![]() Memory: 1.5TB (24圆4GB) Samsung DDR5 RDIMMĢP Epyc 9684X and 9754 are compared against the best AMD server processors. Motherboard: AMD Titanite, RTI1008_C BIOS ![]() Processors: 2x AMD Epyc 9754 and Epyc 9684X Opting for more cores compared to Genoa, however, translates into slower base and boost speeds. 9754 ($11,900) sits as chief protagonist, 9754S ($10,200) is the non-hyperthreaded version for customers whose workloads don’t benefit from the technology, while 9734 ($9,600) switches off one of the eight CCDs to leave a 112-core, 224-thread offering. Now, there are a maximum 16 cores per partition, rather than eight, and simple maths leads us nicely to a full complement of 128 cores.Īs density is of most importance for Bergamo, AMD concentrates on high-core-count models alone. 128 core and 256 threads in a single x86 processor – you don’t see that every dayīergamo’s Epyc 9754 champion, shown above, uses only eight CCDs, which is four fewer than Genoa-based 9654, though AMD effectively doubles the cores contained within each CCD. In fact, if taken on the same process and core-to-core basis, including L1 and L2 caches, Bergamo enjoys an impressive 35 per cent smaller footprint than Genoa. These include, but are not limited to, having less-dense cache, no TSVs for 3D V-Cache technology, and myriad other space-saving refinements. 96 – by stripping away what it deems to be silicon bulk not required for cloud-native applications. Switching gears to all-new Epyc Bergamo processors, AMD concentrates 33 per cent more cores than regular Genoa / X processors – 128 vs. Bergamo harnesses density-optimised Zen 4c Though you may not need it, Epyc 9684X ought to be a tad quicker than Epyc 9654 in almost every scenario, whilst taking it fully to task in cache-limited scenarios that fully play into its design. ![]() ModelĪMD’s taken the opportunity to increase standard chip TDP from 360W to 400W for Big Boy Genoa-X 9684X, and that’s enough to drive the extra 768MB of 元 cache whilst also boosting the base frequency. Understanding how Genoa-X fits into the Epyc landscape is important enough to warrant further discussion, so here’s how similar models line up against regular Genoa and last-gen Milan / Milan-X. In a land where cache is king, Genoa-X is monarch without equal. Yup, you’ve read that right there’s around 2.3GB per standard board. The maths therefore describe a single processor housing 1,152MB of juicy last-level cache, which is doubled in a 2P environment. AMD turns to 3D V-Cache technology, enabling an extra 64MB of 元 per CCD, or 768MB across a 12-CCD chip. Numerous technical-computing workloads are large in application footprint, meaning serious performance uplifts are achieved if their entire working set is resident in chip cache. You see, AMD appreciates there is market opportunity for server processors with heaps more on-chip 元 cache than the maximum 384MB present on the 96-core / 192-thread 9654 monster. Genoa-X is closest in design as it mimics most of what makes the regular chip tick along, but there is one crucial difference. Genoa-X and Bergamo are natural evolutions from the standard Epyc Genoa revealed last November, and it’s worth heading back to that editorial to familiarise yourself with the underlying Zen 4 architecture as it pertains to server processors. Today, we examine the performance credentials of top-line Epyc 9684X Genoa-X and 9754 Bergamo chips. From general-purpose horsepower through cache-rich models primed for technical workloads and density-optimised solutions ready for cloud-native applications, there’s something for everyone. Now harnessing 4th Generation models across multiple swim lanes, Epyc’s portfolio is split between Genoa and all-new Genoa-X and Bergamo processors. ![]() Jump to: Genoa-X | Bergamo | Performance | ConclusionĪMD’s charge in the server space shows no signs of abating. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |