No, I'm only telling you what Core was better.
32 core part with inferior design lack of new keys performance features within 28 core part better design and proven the future way different.
If you look into Zen 2 Microarchitect in-depth AMD borrowings Intel
Skylake designed since 2013 such as changing their L1 data cache
same as Skylake rather than old Zen and Zen + configuration.
increase many inferior features to match only Skylake SKUs.
( Please see AMD Zen 2 Slide for more details )
However the Skylake engine on those Zen 2 Microarchitect upon
way inferior to Skylake X SKU which design on 2014 which many
keys enhancement over Skylake S for big data.
Core to Core , Skylake X was better than Zen 2 a lot.
The Skylake X Core featured 2 512-bit FMA Unit per core with capable
32 Flops/cycle compared to Zen 2 it was only 2 256-bit FPU with capable only 16Flops/cycle same as Skylake S SKUs (since 2013).
Choosing the right one CPU for your budget was depending on yours.
For me it looks like AMD borrowing Intel Skylake S license and built their
customized version on 7nm+ add some kind of candy ( PCIe 4.0 )and some
Spicy sources ( double L3 cache ) then re selling Intel Skylake S AMD Edition
again.
Just reposted this in another thread, might as well put it here too:
https://images.anandtech.com/graphs/graph14605/111165.png[/quote]
[quote"AnandTech"]Normalising the scores for frequency, we see that AMD has achieved something that the company hasn’t been able to claim in over 15 years: It has beat Intel in terms of overall IPC. Overall here, the IPC improvements over Zen+ are 15%, which is a bit lower than the 17% figure for SPEC2006. [/quote]
(emphasis mine)
Of course, this is not an AVX2 or AVX512 test, and for the extremely few AVX512-optimized workloads out there, Intel is likely to beat AMD somewhat (though not by much according to AnandTech's recent EPYC review).
[img]https://images.anandtech.com/graphs/graph14694/87250v212Epyc2.png
As you can see, 2x EPYC 7742 64-core 250W CPUs nearly match 2x Intel Xeon Scalable 8280 28-core 205W CPUs despite lacking AVX512. Yes, AMD has a massive core advantage, but the two platforms are consuming similar amounts of power, which is also rather important. Not to mentio that the EPYC 7742 is about half the price of a Xeon Scalable 8280.
For non-AVX workloads, which are the
vast majority of workloads outside of HPC, AMD has Intel beat in terms of IPC, but Intel makes up for it in low-thread workloads with higher core clocks. AMD is also noticeably more power efficient at anything above very low power loads (and they're even catching up in the 15W laptop space, where they're still using Zen+ APUs).
Besides that, comparing Zen 2 to "AMD borrowing Intel [sic] Skylake S licence and built their customized version" just demonstrates that you haven't spent the required time understanding CPU architectures. I can't even come close to claiming a proper low-level understanding of this, but even I understand that Zen (and Zen+ and Zen 2) are dramatically different from Intel Core.
Ah, so the forum admins proactively stopped you from posting? Yeah, that's not how forum moderation works, bud. Nice try, but your trolling skills are rather weak.
