back to article AMD: Our latest, pricier mega-cache Epyc processors leapfrog Intel’s

AMD has announced its latest, pricier Epyc server processors, code-named Milan-X, to extend the chip giant's lead over Intel for technical computing applications. The key to the appeal is driven by a massive amount of cache fused in, a major jump for HPC and other demanding areas. The four new microprocessors range from 16 to …

  1. This post has been deleted by its author

    1. Peter2 Silver badge

      Re: 664 to 1000 dollar premium is “modest”?

      If you can halve the numbers of servers running then a 50% increase in the price for one server is a modest increase; offset by you buying half the number of servers and using half the electricity, which is of course the major operating cost.

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: 664 to 1000 dollar premium is “modest”?

      "I think that modest premium is more than paid off..."

      *thinks* ... can't prove it, but he thinks.

    3. DS999 Silver badge

      Re: 664 to 1000 dollar premium is “modest”?

      For processors that sell for up to $8000, yes a $1000 premium is modest.

    4. Throatwarbler Mangrove Silver badge

      Re: 664 to 1000 dollar premium is “modest”?

      These are server CPUs with up to 64 logical cores, so yes, it's modest. The article mentions, "Compared to Intel's top line, 40-core Xeon 8380," a CPU which has a recommended price of around $8700.

    5. IGotOut Silver badge

      Re: 664 to 1000 dollar premium is “modest”?

      Compare to how much the likes of Oracle charge to license processors and cores, this would be better described as "insignificant"

  2. Binraider Silver badge

    768MB of cache.... Writing an OS that runs entirely inside of it might be a fun challenge?

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Windows 95 would run quite happily in 16MB :3

      1. Korev Silver badge

        I think I used to run it in 8MB :)

        1. Korev Silver badge

          And I think the HDD was 40MB so that'd have also fitted into the errr epic Epyc cache...

        2. Alan Brown Silver badge

          it would run (ok, ok, crawl) in 4MB

    2. Anonymous Coward

      Been there, done that. See icon.

    3. Ken Hagan Gold badge

      Spin up a VM and see which OSes will boot in 768 MB. I suspect they all will, but you might have to allocate 2GB to actually get the shittier ones to install first.

    4. Old Used Programmer

      Already exists

      Linux (in the form of RPiOS32) runs quite nicely on 512MB systems.

      1. Ne body

        Re: Already exists

        Full install of FreeBSD 12.3 also runs in 512MB in my Vultr cloud instance.

  3. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    I wonder - will Intel someday be an IBM, a shadow of its former powerhouse days? Certainly there is a lot of competition coming on the market, and not just from the x86 instruction set cores. Or is the market just going to shift to specialized cores designed for specific workloads, such as these new AMD chips that likely wouldn't benefit my IO heavy builds all that much?

    1. bazza Silver badge

      Possibly so. They got rid of their best engineers in a hire - fire profit "maximising" pique, and haven't recovered. They now might be permanently behind the curve.

      IBM have done something slightly different, choosing to not compete in market segments where there was growing competition, but didn't really bother inventing new market segments to replace the abandoned divisions. They did pretty well out of their formulation of a PC, but left it to others (Nokia, then Blackberry, then Apple, and Google and Amazon) to invent the next rounds. They've not lead the revolution in financial computing, missing out on the high speed trading segment, nor have they really bothered with the large scale up of Internet processing (analytics, etc). That they're still able to make money out of mainframes for admittedly quite large financial applications is remarkable.

      Whereas Intel tossed their entire market leading position in the bin and then found people didn't want to buy their old hot chips any more.

  4. Bitsminer Silver badge

    AMD catches up to Cray

    The Cray-2 (1985 era) had a 128 MWord static RAM option --- 1 gigabyte of static RAM as main memory.

    Finally, AMD puts enough static RAM on a chip to match a supercomputer that is 37 years old.....

    1. bazza Silver badge

      Re: AMD catches up to Cray

      But runs it a whole lot faster, I think!

      Reminds me of the old days. Clone manufacturers started adding cache, and I recall the day when the cache size equalled the max main memory size at 1MByte (or at least, 640K).

      AMD are headed that way...

      Is the L3 static memory? That doesn't feel right from a power consumption point of view, but very impressive if it is static. Pretty damned impressive anyway.

      1. Steve Todd

        Re: AMD catches up to Cray

        By definition all cache memory is static. Having to cope with RAS/CAS/refresh cycles would ruin their performance. You literally present an address to them and either get a response back or a cache miss signal predictably a couple of cycles later.

  5. ShadowSystems

    All I want to know is...

    Will it play NetHack at full speed, full eye candy enabled, at full screen max resolution, with no stuttering, skipped frames, or shredding?

    I swear to Cthulhu's BDSM-inspired rainbow toe socks that I *hate* it when NetHack goes all laggy, choppy, & auto-reduces itself to a tiny little window to try & keep up.


    On a slightly more serious note (shut up in the peanut gallery!), would such a CPU do much to improve a typical desktop computer user's daily tasks?

    I mean, sure it can process your email faster, sort a file faster, calculate your spreadsheet to a zillion decimal places faster, but given the nature of "software bloating to use every last bit" of all available resources, will us lowly mortals not gifted with more money than Microsoft ever realize any benefits?

    My geek side wants to get it's hands on a few of these, a mobo that supports them, a few TB of DDR5 RAM, a couple of Exabytes of super fast disk, and then install the lightest-system-requirements distro I can find on it to see *exactly* how blazingly fast I could get it to run.

    But then the realistic side reminds me that I don't have a few million to spend, so that upgrade will have to wait a while...

    *Comical arcs of sparkly rainbow crocodile anime tears of geeky angst*

  6. Old Hand

    The plural of die is NOT dies but DICE

    1. NoneSuch Silver badge

      The plural of die, is massacre.

      1. ShadowSystems

        The plural of die... Total Party Kill. =-Jp

        "Rocks fall, everybody dies. Now get out of my home before I set fire to your dice!"


        I'll get my coat, it's the one that's been sealed against ichor splatter...

  7. wsm

    Hardware only option?

    Given the great proliferation of virtual machines, I wonder if Amazon, Microsoft, VMWare or even Oracle will be able to emulate the performance of this 3D cache.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Other stories you might like