Here Is the AMD EPYC "Rome" C-Ray Demo

Discussion in 'HardForum Tech News' started by cageymaru, Jan 24, 2019.

  1. cageymaru

    cageymaru [H]ard as it Gets

    Messages:
    19,728
    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2003
    AMD has released a new live demo of its prototype 2nd generation AMD EPYC "Rome" 64 core 7nm CPU vs 2x Intel Xeon Platinum 8180M CPUs where the workload is C-Ray. C-Ray is a floating point intensive benchmark that renders images. The systems in the demo rendered a total of 3 images; a 1080p (HD), 1440p (QHD), and finally a 2160p (4K) image. The C-Ray version used in both systems during the demo is 1.2.0. The 1P AMD system was clearly faster than the 2P Intel system in this demo.

    The AMD Rome Development Platform consisted of CPU: 1 x 64 core "Rome" SOC, Memory: 8 x 32GB DDR4 2667 DIMMs, Drive: 1TB SSD Samsung EVO 970, and OS version - Ubuntu 18.04.

    The Intel Platform consisted of Chassis: Supermicro Model: SYS-1029U-TRTP, CPU: 2x Intel(R) Xeon(R) Platinum 8180M CPU @2.50GHz, Speed: 2500MHz, Total Cores/Threads: 56/112, Memory: 24xDIMM - 32BG = 768GB, Speed 2666 MHz, Manufacturer: Samsung, Drive: Samsung 970 EVO 1TB - NVME, OS version - Ubuntu 18.04

    One 2nd Generation AMD EPYC 64 core CPU beats two Intel Xeon Platinum 8180M CPUs on the C-Ray benchmark.
     
    Dayaks likes this.
  2. Jim Kim

    Jim Kim 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    3,416
    Joined:
    May 24, 2012
    Is it weird that this makes me tumescent?
    thanks Cageymaru
     
    Viper16 likes this.
  3. Nukester

    Nukester [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,429
    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2016
    On a roll... Lovin' it.
     
  4. clockdogg

    clockdogg Gawd

    Messages:
    865
    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2007
    Kind of. Maybe awkward for Cageymaru. But, not an Epyc problem for AMD's silicon 'implants'.
     
  5. pj-schmidt

    pj-schmidt Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    356
    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2004
    That's impressive. Power usage of each system would be intersting to know..

    I wonder if vending machines at Intel also dispense heart burn medication, or if they're just dumping it into the company drinking king water?
     
  6. Chebsy

    Chebsy Gawd

    Messages:
    524
    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2013
    There is a bit to think about here, such as what is the clock speed of the Rome CPU ? The Intel CPU's have a total of 56 cores and 112 threads. The AMD system has 64 cores, but how many threads ? Having 8 cores more you would expect the Rome CPU to perform better if they have similar IPC's. This benchmark doesn't really say that much.
     
  7. BrotherMichigan

    BrotherMichigan [H]Lite

    Messages:
    103
    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2016
    It says that AMD is able to squeeze more than double the number of cores than Intel into a single socket at comparable performance per core. That's huge in the server market.
     
  8. Mega6

    Mega6 [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,443
    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2017
    64x2 would be 128
     
    Zuul, ole-m, Darth Kyrie and 4 others like this.
  9. Bigdady92

    Bigdady92 [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    5,768
    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2001
    I want one of those shirts.
     
  10. pj-schmidt

    pj-schmidt Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    356
    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2004
    It says that if AMD used a 2 socket system it would absolutely obliterate Intel.
     
    JackNSally, Darth Kyrie and N4CR like this.
  11. andrewaggb

    andrewaggb Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    424
    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2004
    I think it looks great for AMD. Of course it won't be competing against the intel cpus they've shown, it'll be competing against the 48 core cascade ap. AMD looks like they'll be faster in some if not most workloads. That's pretty impressive.
     
  12. fuzzylogik

    fuzzylogik Gawd

    Messages:
    627
    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2012
    That's pretty awesome. So many cores in that little package.
     
  13. Uvaman2

    Uvaman2 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    3,041
    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2016
    It says Intel is getting their ass handed to them.
     
    ole-m and Reality like this.
  14. Mega6

    Mega6 [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,443
    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2017
    Intel just fell short on last quarter earnings and is taking a beating.
    Revenue miss 18.66B vs 19.01B est
     
  15. haste.

    haste. [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,653
    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2011
    It's odd the lack of detail of the specifications for the AMD system. You would think that if you were comparing two systems you would show detail of each system on a comparable level, but that could also be to protect trade secrets. No matter, AMD could have cherry a picked bench as well as a cherry picked CPU then highly optimized for the bench.

    Also they are sure to specify any aspect of the Intel system that outweigh that of the Rome, obviously to get the fans fired up, with lack of detail on their side. Marketing videos/demos are just that, marketing. Let's wait and see!
     
  16. Riccochet

    Riccochet Off Topic Award

    Messages:
    21,599
    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2007
    My thoughts exactly. Especially when you consider per socket licensing. Density is king.
     
    Darth Kyrie, Reality and Jim Kim like this.
  17. qw1cktype1

    qw1cktype1 [H]Lite

    Messages:
    123
    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2005
    But Intel did have a record year with over 70 billion with a 3 year record revenue
     
  18. Mega6

    Mega6 [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,443
    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2017
    They missed their numbers so either:
    1) chip sector related
    2) AMD gain

    My best is BOTH. AMD guided VERY conservative, so hopefully they will be good.
     
  19. Brokennails

    Brokennails [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,916
    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2006
    Makes you wonder what would have been if Intel hadn't cock blocked AMD all those years ago with shady shit.
     
  20. Grimlaking

    Grimlaking 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    2,792
    Joined:
    May 9, 2006
    This does look good for AMD, but... codec's matter, algorithms matter. I would LOVE to build our next SQL server refresh (a 32 core 64 thread system) on a 'Rome' platform and get that reliably out of one socket. I just don't see that quite yet.

    Would love to see some performance comparisons with SQL DB's or Oracle DB's and Different I/O intensive workloads (where with all the PCIE lanes I would expect the ROME platform to shine.).
     
  21. Mega6

    Mega6 [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,443
    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2017
    Anandtech usually has db benchies,
     
  22. DeChache

    DeChache The ONE - Your Ignorance Annoys Me

    Messages:
    6,838
    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2005
    I just want to know if they have AVX2
     
  23. DukenukemX

    DukenukemX [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    4,391
    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2005
    I'd really like to see a benchmark between CPU Ray-Tracing and RTX 2080 Ti's Ray Tracing. I wanna know exactly how capable Nvidia's hardware is.
     
  24. Disco_Stu_04

    Disco_Stu_04 Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    427
    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2003
    Did they not have a better presentation area?

    Otherwise, awesome.
     
  25. cdabc123

    cdabc123 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    2,247
    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2016
    intel already has 72 core 288 thread cpus (phi 7290). I have a few and they obliterate the intel platinums on some tasks.
     
  26. Mega6

    Mega6 [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,443
    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2017
    Not every server app needs 72 cores. Dual socket and single socket Rome will undercut Intel's offering significantly on price / performance in many areas - which is really the point.
     
  27. ianken

    ianken [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,953
    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2006
    Intel Seconds per core: 0.54
    AMD seconds per core: 0.44

    So a bit less than 20% faster with about 14% more cores? So at least in this case AMD seems to have an IPC win...

    So, AMD keeping the pressure on. Which is good for all of us.

    Really hope new consumer CPUs close or surpass the IPC gap. With Intel passing off binned parts as "9th generation" I think they need more motivation. Like market and mind-share loss big time.
     
    Jim Kim, KazeoHin and N4CR like this.
  28. Grimlaking

    Grimlaking 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    2,792
    Joined:
    May 9, 2006
    That is an interesting CPU. Interesting in this case meaning only good for very specific cases. It has zero support for virtualization at all. I didn't see mention of any sort of hyper threading (though I suppose 288 thread means 4 threads per core.) Unless you are running fairly specific ASIC like jobs I don't think this would be a very good platform.

    Yes it has more raw cores and threads... to do a specific thing... slowly UNLESS it is heavily multi threaded.

    I don't think it's even in the same ballpark as that of a ROME or Platinum Intel Xeon CPU for general use.

    But you DID get me to look it up. So props for that! :)
     
  29. N4CR

    N4CR 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    3,717
    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2011
    Damn, and with 256Gb vs 768Gb.. even if C-Ray won't use it all Intel has far, far more bandwidth available at the same memory speed with a few less cores. Interesting bench.
     
  30. uberzero

    uberzero n00b

    Messages:
    13
    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2018
    The devil in the details: on tha Rome runs on a total of 256GB DDR4 2667 Ram with 1TB SSD (SATA or NVMe) vs 768GB DDR4 2667 Mhz RAM with 1TB NVME SSD for the dual Xeon CPU.
     
  31. kllrnohj

    kllrnohj [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    6,846
    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2003
    That's 72 very, very slow cores, though. Not only are they clocked low, they are also Atom cores. Their IPC is terrible. The entire point of it is purely the SIMD floating point performance. That chip isn't competing against other Xeons or Epyc chips, it's competing against Nvidia's Tesla. It's basically a GPU in a CPU socket.

    It has a use, but it's entirely irrelevant here. Only useful in a completely unrelated market segment.
     
  32. ole-m

    ole-m Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    432
    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2015
    they do.
     
    DeChache likes this.
  33. juanrga

    juanrga Pro-Intel / Anti-AMD Just FYI

    Messages:
    2,540
    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2017
    At comparable performance per core on C-Ray... And this is comparing Zen2 to Skylake-SP.
     
  34. sirmonkey1985

    sirmonkey1985 [H]ard|DCer of the Month - July 2010

    Messages:
    21,249
    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2008
    the only unofficial clocks for the 64/128 cpu i've seen was 1.4Ghz base 2.0Ghz max boost on an engineering sample that was posted on sisoftware.. we won't know til it's officially launched what the actual numbers end up being but it's probably some where around there.
     
  35. BloodyIron

    BloodyIron 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    3,443
    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2005
    And what about integer tests?

    CPUs are primarily strong in integer calculations, not floating point. So while this is certainly a promising test, we need to see more.
     
  36. cdabc123

    cdabc123 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    2,247
    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2016
    they also have crazy memory bandwidth due to the 16 gb of mcdram on the chip. the newer ones do have support for virtualization.
     
  37. BrotherMichigan

    BrotherMichigan [H]Lite

    Messages:
    103
    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2016
    Sure, but is there anything to support the conclusion that they won't be competitive in other non-AVX-512 workloads? Epyc was already very competitive with Skylake-SP and that's before the architectural enhancements in Zen 2, not the least of which is full AVX2 support. Given that it seems Intel's only real response is going to be the niche product that is Skylake-AP, I'd say AMD is going to be the overall performance leader at least until Intel is able to push out a true competitor, certainly on a per-socket basis if not per-core.
     
    N4CR likes this.
  38. raz-0

    raz-0 [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    4,503
    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2003
    It tells us tons. First, it's faster at going from start to finish o a given scene. All reasonable renderers these days are heavily multi-threaded, so this should translate to multiple rendering platofrms reasonably reliably. Second you don't care if it is faster as long as it isn't slower because....

    The tweo xeons have a TDP of 205W each.

    The AMD SoC has a TDP of 65W+ It's safe to say that the + means 250W or less given that has been the max thermal envelope for their previous entries and AMD still lists it for ryzen2 entires with lower core counts.

    Right there It wins. Because it means for the amount of power and cooling in your render farm machine room, you can either use less and save money every month on utilities, or you can pack in more render nodes and get work done faster without paying for HVAC, power, and UPS expansion.

    If you have a better understanding of the renderer it alsso tells you something about memory needs and efficiency.

    I have no idea if the intel box is WAAAAY over specced to make AMD look good or if it needs that much ram. But if you can get your desired render times with 128 gigs of ram instead of 700+, those boxes will HAVE to be significantly cheaper. People with more knowledge of the software will know though and be able to tell.
     
    Jim Kim likes this.
  39. N4CR

    N4CR 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    3,717
    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2011
    Sauce?
    Last I had not seen any confirmation. But been too busy to keep on top of things.. cheers
     
  40. DeChache

    DeChache The ONE - Your Ignorance Annoys Me

    Messages:
    6,838
    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2005
    I'm just hoping that its fully implemented not the we will just combine two AVX 128 piplines ala how they are doing AVX 256 on Zen