960X, blowing passed the intel 6 cores.

 

The most common used compilers are GCC, and MSVC, but SPECint doesn't really support GCC, nor allow GCC results to be published.

Intel's compiler also 'cracked" the 462.libquantum part of the CINT2006 suite, which leads to hugely inflated SPEC scores, nowhere to been seen on non-spec-benchmark code.A wise choice of AMD to use the GCC compiler which reflects real world usage.

 

Intel's compiler is "optimised" for the test, giving inflated scores, compared to real world results.

 

One also needs to put some logic into this, some people here and elsewhere actually believe Microsoft Azure, Baidu, 1&1, HP and other partners signed multi-million dollar contracts and partner ships without apparently thoroughly testing Epyc against Intel's offerings for their specific needs.

[The Benjamins]

5 hours ago, lots of unexplainable lag said:

Can I just say that a 16c32t Epyc starts at like $650-$700?

 

This bodes really well for Threadripper pricing. Like, REALLY well.

The single socket version is $750 the 2 socket versions start at $650.

 

and remember their is 4 dies on Epyc and 2 on ThreadRipper

 

[tom_w141]

Hopefully AMD gain a nice chunk of the big money and the profits to match. Their yield on these will be very high because the zen architecture is in general, so profit per chip must be tasty. Which in turn gives them more R&D money.

[leadeater]

4 hours ago, TheRandomness said:

But what servers actually need 4 or 8 sockets when you already have 4 Ryzen 7 CPUs per.. well, CPU?

~80% of the server market is also 2 socket systems so gunning for 4, 6, or 8 socket market segment would likely lead to a net loss of investment so it's better to ignore it for now.

[VanayadGaming]

17 minutes ago, leadeater said:

~80% of the server market is also 2 socket systems so gunning for 4, 6, or 8 socket market segment would likely lead to a net loss of investment so it's better to ignore it for now.

Also considering the number of cores that will be available now for 2 sockets... those will easily eat from the 4 socket server market.

[PCGuy_5960]

14 hours ago, Terodius said:

They'll get ripped to shreds. Even Intel's 9000 Dollar Xeon has only 24 cores. EPYC is supposed to come in at around 5000 for its top-end chip with 8 cores more than that and much better memory and PCIe support.

How can you be so sure? Intel hasn't even announced Skylake Xeons yet

[leadeater]

Just now, PCGuy_5960 said:

How can you be so sure? Intel hasn't even announced Skylake Xeons yet

You need to take in to account the fantasy factor when comparing CPUs, if you add that in to the performance equation AMD will win in every benchmark.

[tom_w141]

2 minutes ago, PCGuy_5960 said:

How can you be so sure? Intel hasn't even announced Skylake Xeons yet

Even if they match or exceed performance it will need to be by a lot >40% because Intel will price the skylake Xeons higher. Value might not matter to some X299 buyers but price/performance and TDP matter to server business. We know how thirsty X299 is, I can only Imagine the TDP of Skylake Xeons.

[leadeater]

Just now, tom_w141 said:

Even if they match or exceed performance it will need to be by a lot >40% because Intel will price the skylake Xeons higher. Value might not matter to some X299 buyers but price/performance and TDP matter to server business. We know how thirsty X299 is, I can only Imagine the TDP of Skylake Xeons.

Here's a tip, I have it on very good authority directly from HPE that Intel are raising Xeon prices across the board by 30%. I was told this before this Eypc announcement, 2 weeks ago now I think so you can actually go back to all the AMD slides where they price compare and add that 30% to Intel.

 

This price increase might be readjusted now or maybe not but as far as HPE in concerned it's happening and they have already prepared their entire Gen 10 generation around that and extended sales life of Gen 9.

[done12many2]

5 minutes ago, leadeater said:

You need to take in to account the fantasy factor when comparing CPUs, if you add that in to the performance equation AMD will win in every benchmark.

 

I don't care if you wear blue or red Fruit of the Looms, that was some funny shit.  

[PCGuy_5960]

Just now, tom_w141 said:

Even if they match or exceed performance it will need to be by a lot >40% because Intel will price the skylake Xeons higher. Value might not matter to some X299 buyers but price/performance and TDP matter to server business. We know how thirsty X299 is, I can only Imagine the TDP of Skylake Xeons.

I don't think that most companies buying server CPUs care about price/performance  Performance and performance per watt are way more important. And TDP won't be that high, remember, Skylake Xeons won't be clocked higher than 3GHz

[tom_w141]

3 minutes ago, PCGuy_5960 said:

I don't think that most companies buying server CPUs care about price/performance  Performance and performance per watt are way more important. And TDP won't be that high, remember, Skylake Xeons won't be clocked higher than 3GHz

Guess we have to wait and see. Coming soon tm isn't enough, Intel need to release their competitor before people start looking at Eypc.

 

There is no waiting in tech if you need to build you build. You look at what is best on the day and you buy. The current Xeons don't win on price or performance so Intel need to hurry up and knee jerk faster to get their product out  Though I think they are still seeing a doctor after they knee jerked so hard to Threadripper they broke their leg.

[PCGuy_5960]

2 minutes ago, tom_w141 said:

There is no waiting in tech if you need to build you build. You look at what is best on the day and you buy. The current Xeons don't win on price or performance so Intel need to hurry up and knee jerk faster to get their product out  Though I think they are still seeing a doctor after they knee jerked so hard to Threadripper they broke their leg.

Well, it's a server platform, so waiting is preferable to a rushed launch

[tom_w141]

9 minutes ago, PCGuy_5960 said:

Well, it's a server platform, so waiting is preferable to a rushed launch

I meant the builder (customer) won't wait.

 

Also yes to a degree but there is also a good reason to not take too long to react. Every day they don't react they risk losing more market share.