Sizing Up Servers: Intel's Skylake-SP Xeon versus AMD's EPYC 7000 - The Server CPU Battle of the Decade?by Johan De Gelas & Ian Cutress on July 11, 2017 12:15 PM EST
- Posted in
We tested the energy consumption of our servers for a one-minute period in several scenario. The first scenario is the point where the server under testing performs best in MySQL: the highest throughput just before the response time goes up significantly.
To test the power usage of the FPU, we measure the power consumption when POV-Ray was using all available threads.
at Lowest Resp. Time (*)
100% CPU load
|Dual Xeon E5-2699 v4||2x145 W||106||412||425|
|Dual Xeon 8176||2x165W||190||300||453|
|Dual EPYC 7601||2x180W||151||321||327|
Both the Xeon 8176 and Dual EPYC server had a few more additional components (a separate 10 GBe card for example) than the Dual Xeon E5-2699v4 system, but that does not fully explain why idle power is so much higher, especially on the Dual Xeon 8176. We lacked the time to fully investigate this, and the last two systems have relatively new firmware.
The only conclusion that we can draw so far, is that the EPYC 7601 is likely to draw more power when running integer applications, while the rather wide FP units of the Intel CPUs are real power hogs even if they do not run heavy AVX applications. To be continued...
Post Your CommentPlease log in or sign up to comment.
View All Comments
TheOriginalTyan - Tuesday, July 11, 2017 - linkAnother nicely written article. This is going to be a very interesting next couple of months.
coder543 - Tuesday, July 11, 2017 - linkI'm curious about the database benchmarks. It sounds like the database is tiny enough to fit into L3? That seems like a... poor benchmark. Real world databases are gigabytes _at best_, and AMD's higher DRAM bandwidth would likely play to their favor in that scenario. It would be interesting to see different sizes of transactional databases tested, as well as some NoSQL databases.
psychobriggsy - Tuesday, July 11, 2017 - linkI wrote stuff about the active part of a larger database, but someone's put a terrible spam blocker on the comments system.
Regardless, if you're buying 64C systems to run a DB on, you likely will have a dataset larger than L3, likely using a lot of the actual RAM in the system.
roybotnik - Wednesday, July 12, 2017 - linkYea... we use about 120GB of RAM on the production DB that runs our primary user-facing app. The benchmark here is useless.
haplo602 - Thursday, July 13, 2017 - linkI do hope they elaborate on the DB benchmarks a bit more or do a separate article on it. Since this is a CPU article, I can see the point of using a small DB to fit into the cache, however that is useless as an actual DB test. It's more an int/IO test.
I'd love to see a larger DB tested that can fit into the DRAM but is larger than available caches (32GB maybe ?).
ddriver - Tuesday, July 11, 2017 - linkWe don't care about real world workloads here. We care about making intel look good. Well... at this point it is pretty much damage control. So let's lie to people that intel is at least better in one thing.
Let me guess, the databse size was carefully chosen to NOT fit in a ryzen module's cache, but small enough to fit in intel's monolithic die cache?
Brought to you by the self proclaimed "Most Trusted in Tech Since 1997" LOL
Ian Cutress - Tuesday, July 11, 2017 - linkI'm getting tweets saying this is a severely pro AMD piece. You are saying it's anti-AMD. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
ddriver - Tuesday, July 11, 2017 - linkWell, it is hard to please intel fanboys regardless of how much bias you give intel, considering the numbers.
I did not see you deny my guess on the database size, so presumably it is correct then?
ddriver - Tuesday, July 11, 2017 - linkIn the multicore 464.h264ref test we have 2670 vs 2680 for the xeon and epyc respectively. Considering that the epyc score is mathematically higher, howdoes it yield a negative zero?
Granted, the difference is a mere 0.3% advantage for epyc, but it is still a positive number.
Headley - Friday, July 14, 2017 - linkI thought the exact same thing