|
Methylethylaldehyde posted:CFD is still strongly single thread limited. Not nearly as badly as most things, but it's often better to have 10 cores at 5ghz vs. 20 cores at 3ghz. Some code sets scale very nicely, where each extra proc gives you 0.97x the previous performance, some code is poo poo and gives you only 0.71x. In some specific cases, it's better to run the code on some hilariously OC'd HEDT proc vs. putting it on the shiny new 90 core quad socket servers. We use Ansys Fluent which claims pretty good linear scaling until quite a low cells per core number.
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2018 23:41
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 01:08 |
|
|
Another way of looking at it is 32 core threadripper already exists and is sold, they call it Epyc. Newegg will sell you ATX motherboards for it, too https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=9SIA5EM7856411 They could rebrand those parts to try to sell to HEDT with new motherboards, like Intel did with HCC and Skylake X, but the parts are already on the market.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2018 00:15
|
|
|
https://www.pcper.com/news/General-Tech/Computex-2018-CaseKing-and-Der8auer-Debut-Phase-Shift-Cooler-AIO-Prototype Please help, I may actually get a case with a side panel and lighting to show this off.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2018 02:12
|
|
|
Core wars https://twitter.com/david_schor/status/1004198284515270656?s=19 
MaxxBot fucked around with this message at 04:10 on Jun 6, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2018 04:07
|
|
|
https://www.anandtech.com/show/12906/amd-reveals-threadripper-2-up-to-32-cores-250w-x399-refreshquote:At the AMD press event at Computex, it was revealed that these new processors would have up to 32 cores in total, mirroring the 32-core versions of EPYC. On EPYC, those processors have four active dies, with eight active cores on each die (four for each CCX). On EPYC however, there are eight memory channels, and AMD’s X399 platform only has support for four channels. For the first generation this meant that each of the two active die would have two memory channels attached – in the second generation Threadripper this is still the case: the two now ‘active’ parts of the chip do not have direct memory access. This technically adds latency to the platform, however AMD is of the impression that for all but the most memory bound tasks, this should not be an issue (usually it is suggested to just go buy an EPYC for those workloads). While it does put more pressure on the internal Infinity Fabric, AMD ultimately designed Infinity Fabric for scalable scenarios like this between different silicon with different levels of cache and memory access.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2018 04:18
|
|
|
Current motherboards, too. So I guess the differentiation between Epyc and TR will be the memory situation? e: yup, looks like it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2018 04:19
|
|
|
Haha, the idea of possibly owning a 32-core PC is mind blowing.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2018 04:48
|
|
|
Yeah, so they're going with this:Eletriarnation posted:are we going to just tack on two new dies and force them to go through the first two for all memory accesses? Since the penalty for indirect access in 1st gen Threadripper from what I remember is roughly double memory latency, I guess I can buy their argument that it's not necessarily that crippling. Benchmarks will tell, at least. I'm more curious to see if there are new 2-die models and if their clocks increase significantly.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2018 04:49
|
|
|
Goddamnit, AMD. I think they're pushing too many cores, way too loving fast, and should realistically be sitting on eight cores for about half a decade or so before pushing mainstream further. Yeah, I know it's Threadripper, but this makes me feel like AMD's just waiting for Intel to make a move and then BAM, 16 CORE RYZEN. This logo right here is like, missing crackling lighting, being overlaid a neon wireframe landscape, and a retrowave beat. edit: something like this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=46crvk9UXlU&t=42s SwissArmyDruid fucked around with this message at 05:02 on Jun 6, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2018 04:52
|
|
|
Dadbod Apocalypse posted:Haha, the idea of possibly owning a 32-core PC is mind blowing. I didn't replace my quad core xeon workstation as I was waiting to see what competition between intel and amd would deliver. I'd be quite happy with a 32 core workstation mostly idle running word and for 2d drawing (with occassional CFD workloads running for days).
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2018 05:03
|
|
|
A 32 core machine would be loving hilarious, but I'd expect it at 2.5x the price of a 16C/32T Threadripper, so meh.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2018 05:38
|
|
|
The price of the Epyc chips is pretty drat crazy at the low end so yeah 32 core TR is likely to have an eye bleed price.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2018 06:43
|
|
|
Devian666 posted:The price of the Epyc chips is pretty drat crazy at the low end so yeah 32 core TR is likely to have an eye bleed price. The multi socket capable EPYCs are pretty expensive but the single socket ones are quite reasonable, there's a 24-core one for $1000.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2018 06:47
|
|
|
poo poo, now I want one.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2018 06:52
|
|
|
Wow, so I guess they are going with the single-channel-per-CCX thing? Might not be as bad as people figure since iirc memory is attached by Infinity Fabric anyway? Be interesting to see how it performs, I'm sure for a lot of workstation things it don't matter anyway.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2018 07:16
|
|
|
Paul MaudDib posted:Wow, so I guess they are going with the single-channel-per-CCX thing? Sent from my iPad posted:https://www.anandtech.com/show/12906/amd-reveals-threadripper-2-up-to-32-cores-250w-x399-refresh
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2018 07:29
|
|
|
Do we have any idea when Intel might announce their 8C CFL? I've been holding off on buying a 2700X because I want to see if there's something like a 2800X response prepped for an announcement like that, and I assumed Intel would unveil their CPU at Computex.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2018 09:09
|
|
|
In the land of videogames, are there any games out or coming out in the near future that really would benefit from more than 4 cores? Battlefield 1 is a cpu hog but even then I don't know if more cores would make a big difference vs. higher clock speeds.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2018 12:51
|
|
|
CPUs not having memory access isn't particularly new btw, intel's dual-ring SKUs for broadwell and haswell had no direct memory access on the second ring.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2018 12:52
|
|
|
Hmm, I'm not sure I have a reasonable use for 32 cores. I'd rather have 16 at a higher clock speed.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2018 14:15
|
|
|
Same, but hopefully this kicks 16 cores another notch down in price 
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2018 14:20
|
|
|
SwissArmyDruid posted:https://www.pcper.com/news/General-Tech/Computex-2018-CaseKing-and-Der8auer-Debut-Phase-Shift-Cooler-AIO-Prototype I was gonna encourage you to be strong and hold the line, but you can see the fluid boiling in the chamber and  uh yeah saaame
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2018 14:57
|
|
|
AMD drags Intel kicking and screaming into offering more cores to consumers, :feelsgoodman:
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2018 15:13
|
|
|
Munkeymon posted:I was gonna encourage you to be strong and hold the line, but you can see the fluid boiling in the chamber and Yea that's loving awesome tbh and I dislike case windows.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2018 16:02
|
|
|
I'm just watching a GN video about the TR2 cooler from BeQuiet, and he mentioned a 24 core TR2, too, scheduled for August (sounds like the 32 core comes later).
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2018 18:31
|
|
|
Avalanche posted:In the land of videogames, are there any games out or coming out in the near future that really would benefit from more than 4 cores? Maybe soon. AMD's many-cores works well for people in high end productivity niche or running open-source video compressors or what have you. However, they don't set standards or define the mainstream so most home/gaming software won't make use of it for now. The gaming industry marches to the tune of the blue team, so games may take advantage of six cores now that Intel is offering six-cores in a consumer focused product. However, just because game software won't take advantage of more cores than Intel is going to support doesn't mean AMD's extra cores are worthless, since you do sometimes run other software alongside games. The latest review trend seems to be "yes, games leave cores at the table and don't reach the peak FPS they do on Intel's fewer, faster cores; but when simultaneously compressing a stream in h264 you'll see the viewers are closer to the stream's targeted framerate, even if the player is getting 80 FPS instead of 95." That's appealing if you're interested in being a streamer on the hobbyist, not-buying-two-PCs-for-this level.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2018 19:12
|
|
|
Anime Schoolgirl posted:CPUs not having memory access isn't particularly new btw, intel's dual-ring SKUs for broadwell and haswell had no direct memory access on the second ring. Dual-ring SKUs were Xeon only though.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2018 19:36
|
|
|
AMD posted:Threadripper2  Two years ago I was all about trying to build the most effective machines I could: maximizing compute capability with low power usage. Now I want to throw out every machine I own and build something to hold this monster.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2018 21:25
|
|
|
mdxi posted:
It's the monster truck of home computers, you have to build a case that can run over and crush your former, lowly systems.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2018 21:39
|
|
|
Craptacular! posted:The gaming industry marches to the tune of the blue team Seems pretty specious when both consoles use AMD cpus. I'm sure Sony and MS are not hobbling performance just to kowtow to intel. The sad truth is that multithreading is difficult, games are not made with the same priorities as server software, and a lot of the tasks that are easy to split out onto their own thread are not the ones that consume the majority of cpu time. 4-core CPUs have been the general point of diminishing returns for games because once you have the main game loop, GPU API, and OS/misc junk on their own cores you're left with pulling work out of the main thread.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2018 22:29
|
|
|
Computer Jesus putting Intel on blast: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tRH0-QwhvVQquote:We talk about Intel's 28-core, 5GHz CPU unveil at Computex, which we found disingenuous and misleading.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2018 23:24
|
|
|
Also I guess a lot of game engines were built during the long term period of 100% AMD suckage.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2018 23:25
|
|
|
mdxi posted:
Same here, I built one and it is pretty awesome. Running a VM and you want 6 cores for it? Sure why not. Run multiple VMs? One 6 cores the other 4, no worries. I like it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2018 23:25
|
|
|
GRINDCORE MEGGIDO posted:Also I guess a lot of game engines were built during the long term period of 100% AMD suckage. It is more that even if an engine uses 8 threads it can still bottleneck on a single thread. That single thread is usually the core engine or the thread managing the render calls.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2018 00:37
|
|
|
Can't wait to see the power consumption on that "5ghz" CPU before it falls over.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2018 03:40
|
|
|
Xae posted:It is more that even if an engine uses 8 threads it can still bottleneck on a single thread. That single thread is usually the core engine or the thread managing the render calls. Is there still much of a difference in performance due to Intel compiler shenanigans?
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2018 03:46
|
|
|
snickothemule posted:Can't wait to see the power consumption on that "5ghz" CPU before it falls over. For the very first and possibly only time ever, those dumbass nuclear reactor comparisons on ayymd come close to having actual merit.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2018 05:33
|
|
|
https://www.servethehome.com/amd-epyc-rome-details-trickle-out-64-cores-128-threads-per-socket/quote:First, Rome will have up to 64 cores and 128 threads in a single socket. (Edit June 6, 2018: Mea Culpa. Looks like we got some generational information “confirmed” to us incorrectly. Expect a 48 core / 96 thread generation before a 64 core / 128 thread generation Am I understanding that wrong or does that mean Zen 2 will have 6 cores per CCX and Zen 3 will get 8 cores? That's assuming Epyc will have the same configuration as it does now. That would mean 12 core ryzen on AM4 in 2019, and 16 cores in 2020/21 on AM5, with ddr5
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2018 06:02
|
|
|
The other option is moving to 3 CCXs then 4 but that adds a different kind of complexity. I guess the question is which has the lowest performance hit and which is easiest to tape out.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2018 06:11
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 01:08 |
|
|
Seamonster posted:For the very first and possibly only time ever, those dumbass nuclear reactor comparisons on ayymd come close to having actual merit. 1.21GW TDP, the buttcoiner's wet dream
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2018 06:12
|
|
