AMD’s EPYC 7000-Series Processors

As announced back at the official launch, AMD is planning to hit both the dual socket and single socket markets. With up to 32 cores, 64 threads, 2TB/socket support and 128 PCIe lanes per CPU, they believe that by offering a range of core counts and frequencies, they have the nous to attack Intel, even if it comes at a slight IPC disadvantage.

AMD’s main focus will be on the 2P parts, where each CPU will use 64 PCIe lanes (using the Infinity Fabric protocol) to connect to each other, meaning that in a 2P system there will still be 128 PCIe 3.0 lanes to go around for add-in devices. There will be the top four SKUs available initially, and the other parts should be in the hands of OEMs by the end of July. All the CPUs will have access to all 64MB of the L3 cache, except the 7200-series which will have access to half.

The new processors from AMD are called the EPYC 7000 series, with names such as EPYC 7301 and EPYC 7551P. The naming of the CPUs is as follows:

EPYC 7551P

  • EPYC = Brand
  • = 7000 Series
  • 30/55 = Dual Digit Number indicative of stack positioning / performance (non-linear)
  • 1 = Generation
  • P = Single Socket, not present in Dual Socket

So in the future, we will see second generation ‘EPYC 7302’ processors, or if AMD scales out the design there may be EPYC 5000 processors with fewer silicon dies inside, or EPYC 3000 with a single die but for the EPYC platform socket (obviously, those last two are speculation).

But starting with the 2P processors:

AMD EPYC Processors (2P)
  Cores
Threads
Frequency (GHz) L3 DRAM PCIe TDP Price
Base All Max
EPYC 7601 32 / 64 2.20 2.70 3.2 64 MB 8-Ch
DDR4
2666
MT/s
8 x16
128
PCIe
180W $4200
EPYC 7551 32 / 64 2.00 2.55 3.0 180W >$3400
EPYC 7501 32 / 64 2.00 2.60 3.0 155W/170W $3400
EPYC 7451 24 / 48 2.30 2.90 3.2 180W >$2400
EPYC 7401 24 / 48 2.00 2.80 3.0 155W/170W $1850
EPYC 7351 16 / 32 2.40 2.9 155W/170W >$1100
EPYC 7301 16 / 32 2.20 2.7 155W/170W >$800
EPYC 7281 16 / 32 2.10 2.7 32 MB 155W/170W $650
EPYC 7251 8 / 16 2.10 2.9 120W $475

The top part is the EPYC 7601, which is the CPU we were provided for in this comparison. This is a 32-core part with simultaneous multithreading, a TDP of 180W and a tray price of $4200. As the halo part, it also gets the good choice on frequencies: 2.20 GHz base, 3.2 GHz at max turbo (up to 12 cores active) and 2.70 GHz when all cores are active.

Moving down the stack, AMD will offer 24, 16 and 8-core parts. These will disable 1, 2 and 3 cores per CCX respectively, as we saw with the consumer Ryzen processors, and is done in order to keep core-to-core latencies more predictable (as well as keeping access to all the L3 cache). What is interesting to note is that AMD will offer a 32-core part at 155W (when using DDR4-2400) for $3400, which is expected to be very competitive compared to Intel (and support 2.66x more DRAM per CPU). 

The 16-core EPYC 7281, while having half the L3, will be available for $650, making an interesting 2P option. Even the bottom processor at the stack, the 8-core EPYC 7251, will support the full 2TB of DRAM per socket as well as 128 PCIe lanes, making it a more memory focused SKU and having almost zero competition on these sorts of builds from Intel. For software that requires a lot of memory but pays license fees per core/socket, this is a nice part.

For single socket systems, AMD will offer the following three processors:

AMD EPYC Processors (1P)
  Cores
Threads
Frequency (GHz) L3 DRAM PCIe TDP Price
Base All Max
EPYC 7551P 32 / 64 2.0 2.6 3.0 64 MB 8-Ch
DDR4
2666
MT/s
8 x16
128
PCIe
180W $2100
EPYC 7401P 24 / 48 2.0 2.8 3.0 155W/170W $1075
EPYC 7351P 16 / 32 2.4 2.9 155W/170W $750

These processors mirror the specifications of the 2P counterparts, but have a P in the name and slightly different pricing.

AMD's EPYC Server CPU Introducing Skylake-SP
POST A COMMENT

219 Comments

View All Comments

  • Shankar1962 - Thursday, July 13, 2017 - link

    So you think Intel won't release anything new again by then? Intel would be ready for cascadelake by then. None of the big players won't switch to AMD. Skylake alone is enough to beat epyc handsomely and cascadelake will just blow epyc. Its funny people are looking at lab results when real workloads are showing 1.5-1.7x speed improvement Reply
  • PixyMisa - Saturday, July 15, 2017 - link

    This IS comparing AMD to Intel's newest CPUs, you idiot. Skylake loses to Epyc outright on many workloads, and is destroyed by Epyc on TCO. Reply
  • Shankar1962 - Sunday, July 16, 2017 - link

    Mind your language asshole
    Either continue the debate or find another place for your shit and ur language
    Real workloads don't happen in the labs you moron
    Real workloads are specific to each company and Intel is ahead either way
    If you have the guts come out with Q3 Q4 2017 and 2018 revenues from AMD
    If you come back debating epyc won over skylake if AMD gets 5-10% share then i pity your common sense and your analysis
    You are a bigger idiot because you spoiled a healthy thread where people were taking sides by presenting technical perspective
    Reply
  • PixyMisa - Tuesday, July 25, 2017 - link

    I'm sorry you're an idiot. Reply
  • Shankar1962 - Thursday, July 13, 2017 - link

    Does not matter. We can debate this forever but Intel is just ahead and better optimized for real world workloads. Nvidia i agree is a potential threat and ahead in AI workloads which is the future but AMD is just an unnecessary hype. Since the fan boys are so excited with lab results (funny) lets look at Q3,Q4 results to see how many are ordering to test it for future deployment. Reply
  • martinpw - Wednesday, July 12, 2017 - link

    I'm curious about the clock speed reduction with AVX-512. If code makes use of these instructions and gets a speedup, will all other code slow down due to lower overall clock speeds? In other words, how much AVX-512 do you have to use before things start clocking down? It feels like it might be a risk that AVX-512 may actually be counterproductive if not used heavily. Reply
  • msroadkill612 - Wednesday, July 12, 2017 - link

    (sorry if a repost)

    Well yeah, but this is where it starts getting weird - 4-6 vega gpuS, hbm2 ram & huge raid nvme , all on the second socket of your 32 core, c/gpu compute ~Epyc server:

    https://marketrealist.imgix.net/uploads/2017/07/A1...

    from

    http://marketrealist.com/2017/07/how-amd-plans-to-...

    All these fabric linked processors, can interact independently of the system bus. Most data seems to get point to point in 2 hops, at about 40GBps bi-directional (~40 pcie3 lanes, which would need many hops), and can be combined to 160GBps - as i recall.

    Suitably custom hot rodded for fabric rather than pcie3, the nvme quad arrays could reach 16MBps sequential imo on epycs/vegaS native nvme ports.

    To the extent that gpuS are increasing their role in big servers, intel and nvidea simply have no answer to amd in the bulk of this market segment.
    Reply
  • davide445 - Wednesday, July 12, 2017 - link

    Finally real competition in the HPC market. Waiting for the next top500 AMD powered supercomputer. Reply
  • Shankar1962 - Wednesday, July 12, 2017 - link

    Intel makes $60billion a year and its official that Skylake was shipping from Feb17 so i do not understand this excitement from AMD fan boys......if it is so good can we discuss the quarterly revenues between these companies? Why is AMD selling for very low prices when you claim superior performance over Intel? You can charge less but almost 40-50% cheap compared to Intel really?
    AMD exists because they are always inferior and can beat Intel only by selling for low prices and that too for what gaining 5-10% market which is just a matter of time before Intel releases more SKUs to grab it back
    What about the software optimizations and extra BOM if someone switches to AMD?
    What if AMD goes into hibernation like they did in last 5-6years?
    Can you mention one innovation from AMD that changed the world?
    Intel is a leader and all the technology we enjoy today happenned because of Intel technology.
    Intel is a data center giant have head start have the resources money acquisitions like altera mobileeye movidus infineon nirvana etc and its just impossible that they will lose
    Even if all the competent combines Intel will maintain atleast 80% share even 10years from now
    Reply
  • Shankar1962 - Wednesday, July 12, 2017 - link

    To add on
    No one cares about these lab tests. Let's talk about the real world work loads.
    Look at what Google AWS ATT etc has to say as they already switched to xeon sky lake
    We should not really be debating if we have the clarity that we are talking about AMD getting just 5% -10% share by selling high end products they have for cheap prices....they fo not make too much money by doing that.....they have no other option as thats the only way they can dream of a 5-10% market share
    For Analogy think Intel in semiconductor as Apple in selling smartphones
    Intel has gross margins of ~63%
    They have a solid product portfolio technologies and roadmap .....we can debate this forever but the revenues profits innovations and history between these companies can answer everything
    Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now