AMD's 128-core Epycs could spell trouble for Ampere Computing

Re:AMD's 128-core Epycs could spell trouble for Ampere Compu... by geerlingguy on Saturday June 24, 2023 @07:39PM (#36463746)

At a certain density, though, power budgets come into consideration.

For 2 or 4 sockets per RU, you could be dealing with hundreds of kW per rack, and the heat that entails.

For certain deployments that could make sense. For others, a lower power, but still high core count solution could be better.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:AMD's 128-core Epycs could spell trouble for Ampere Compu... by wmf on Saturday June 24, 2023 @07:51PM (#36463812)

You can always solve power density by not fully populating a rack or underclocking or both. If Epyc is better it's better; it doesn't depend on density.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:AMD's 128-core Epycs could spell trouble for Ampere Compu... by geerlingguy on Saturday June 24, 2023 @10:17PM (#36464587)

It's definitely better for certain workloads.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:AMD's 128-core Epycs could spell trouble for Ampere Compu... by pclmulqdq on Saturday June 24, 2023 @07:56PM (#36463842)

I would assume that undervolting and underclocking will likely drop that power consumption quite considerably.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:AMD's 128-core Epycs could spell trouble for Ampere Compu... by rewmie on Sunday June 25, 2023 @04:49AM (#36466175)

> For others, a lower power, but still high core count solution could be better.

I think OP's point is that you'd need over twice the number of the lower density cores to get the same performance, thus by going that route you'd end up needing more power to get the same computational resources.

To put it simply, with ARM you'd need a 4U to get almost the same compute as a 2U of AMD.

[ Parent | on HN ]