• Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

AMD Debuts New 12- and 16-Core Opteron 6300 Series Processors

Joined
Dec 6, 2011
Messages
4,784 (1.06/day)
Location
Still on the East Side
AMD today announced the immediate availability of its new 12- and 16-core AMD Opteron 6300 Series server processors, code named "Warsaw." Designed for enterprise workloads, the new AMD Opteron 6300 Series processors feature the "Piledriver" core and are fully socket and software compatible with the existing AMD Opteron 6300 Series. The power efficiency and cost effectiveness of the new products are ideal for the AMD Open 3.0 Open Compute Platform - the industry's most cost effective Open Compute platform.

Driven by customers' requests, the new AMD Opteron 6338P (12 core) and 6370P (16 core) processors are optimized to handle the heavily virtualized workloads found in enterprise environments, including the more complex compute needs of data analysis, xSQL and traditional databases, at optimal performance per-watt, per-dollar.





"With the continued move to virtualized environments for more efficient server utilization, more and more workloads are limited by memory capacity and I/O bandwidth," said Suresh Gopalakrishnan, corporate vice president and general manager, Server Business Unit, AMD. "The Opteron 6338P and 6370P processors are server CPUs optimized to deliver improved performance per-watt for virtualized private cloud deployments with less power and at lower cost points."

The new AMD Opteron 6338P and 6370P processors are available today through Penguin and Avnet system integrators and have been qualified for servers from Sugon and Supermicro at a starting price of $377 and $598, respectively. More information can be found on AMD's website.



View at TechPowerUp Main Site
 
Joined
Oct 29, 2012
Messages
1,926 (0.46/day)
Location
UK
System Name TITAN Slayer / CPUCannon / MassFX
Processor i7 5960X @ 4.6Ghz / i7 3960x @5.0Ghz / FX6350 @ 4.?Ghz
Motherboard Rampage V Extreme / Rampage IV Extreme / MSI 970 Gaming
Cooling Phanteks PHTC14PE 2.5K 145mm TRs / Custom waterloop / Phanteks PHTC14PE + 3K 140mm Noctuas
Memory Crucial 2666 11-13-13-25 1.45V / G.skill RipjawsX 2400 10-12-12-34 1.7V / Crucial 2133 9-9-9-27 1.7V
Video Card(s) 3 Fury X in CF / R9 Fury 3840 cores 1145/570 1.3V / Nothing ATM
Storage 500GB Crucial SSD and 3TB WD Black / WD 1TB Black(OS) + WD 3TB Green / WD 1TB Blue
Display(s) LG 29UM67 80Hz/Asus mx299q 2560x1080 @ 84Hz / Asus VX239 1920x1080 @60hz
Case Dismatech easy v3.0 / Xigmatek Alfar (Open side panel)
Audio Device(s) M-audio M-track / realtek ALC 1150
Power Supply EVGA G2 1600W / CoolerMaster V1000 / Seasonic 620 M12-II
Mouse Mouse in review process/Razer Naga Epic 2011/Razer Naga 2014
Keyboard Keyboard in review process / Razer Blackwidow Ultimate 2014/Razer Blackwidow Ultimate 2011
Software Windows 7 Ultimate / Windows 7 ultimate / Windows 7 ultimate
Benchmark Scores cinebench 15.41 3960x @ 5.3ghz Wprime32m 3.352 3960x @ 5.25ghz Super PI 32m: 6m 42s 472ms @5.25ghz
If there were desktop boards for these I'd be all over the 12 core variant.
 
Joined
Jul 13, 2010
Messages
60 (0.01/day)
Location
Slovakia
System Name Pap1er
Processor AMD Ryzen 5 2600 @ 4000 MHz
Motherboard MSI B450 GAMING PRO CARBON AC
Cooling ARCTIC Freezer 33 eSport One - Red
Memory Kingston HyperX Predator DDR4 3333MHz CL16
Video Card(s) Sapphire PULSE RX VEGA 56
Storage WD Blue SN500 NVMe 250GB / WD20EURS @ 2TB
Display(s) LG 29UC88 Curved UltraWide Monitor
Case Corsair 230T Graphite Series - Orange
Audio Device(s) OnBoard
Power Supply Corsair CX750M
Mouse Creative Sound BlasterX Siege M04 Gaming mouse
Software Windows 10 Pro x64
If there were desktop boards for these I'd be all over the 12 core variant.

I would also like to see desktop board for these meat grinders
 
Joined
Oct 29, 2012
Messages
1,926 (0.46/day)
Location
UK
System Name TITAN Slayer / CPUCannon / MassFX
Processor i7 5960X @ 4.6Ghz / i7 3960x @5.0Ghz / FX6350 @ 4.?Ghz
Motherboard Rampage V Extreme / Rampage IV Extreme / MSI 970 Gaming
Cooling Phanteks PHTC14PE 2.5K 145mm TRs / Custom waterloop / Phanteks PHTC14PE + 3K 140mm Noctuas
Memory Crucial 2666 11-13-13-25 1.45V / G.skill RipjawsX 2400 10-12-12-34 1.7V / Crucial 2133 9-9-9-27 1.7V
Video Card(s) 3 Fury X in CF / R9 Fury 3840 cores 1145/570 1.3V / Nothing ATM
Storage 500GB Crucial SSD and 3TB WD Black / WD 1TB Black(OS) + WD 3TB Green / WD 1TB Blue
Display(s) LG 29UM67 80Hz/Asus mx299q 2560x1080 @ 84Hz / Asus VX239 1920x1080 @60hz
Case Dismatech easy v3.0 / Xigmatek Alfar (Open side panel)
Audio Device(s) M-audio M-track / realtek ALC 1150
Power Supply EVGA G2 1600W / CoolerMaster V1000 / Seasonic 620 M12-II
Mouse Mouse in review process/Razer Naga Epic 2011/Razer Naga 2014
Keyboard Keyboard in review process / Razer Blackwidow Ultimate 2014/Razer Blackwidow Ultimate 2011
Software Windows 7 Ultimate / Windows 7 ultimate / Windows 7 ultimate
Benchmark Scores cinebench 15.41 3960x @ 5.3ghz Wprime32m 3.352 3960x @ 5.25ghz Super PI 32m: 6m 42s 472ms @5.25ghz
Not all that real.
More real than intel's 8 cores 16 threads. The 8 extra threads only appear in specific scenarios and in others they don't exist whereas AMD's 16 cores are always capable of doing 16 tasks simultaneously it just doesn't scale perfectly because 1 core will do 100% single core performance but 16 will only do around 1260% instead of semi perfect scaling like what intel has where 1 core does 100% and 8 cores do 799% and with hyper threading it maxes out at 1038% so in some scenarios(3D graphics rendering) the 2000$ 8 core intel will beat the 600$ 16 core AMD and the AMD will win in video encoding and similar dumb work loads like searching for stuff so the AMD is a better server CPU than the intel.
 
Joined
Feb 18, 2005
Messages
5,239 (0.75/day)
Location
Ikenai borderline!
System Name Firelance.
Processor Threadripper 3960X
Motherboard ROG Strix TRX40-E Gaming
Cooling IceGem 360 + 6x Arctic Cooling P12
Memory 8x 16GB Patriot Viper DDR4-3200 CL16
Video Card(s) MSI GeForce RTX 4060 Ti Ventus 2X OC
Storage 2TB WD SN850X (boot), 4TB Crucial P3 (data)
Display(s) 3x AOC Q32E2N (32" 2560x1440 75Hz)
Case Enthoo Pro II Server Edition (Closed Panel) + 6 fans
Power Supply Fractal Design Ion+ 2 Platinum 760W
Mouse Logitech G602
Keyboard Logitech G613
Software Windows 10 Professional x64
And, sadly, the Xeons will still beat the ever living crap out of these.
 
Joined
Oct 30, 2008
Messages
1,757 (0.31/day)
System Name Lailalo
Processor Ryzen 9 5900X Boosts to 4.95Ghz
Motherboard Asus TUF Gaming X570-Plus (WIFI
Cooling Noctua
Memory 32GB DDR4 3200 Corsair Vengeance
Video Card(s) XFX 7900XT 20GB
Storage Samsung 970 Pro Plus 1TB, Crucial 1TB MX500 SSD, Segate 3TB
Display(s) LG Ultrawide 29in @ 2560x1080
Case Coolermaster Storm Sniper
Power Supply XPG 1000W
Mouse G602
Keyboard G510s
Software Windows 10 Pro / Windows 10 Home
And, sadly, the Xeons will still beat the ever living crap out of these.

I dunno. In multithreading AMD was beating Intel. Xeons are another story but when it comes to price for the performance. That I'd be interested to see.
 
Joined
Mar 31, 2012
Messages
828 (0.19/day)
Location
NL
System Name SIGSEGV
Processor INTEL i7-7700K | AMD Ryzen 2700X
Motherboard QUANTA | ASUS Crosshair VII Hero
Cooling Air cooling 4 heatpipes | Corsair H115i | Noctua NF-A14 IndustrialPPC Fan 3000RPM
Memory Micron 16 Gb DDR4 2400 | GSkill Ripjaws 32Gb DDR4 3200 3400(OC) 14-14-14-34 @1.38v
Video Card(s) Nvidia 1060 6GB | Gigabyte 1080Ti Aorus
Storage 1TB 7200/256 SSD PCIE | ~ TB | 970 Evo
Display(s) 15,5" / 27"
Case Black & Grey | Phanteks P400S
Audio Device(s) Realtek
Power Supply Li Battery | Seasonic Focus Gold 750W
Mouse g402
Keyboard Leopold|Ducky
Software LinuxMint KDE |UBUNTU | Windows 10 PRO
Benchmark Scores i dont care about scores
And, sadly, the Xeons will still beat the ever living crap out of these.


Sadly, there is no opteron based server available in my country..
So i have no choice instead using (buying) xeon server and workstation for my lab which is very expensive..
That was very frustating..
 
Joined
Jan 20, 2014
Messages
299 (0.08/day)
System Name gamingPZ
Processor i7-6700k
Motherboard Asrock Z170M Pro4S
Cooling scythe mugen4
Memory 32GB ddr4 2400mhz crucial ballistix sport lt
Video Card(s) gigabyte GTX 1070 ti
Storage ssd - crucial MX500 1TB
Case silverstone sugo sg10
Power Supply Evga G2 650w
Software win10
soon there will be AMD marketing slides about +400% performance increase over "other competitors" 4 core CPUs :D
 
Joined
Apr 16, 2010
Messages
2,067 (0.41/day)
System Name The Stone that the Builders Refused / iJayo
Processor R5 1600/ R7 3700X
Motherboard Asrock AB350 Pro4 / Asus Rog Strix B450-F gaming
Cooling Cryorig M9 / Noctua NH-D14
Memory G skill 16 Gigs ddr4 / 16 gigs PNY ddr4
Video Card(s) Nvdia GTX 660 / Nvidia RTX 2070 Super
Storage 120gig 840 evo, 120gig adata sp900 / 1tb Mushkin M.2 ssd 1 & 3 tb seagate hdd, 120 gig Hyper X ssd
Display(s) 42" Nec retail display monitor/ 34" Dell curved 165hz monitor
Case Pink Enermax Ostrog / Phanteks Enthoo Evolv Tempered Glass edition
Audio Device(s) Altec Lansing Expressionist Bass/ M-Audio monitors
Power Supply Corsair450 / Be Quiet Dark Power Pro 650
Mouse corsair vengence M65 / Zalman Knossos
Keyboard corsair k95 / Roccat Vulcan 121
Software Window 10 pro / Windows 10 pro
Benchmark Scores meh... feel me on the battle field!
...cool and at a great price..... but once again the lemming approach. A bunch of little ...adequate cores. The best result would be a price reduction at intel....bah hhhaaa hhhhaaaa:roll: yeah right. Maybe some day but not by this. Nether the less Amd is still moving in the right direction.
 

Aquinus

Resident Wat-man
Joined
Jan 28, 2012
Messages
13,147 (2.96/day)
Location
Concord, NH, USA
System Name Apollo
Processor Intel Core i9 9880H
Motherboard Some proprietary Apple thing.
Memory 64GB DDR4-2667
Video Card(s) AMD Radeon Pro 5600M, 8GB HBM2
Storage 1TB Apple NVMe, 4TB External
Display(s) Laptop @ 3072x1920 + 2x LG 5k Ultrafine TB3 displays
Case MacBook Pro (16", 2019)
Audio Device(s) AirPods Pro, Sennheiser HD 380s w/ FIIO Alpen 2, or Logitech 2.1 Speakers
Power Supply 96w Power Adapter
Mouse Logitech MX Master 3
Keyboard Logitech G915, GL Clicky
Software MacOS 12.1
I would like everyone to remember what the equivalent Xeon is at that price point. I'm willing to bet that the Opteron is more cost effective, considering a 10 Core Xeon starts at 1600 USD, I think everything needs to be put into perspective. I would rather take two 16c Opterons than a single 10c Xeon, but that's just me.
 
Joined
Oct 29, 2012
Messages
1,926 (0.46/day)
Location
UK
System Name TITAN Slayer / CPUCannon / MassFX
Processor i7 5960X @ 4.6Ghz / i7 3960x @5.0Ghz / FX6350 @ 4.?Ghz
Motherboard Rampage V Extreme / Rampage IV Extreme / MSI 970 Gaming
Cooling Phanteks PHTC14PE 2.5K 145mm TRs / Custom waterloop / Phanteks PHTC14PE + 3K 140mm Noctuas
Memory Crucial 2666 11-13-13-25 1.45V / G.skill RipjawsX 2400 10-12-12-34 1.7V / Crucial 2133 9-9-9-27 1.7V
Video Card(s) 3 Fury X in CF / R9 Fury 3840 cores 1145/570 1.3V / Nothing ATM
Storage 500GB Crucial SSD and 3TB WD Black / WD 1TB Black(OS) + WD 3TB Green / WD 1TB Blue
Display(s) LG 29UM67 80Hz/Asus mx299q 2560x1080 @ 84Hz / Asus VX239 1920x1080 @60hz
Case Dismatech easy v3.0 / Xigmatek Alfar (Open side panel)
Audio Device(s) M-audio M-track / realtek ALC 1150
Power Supply EVGA G2 1600W / CoolerMaster V1000 / Seasonic 620 M12-II
Mouse Mouse in review process/Razer Naga Epic 2011/Razer Naga 2014
Keyboard Keyboard in review process / Razer Blackwidow Ultimate 2014/Razer Blackwidow Ultimate 2011
Software Windows 7 Ultimate / Windows 7 ultimate / Windows 7 ultimate
Benchmark Scores cinebench 15.41 3960x @ 5.3ghz Wprime32m 3.352 3960x @ 5.25ghz Super PI 32m: 6m 42s 472ms @5.25ghz
soon there will be AMD marketing slides about +400% performance increase over "other competitors" 4 core CPUs :D
it'd be true for the integer math capability but not much else.
 
Joined
May 11, 2006
Messages
61 (0.01/day)
Location
Denmark EU
Not all that real.

Your either to stupid or don't know anything about Amd CPU's they are all independent cores with own multiplier and volt control and if 1 core go's up in speed all the other stays down until used.
That makes for better power usage.
 
Joined
Jun 4, 2004
Messages
480 (0.07/day)
System Name Blackbird
Processor AMD Threadripper 3960X 24-core
Motherboard Gigabyte TRX40 Aorus Master
Cooling Full custom-loop water cooling, mostly Aqua Computer and EKWB stuff!
Memory 4x 16GB G.Skill Trident-Z RGB @3733-CL14
Video Card(s) Nvidia RTX 3090 FE
Storage Samsung 950PRO 512GB, Crusial P5 2TB, Samsung 850PRO 1TB
Display(s) LG 38GN950-B 38" IPS TFT, Dell U3011 30" IPS TFT
Case CaseLabs TH10A
Audio Device(s) Edifier S1000DB
Power Supply ASUS ROG Thor 1200W (SeaSonic)
Mouse Logitech MX Master
Keyboard SteelSeries Apex M800
Software MS Windows 10 Pro for Workstation
Benchmark Scores A lot.
Your either to stupid or don't know anything about Amd CPU's they are all independent cores with own multiplier and volt control and if 1 core go's up in speed all the other stays down until used.
That makes for better power usage.

I don't get what the power characteristics have to do with the debate about what counts as a "real" core and what does not?!
The fact is that with the Bulldozer architecture AMD choose to implement CMT in the form of modules rather than Hyperthreading as implemented by Intel (here called SMT). A module on an AMD CPU acts as 2 independent cores, but nonetheless they share certain functional units together. So technically they are NOT 2 independent cores. It's more or less the same as with Intels Hyperthreading, where a core can run 2 threads simultaneously and is seen by the OS as 2, but is actually only one core.
So maybe AMDs implementation of CMT/SMT in the form of modules is a step further in the direction of independent cores than Intel is with Hyperthreading. But all that doesn't really matter at all. At the end of the day, what counts is the performance you get out of the CPU (or performance per dollar or performance per watt, whatever matters most to you).

As far as I'm concerned, they should advertise these as 6 modules / 12 threads and 8 modules / 16 threads like Intel does with for instance the 8 core / 16 threads (8c/16t) nomenclature...
 
Joined
Sep 15, 2011
Messages
6,457 (1.41/day)
Processor Intel® Core™ i7-13700K
Motherboard Gigabyte Z790 Aorus Elite AX
Cooling Noctua NH-D15
Memory 32GB(2x16) DDR5@6600MHz G-Skill Trident Z5
Video Card(s) ZOTAC GAMING GeForce RTX 3080 AMP Holo
Storage 2TB SK Platinum P41 SSD + 4TB SanDisk Ultra SSD + 500GB Samsung 840 EVO SSD
Display(s) Acer Predator X34 3440x1440@100Hz G-Sync
Case NZXT PHANTOM410-BK
Audio Device(s) Creative X-Fi Titanium PCIe
Power Supply Corsair 850W
Mouse Logitech Hero G502 SE
Software Windows 11 Pro - 64bit
Benchmark Scores 30FPS in NFS:Rivals
Your either to stupid or don't know anything about Amd CPU's they are all independent cores with own multiplier and volt control and if 1 core go's up in speed all the other stays down until used.
That makes for better power usage.
Wow. You must be very smart for insulting and flaming users. Please, go on...
 

Aquinus

Resident Wat-man
Joined
Jan 28, 2012
Messages
13,147 (2.96/day)
Location
Concord, NH, USA
System Name Apollo
Processor Intel Core i9 9880H
Motherboard Some proprietary Apple thing.
Memory 64GB DDR4-2667
Video Card(s) AMD Radeon Pro 5600M, 8GB HBM2
Storage 1TB Apple NVMe, 4TB External
Display(s) Laptop @ 3072x1920 + 2x LG 5k Ultrafine TB3 displays
Case MacBook Pro (16", 2019)
Audio Device(s) AirPods Pro, Sennheiser HD 380s w/ FIIO Alpen 2, or Logitech 2.1 Speakers
Power Supply 96w Power Adapter
Mouse Logitech MX Master 3
Keyboard Logitech G915, GL Clicky
Software MacOS 12.1
I don't get what the power characteristics have to do with the debate about what counts as a "real" core and what does not?!
The fact is that with the Bulldozer architecture AMD choose to implement CMT in the form of modules rather than Hyperthreading as implemented by Intel (here called SMT). A module on an AMD CPU acts as 2 independent cores, but nonetheless they share certain functional units together. So technically they are NOT 2 independent cores. It's more or less the same as with Intels Hyperthreading, where a core can run 2 threads simultaneously and is seen by the OS as 2, but is actually only one core.
So maybe AMDs implementation of CMT/SMT in the form of modules is a step further in the direction of independent cores than Intel is with Hyperthreading. But all that doesn't really matter at all. At the end of the day, what counts is the performance you get out of the CPU (or performance per dollar or performance per watt, whatever matters most to you).

As far as I'm concerned, they should advertise these as 6 modules / 12 threads and 8 modules / 16 threads like Intel does with for instance the 8 core / 16 threads (8c/16t) nomenclature...
The problem with that statement is that there is enough shared hardware to run two threads in tandem where hyper-threading won't always because it depends on parts of the CPU that are not being used.

Intel uses unused resources in the CPU to get extra multi-threaded performance. AMD added extra hardware for multi-threaded performance as opposed to using just the extra resources available. The performance of a module vs the performance of a single core with HT has costs and benefits of their own. With an Intel CPU, that second thread doesn't nearly have as much processing power that the first thread does, where with AMD, the amount of performance that second "thread" or "core" if you will has much more tangible gains than the HT thread does.

It's worth mentioning that the integer units do have enough hardware to run two full threads side-by-side. It's the floating point unit that doesn't but even still, FMA is supposed to give some ability to decouple the 256-bit FP unit to do two 128-bit ops at once.

I think AMD's goal is to emphasize what CPUs do best, integer math, and let GPUs do what they do best, FP math. Not to say that a CPU shouldn't do any FP math, but if there is a lot of FP math to be done, a GPU is better optimized to do those kinds of operations.

Also, I should add that I'm pretty sure that AMD clocks are controlled on a per-module basis but parts of each module can be power gated to improve power usage. One of the biggest benefits of having a module is that you save die space to add that second thread without too much of a hit on single-threaded performance (relatively speaking).

Wow. You must be very smart for insulting and flaming users. Please, go on...
Please don't feed the ducks trolls.
 
Joined
Sep 15, 2011
Messages
6,457 (1.41/day)
Processor Intel® Core™ i7-13700K
Motherboard Gigabyte Z790 Aorus Elite AX
Cooling Noctua NH-D15
Memory 32GB(2x16) DDR5@6600MHz G-Skill Trident Z5
Video Card(s) ZOTAC GAMING GeForce RTX 3080 AMP Holo
Storage 2TB SK Platinum P41 SSD + 4TB SanDisk Ultra SSD + 500GB Samsung 840 EVO SSD
Display(s) Acer Predator X34 3440x1440@100Hz G-Sync
Case NZXT PHANTOM410-BK
Audio Device(s) Creative X-Fi Titanium PCIe
Power Supply Corsair 850W
Mouse Logitech Hero G502 SE
Software Windows 11 Pro - 64bit
Benchmark Scores 30FPS in NFS:Rivals
Also, I should add that I'm pretty sure that AMD clocks are controlled on a per-module basis but parts of each module can be power gated to improve power usage. One of the biggest benefits of having a module is that you save die space to add that second thread without too much of a hit on single-threaded performance (relatively speaking).

Aq, agree with you.
However I have a question. Don't you think this approach is somehow not ideal for AMD, because in this way, a core is having a lot less transistors than Intel's, therefore the bad performance in single-threaded applications, like games for example?
I don't understand why AMD is still going for strong GPU performance, even on the so called top CPU's, instead of having a GPU with only basic stuff to run the Win 7 desktop, then with the available space to increase the transistor count for each of the cores?? This way I think they will finally have a CPU to compete with the I7. Just some thoughts.
 

Aquinus

Resident Wat-man
Joined
Jan 28, 2012
Messages
13,147 (2.96/day)
Location
Concord, NH, USA
System Name Apollo
Processor Intel Core i9 9880H
Motherboard Some proprietary Apple thing.
Memory 64GB DDR4-2667
Video Card(s) AMD Radeon Pro 5600M, 8GB HBM2
Storage 1TB Apple NVMe, 4TB External
Display(s) Laptop @ 3072x1920 + 2x LG 5k Ultrafine TB3 displays
Case MacBook Pro (16", 2019)
Audio Device(s) AirPods Pro, Sennheiser HD 380s w/ FIIO Alpen 2, or Logitech 2.1 Speakers
Power Supply 96w Power Adapter
Mouse Logitech MX Master 3
Keyboard Logitech G915, GL Clicky
Software MacOS 12.1
Well, AMD has always pushed the "future is fusion" motto. HSA has always been a constant theme of theirs. I will be thrilled when AMD has an APU where CPU and iGPU compute units are shared, further blurring the distinction between massively parallel workloads on GPUs and fast serial workloads on CPUs.

Either way, CPUs are fast enough where there definitely is a point of diminishing returns. A CPU will only go so fast and you can only cram so many transistors in any given area. Also, on games that can utilize multi-core systems well, AMD isn't trailing behind all that much. Considering upcoming consoles have 8c CPUs in them, there will be more of a push to utilize that kind of hardware. It's completely realistic for a machine to have at least 4 logical threads now and as many as 8 for a consumer CPU. This wasn't the case several years ago.
 
Joined
Jun 4, 2004
Messages
480 (0.07/day)
System Name Blackbird
Processor AMD Threadripper 3960X 24-core
Motherboard Gigabyte TRX40 Aorus Master
Cooling Full custom-loop water cooling, mostly Aqua Computer and EKWB stuff!
Memory 4x 16GB G.Skill Trident-Z RGB @3733-CL14
Video Card(s) Nvidia RTX 3090 FE
Storage Samsung 950PRO 512GB, Crusial P5 2TB, Samsung 850PRO 1TB
Display(s) LG 38GN950-B 38" IPS TFT, Dell U3011 30" IPS TFT
Case CaseLabs TH10A
Audio Device(s) Edifier S1000DB
Power Supply ASUS ROG Thor 1200W (SeaSonic)
Mouse Logitech MX Master
Keyboard SteelSeries Apex M800
Software MS Windows 10 Pro for Workstation
Benchmark Scores A lot.
Aq, agree with you.
However I have a question. Don't you think this approach is somehow not ideal for AMD, because in this way, a core is having a lot less transistors than Intel's, therefore the bad performance in single-threaded applications, like games for example?
I don't understand why AMD is still going for strong GPU performance, even on the so called top CPU's, instead of having a GPU with only basic stuff to run the Win 7 desktop, then with the available space to increase the transistor count for each of the cores?? This way I think they will finally have a CPU to compete with the I7. Just some thoughts.

I guess that's because it's technically very challenging and AMD might simply not be able to come up with something better? Just a guess... ;)
 
Joined
Nov 4, 2005
Messages
11,654 (1.73/day)
System Name Compy 386
Processor 7800X3D
Motherboard Asus
Cooling Air for now.....
Memory 64 GB DDR5 6400Mhz
Video Card(s) 7900XTX 310 Merc
Storage Samsung 990 2TB, 2 SP 2TB SSDs and over 10TB spinning
Display(s) 56" Samsung 4K HDR
Audio Device(s) ATI HDMI
Mouse Logitech MX518
Keyboard Razer
Software A lot.
Benchmark Scores Its fast. Enough.
Dual socket with 16 cores, can run 32 VM's in one rackmount tray, company X has 320 employees running thin clients, 10 racks plus one and assuming same drive/memory/board cost the AMD will win for $$$ reason alone. Data entry jobs don't need Xeon core performance for 10 key and typing.
 
Joined
Jun 4, 2004
Messages
480 (0.07/day)
System Name Blackbird
Processor AMD Threadripper 3960X 24-core
Motherboard Gigabyte TRX40 Aorus Master
Cooling Full custom-loop water cooling, mostly Aqua Computer and EKWB stuff!
Memory 4x 16GB G.Skill Trident-Z RGB @3733-CL14
Video Card(s) Nvidia RTX 3090 FE
Storage Samsung 950PRO 512GB, Crusial P5 2TB, Samsung 850PRO 1TB
Display(s) LG 38GN950-B 38" IPS TFT, Dell U3011 30" IPS TFT
Case CaseLabs TH10A
Audio Device(s) Edifier S1000DB
Power Supply ASUS ROG Thor 1200W (SeaSonic)
Mouse Logitech MX Master
Keyboard SteelSeries Apex M800
Software MS Windows 10 Pro for Workstation
Benchmark Scores A lot.
I think AMD's goal is to emphasize what CPUs do best, integer math, and let GPUs do what they do best, FP math. Not to say that a CPU shouldn't do any FP math, but if there is a lot of FP math to be done, a GPU is better optimized to do those kinds of operations.

Sure? In theory you might be right, but most of at least consumer grade hardware is not that great at FP math (I'm talking about DP-FP of course).
An ordinary Core i7-4770K quad-core has a DP performance of about 177 GFLOPS. Thats for a 84W CPU (talking TDP). NVidia's 780Ti though is rated at 210 GFLOPS DP performance (DP is crippled on consumer chips, I know), but this comes at a cost of a whopping 250W TDP, which is about 3x the power draw! So simple math tells me that the Haswell i7 is about twice as efficient in DP-FP calculations as the current-gen GPU hardware is...
Single precision might be a totally different story though. :)
 
Joined
Jun 27, 2011
Messages
6,680 (1.43/day)
Processor 7800x3d
Motherboard Gigabyte B650 Auros Elite AX
Cooling Custom Water
Memory GSKILL 2x16gb 6000mhz Cas 30 with custom timings
Video Card(s) MSI RX 6750 XT MECH 2X 12G OC
Storage Adata SX8200 1tb with Windows, Samsung 990 Pro 2tb with games
Display(s) HP Omen 27q QHD 165hz
Case ThermalTake P3
Power Supply SuperFlower Leadex Titanium
Software Windows 11 64 Bit
Benchmark Scores CB23: 1811 / 19424 CB24: 1136 / 7687
Sure? In theory you might be right, but most of at least consumer grade hardware is not that great at FP math (I'm talking about DP-FP of course).
An ordinary Core i7-4770K quad-core has a DP performance of about 177 GFLOPS. Thats for a 84W CPU (talking TDP). NVidia's 780Ti though is rated at 210 GFLOPS DP performance (DP is crippled on consumer chips, I know), but this comes at a cost of a whopping 250W TDP, which is about 3x the power draw! So simple math tells me that the Haswell i7 is about twice as efficient in DP-FP calculations as the current-gen GPU hardware is...
Single precision might be a totally different story though. :)
An amd 7970 has ~1060 GFLOPS DP performance at 225 tdp. Amd gpu's are pretty darn great at compute and amd apu's will use amd gpu's not nvidea gpu's. So your comparison with a 780ti is silly.
 
Joined
Jun 4, 2004
Messages
480 (0.07/day)
System Name Blackbird
Processor AMD Threadripper 3960X 24-core
Motherboard Gigabyte TRX40 Aorus Master
Cooling Full custom-loop water cooling, mostly Aqua Computer and EKWB stuff!
Memory 4x 16GB G.Skill Trident-Z RGB @3733-CL14
Video Card(s) Nvidia RTX 3090 FE
Storage Samsung 950PRO 512GB, Crusial P5 2TB, Samsung 850PRO 1TB
Display(s) LG 38GN950-B 38" IPS TFT, Dell U3011 30" IPS TFT
Case CaseLabs TH10A
Audio Device(s) Edifier S1000DB
Power Supply ASUS ROG Thor 1200W (SeaSonic)
Mouse Logitech MX Master
Keyboard SteelSeries Apex M800
Software MS Windows 10 Pro for Workstation
Benchmark Scores A lot.
An amd 7970 has ~1060 GFLOPS DP performance at 225 tdp. Amd gpu's are pretty darn great at compute and amd apu's will use amd gpu's not nvidea gpu's. So your comparison with a 780ti is silly.

Even it its way of topic:
A nVidia Titan has ~1300 GFLOPS DP at 250W TDP, but that was not the point.
All that compute power on your GPU is pretty useless unless you have a task where you have to crunch numbers for an extended period of time AND your task can be scheduled in parallel, but I guess you know that. The latencies for copying data to the GPU and after processing there from the GPU back to the main memory / CPU are way to high for any mixed workload to perform well, so strong single-threaded FP performance will always be important in some way.
 

Aquinus

Resident Wat-man
Joined
Jan 28, 2012
Messages
13,147 (2.96/day)
Location
Concord, NH, USA
System Name Apollo
Processor Intel Core i9 9880H
Motherboard Some proprietary Apple thing.
Memory 64GB DDR4-2667
Video Card(s) AMD Radeon Pro 5600M, 8GB HBM2
Storage 1TB Apple NVMe, 4TB External
Display(s) Laptop @ 3072x1920 + 2x LG 5k Ultrafine TB3 displays
Case MacBook Pro (16", 2019)
Audio Device(s) AirPods Pro, Sennheiser HD 380s w/ FIIO Alpen 2, or Logitech 2.1 Speakers
Power Supply 96w Power Adapter
Mouse Logitech MX Master 3
Keyboard Logitech G915, GL Clicky
Software MacOS 12.1
Even it its way of topic:
A nVidia Titan has ~1300 GFLOPS DP at 250W TDP, but that was not the point.
All that compute power on your GPU is pretty useless unless you have a task where you have to crunch numbers for an extended period of time AND your task can be scheduled in parallel, but I guess you know that. The latencies for copying data to the GPU and after processing there from the GPU back to the main memory / CPU are way to high for any mixed workload to perform well, so strong single-threaded FP performance will always be important in some way.

Might read into APUs again. There are benefits to be had by having HUMA on an APU, which solves the memory copying problem. The simple point is that CPUs are good at serial processing and GPUs are good at massively parallel ops. Depending on your workload, one may be better than the other. More often than not though, CPUs are doing integer math and GPUs are doing floating point math (single or double).

Basically CPUs are good at working with data that changes a lot (relatively small amounts of data that change a lot). GPUs are good at processing (or transforming if you will) a lot of data in a relatively fixed way.

So a simple example of what GPUs do best would be something like.
Code:
add 9 and multiply by 2 to every element of [1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 1000]

Where a CPU would excel at something like adding all of those elements, or doing something that reduces those values, as opposed to transforming it to a set of the same size as the input.

GPUs can only process independent vertices and fragments, but can process many of them in parallel. This is especially effective when the programmer wants to process many vertices or fragments in the same way. In this sense, GPUs are stream processors – processors that can operate in parallel by running one kernel on many records in a stream at once.

A stream is simply a set of records that require similar computation. Streams provide data parallelism. Kernels are the functions that are applied to each element in the stream. In the GPUs, vertices and fragments are the elements in streams and vertex and fragment shaders are the kernels to be run on them. Since GPUs process elements independently there is no way to have shared or static data. For each element we can only read from the input, perform operations on it, and write to the output. It is permissible to have multiple inputs and multiple outputs, but never a piece of memory that is both readable and writable.[vague]

Arithmetic intensity is defined as the number of operations performed per word of memory transferred. It is important for GPGPU applications to have high arithmetic intensity else the memory access latency will limit computational speedup.[11]

Ideal GPGPU applications have large data sets, high parallelism, and minimal dependency between data elements.
See Stream Processing on Wikipedia.
 
Top