• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

AMD announce EPYC

muziqaz said:
And its so easy for you guys to wish AMD to release twice the cores for less money, but we need strong AMD with more money pumped in R&D, not the one which is selling their chips for peanuts just to satisfy few select people, just to prove that hey they can. Market woke up already, thanks to Ryzen.
Click to expand...

Why is £500 peanuts? It's called marketing, and a show of force it makes life difficult for anyone to choose the competition if you have every base covered and then some. I'm pretty sure that brand awareness and word association is something that AMD would like when people say, fastest CPU for gaming, best CPU for productivity, best longevity, and high end enthusiast.

Also £500 16c is not twice the money, they sell 8c for less than £200... So yes.
 
muziqaz said:
Brand awareness and clogging the market with pointless SKUs are two different things ;)
Click to expand...

Not sure what the winky smily is for? You missed the point entirety, the inability for the most direct competition to respond with any SKU that compares gives them further marketing ability regardless of the size of the market. Intel only released an 8 core desktop part to stop AMD having 'the most cores' so they can have 'the best' in all market segments, but they would be unable to react to anything higher.

Why did AMD release TR2 32 core CPU's on the HEDT platform, and why are they priced so aggressively?
 
muziqaz said:
Zen+ tops out at 3600Mhz RAM, and is extremely sensitive to ram speeds and latency. So you are adding 600mhz more for double the cores? Don't think it will be enough.


Winky face is to remind that we are discussing pointless topic in the wrong thread. Intel already cannot price/perf match what AMD has now on the market, in other words, AMD already is setting the market ablaze. 8core Zen 2 based cpu which clocks similarly to Intels offerings would reinforce the fire. You guys think that AMD will lose the edge against Intel if they do not release 16 core AM4 cpu. I'm done with this discussion, since some of you think that Intel is in this great position to counter AMD. If you think AMD could release 4.5ghz 32 thread CPU on dual channel interface with normal sized wraith cooler for reasonable mainstream money to the market which is seriously lack software support for so many threads, you are seriously tripping, and its not even funny anymore :/
Click to expand...

See you later then.

But since you are so utterly convinced you are right, you haven't considered that the I/O is removed from the CPU dies, that they may very well be a L4 cache carried over to the standard desktop part also. You seem to have completely forgotten, or are just ignorant of the fact that currently EPYC is 32 cores with 8-channels, and that is going to 64 cores with 8-channels still. That is a total of 8 cores per channel, exactly the same as the AM4 version would end up, so do you really think they are going to starve a data centre grade CPU of memory bandwidth, no they won't. ;)
 
What I find interesting is that the Intel Cascade Lake 48-core CPU's are supposed to have no Hyper-threading due to package temperature constraints, so that leak certainly seems to be odd, possibly from a very early sample of the part which had it included. So if they re-run the test on production silicon it would be 96 threads vs. 256. :)
 
4K8KW10 said:
AMD should be more aggressive and push the corporate types and bean counters to use EPYCs now not later.
Click to expand...

How exactly do you propose AMD push these types of businesses/governments? Upgrade cycles come around when they come around, new infrastructure projects don't just happen over night and take months or years of planning, depending on the size and type of project.

It is also hard to sell a current product when your up and coming one makes it look bad value, Rome with up to 64 cores, lower power usage, and higher clock speeds and newly integrated technologies like PCI-E 4.0 mean that upgrading to current generation EPYC would be a poor move. Market share will increase naturally over the next 12-18 months once EPYC gets a foot hold in the market and the platform has been around a bit longer to prove itself above that of the Intel equivalents.
 
Here's some exclusive info to be found nowhere else, lets see how quickly some one like WCCF pick it up and don't credit me. ;)

  • EPYC ROME 64-CORE 7702 3.35GHZ/SKT SP3 256MB CACHE 200W - P/N: 100-000000038
    EPYC ROME 8-CORE 7262 3.4GHZ/SKT SP3 64MB CACHE 155W - P/N: 100-000000041
    EPYC ROME 16-CORE 7302 3.3GHZ/SKT SP3 128MB CACHE 155W - P/N: 100-000000043
    EPYC ROME 32-CORE 7502P 3.35GHZ/SKT SP3 128MB CACHE 180W - P/N: 100-000000045
    EPYC ROME 24-CORE 7402 3.35GHZ/SKT SP3 128MB CACHE 180W - P/N: 100-000000046
    EPYC ROME 64-CORE 7702P 3.35GHZ/SKT SP3 256MB CACHE 200W - P/N: 100-000000047
    EPYC ROME 24-CORE 7402P 3.35GHZ/SKT SP3 128MB CACHE 180W - P/N: 100-000000048
    EPYC ROME 16-CORE 7302P 3.3GHZ/SKT SP3 128MB CACHE 155W - P/N: 100-000000049
    EPYC ROME 64-CORE 7742 3.4GHZ/SKT SP3 256MB CACHE 225W - P/N: 100-000000053
    EPYC ROME 32-CORE 7502 3.35GHZ/SKT SP3 128MB CACHE 180W - P/N: 100-000000054
    EPYC ROME 32-CORE 7452 3.35GHZ/SKT SP3 128MB CACHE 155W - P/N: 100-000000057
    EPYC ROME 48-CORE 7642 3.4GHZ/SKT SP3 192MB CACHE 225W - P/N: 100-000000074
    EPYC ROME 32-CORE 7542 3.4GHZ/SKT SP3 128MB CACHE 225W - P/N: 100-000000075
    EPYC ROME 48-CORE 7552 3.35GHZ/SKT SP3 192MB CACHE 200W - P/N: 100-000000076
    EPYC ROME 24-CORE 7352 3.2GHZ/SKT SP3 128MB CACHE 155W - P/N: 100-000000077
    EPYC ROME 16-CORE 7282 3.2GHZ/SKT SP3 64MB CACHE 120W - P/N: 100-000000078
    EPYC ROME 12-CORE 7272 3.2GHZ/SKT SP3 64MB CACHE 120W - P/N: 100-000000079
    EPYC ROME 8-CORE 7252 3.2GHZ/SKT SP3 64MB CACHE 120W - P/N: 100-000000080
    EPYC ROME 8-CORE 7252P 3.2GHZ/SKT SP3 32MB CACHE 120W - P/N: 100-000000081

What's new you ask? The all important clock speeds which were missing before. If any one has an Anandtech account, can you please post a link in this https://forums.anandtech.com/threads/64-core-epyc-rome-（zen2）architecture-overview？.2554453/page-33 thread please?

Oh they are in part number order, not core count or anything sensible like that. :)
 
Vince said:
Well as soon as HP let me buy 3 of these I'll let you know. I've got my normal disti as well as a couple of others on the case. Mind you they have all been fighting over who registered interest with hp first so I might end up just losing the will to live before it's even here. The plan is to plug these into some new fiber channel switches alongside my 6500 eva / 4500 Store Once Devices and the current hp dl380 G9 servers and crack on with some migrations.

A little birdy told me recently that you can now vmotion Intel to amd so we shall see if that's true or not.
Click to expand...

Nice and easy for you hopefully, and I think you'll get them pretty soon from what I'm being told about stock (not HP mind you). I only deal with designing and testing the machines that these go in, hence why I have the info, I don't do much with migration and installation since that's not my forte.

The biggest surprise for me is the 3.4GHz 64-core at only 225w, that works out at 3.5w per core! Truly EPYC. :)
 
Vince said:
You really cant argue with that. I'm loving the selection to be honest. I mean I'm replacing 3x 24 thread systems 2x 6c/12t xeons with 192gb of memory each and I'm running out of resources so I'm thinking hopefully there is a 32/64 chip or bigger in there that with the required memory, plus other kit I'll need all comes in at less than something like 80k. Let's see what the pricing looks like. The last server I bought (a g9 again stacked with 2tb local storage) was something like 10k so fingers crossed these arent stupid and I've budgeted enough.
Click to expand...

Well at least DRAM prices on on your side presently, do you spec RAM per core? I doubt the prices will be stupid, but again all depends on if HP try to fleece you elsewhere in the system, if you are going 1P then it should keep the price down quite a bit.
 
I'm wondering whether they will add a 7371 replacement, that is a 200w part with 3.1GHz base, 3.6GHz all-core or 3.8GHz 8-core boost. I'd hope they can do 3.3GHz, with a 4.0GHz all-core, and 4.2GHz 8-core for the same power.
 
Vince said:
I can't imagine what 40tb of data a second looks like.. How do you process that kind of volume?
Click to expand...

Most I've had to deal with is shoving 14,000 MB/s so ~112Gb/s into a single system and that was only in bursts of 15 secs to 10 minutes max. Although I am hoping to get some of the Mellanox 200Gbs cards to test out over the next year, along with some switch gear (obviously.

I wonder what sort of storage solution they are using.
 
ChrisD. said:
I’d expect a lot of it is done in memory. Storage can’t keep up with those numbers!
Click to expand...

Indeed, I've used dedicated devices that communicate directly into the PCI-E bus, and then to a RAM disk and that is committed to disk at a slower speed.

They must have some serious kit to divvy up 40Tbs though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom