AMD EPYC "Turin" with 192 Cores and 384 Threads Delivers Almost 40% Higher Performance Than Intel Xeon 6

[AleksandarK]

AMD has unveiled its latest EPYC processors, codenamed "Turin," featuring Zen 5 and Zen 5C dense cores. Phoronix's thorough testing reveals remarkable advancements in performance, efficiency, and value. The new lineup includes the EPYC 9575F (64-core), EPYC 9755 (128-core), and EPYC 9965 (192-core) models, all showing impressive capabilities across various server and HPC workloads. In benchmarks, a dual-socket configuration of the 128-core EPYC 9755 Turin outperformed Intel's dual Xeon "Granite Rapids" 6980P setup with MRDIMM-8800 by 40% in the geometric mean of all tests. Surprisingly, even a single EPYC 9755 or EPYC 9965 matched the dual Xeon 6980P in expanded tests with regular DDR5-6400. Within AMD's lineup, the EPYC 9755 showed a 1.55x performance increase over its predecessor, the 96-core EPYC 9654 "Genoa". The EPYC 9965 surpassed the dual EPYC 9754 "Bergamo" by 45%.

These gains come with improved efficiency. While power consumption increased moderately, performance improvements resulted in better overall efficiency. For example, the EPYC 9965 used 32% more power than the EPYC 9654 but delivered 1.55x the performance. Power consumption remains competitive: the EPYC 9965 averaged 275 Watts (peak 461 Watts), the EPYC 9755 averaged 324 Watts (peak 500 Watts), while Intel's Xeon 6980P averaged 322 Watts (peak 547 Watts). AMD's pricing strategy adds to the appeal. The 192-core model is priced at $14,813, compared to Intel's 128-core CPU at $17,800. This competitive pricing, combined with superior performance per dollar and watt, has resonated with hyperscalers. Estimates suggest 50-60% of hyperscale deployments now use AMD processors.




The Blue Empire is ready to strike back at AMD, with its upcoming "Sierra Forest" CPUs with up to 288 E-cores. Intel must deliver similar or greater performance metrics with its new E-core Xeon processor, keeping power consumption low and costs reasonable, so we expect to see a heated battle in the server space between Intel and AMD. Besides more cores, "Sierra Forest" will bring 12-channel DDR5 memory, so the massive core count will get adequate memory bandwidth. Until then, AMD has the crown of performance, efficiency, and value, and we are curious to see this driving competition and further innovation from both sides.

View at TechPowerUp Main Site | Source

 

[darkangel0504]

Can't wait to see Intel releases their 1024 cores/2048 threads to counter this.

 

[Daven]

Both Intel and AMD have 128 Performance core versions with similar amounts of cache but AMD still kicks their butt by almost 40%. Is it clocks, IPC, AVX512, all, something else?

Intel doubled the cores from 64 to 128 in one generation, had the performance crown for two weeks and then was majorly owned by AMD.

By the way, this was the Intel performance increase going from 64 to 128 cores:

38%!?!?!

 

[phints]

Can't wait to see Intel releases their 1024 cores/2048 threads to counter this.

Pfft needs another 20,000 cores and 32GB cache if it wants to rival the 5090. /s

 

[JohH]

Modern server CPUs are bonkers. 192 cores in a single socket. 384 threads.
I'm pretty sure that's more than all the x64 CPU cores I've ever bought.

 

[TheLostSwede]

Can't wait to see Intel releases their 1024 cores/2048 threads to counter this.

Intel killed hyperthreading, remember?

 

[Daven]

Intel killed hyperthreading, remember?

Not in Xeons

 

[Vayra86]

Impressive. And actually capturing market share. Strange indeed, no anti AMD crowd here! Because the products just speak for themselves. Worth reflecting on, for any average GPU topic.

 

[Neo_Morpheus]

Also this….

.

 

[usiname]

Not in Xeons

The last Intel's server cpu is based on Meteor Lake, the next one will be without HT because will be based on Arrow Lake P cores

 

[TechBuyingHavoc]

Both Intel and AMD have 128 Performance core versions with similar amounts of cache but AMD still kicks their butt by almost 40%. Is it clocks, IPC, AVX512, all, something else?

Intel doubled the cores from 64 to 128 in one generation, had the performance crown for two weeks and then was majorly owned by AMD.

By the way, this was the Intel performance increase going from 64 to 128 cores:


38%!?!?!

A lot of it is just a superior TSMC process. The process advantage is so blatant that Intel is being forced to also use TSMC for their top-end chips. The 10 nm node and not using EUV for that node really crippled Intel but nobody realized just how bad it was and continues to be.

Aside from that, AMD's architecture is actually something quite nice and closer to a clean-sheet design vs Intel's Skylake (Core?) architecture that has been patched and iterated on for almost a decade.

The security patches from the last decade have also gimped Intel's performance more than AMD's performance.

Finally, what comes to mind is chiplets (and related packaging). AMD used chiplets earlier, got comfortable with them on both CPUs and GPUs, and maximized the PPA (performance, power, area) variables where as Intel is still experimenting with chiplets in a earlier stage of adoption. Intel has a lot of advanced packaging technology but all of it is still on the roadmaps and in the product pipelines.

Finally (for real this time), software has rapidly improved for AMD as server revenues increase. AMD was catching up with Intel on the architecture front and using TSMC's catching up process nodes during a time when AMD software was far behind Intel's. Now it is far more even of a fight so even if Intel neutralizes AMD's other advantages, AMD's software is finally benefiting from a decade of reinvestment and a half-decade of increased customer adoption and feedback.

 

[Nhonho]

Many people want to have a computer with a CPU like this at home, to run certain applications via CPU, such as video encoding. AMD, parts manufacturers and assemblers should make it easier for home users to acquire these machines.

A few days ago, just out of curiosity, I tried to look for parts (CPU, motherboard, cooler, RAM, chassis, etc.) to assemble an EPYC CPU PC in online stores, but I couldn't find all the parts, even after searching on several websites.

Even on DELL's website, it's difficult for a home user to buy a blade (or a "PC") like this with hundreds of cores. On DELL's website, "compatibility error" frequently appears.

 

[RicardoRocha]

Many people want to have a computer with a CPU like this at home, to run certain applications via CPU, such as video encoding. AMD, parts manufacturers and assemblers should make it easier for home users to acquire these machines.

A few days ago, just out of curiosity, I tried to look for parts (CPU, motherboard, cooler, RAM, chassis, etc.) to assemble an EPYC CPU PC in online stores, but I couldn't find all the parts, even after searching on several websites.

Even on DELL's website, it's difficult for a home user to buy a blade (or a "PC") like this with hundreds of cores. On DELL's website, "compatibility error" frequently appears.

Why a home user would want such powerfull processor? Wouldn't a Threadripper serve this purpose?

 

[Wirko]

On DELL's website, "compatibility error" frequently appears.

You're incompatible.

to run certain applications via CPU, such as video encoding.

That would be video encoding on a commercial scale already, even if you were running the encoding at your home.

 

[AnarchoPrimitiv]

Attention Gamers:

This is the point of Zen5.....to win the battle where the REAL money in x86 is....

But of course anyone who read Phoronix's review of Zen5 when the consumer chips were released, you would have seen this coming.

 

[Wirko]

Intel has a lot of advanced packaging technology but all of it is still on the roadmaps and in the product pipelines.

Intel uses EMIB in Xeon 6. It was in Sapphire Rapids Xeons already.
But we never get to learn how much all this advanced packaging costs. It could be a substantial part of the total manufacturing cost.

 

[HBSound]

NICE! I would imagine that only a few pieces of software are designed to step on the gas to take advantage of a CPU like that!!!
Getting a CPU like that, only to take advantage of 75%, would not be worthwhile in the long run.

 

[igormp]

The last Intel's server cpu is based on Meteor Lake, the next one will be without HT because will be based on Arrow Lake P cores

Lion Cove is said to be modular enough to allow for HT to be added back:

Intel’s Lion Cove Architecture Preview

Intel’s P-Core’s lineage can be traced all the way back to the P6 architecture that was originally found in the Pentium Pro.

open.substack.com

 

[venturi]

Many people want to have a computer with a CPU like this at home, to run certain applications via CPU, such as video encoding. AMD, parts manufacturers and assemblers should make it easier for home users to acquire these machines.

A few days ago, just out of curiosity, I tried to look for parts (CPU, motherboard, cooler, RAM, chassis, etc.) to assemble an EPYC CPU PC in online stores, but I couldn't find all the parts, even after searching on several websites.

Even on DELL's website, it's difficult for a home user to buy a blade (or a "PC") like this with hundreds of cores. On DELL's website, "compatibility error" frequently appears.

Well... ...not exactly. ...Some of us have those builds as our personal home PC. Yes, you can actually get all the parts. It does require some creativity, engineering, and patience to make it quiet and suitable for your home.

 

[OSdevr]

Many people want to have a computer with a CPU like this at home, to run certain applications via CPU, such as video encoding. AMD, parts manufacturers and assemblers should make it easier for home users to acquire these machines.

A few days ago, just out of curiosity, I tried to look for parts (CPU, motherboard, cooler, RAM, chassis, etc.) to assemble an EPYC CPU PC in online stores, but I couldn't find all the parts, even after searching on several websites.

Even on DELL's website, it's difficult for a home user to buy a blade (or a "PC") like this with hundreds of cores. On DELL's website, "compatibility error" frequently appears.

You joke but we all know we want one.

 

[HBSound]

Also, I think about when Asrock/Supermicro have the dual slot support for a processor like this, that is 1000W just at a dual CPUS.

 

[Tek-Check]

Crushing performance blow for new Xeons!
Xeons were one generation behind when they were released.
Now, Granite Rapids are two generations behind, yet again.

 

[kondamin]

The performance gap is strange, is it because the intel systems are bound by heat and clock down far faster than the AMD chips?
the 0.25Ghz in base clock can't be it

 

[venturi]

The performance gap is strange, is it because the intel systems are bound by heat and clock down far faster than the AMD chips?
the 0.25Ghz in base clock can't be it

Architecture, design, per clock performance, fabric speed, cache....etc

 

[kapone32]

Many people want to have a computer with a CPU like this at home, to run certain applications via CPU, such as video encoding. AMD, parts manufacturers and assemblers should make it easier for home users to acquire these machines.

A few days ago, just out of curiosity, I tried to look for parts (CPU, motherboard, cooler, RAM, chassis, etc.) to assemble an EPYC CPU PC in online stores, but I couldn't find all the parts, even after searching on several websites.

Even on DELL's website, it's difficult for a home user to buy a blade (or a "PC") like this with hundreds of cores. On DELL's website, "compatibility error" frequently appears.

This thing would be a monster at CPU mining.