Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)

[DisEnchantment]

Speculate at will

 

[Markfw]

I think Siena is positioned a lot higher than that. Low end servers are way below $2,000 price even below $1,000 for the whole server.

Siena will probably be above that just for the CPU.

Can you link an example ? If somebody wants a REAL low end server, Naples are being given away, and Rome are cheap.

 

[Joe NYC]

Lower-end SKUs no, and it will be more interesting with Sorano, too.

Beyond niche market.

Dell is selling a lot of them. To On-Premises / Enterprise. It also pads Intel server unit market share, while AMD is gaining dollar market share.

AMD just should not leave this market to Intel as a monopoly market.

 

[Joe NYC]

Can you link an example ? If somebody wants a REAL low end server, Naples are being given away, and Rome are cheap.

You can configure a Dell server here:

PowerEdge R250 Rack Server | Dell USA

The Dell EMC PowerEdge R250 is an easy to use entry-level rack server designed for general purpose business applications for budget-conscious businesses.

www.google.com

Even cheaper for non-rack versions...

 

[adroc_thurston]

Dell is selling a lot of them

Nah.

It also pads Intel server unit market share

AMD doesn't care about raw unit count; they're not here to wage a price war in mainstream core count segments.

AMD just should not leave this market to Intel as a monopoly market.

They have server Raphael for that in case you've missed it.

Even cheaper for non-rack versions...

No one buys funny Xeon-E boxes.
Like, ever.
Entry-level platforms have been a meme since Romley and that hasn't changed.

 

[Markfw]

You can configure a Dell server here:

PowerEdge R250 Rack Server | Dell USA

The Dell EMC PowerEdge R250 is an easy to use entry-level rack server designed for general purpose business applications for budget-conscious businesses.

www.google.com

Even cheaper for non-rack versions...

OK, thats $1049 for 2 cores and 8 gig ram. Here (on ebay) is a 24 core and 32 gig ram server, that I am sure would blows the doors off of that one for $275.

DELL PowerEdge R630 8SFF Server 2x E5-2690v3 2.6GHz =24 Cores 32GB H730 4xRJ45 | eBay

DELL PowerEdge R630 8SFF. 8SFF - 8 x 2.5" SAS/SATA - HDD/SSD. Dell PowerEdge R330 R430 R630 R730 R730xd R930 Blade R340 R640 R740 R740xd R840 VRTX HP Enterprise HP ProLiant DL360 HP ProLiant DL380 HP ProLiant DL560 HP ProLiant Blade Other Other Servers Parts Other.

www.ebay.com

I know it ebay , but come on .....

I can't think of any server with less than 8 cores and 64 gig ram that is worth buying with all this old stuff at givaway prices.

 

[Joe NYC]

Nah.

AMD doesn't care about raw unit count; they're not here to wage a price war in mainstream core count segments.

I don't even think AMD would have to discount them by much given the performance disparity, as showed in the Phoronix article

They have server Raphael for that in case you've missed it.

I may have, which one is that?

I mean, I see people using regular desktop CPUS in server oriented motherboards like one from Asrock and others...

No one buys funny Xeon-E boxes.
Like, ever.
Entry-level platforms have been a meme since Romley and that hasn't changed.

I think that's how some market research numbers keep showing Intel with > 80% of the server market.

 

[Joe NYC]

OK, thats $1049 for 2 cores and 8 gig ram. Here (on ebay) is a 24 core and 32 gig ram server, that I am sure would blows the doors off of that one for $275.

DELL PowerEdge R630 8SFF Server 2x E5-2690v3 2.6GHz =24 Cores 32GB H730 4xRJ45 | eBay

DELL PowerEdge R630 8SFF. 8SFF - 8 x 2.5" SAS/SATA - HDD/SSD. Dell PowerEdge R330 R430 R630 R730 R730xd R930 Blade R340 R640 R740 R740xd R840 VRTX HP Enterprise HP ProLiant DL360 HP ProLiant DL380 HP ProLiant DL560 HP ProLiant Blade Other Other Servers Parts Other.

www.ebay.com

I know it ebay , but come on .....

I can't think of any server with less than 8 cores and 64 gig ram that is worth buying with all this old stuff at givaway prices.

You can configure these (at rip-off prices) to a less ridiculous configuration.

A far better configurations would be possible just using AMD desktop CPUs. with 2x to 4x + performance, as the review shows. Which is the gap AMD needs to fill. A low hanging fruit that AMD just leaves there for Intel.

BTW, corporations will only buy the ones that come from Dell / HPe / Lenovo. No 2nd hand stuff or stuff from E-Bay.

 

[jpiniero]

A far better configurations would be possible just using AMD desktop CPUs. with 2x to 4x + performance, as the review shows. Which is the gap AMD needs to fill. A low hanging fruit that AMD just leaves there for Intel.

I think the market you are talking about (extreme single core perf due to licensing costs) is somewhat taken care of by the F line. But the F line processors don't quite have desktop like boost. I do think most would want more than 2 channels though.

 

[Joe NYC]

I think the market you are talking about (extreme single core perf due to licensing costs) is somewhat taken care of by the F line. But the F line processors don't quite have desktop like boost. I do think most would want more than 2 channels though.

The F-Line of EPYC servers still cost $1,000s of dollars for CPU alone.

I am talking about just taking desktop AM5 chips and pair them with more server oriented motherboards and chassis, to compete with Intel line of budget servers. These Intel budget servers are a complete farse.

Yet, they have a dominant position in the segment because AMD does not bother to sell more CPUs - even though AMD has CPUs are sitting unsold in AMD warehouses and inventories.

These standard desktop CPUs, from 8 cores to 16 sell for $300 to $500.

 

[Markfw]

You can configure these (at rip-off prices) to a less ridiculous configuration.

A far better configurations would be possible just using AMD desktop CPUs. with 2x to 4x + performance, as the review shows. Which is the gap AMD needs to fill. A low hanging fruit that AMD just leaves there for Intel.

BTW, corporations will only buy the ones that come from Dell / HPe / Lenovo. No 2nd hand stuff or stuff from E-Bay.

I will have to look, but I could swear I saw server motherboard for AM5 that a 7950x would do well on.

Edit: one example, there are more.

AMD Ryzen Server the ASRock Rack 1U4LW-B650/2L2T Review

ASRock Rack did it! In our ASRock Rack 1U4LW-B650/2L2T review we see why this AMD Ryzen server offers a huge gap over Intel's alternatives

www.servethehome.com

 

[adroc_thurston]

I may have, which one is that?

Consult your nearest Gigabyte rep.

I think that's how some market research numbers keep showing Intel with > 80% of the server market.

They do it with cheapo proper xeons, and not rebranded desktop platforms.
Please have some clue for once.

Ask ICX-SP quotes idk.

 

[Joe NYC]

Consult your nearest Gigabyte rep.

They do it with cheapo proper xeons, and not rebranded desktop platforms.
Please have some clue for once.

Ask ICX-SP quotes idk.

The Gigabyte Ryzen Server is very similar to Asrock Ryzen server. Mobo with some nice networking capabilities, such as 2x10 Gbit Ethernet + 2x2.5 Gbit or 2x1 Gbit, additional server features....

But the CPU for both is a standard desktop AM5 CPU. I have one of these running in my office.

AMD could come up with a special name for these: "Somewhat EPYC" instead of calling them Ryzen, for some increased market confusopoly...

 

[adroc_thurston]

But the CPU for both is a standard desktop AM5 CPU

That's all you need.

AMD could come up with a special name for these: "Somewhat EPYC" instead of calling them Ryzen, for some increased market confusopoly...

No, it is what it is.

 

[Joe NYC]

That's all you need.

No, it is what it is.

That's what I have been talking about.

Today's publishing Phoronix review of these budget servers showing even greater performance lead than I expected (and potential for Zen 5 in this market) is what brought this topic back to focus:

AMD Ryzen 7000 Series Make For Compelling Budget Servers, Leading Performance & Value Over Xeon E Review - Phoronix

www.phoronix.com

 

[bakyt115]

Seems like 3d Cash helps not only in games

https://www.phoronix.com/benchmark/...performance/timed-llvm-compilation-ninja.svgz
https://www.phoronix.com/benchmark/...ries-linux-server-performance/nginx-1000.svgz

 

[soresu]

N2 has no density bump over N3p (it's like 1.1x moar); perf/power is what cloud guys ready to pay for and they will.

Indeed, a known downside of Nanosheet/MBCFET is density vs finFET for a given transistor pitch, something that Forksheet is supposed to fix while also providing extra perf/power improvements over Nanosheet too.

 

[DisEnchantment]

Indeed, a known downside of Nanosheet/MBCFET is density vs finFET for a given transistor pitch, something that Forksheet is supposed to fix while also providing extra perf/power improvements over Nanosheet too.

Vs 2x2 cells hardly any density improvement.
Vs 3x3 cells there is a lot of density improvements to be had because increasing drive currents can be achieved by stacking sheets vertically and controlling sheet width. While Samsung has been conservative with number of sheets and using sheet width only to control drive current it remains to be seen what TSMC's N2 HP cells looks like. Extracting extra perf from N2 HD cells seems interesting.

 

[DrMrLordX]

Rome are cheap.

Nobody should be buying Rome at this point. It has some unfortunate vulnerabilities. Well one anyway.

 

[soresu]

Nobody should be buying Rome at this point. It has some unfortunate vulnerabilities. Well one anyway.

If all you want to do is run offline raytracing renderers on a 64-128C closed system then I think a vulnerability or 2 could be overlooked 😁

 

[Thibsie]

Nobody should be buying Rome at this point. It has some unfortunate vulnerabilities. Well one anyway.

I'd be happier with anything Rome than what I have now to teach my students.

 

[Fjodor2001]

Not any time soon.
Desktop can pay for real cores.

Not sure what you mean by that. E.g. Apple iPhones could also "pay" for only having big cores if that would be desired, so could expensive laptops. But clearly, iPhones have intentionally chosen to go big.LITTLE for a reason.

So I'm not sure why you're trying to make it into an issue of cost, indicating that it's always better to only have big cores if cost does not matter.

Here's how I see it. You have two main categories of workload types:

1. You want a certain number of big cores to handle workloads that can only have limited number of threads. They need max possible ST performance. What is a reasonable number of such threads/cores? Depends on the use case, but perhaps ~8 cores.

2. For other use cases, you usually have workloads that are very MT heavy. I.e. they scale well, and use whatever number cores are available efficiently. Example: Video encoding, cloud servers, etc. For this type of workload, it's much more perf/watt efficient to have many cores, not executing at top ST performance. Because power consumption increases exponentially for cores when you try to squeeze out the last few extra percent of performance by bumping frequency, or by adding complex logic to get additional IPC. And you'll always be limited by the power available for the CPU to use. This applies both to mobile and desktop.

In conclusion:

Best approach is to have a limited number of big cores, and the rest little cores. This applies both to mobile and desktop.

 

[adroc_thurston]

Apple iPhones could also "pay" for only having big cores if that would be desired, so could expensive laptops. But clearly, iPhones have intentionally chosen to go big.LITTLE for a reason.

Apple LITTLE is an actual sub-600mW LITTLE.
AMD dense cores are not that.

Best approach is to have a limited number of big cores, and the rest little cores. This applies both to mobile and desktop.

No.
Poverty cores make sense in cost-constrained segments.
Desktop isn't one of them (and isn't really a thing Zen6 onwards).

 

[BorisTheBlade82]

I am siding with @Fjodor2001 here.
For a wide range of consumer workloads it is best to have a reasonable amount of big cores ( <=8) and as much little cores as the transistor budget provides to get best PPA and Perf/Joule.
Main constraint: The little cores need to have better Perf/Joule like Apple has.

 

[Joe NYC]

Desktop isn't one of them (and isn't really a thing Zen6 onwards).

So what's the alternative for more cores? Or has the limit of number of cores that can be put to work effectively been reached?

 

[adroc_thurston]

So what's the alternative for more cores?

More single thread perf, more efficiency.

Or has the limit of number of cores that can be put to work effectively been reached?

In client?
Well until the next console gen, for the most part, yea.