[Tom's Hardware] AMD EPYC Rome Benched: 64 Cores, 128 Threads Boosting to 2.2 GHz (for now) - Overclock.net - An Overclocking Community

Forum Jump: 

[Tom's Hardware] AMD EPYC Rome Benched: 64 Cores, 128 Threads Boosting to 2.2 GHz (for now)

Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 31 (permalink) Old 03-29-2019, 04:20 PM - Thread Starter
sudo apt install sl
 
WannaBeOCer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 5,739
Rep: 179 (Unique: 123)
[Tom's Hardware] AMD EPYC Rome Benched: 64 Cores, 128 Threads Boosting to 2.2 GHz (for now)

Source: https://www.tomshardware.com/news/am...ter,38939.html

Quote:
Several benchmarks of AMD's 64-core, 128-thread EPYC Rome processors have popped up in an online database, indicating that the early chips run at a 1.4 GHz base clock and boost to 2.2 GHz.

Earlier this year, AMD CEO Lisa Su announced that the 64 core 128 thread EPYC Rome processors would come to market in mid-2019, perhaps setting the stage for a massive upset victory against Intel as AMD marches forward to the 7nm manufacturing process while its competitor remains mired on 14nm.

Silent
(20 items)
CPU
Core i9 9900K... CoffeeTime! @ 5.1Ghz w/ 1.36v
Motherboard
Maximus VIII Formula
GPU
Radeon VII @ 2100Mhz/1250Mhz w/ 1218mV
RAM
TeamGroup Xtreem 32GB 3200Mhz CL15
Hard Drive
HP EX950 2TB
Hard Drive
Samsung 850 Evo 1TB
Hard Drive
Samsung 850 Evo 1TB
Power Supply
EVGA SuperNova 1200w P2
Cooling
EK Supremacy Full Copper Clean
Cooling
XSPC D5 Photon v2
Cooling
Black Ice Gen 2 GTX360 x2
Cooling
EK-Vector Radeon VII - Copper + Plexi
Case
Thermaltake Core X5 Tempered Glass Edition
Operating System
Clear Linux
Monitor
Acer XF270HUA
Keyboard
Cherry MX Board 6.0
Mouse
Logitech G600
Mouse
Alugraphics GamerArt
Audio
Definitive Technology Incline
Audio
SMSL M8A
▲ hide details ▲
WannaBeOCer is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 31 (permalink) Old 03-29-2019, 04:28 PM
Invalid Media
 
J7SC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Posts: 1,092
Rep: 40 (Unique: 20)
Quote: Originally Posted by WannaBeOCer View Post

yummy..especially if there's a consumer (Threadripper) version at max (yeah, right ) 4 GHz; 16+3 phase mobo ready, willing and waiting, especially while the wallet is out for a Friday lunch...
J7SC is offline  
post #3 of 31 (permalink) Old 03-29-2019, 04:29 PM
Hardware Princess
 
Hydroplane's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Buffalo
Posts: 1,730
Rep: 31 (Unique: 26)
256MB cache :O

CHILLER DESTRUCTION
Build Log - White Voodoo
Z390 Station
(11 items)
White Voodoo
(15 items)
CPU
9900K @ 5.4 1.50v
Motherboard
EVGA Z390 Dark
GPU
Titan RTX 2085/8500
RAM
Trident Z 3200c14 @ 4133c16 1.5v
Hard Drive
970 Evo Plus 250gb
Power Supply
silverstone 1200 from 2008 (other one exploded)
Cooling
HWLabs GTX 360 Rad (in RED)
Cooling
3x EK Vader 120mm 2200rpm Fans
Case
Dimastech Test Bench
Monitor
AOC Agon AG251FZ 240Hz
Audio
Built-in Monitor Speakers (3 watt)
CPU
7980XE @ 4.3 GHz 1.10v
Motherboard
Asus Rampage VI Apex
GPU
2 x Aorus Waterforce WB 1080 Ti @ 2037/6318
RAM
Trident Z 16gb 3200c14 @ 3800c16 1.50V (the other two sticks were sacrificed)
Hard Drive
960 Evo 1TB
Power Supply
EVGA 1600 T2
Cooling
HWLabs GTR 420+280 Rads
Cooling
7 x Noctua Industrial 140mm 3000 RPM Fans
Cooling
EK D5 Pump/Res (with RGB!)
Case
LD Cooling PC-V7
Operating System
Windows 10 LTSB
Monitor
NEC PA271W
Keyboard
Razer Blackwidow Chroma V2
Mouse
Logitech M510
Mousepad
anime tiddy mousepad
CPU
Dual Intel Xeon L5520 2.26 GHz
RAM
48 GB Samsung DDR3-1066
Hard Drive
120 GB Samsung 750 Evo SSD
Hard Drive
2 TB Western Digital Green
Hard Drive
2 TB Hitachi 7200 RPM
Power Supply
650W Delta PSU
Case
1U Rackmount
Operating System
Ubuntu Server 16.04
▲ hide details ▲
Hydroplane is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #4 of 31 (permalink) Old 03-29-2019, 04:57 PM
New to Overclock.net
 
mothergoose729's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Citrus Heights, CA
Posts: 5,711
Rep: 341 (Unique: 284)
This is the same benchmark with 2 of intels Xeon 8180s.

https://ranker.sisoftware.co.uk/show...781f2cff7&l=en

And this is two EPYC 32 cores

https://wccftech.com/amd-epyc-7601-benchmarks-analysis/

Assuming the score would double with a dual socket configuration (and it usually does) that would yield a result of 1553 GOPS, which is up to a 16.1% higher score than the dual Xeon 8180s, and a 21.1% higher score than dual EPYC 32 cores.

The performance per core though is pretty terrible. The average clock speed for the run was 2.2ghz and it had twice the cores, compared to the 2.7ghz average clock speed of EPYC 32 cores with half the threads, yet only achieving a modest 21% score increase, instead of what you would expect to be a 81% performance increase with similar IPC. There is a lot of performance left on the table. Whether that is due to poor scaling in the sisoft sandra benchmark, errors in the silicon, or some other issue, who can say. These numbers might not even be accurate.

Put another way, two EPYC 32 core CPUs are 30% faster than a single one of these 64 cores CPU, assuming linear scaling with clock speed.

Last edited by mothergoose729; 03-29-2019 at 05:09 PM.
mothergoose729 is offline  
post #5 of 31 (permalink) Old 03-30-2019, 04:07 PM
Overclocker
 
JackCY's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 10,245
Rep: 344 (Unique: 243)
JackCY is offline  
post #6 of 31 (permalink) Old 03-31-2019, 08:55 PM
New to Overclock.net
 
guttheslayer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 3,771
Rep: 110 (Unique: 65)
Quote: Originally Posted by mothergoose729 View Post
This is the same benchmark with 2 of intels Xeon 8180s.

https://ranker.sisoftware.co.uk/show...781f2cff7&l=en

And this is two EPYC 32 cores

https://wccftech.com/amd-epyc-7601-benchmarks-analysis/

Assuming the score would double with a dual socket configuration (and it usually does) that would yield a result of 1553 GOPS, which is up to a 16.1% higher score than the dual Xeon 8180s, and a 21.1% higher score than dual EPYC 32 cores.

The performance per core though is pretty terrible. The average clock speed for the run was 2.2ghz and it had twice the cores, compared to the 2.7ghz average clock speed of EPYC 32 cores with half the threads, yet only achieving a modest 21% score increase, instead of what you would expect to be a 81% performance increase with similar IPC. There is a lot of performance left on the table. Whether that is due to poor scaling in the sisoft sandra benchmark, errors in the silicon, or some other issue, who can say. These numbers might not even be accurate.

Put another way, two EPYC 32 core CPUs are 30% faster than a single one of these 64 cores CPU, assuming linear scaling with clock speed.

I don't know where you get the 30% figure for single 64C vs 2x 32C. What I saw was:

Dual 7601 vs 64C new cores.

Arithmetic: 1242 vs 766 (Registered. clock GHz: 2.7 vs 2.2)
Multimedia: 1348 vs 2089 (Registered. clock GHz: 1.81 vs 2.2)


What I conclude is that the new Eypc is bad at Arthmetic but impressive at multimedia against the 2x 7601. I am not too sure if the registered clock is reliable, if not you can do a direct IPC comparison.

guttheslayer is offline  
post #7 of 31 (permalink) Old 03-31-2019, 09:03 PM
Canada Goose Puncher
 
CynicalUnicorn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Extra-west Virginia
Posts: 9,130
Quote: Originally Posted by Hydroplane View Post
256MB cache :O
4MB per core, double what's on current Ryzen.

Given how expensive SRAM is, there's probably a good reason for it, and I'm betting that the I/O hub has some shortcomings that will explain why.

Quote: Originally Posted by TheBadBull View Post
someone sig this


CynicalUnicorn is offline  
post #8 of 31 (permalink) Old 04-01-2019, 03:45 AM
OG AMD
 
Redwoodz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Silicon Valley
Posts: 8,442
Rep: 588 (Unique: 461)
The TDP will really tell the whole story along with clock speeds.

https://valid.x86.fr/cache/banner/4d8m5e-6.png
AMD Athlon II 450 @4.74GHz http://valid.canardpc.com/show_oc.php?id=2204588
AMD MaxxMemm Rankings
960T @ 4.6GHz http://valid.canardpc.com/show_oc.php?id=2171450
RedwoodCustomPC
AM4
(4 items)
RCPC#1
(17 items)
Professional
(13 items)
CPU
Ryzen 2200G
Motherboard
ASRock X470 Taichi
GPU
MSI RX570 Armor MKII 8GB
Power Supply
GSKill Ripjaws PS850G
CPU
AMD Phenom II X6 960T
Motherboard
Asus M4A88T-VEVO
GPU
Asus Strix R7 370
RAM
SuperTalent Perfomance
RAM
GSkill Snipers
Hard Drive
Monster Daytona
Hard Drive
Seagate Barracuda 500GB 7,200 RPM 16Mb cache
Optical Drive
Memorex DVD/RW
Power Supply
Corsair GS500
Cooling
Corsair H60
Case
In Win H-Frame
Operating System
Windows 8N
Monitor
IBM 9494 19" LCD
Keyboard
IBM
Mouse
OCZ Behemoth
Mouse
Wolfking
Audio
JBL Creature
CPU
Phenom II X6 1100t
Motherboard
MSI 890FX GD65
GPU
MSI Radeon HD5670
RAM
GSkill RipjawsX DDR3 PC3 12800 2x4GB CL8
Hard Drive
WD Black 1TB SATA III
Optical Drive
Samsung BD
Power Supply
Kingwin Lazer Platinum 500w
Cooling
Zalman 9900MAX
Case
Fractal Design R3
Operating System
Windows 7 64 Professional
Monitor
AOC 22" LED
Keyboard
Logitech
Other
Samsung 470 SSD 128GB
▲ hide details ▲


Redwoodz is offline  
post #9 of 31 (permalink) Old 04-01-2019, 09:04 AM
New to Overclock.net
 
rdr09's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: From the US but lives in Africa
Posts: 18,860
Rep: 868 (Unique: 634)
In this type of use case, security (less vulnerabilities) should be top most concern. I guess that falls under performance as well.

[email protected] 6 http://valid.canardpc.com/show_oc.php?id=2211392 4.6 @ 4 http://valid.canardpc.com/show_oc.php?id=2216580
5.0 @ 8 http://valid.canardpc.com/show_oc.php?id=2511322
2nd AMD Build
(10 items)
CPU
2700
Motherboard
X470
GPU
290
RAM
3200 CL14
Hard Drive
1000
Power Supply
700
Case
212
Operating System
10/64
Monitor
40 1080
Keyboard
M100
▲ hide details ▲
rdr09 is offline  
post #10 of 31 (permalink) Old 04-01-2019, 09:32 AM
New to Overclock.net
 
mothergoose729's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Citrus Heights, CA
Posts: 5,711
Rep: 341 (Unique: 284)
Quote: Originally Posted by guttheslayer View Post
I don't know where you get the 30% figure for single 64C vs 2x 32C. What I saw was:

Dual 7601 vs 64C new cores.

Arithmetic: 1242 vs 766 (Registered. clock GHz: 2.7 vs 2.2)
Multimedia: 1348 vs 2089 (Registered. clock GHz: 1.81 vs 2.2)


What I conclude is that the new Eypc is bad at Arthmetic but impressive at multimedia against the 2x 7601. I am not too sure if the registered clock is reliable, if not you can do a direct IPC comparison.
I was only looking at arithmetic. Good catch on multimedia. Odd that there would be such a huge difference in relative performance depending on the workload, considering Ryzen 3 architecture is only supposed to be a minor iteration on Ryzen 2.
mothergoose729 is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Overclock.net - An Overclocking Community forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in



Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off