News AMD Launches EPYC 8004-Series 'Siena' CPUs: Up to 64 Zen 4c Cores

[Admin]

AMD's EPYC 8004-series processors for edge servers feature up to 64 Zen 64 cores, come in SP6 form-factor, and only support 1-way configurations.

AMD Launches EPYC 8004-Series 'Siena' CPUs: Up to 64 Zen 4c Cores : Read more

 

[Order 66]

I wonder how these CPUs score in cinebench r23 and 2024?

 

[bit_user]

I wonder how these CPUs score in cinebench r23 and 2024?

Well, here's data from CineBench R20. If you compare the two scores for the TR 3990X (4-channel memory) vs. the corresponding scores for the 3995WX (8-channel memory), you can see that it favors clockspeed over memory bandwidth.

Source: https://www.anandtech.com/show/1680...review-an-upgrade-over-regular-threadripper/3
​

Assuming those newer CB revs behave similarly, the main question is how well it'll fare with half the L3 cache per core. That will probably hurt a lot more than going from 12-channels to 6-chanels.

 

[Order 66]

Well, here's data from CineBench R20. If you compare the two scores for the TR 3990X (4-channel memory) vs. the corresponding scores for the 3995WX (8-channel memory), you can see that it favors clockspeed over memory bandwidth.

​

Source: https://www.anandtech.com/show/1680...review-an-upgrade-over-regular-threadripper/3​

​

Assuming those newer CB revs behave similarly, the main question is how well it'll fare with half the L3 cache per core. That will probably hurt a lot more than going from 12-channels to 6-chanels.

what about data from cinebench r23? r20 doesn't tell me much in comparison to my CPU as I have only used r23 and 2024.

 

[bit_user]

Since AMD already did all of the work needed to bring this socket to fruition, it might've been nice if they also offered it as a lower-cost HEDT platform than ThreadRipper.

 

[bit_user]

what about data from cinebench r23? r20 doesn't tell me much in comparison to my CPU as I have only used r23 and 2024.

You're on your own, then. I was interested in revisiting what was known about how CineBench responded to a reduction in memory bandwidth @ 64 cores. I've done that. If I knew where such data existed for more recent CB versions, I'd have cited it. I wasn't about to go on a wild goose chase, because I really have no stake in the matter.

If you find data showing newer CB revisions are more bandwidth (or L3 cache) sensitive, feel free to share it.

 

[TJ Hooker]

what about data from cinebench r23? r20 doesn't tell me much in comparison to my CPU as I have only used r23 and 2024.

Can't you just run r20 on your current CPU for comparison?

 

[Order 66]

Can't you just run r20 on your current CPU for comparison?

I could however r23 takes better advantage of multi core cpus. and I would like to see something from Zen 4 get over 30,000 points.

 

[bit_user]

Can't you just run r20 on your current CPU for comparison?

The point of my looking up those benchmarks was to see how much CineBench was affected by memory bandwidth. ThreadRipper 3000 vs. ThreadRipper Pro 3000 differed in that Pro had 8-channel memory & slightly lower clock speed, while the non-Pro had 4-channel memory & slightly higher clock speed.

The idea was to gauge how CB might fare on a 64-core Zen4C CPU with only 6-channel memory. I don't really see what @jaydenmiller1 's CPU has to do with that question, unless it's some ThreadRipper or EPYC.

However, if that CPU model is popular, then I guess you could go ahead and look for R20 benchmarks of it. Not sure how useful either that or comparing your R23/R24 results with TR 3k would be. The main argument I see for searching out data on the newer benchmarks is if it affects multi-core scalability, but you still need to find essentially the same CPU tested with substantially different memory configurations.

 

[Order 66]

The point of my looking up those benchmarks was to see how much CineBench was affected by memory bandwidth. ThreadRipper 3000 vs. ThreadRipper Pro 3000 differed in that Pro had 8-channel memory & slightly lower clock speed, while the non-Pro had 4-channel memory & slightly higher clock speed.

The idea was to gauge how CB might fare on a 64-core Zen4C CPU with only 6-channel memory. I don't really see what @jaydenmiller1 's CPU has to do with that question, unless it's some ThreadRipper or EPYC.

However, if that CPU model is popular, then I guess you could go ahead and look for R20 benchmarks of it. Not sure how useful either that or comparing your R23/R24 results with TR 3k would be. The main argument I see for searching out data on the newer benchmarks is if it affects multi-core scalability, but you still need to find essentially the same CPU tested with substantially different memory configurations.

I will admit, I skimmed your original post and missed the part where the point was to see the difference in memory channels. My CPU is "only" a ryzen 7 7700x. No fancy TR or EPYC here.

 

[bit_user]

I will admit, I skimmed your original post and missed the part where the point was to see the difference in memory channels. My CPU is "only" a ryzen 7 7700x. No fancy TR or EPYC here.

The new CPUs are likely just a matter of curiosity, then? The article includes a price list, so you can see it's unlikely to be much of a cost savings vs. ThreadRipper, if any.

I don't even know if AMD will be very receptive to the idea of mainstreaming this platform. Intel has specialty edge/communication-oriented SKUs (allegedly what Siena is targeting) and they're effectively impossible to find on any kind of standard server or PC motherboard. So, if AMD plans to follow that playbook, then Siena could be a mere footnote for the mainstream computing industry.

If I had to guess, I think it'll end up being more like Xeon D, where you actually can use them for other things. Then again, I'm reminded of how scarce Ryzen Pro is, outside of specific OEM systems.

 

[Order 66]

The new CPUs are likely just a matter of curiosity, then?

Very much so, usually, when I see new expensive CPUs announced or released I will wait for reviews or articles or go searching for Cinebench benchmarks myself. I remember reading about an intel xeon that someone overclocked to 5.5GHz on all 56 cores and it used 1900W. Here is the article in question:

Intel's Xeon W9-3495X Can Draw 1,900W of Power

Intel's new HEDT CPU leaves behind Skylake-X in terms of power consumption.

www.tomshardware.com