Anandtech benches dual Magny Cours and Xeon

[randomizer]

http://it.anandtech.com/IT/showdoc.aspx?i=3784

I won't cherry pick graphs to post so you're going to have to read it yourself However, I will post these two as I thought they were rather interesting.

Looks like the Magny Cours is getting its butt handed to it, but then we look at the Linux graph and see this:

The Intel system doesn't really do any better (actually slightly worse) but the AMD one does alot better! Of course it's Alpha software at the moment so performance in later versions will likely vary alot. In any case the Linux version wipes the floor with the Windows one as long as you're not on an Intel rig.

 

[jennyh]

Would like to see more linux tests actually. That said, intel is now irrelevent at 4P and AMD has never been stronger in HPC either.

Considering bulldozer will be a simple drop in, anybody buying a server right now must be looking at AMD and realising intel's pricing schemes are ridiculous in comparison.

 

[Chad Boga]

Would like to see more linux tests actually. That said, intel is now irrelevent at 4P and AMD has never been stronger in HPC either.

How have you reached the conclusion that Intel is irrelevant at 4P?

 

[fazers_on_stun]

How have you reached the conclusion that Intel is irrelevant at 4P?

I'd imagine chugging a bottle of cheap Scotch helps considerably 😛. Not to mention forming your AMD-sanctioned opinions a year or so ago, long before any product release, over on AMDZone

Actually it is a fairly good if incomplete or premature review. Would like to see the perf. vs. power consumption numbers. AMD wins a few but also loses substantially in the increasingly important virtualization VMmark.

Of course, Intel could always pull an AMD and lower prices if they feel threatened - eventually AMD with nearly 700 mm^2 total die size per 12core MC would find their profit margin evaporating long before Intel's 6-core with under 250 mm^2 die size, when you take into account that SOI is something like 20-30% more expensive than strained silicon. In fact I would not be surprised to see Intel cutting deals for HPC-like quantities.

 

[jennyh]

We're talking about servers, margins are stupidly high already. I'm pretty sure AMD could use gold instead of copper and still make a big profit per chip sold on these.

80w ACP = 115w TDP.

http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/1598756/acer-moves-amd
http://newsblaze.com/story/2010032909152400001.bw/topstory.html
http://www.zdnet.co.uk/news/storage/2010/03/29/hp-bases-three-servers-on-amds-magny-cours-40088475/?s_cid=938

Btw anand didn't review the top chip, that is 2.3ghz.

 

[Chad Boga]

I'd imagine chugging a bottle of cheap Scotch helps considerably 😛. Not to mention forming your AMD-sanctioned opinions a year or so ago, long before any product release, over on AMDZone

Actually it is a fairly good if incomplete or premature review. Would like to see the perf. vs. power consumption numbers. AMD wins a few but also loses substantially in the increasingly important virtualization VMmark.

Of course, Intel could always pull an AMD and lower prices if they feel threatened - eventually AMD with nearly 700 mm^2 total die size per 12core MC would find their profit margin evaporating long before Intel's 6-core with under 250 mm^2 die size, when you take into account that SOI is something like 20-30% more expensive than strained silicon. In fact I would not be surprised to see Intel cutting deals for HPC-like quantities.

Intel have Nehalem-Ex to come out, but it would be really stupid if Intel didn't anticipate the possibility of AMD going the MCM route.

 

[roofus]

So the 12 core beat the 6 core. I am shocked.

 

[jennyh]

So the 12 core beat the 6 core. I am shocked.

The 45nm 12 core beat the 32nm 6-core with turbo, Hyperthreading yadda yadda.

Anyway, fastest cpu in the world.

 

[jennyh]

Wow has it really been so long?

Seems like I posted that last one an hour ago, yet no intel fanboy is arguing with it?

The silence is deafening.

 

[someguy7]

Wow. So now you post some blog that says AMD has the worlds fastest chips because "Although Intel Corp (INTC - Analyst Report) and AMD have continued to battle for supremacy in speed and performance over the last few years with successive launches of their dual core, triple core (from AMD) and quad core microprocessors, AMD’s new chip tops the list so far.

The new chips are based on a design called the Magny-Cours and come with eight and 12 cores, meaning that they are the fastest chips in the world. Intel’s new Xeon 5600 chips announced a couple of weeks ago have six cores."

What a waste of time.

I am not saying that the new 12core chip is not the overall fastest chip either. I have truthfully not looked into in detail yet and dont actually know. Just a brief look through the anand article is all I have seen. But linking to that page as proof that the AMD's are the fastest in the world is flat out stupid. Even for you.

And jenny I think you said something in a other post about the difference between AMD and Intel fans. Here is the actual difference. AMD will defend anything/any product AMD ever makes blindly to death. An Intel fan will do the same. Both are idiots. The people you actually think of as Intel fans are simply not people like you and the other loons at AMDzone that have a love affair with AMD for some reason.

 

[enzo matrix]

Here is the actual difference. AMD will defend anything/any product AMD ever makes blindly to death. An Intel fan will do the same. Both are idiots.

I think I missed where you told us what the difference was.

 

[someguy7]

Yes. I did not structure that last statement very well. But my actual point was after that line you quoted. Which is "The people you actually think of as Intel fans are simply not people like you and the other loons at AMDzone that have a love affair with AMD for some reason."

Let me try and clear it up. There is NO difference between fanboys. The difference is the likes of Jenny think that anybody that is not a member of the AMD fan club just has to be a Intel fanboy. That is what I was getting as the difference as it related to her other post.

She stated something like AMD fans stick by AMD through thick and thin while the Intel fanboys dont. That being said. Those people in her eyes that are not sticking by Intel are fanboys that jumped ship. No, they would just be the normal person who is not a loyal fanboy idiot.

Ya dig?

 

[Chad Boga]

Yes. I did not structure that last statement very well. But my actual point was after that line you quoted. Which is "The people you actually think of as Intel fans are simply not people like you and the other loons at AMDzone that have a love affair with AMD for some reason."

Let me try and clear it up. There is NO difference between fanboys. The difference is the likes of Jenny think that anybody that is not a member of the AMD fan club just has to be a Intel fanboy. That is what I was getting as the difference as it related to her other post.

She stated something like AMD fans stick by AMD through thick and thin while the Intel fanboys dont. That being said. Those people in her eyes that are not sticking by Intel are fanboys that jumped ship. No, they would just be the normal person who is not a loyal fanboy idiot.

Ya dig?

So true.

Just because JennyH and her ilk at AMDZone have deep seated psychological issues around CPU's, it doesn't mean other people do, and this is something that they never seem to comprehend.

 

[yannifb]

Well you all have to admit the massive performance increase in memory bandwidth. The quad channel controller really helped it seems.

 

[Chad Boga]

Well you all have to admit the massive performance increase in memory bandwidth. The quad channel controller really helped it seems.

Was anyone ever disputing such an obvious thing was on the cards?

 

[yannifb]

Was anyone ever disputing such an obvious thing was on the cards?

No, but it seems you only focus on the negatives. And no need to get hostile, i said i liked the bandwidth, not that i killed your cat 😀

 

[Chad Boga]

No, but it seems you only focus on the negatives. And no need to get hostile, i said i liked the bandwidth, not that i killed your cat 😀

To whatever extent I focus on the negatives it is due to trying to counteract the often insane propaganda of AMD Zealots like Jenny and Keith and other bozo's from AMDZone, who make it difficult to have a rational conversation about computing technology.

However a number of things need to be kept in mind about this launch, Magny Cours loses as often as it wins against Westmere Xeons and as another poster pointed out to me on a different forum, the following things about what AMD has done here(besides avoiding outright annihilation in the server market) :

"AMD is expending 692 mm2 of silicon to get near Intel's
240 mm2 Westmere in performance and has to price it low
to sell. Servers used to be a place AMD could get decent
margins...

Intel wins in performance per core, total performance for most
everything other than STREAM, and software licensing costs.

MC is a sign of how far AMD has fallen in competitiveness
since its Opteron heydays. "

 

[randomizer]

One thing to keep in mind is that at least one of the benchmarks, although I don't remember which one, only uses up to 16 threads. So while the Xeon system can use all 12 available physical cores, the Magny Cours system is only using 16 of its 24.

 

[jimmysmitty]

Um this is useless. It only has Dunnington. And its from AMD themselves.

 

[BadTrip]

doesnt the new Xeon come out in the morning?

 

[jennyh]

"AMD is expending 692 mm2 of silicon to get near Intel's
240 mm2 Westmere in performance and has to price it low
to sell. Servers used to be a place AMD could get decent
margins...

Intel wins in performance per core, total performance for most
everything other than STREAM, and software licensing costs.

MC is a sign of how far AMD has fallen in competitiveness
since its Opteron heydays. "

I laugh every time I see 'performance per core' and in no way does it win in total performance. Buyers don't care if it's 692mm2 or 240mm2 of silicon either.

The fact is MC could have matched or surpassed the Xeons in price, but AMD chose to price it even cheaper. We'll see what intel responds with soon enough.

 

[Scotteq]

No, but it seems you only focus on the negatives. And no need to get hostile, i said i liked the bandwidth, not that i killed your cat 😀

it needed killed... little b*stard...

 

[Chad Boga]

I laugh every time I see 'performance per core' and in no way does it win in total performance.

It depends on the application/benchmark. And don't forget some licensing models are done on a per core basis.

Buyers don't care if it's 692mm2 or 240mm2 of silicon either.

True, but it continues the trend of AMD's cash cow(i.e. server) getting leaner and leaner.

The fact is MC could have matched or surpassed the Xeons in price, but AMD chose to price it even cheaper.

It is no fact whatsoever, unless you feel the people running AMD are stupid beyond belief.

 

[huntluck]

that's really cool to hear some intersting here

 

[fazers_on_stun]

The 45nm 12 core beat the 32nm 6-core with turbo, Hyperthreading yadda yadda.

Anyway, [strike]fastest[/strike] FATTEST cpu in the world.[/url]

There, fixed it for ya 😀.

That financial blogger has as much credibility as you do, it seems, since he equates physical core count, and only core count, with speed 😛..