Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

AMD EPYC 7502 + EPYC 7742 Linux Performance Benchmarks

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • AMD EPYC 7502 + EPYC 7742 Linux Performance Benchmarks

    Phoronix: AMD EPYC 7502 + EPYC 7742 Linux Performance Benchmarks

    Now that you have read our AMD EPYC "Rome" 7002 series overview, here is a look at the initial performance benchmarks from our testing over the past few weeks. This testing focused on the new AMD EPYC 7502 and EPYC 7742 processors in both single (1P) and dual (2P) socket configurations using AMD's Daytona server reference platform. Tests were done on Ubuntu Linux and compared to previous AMD EPYC processors as well as Intel Xeon Scalable.

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=28142

  • #2
    Yes, I do have a test request: BLAKE2 between all aforebenchmarked processors.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by tildearrow View Post
      Yes, I do have a test request: BLAKE2 between all aforebenchmarked processors.
      Actually had an issue with blake2 IIRC over either the GCC version or the compiler flags.
      Michael Larabel
      http://www.michaellarabel.com/

      Comment


      • #4
        - dav1d results in FPS -


        1080p
        Xeon Platinum 8280 301.76
        2 x Xeon Gold 6138 303.54
        EPYC 7551 324.01
        EPYC 7601 344.46
        2 x Xeon Platinum 8280 393.34
        EPYC 7502 484.93
        2 x EPYC 7601 553.46
        2 x EPYC 7502 629.9
        EPYC 7742 655.09
        2 x EPYC 7742 750.63













        4K
        EPYC 7551 131.54
        2 x Xeon Gold 6138 143.66
        EPYC 7601 144.87
        Xeon Platinum 8280 167.04
        2 x EPYC 7601 190.33
        2 x Xeon Platinum 8280 197.53
        EPYC 7502 225.75
        2 x EPYC 7502 273.78
        EPYC 7742 299.5
        2 x EPYC 7742 322.56​​​​
        4K Frames Per Dollar
        2 x Xeon Platinum 8280 0.009867772
        Xeon Platinum 8280 0.016688745
        2 x EPYC 7601 0.021628728
        2 x EPYC 7742 0.023205786
        2 x Xeon Gold 6138 0.026643299
        EPYC 7601 0.032925759
        EPYC 7551 0.036358316
        EPYC 7742 0.043093447
        2 x EPYC 7502 0.052650807
        EPYC 7502 0.086827646
        Last edited by tildearrow; 08-07-2019, 08:06 PM.

        Comment


        • #5
          Typos:

          Originally posted by phoronix View Post
          Using a Linux x86_64 kerneel default configuration
          Originally posted by phoronix View Post
          But it's interesting to see here the roughly 15% better Python performance generation-over-generation for EPYC.\

          Comment


          • #6
            0.5 TB of RAM... Gnome and browser tabs could leak freely there

            Comment


            • #7
              Any chance some (or all) of these tests could be rerun with GCC 9.x that supports the new Zen 2 target using -march=native so we can see if there are any further performance improvements to be had to either platform?

              Cheers,
              Mike

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by mroche View Post
                Any chance some (or all) of these tests could be rerun with GCC 9.x that supports the new Zen 2 target using -march=native so we can see if there are any further performance improvements to be had to either platform?

                Cheers,
                Mike
                I thought I wrote in the article, but I do have some GCC (including latest Git) vs. Clang vs. AOCC benchmarks coming out in next few days.
                Michael Larabel
                http://www.michaellarabel.com/

                Comment


                • #9
                  Thanks for these tests.

                  Originally posted by phoronix View Post
                  The MySQL/MariaDB performance is another scenario where the EPYC Rome performance didn't beat out the Xeon Scalable Cascadelake performance, but AMD is investigating.
                  That MariaDB result is interesting. Did you run pgbench too with same/different results?

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by chithanh View Post
                    Thanks for these tests.


                    That MariaDB result is interesting. Did you run pgbench too with same/different results?
                    Will check on PostgreSQL, forgot why I hadn't included it in my original testing, been a terribly long past few weeks.
                    Michael Larabel
                    http://www.michaellarabel.com/

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X