- Learn more about AMD EPYC 8004 Series Processors
- Learn more about AMD EPYC processors
- Follow AMD on Twitter
- Connect with AMD on LinkedIn
About AMD
For more than 50 years AMD has driven innovation in high-performance computing, graphics and visualization technologies. Billions of people, leading Fortune 500 businesses and cutting-edge scientific research institutions around the world rely on AMD technology daily to improve how they live, work and play. AMD employees are focused on building leadership high-performance and adaptive products that push the boundaries of what is possible. For more information about how AMD is enabling today and inspiring tomorrow, visit the AMD (NASDAQ: AMD)
website,
blog,
LinkedIn and
Twitter pages.
AMD, the AMD Arrow logo, EPYC, and combinations thereof are trademarks of Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. NEBS is a trademark of Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson. PCIe is a registered trademark of PCI-SIG Corporation. SPEC®, SPECpower®, SPECpower_ssj®, SPECrate® and SPEC CPU® are registered trademarks of the Standard Performance Evaluation Corporation. See www.spec.org for more information. Other names are for informational purposes only and may be trademarks of their respective owners.
____________________
i SP6-008: Server-side Java® overall operations/watt (SPECpower_ssj®2008) claim based on 1P published results at spec.org as of 9/18/2023. 1P servers: EPYC 8534P (64-core, 200W TDP, 27,342 overall ssj_ops/W, https://spec.org/power_ssj2008/results/res2023q3/power_ssj2008-20230830-01309.html); Intel Xeon Platinum 8471N (52-core, 300W TDP, 12,281 overall ssj_ops/W, https://spec.org/power_ssj2008/results/res2023q3/power_ssj2008-20230822-01294.html.
iiSP6-014: Transcoding (FFmpeg DTS raw to VP9 codec) aggregate frames/hour/system W comparison based on AMD internal testing as of 9/16/2023. Configurations: 1P 64C EPYC 8534P (437,774 fph median performance, 16 jobs/8 threads each, avg system power 362W) powered server versus 1P 52C Xeon Platinum 8471N (263,691 fph median performance, 13 jobs/8 threads each, avg system power 522W) for ~1.66x the performance and ~2.39x relative performance per W. Scores will vary based on system configuration and determinism mode used (max TDP power determinism mode profile used). This scenario contains many assumptions and estimates and, while based on AMD internal research and best approximations, should be considered an example for information purposes only, and not used as a basis for decision making over actual testing.
iii SP6-005: Apache IoTDB edge gateway performance/system W/system $ comparison based on Phoronix Test Suite paid testing as of 8/18/2023. Configurations: 1P 8C EPYC 8024P (1.00x relative performance, 159 avg system W, est $3,441 system cost USD) powered server versus 1P 8C Xeon Bronze 3408U (0.81x relative performance, 227 avg system W, est $3,721 system cost USD) powered server for 1.23x the performance, 30% lower system power (1.76x the performance/system W), 8% lower system cost (1.34x the performance/system $) for 1.91x the overall system performance/W/$. Assuming an 8kW 42U rack deploying servers, 50 ea. EPYC 8024P (assuming a multi-node deployment) vs. 35 ea. Xeon 3408U can fit within the power budget delivering 1.76x the total IoT points/sec throughput/rack. Testing not independently verified by AMD. Scores will vary based on system configuration and determinism mode used (default TDP power determinism mode profile used). This scenario contains many assumptions and estimates and, while based on AMD internal research and best approximations, should be considered an example for information purposes only, and not used as a basis for decision making over actual testing.
iv SP6TCO-001: This scenario contains many assumptions and estimates and, while based on AMD internal research and best approximations, should be considered an example for information purposes only, and not used as a basis for decision making over actual testing. The Bare Metal Server Greenhouse Gas Emissions TCO (total cost of ownership) Estimator Tool compares the selected AMD EPYC™ and Intel® Xeon® CPU based server solutions comparing a COUNT of 1-, 3-, and 10 server nodes and using integer throughput performance based on the published scores for Intel Xeon and AMD EPYC CPU based servers. This estimation reflects a 5-year time frame.
This analysis compares a 1P AMD EPYC_8534PN powered server with a SPECrate®2017_int_base score of 439, https://spec.org/cpu2017/results/res2023q3/cpu2017-20230828-38760.html compared to a 1P Xeon Intel Platinum_8471N based server with a SPECrate®2017_int_base score of 450, https://spec.org/cpu2017/results/res2023q3/cpu2017-20230619-37381.html.
Due the large variation in these costs these components: Admin costs are not included as part of this analysis. Real estate costs are not included as part of this analysis.
Core Assumptions: Cost of Power @ 0.128 per kWh; Power per rack for server use 8 kW (kilowatts); PUE (power usage effectiveness) of 1.7; server rack size of 42RU. The CPU & Chassis Power in this analysis is modeled at 100% of TDP for EPYC powered servers, and at 100% for the Intel based servers.
POWER ONLY OPERATING COSTS: For 1P servers in 1-, 3-, and 10-node configurations, EPYC 8534PN CPU-based servers uses 34% less power and 34% lower cost over the 5-years of this analysis.
The AMD EPYC solution supports an estimated 26 servers per 1 8kW rack(s); the Intel solution supports 17 servers 1 8kW rack(s). AMD has 23% more cores and can deliver up to 11414 units of integer performance per rack. Intel can provide up to 7650 units of integer performance per rack.
For more detail see https://www.amd.co/en/claims/epyc4#SP6TCO-001
v EPYC-018: Max boost for AMD EPYC processors is the maximum frequency achievable by any single core on the processor under normal operating conditions for server systems.
Contact: Aaron Grabein AMD Communications (512) 602-8950 aaron.grabein@amd.com Suresh Bhaskaran AMD Investor Relations (408) 749-2845 Suresh.Bhaskaran@amd.com
