SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Submitted via IRC for takyon
Ampere is launching two versions of its first ARM-based 64-bit server processor today in a challenge to Intel's dominance of data center chips.
Intel dominates about 99 percent of the server chip market with its x86-based processors, but Ampere is targeting power-efficient, high-performance, and high-memory capacity features with its Ampere eMAG processors for data centers.
Renee James, former president of Intel and CEO of Ampere, said in an interview with VentureBeat that customers can now order the chip from the company's website. The chips are aimed at hyperscale cloud and edge computing, using the ARMv8-A cores. The chips target big data and in-memory databases.
[...] Based on the SPECint benchmark performance, Ampere's eMAG processor can deliver about twice the performance of the Intel Xeon Gold 6130 processor at about the same price, the company said. The eMAG with 32 cores and 3.3 Ghz in performance will sell for $850, and with 16 cores at 3.3 GHz will sell for $550.
[...] Ampere designed its cores, which feature eight DDR4-2667 memory controllers, 42 lanes of PCIe 3.0 for high bandwidth I/O, 125W TDP for maximum power efficiency, and a 16-nanometer FinFET manufacturing process at contract manufacturer TSMC.
Previously: Former Intel President Launches New Chip Company With Backing From Carlyle Group
(Score: 2) by requerdanos on Friday September 21 2018, @01:34PM (2 children)
Venturebeat, being a business-source and not a tech-source, seems to be pretty accepting of Ampere's claims, though to be fair, I suppose there's no reason not to be.
Is there some reason that 125W TDP yields maximum efficiency? In what way(s) is 125W better than 95W, or 140W, say, in efficiency? Just curious.
That 6130 seems a rather soft target. It isn't anywhere near the top of its line at 16 cores/2.1GHz, and its MSRP is a hefty $1979. For comparison, consider a lowly 8-core Ryzen R7: This Xeon overall benchmarks barely 20% better despite costing six times as much as the $320 Ryzen, and its single-thread performance is actually worse.
Some questions...
--------
* Ryzen R7 2700X vs. Xeon Gold 6130 specs and benchmarks: https://www.cpubenchmark.net/compare/Intel-Xeon-Gold-6130-vs-AMD-Ryzen-7-2700X/3126vs3238 [cpubenchmark.net]
(Score: 2) by hendrikboom on Friday September 21 2018, @05:06PM (1 child)
Even if they cost more and have lower performance, it may still be worth buying them if they are more secure, without backdoors or overengineered complexity,
But are they more secure?
-- hendrik
(Score: 2) by requerdanos on Friday September 21 2018, @05:24PM
Well, if the Emag is 100% faster ("twice the performance") than a mid-level Xeon that itself is about 20% faster than a Ryzen, for between $500 and $800, then it's going to be quite the speed demon (about 240% as fast as the Ryzen).
As you say, the security issues will be interesting. My guess would be spectre/meltdown vulnerability "yes" but ameliorated by software patches, forced management engine "no". But my guess has very little value here.