News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Intel’s High-End Cascade Lake CPUs to Support 3.84 TB of Memory per Socket. Parent comment

Re:Intel’s High-End Cascade Lake CPUs to Support 3.84 TB of ... by theevilsharpie on Tuesday July 17, 2018 @07:53AM (#17549018)
Threadripper may come close in core count, but it cannot use registered memory, which means it's limited to 128 GB of RAM (based on the current maximum UDIMM capacities). That's not competitive in the server space.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Intel’s High-End Cascade Lake CPUs to Support 3.84 TB of ... by andy_ppp on Tuesday July 17, 2018 @09:23AM (#17549527)
EPYC supports up to 2TB per CPU so it's not entirely uncompetitive... Not sure I trust Intel's figures here anyway - some people are saying it's less than the 3.84TB per socket...

https://www.tweaktown.com/news/58052/amd-epyc-32c-64t-3-2ghz...

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Intel’s High-End Cascade Lake CPUs to Support 3.84 TB of ... by aoeusnth1 on Tuesday July 17, 2018 @09:07AM (#17549417)
Why does threadripper need to be competitive in the server space?

Edit: emphasis on threadripper, which is a consumer product.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Intel’s High-End Cascade Lake CPUs to Support 3.84 TB of ... by sandworm101 on Tuesday July 17, 2018 @10:27AM (#17549941)
The server market is like Formula One for chip makers. It is where there is enough money to really push the limits of the technology. Competing in such leagues brings institutional knowledge, and bragging rights.

Servers is also where you get back-and-forth discussions with customers large enough to be worth listening to. Getting useful feedback from the users of desktop CPUs is difficult and time-consuming. But someone like Facebook or Google, who buy thousands of CPUs, and know how to use them, can give you quick and reliable feedback. They can test prototypes and suggest changes within weeks.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Intel’s High-End Cascade Lake CPUs to Support 3.84 TB of ... by ben-schaaf on Tuesday July 17, 2018 @12:16PM (#17550757)
Threadripper doesn't target servers, their EPYC line does...
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Intel’s High-End Cascade Lake CPUs to Support 3.84 TB of ... by theevilsharpie on Tuesday July 17, 2018 @12:46PM (#17551050)
> Why does threadripper need to be competitive in the server space?

It doesn't, and AMD doesn't market Threadripper for server use. It only came up in this discussion because of a misunderstanding of Threadripper's capabilities.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Intel’s High-End Cascade Lake CPUs to Support 3.84 TB of ... by ajross on Tuesday July 17, 2018 @10:58AM (#17550115)
Because laptop CPUs don't make any money, and gaming PCs are so small a market as to be irrelevant. The bulk of x86 revenue, and almost all the profit, is in the datacenter.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Intel’s High-End Cascade Lake CPUs to Support 3.84 TB of ... by aoeusnth1 on Tuesday July 17, 2018 @11:05AM (#17550162)
Right. But threadripper isn’t AMD’s server processor, and EPYC is eating Intel’s lunch.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Intel’s High-End Cascade Lake CPUs to Support 3.84 TB of ... by throwaway2048 on Tuesday July 17, 2018 @08:40AM (#17549245)
EYPC is their server line, which has a 32 core count cpu with RDIMM support.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Intel’s High-End Cascade Lake CPUs to Support 3.84 TB of ... by opportune on Tuesday July 17, 2018 @07:55AM (#17549032)
oops, you're right, good point
[ Parent | on HN ]