News AMD Genoa 96-Core CPU Towers Over Intel Sapphire Rapids 56-Core CPU In 2P System Benchmark

[Admin]

In the battle of the following gen 2P server systems, AMD leads, despite Cinebench R23 rendering maxing out at 125C/256T - leaving 64C/128T of untapped potential.

AMD Genoa 96-Core CPU Towers Over Intel Sapphire Rapids 56-Core CPU In 2P System Benchmark : Read more

 

[Makaveli]

There is photoshopping done on this image. Should be tagged as a Rumor

View: https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/wrzxz2/sapphire_rapids_8480_vs_epyc_genoa_cinebench_r23/

 

[Jimbojan]

If Intel Sapphire Rapids 2 socket is still cheaper than AMD's 96 Core, what is the point here? As most users do not need 96 cores.

 

[Kamen Rider Blade]

If Intel Sapphire Rapids 2 socket is still cheaper than AMD's 96 Core, what is the point here? As most users do not need 96 cores.

You do know that Sapphire Rapids & Genoa are generally for Enterprise workloads.

They're not designed for consumers.

 

[waltc3]

With Intel having officially delayed Sapphire Rapids until ~mid 2023, I see no reason to doubt this general assessment--but I'm sure it isn't literal--the performance difference could be much higher in favor of Genoa... But, seriously, all of it is pure speculation at this point. Still, Intel's delay of SR is telling.

 

[Friesiansam]

There is photoshopping done on this image. Should be tagged as a Rumor

View: https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/wrzxz2/sapphire_rapids_8480_vs_epyc_genoa_cinebench_r23/

No need for it to be tagged as a rumour. Presumably you missed: "However, before going on, please take the results with a pinch of salt, as YuuKi_AnS admits this type of shared data isn’t guaranteed to be accurate but is “for reference only. "

 

[C_D]

Meet Delayed Rapids! Cheers!

 

[Wisecracker]

Next on deck ___ 'Bergamo' packing a whopping 128 Zen 4c cores (if AMD hits their roadmap in 1H-2023 . . . )

With Intel having officially delayed Sapphire Rapids until ~mid 2023, I see no reason to doubt this general assessment--but I'm sure it isn't literal--the performance difference could be much higher in favor of Genoa... But, seriously, all of it is pure speculation at this point. Still, Intel's delay of SR is telling.

 

[drtweak]

You do know that Sapphire Rapids & Genoa are generally for Enterprise workloads.

They're not designed for consumers.

lol right? like yea we all gonna buy dual CPU 96 core systems for our daily driver lol

 

[nicalandia]

View: https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/wrzxz2/sapphire_rapids_8480_vs_epyc_genoa_cinebench_r23/

Yes. the screenshots I got from the source(YuuKi_AnS) had a few blurred sections on the original picture. I did a terrible job at trying to "Clean" it with Paint(not even PhotoShop).

I Got with YuuKi_Ans, shared the pics, he reviewed, like it and posted on his Twitter Account...

This is one of the pictures(I have others, also 4S and 8S Sapphire Rapids data will be shared in due time)

https://twitter.com/x/status/1560787109463687170

View: https://mobile.twitter.com/SprayOnCopper/status/1560787109463687170

 

[shady28]

The comparative Intel scores already got debunked, or something is wrong with their ES. The lower end 52 core 8370 got 79150 s the 56 core 8380 they used to compare to Genoa getting 69000.

52 core 8370 getting 79,150 vs Genoa 96 core at 110,230.

You are getting 71% of the performance from Sapphire Rapids with 54% of the cores count of the Genoa part.

If you are in a licensing situation where you have to pay per core, common to say Oracle or SQL Server licensing, Sapphire rapids is going to be a runaway winner here.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1519330531871051777

View: https://twitter.com/yuuki_ans/status/1519330531871051777