News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on 64 Core Threadripper 3990X CPU Review. Parent comment

Re:64 Core Threadripper 3990X CPU Review by kadoban on Friday February 07, 2020 @10:55AM (#22267170)
Probably not near as well, if they're all actually doing anything. You'd hit bottlenecks moving data around, the bus used to fetch memory isn't 32 times as wide, and the memory isn't 32 times as fast, same with other resources.

You could in practice run quite a few VMs before you'd run into trouble, especially if most of them are idle at any given point.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:64 Core Threadripper 3990X CPU Review by anon73044 on Friday February 07, 2020 @02:00PM (#22269439)
That's some data I'd love to see. 32 1u servers all connected with fiber or 10gig vs 32 VMs on the same host vs 32 k8s pods on the same node. I'm wondering if the same test would scale from 4 hosts/VMs/pods

I don't even think there's a benchmark out there for such a test.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:64 Core Threadripper 3990X CPU Review by AstralStorm on Friday February 07, 2020 @11:46AM (#22267809)
It's still much faster than any Core 2. It's faster than 2 cores of Sandy Bridge on my older 2950x, so I'd expect 39z0x to be even faster, probably beating older Skylake.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:64 Core Threadripper 3990X CPU Review by kadoban on Friday February 07, 2020 @01:34PM (#22269113)
Yeah, I'm sure it's going to depend a lot on workload. If each one is in some crazy tight loop, CPU bound without using much working set of memory at all, it should be faster.

Or more realistically if they're usual VMs and idle the vast majority of the time, that should be faster too.

[ Parent | on HN ]