Question Which is better for multi-threaded simulation purposes: Dual Xeon Platinum 8168 or Intel Core Ultra 265k

[fery007]

Hi everyone,

I'm planning to build a PC for multi-threaded simulation work that is highly memory-bound. Gaming is not a priority. I have narrowed it down to two options. I’d greatly appreciate guidance on which choice would be better suited for my needs. Here are the details:

1. Option 1: Dual Xeon Platinum 8168
   • Total of 48 real cores (24 cores per CPU).
   • Maximum all-core frequency: 3.4 GHz (48 × 3.4 = 163 GHz combined).
   • Limited to DDR4 2666 MHz memory in 6 channel configuration.
2. Option 2: Core ultra 265k
   • 20 cores in total: 8 performance cores (5.4 GHz max) and 16 efficient cores (4.6 GHz max).
   • Combined frequency: 8 × 5.4 + 12 × 4.6 = 98 GHz total.
   • Supports DDR5 6400 MHz memory in dual-channel mode.
   • More modern architecture and higher single-thread performance.

Which option would be better for multi-threaded simulation tasks, considering, core count, clock speed, and memory performance?

Thanks in advance for your insights!

 

[kanewolf]

Hi everyone,

I'm planning to build a PC for multi-threaded simulation work that is highly memory-bound. Gaming is not a priority. I have narrowed it down to two options. I’d greatly appreciate guidance on which choice would be better suited for my needs. Here are the details:

1. Option 1: Dual Xeon Platinum 8168
   • Total of 48 real cores (24 cores per CPU).
   • Maximum all-core frequency: 3.4 GHz (48 × 3.4 = 163 GHz combined).
   • Limited to DDR4 2666 MHz memory in 6 channel configuration.
2. Option 2: Core ultra 265k
   • 20 cores in total: 8 performance cores (5.4 GHz max) and 16 efficient cores (4.6 GHz max).
   • Combined frequency: 8 × 5.4 + 12 × 4.6 = 98 GHz total.
   • Supports DDR5 6400 MHz memory in dual-channel mode.
   • More modern architecture and higher single-thread performance.

Which option would be better for multi-threaded simulation tasks, considering, core count, clock speed, and memory performance?

Thanks in advance for your insights!

It will depend on the data and the software.
Same basic answer as your previous question -- https://forums.tomshardware.com/thr...n-e5-2699-v3-or-intel-core-i9-13900k.3864250/
It is VERY hard to write parallel code AND it is data dependent. Look at the LAMMPS benchmark page -- https://www.lammps.org/bench.html
More threads helps in some instances but not in other.s

 

[fery007]

Thank you for your response. However, I have some concerns regarding the 265K, particularly due to the recent issues reported with the 14th and 15th generation Intel processors. Have these issues been resolved in the 265K?

 

[USAFRet]

Thank you for your response. However, I have some concerns regarding the 265K, particularly due to the recent issues reported with the 14th and 15th generation Intel processors. Have these issues been resolved in the 265K?

Its not a case of "resolved". Rather...'did not exist'.
13-14 gen is different than the Ultra line.

I have a 265k sitting next to me, in a box, awaiting assembly.

 

[Dark Lord of Tech]

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265K outperforms the Dual Xeon Platinum 8168 by an impressive 78% in multi-threaded scenarios, making it the clear choice for your simulation needs.