|Topic Review (Newest First)|
|08-20-2019 08:57 AM|
|Liranan||ARM's great strength is their extreme low power usage so in the future they might become more competitive as workloads become ever more parallel.|
|08-20-2019 08:00 AM|
For those two specific systems (ARM and power9), you need specific software written for them to really utilise their abilities.
Standard tests don't really show the full potential of those systems.
|08-20-2019 07:35 AM|
|Paradigm Shifter||I'd be very interested in seeing what POWER9 can do for some of our in-house stuff, but I think we'll choke on I/O before the cores get a serious workout.|
|08-20-2019 06:29 AM|
|EniGma1987||So much for "ARM is competitive to Core" arguments. Looks like it was absolutely destroyed in 99% of those tests even with similar clock speeds.|
|08-19-2019 04:42 PM|
[Phoronix] POWER9 & ARM Performance Against Intel Xeon Cascadelake + AMD EPYC Rome
For those wondering how ARM and IBM POWER hardware stack up against AMD's new EPYC "Rome" processors and that of Intel's existing Xeon "Cascade Lake" processors, here is a round of tests from the POWER9 Talos II, Ampere eMAG, and Cavium ThunderX in looking at the cross-architecture Linux CPU performance currently in the server space.
Our AMD EPYC Rome benchmarks this month have been focused on the performance compared to earlier AMD EPYC and Intel Xeon processors, but given the broader architecture support on Linux and there also being significant interest in the likes of IBM POWER / OpenPOWER thanks to more open-source designs when paired with motherboards from Raptor Computing Systems, here are some initial numbers for ARM and POWER9 performance against the new x86_64 server CPUs.