The Intel Xeon E7 v2 Review: Quad Socket, Up to 60 Cores/120 Threads
by Johan De Gelas on February 21, 2014 6:00 AM EST- Posted in
- IT Computing
- Intel
- Xeon
- Ivy Bridge EX
- server
- Brickland
SAP S&D Benchmark
The SAP SD (Sales and Distribution, 2-Tier Internet Configuration) benchmark is an interesting benchmark as it is a real-world client-server application. It is one of those rare industry benchmarks that actually means something to the real IT professionals. Even better, the SAP ERP software is a prime example of where these Xeon E7 v2 chips will be used. We looked at SAP's benchmark database for these results.
Most of the results below all run on Windows 2008/2012 and MS SQL Server (both 64-bit). Every 2-Tier Sales & Distribution benchmark was performed with SAP's latest ERP 6 Enhancement Package 4. These results are not comparable with any benchmark performed before 2009. We analyzed the SAP Benchmark in-depth in one of our earlier articles. The profile of the benchmark has remained the same:
- Very parallel resulting in excellent scaling
- Low to medium IPC, mostly due to "branchy" code
- Somewhat limited by memory bandwidth
- Likes large caches (memory latency)
- Very sensitive to sync ("cache coherency") latency
Let's see how the quad Xeon compares to the previous Intel generation, the cheaper dual socket systems, and the RISC competition.
The new Xeon E7 v2 is no less than 80% faster than its predecessor. The nearest RISC competitor (IBM Power 7 3.55) is a lot more expensive and delivers only 70% of the performance. We have little doubt that the performance/watt ratio of the Xeon E7 v2 is a lot better too.
Intel delivers a serious blow to the RISC competition. For about 11 months, the Oracle SPARC T5-8 delivered the highest SAPS of all octal-socket machines. This insanely expensive machine, which keeps 1024 threads in flight (but executes 256 of them) is now beaten by the Fujitsu PRIMEQUEST 2800E. The 240 thread octal Xeon E7-8890 v2 outperforms the former champion of Oracle by about 18%. The SPARC comeback is still remarkable, although we are pretty sure that the Fujitsu server will be less expensive. Even better is you do not have to pay the Oracle support costs.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
125 Comments
View All Comments
snoopy1710 - Friday, February 21, 2014 - link
Minor correction on the Dell E7-4890 SAP benchmark, which was done on SUSE Linux Enterprise Server for SAP Applications:http://download.sap.com/download.epd?context=40E2D...
Snoopy
FunBunny2 - Friday, February 21, 2014 - link
you should opt for ubuntu 12.04. "real" databases are approved only for LTS versions, and 12.04 is the latest.bji - Friday, February 21, 2014 - link
Page 10 does not contain the Linux Kernel Compile time benchmarks.JohanAnandtech - Saturday, February 22, 2014 - link
The web engine did something weird...I restored the pageJawsOfLife - Friday, February 21, 2014 - link
Very thorough review, which is what I've come to expect from Anandtech! I am interested but not very knowledgeable about the server side of computing, so this definitely filled me in on a lot of the facets of that area. Thanks for the writeup.By the way, the "Linux Kernel Compile" page is blank, as bji noted.
JohanAnandtech - Saturday, February 22, 2014 - link
Thx. A glitch in the engine made it delete a page. Restored.iwod - Friday, February 21, 2014 - link
While the revenue are high, just how many unit are shipped?I have been thinking if Intel would move Mobile First, meaning Atom, Tablet and Laptop Chips all gets the latest node first, which are low power design. While Desktop and Server will be a Architecture and Node behind. Which will align the Desktop and Xeon E3 - E5 Series.
But it seems the volume of Chips dont quite measure out, since the top end volume are far too small? Anyone have any idea on this.
dealcorn - Saturday, February 22, 2014 - link
I believe the statement "Still, that tiny amount of RISC servers represents about 50% of the server market revenues." should read "Still, that tiny amount of RISC servers represents about 50% of the high end server market revenues." Stated differently, from a revenue perspective Intel is #1 vendor in the high end segment even though it has less than a 50% market share. Server orders are placed with vendors, not architectures. Intel has fought an uphill battle to access the high end market and it is costly. However, if Intel can amortize its development costs over a larger revenue base than any competitor, it is well positioned to maintain it's share acquisition momentum.NikosD - Saturday, February 22, 2014 - link
@JohanVery nice review, I would like to see more benchmarks between E7 v2 vs RISC processors because I think the real competition is there.
Older Intel and AMD servers are not real competition for IvyBridge-EX.
It would be interesting when POWER8 is out, to give us the new figures of 8 socket benchmarks and if there is any progress on more 8+ sockets for Intel E7 v2 (built by Cray and other vendors)
I think that E7 v2 (I don't know about older vendors) can be placed in up to 32-socket systems - not natively of course.
JohanAnandtech - Saturday, February 22, 2014 - link
Older Intel systems are competition, because these kind of servers are not replaced quickly. If a new generation does not deliver substantial gains, some companies will postpone replacement. In fact, very few people that already have a quad intel consider the move to RISC platforms.But you have a point. But it is almost impossible for us to do an independent review of other vendors. I have never seen an independent review, and the systems are too scarce, so there is little chance that we can ask a friendly company to borrow us one.