[HN Gopher] AMD Gives Details on EPYC Zen4: Genoa and Bergamo, U...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       AMD Gives Details on EPYC Zen4: Genoa and Bergamo, Up to 96 and 128
       Cores
        
       Author : rbanffy
       Score  : 124 points
       Date   : 2021-11-10 12:29 UTC (10 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.anandtech.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.anandtech.com)
        
       | jbellis wrote:
       | Have they said anything about new Threadrippers?
        
         | mastax wrote:
         | Moore's Law is Dead (a very accurate leaker) said zen 3
         | threadripper was cancelled except maybe a limited launch of TR
         | Pro, IIRC. Which makes sense since there are severe EPYC
         | shortages and those are more important and profitable products.
         | Intel doesn't have any workstation competition at the moment
         | anyway.
        
         | mbfg wrote:
         | i suspect supply chain issues are at the heart of no
         | threadripper news.
        
         | rbanffy wrote:
         | The Threadripper Pro is usually an EPYC with different warranty
         | and a higher clock. Last time I think they were announced one
         | day after their server counterparts.
         | 
         | Now, with Zen 4 and Zen 4c they'll have two different single-
         | thread performance versions to play with.
        
           | ComputerGuru wrote:
           | No, the Zen 3 Threadripper was never announced. We're now
           | seeing announcements for the _next_ Epyc generation with no
           | TR Pro for the previous one.
        
       | IYasha wrote:
       | I bet it's a DRM-on-chip again. Better stock up on older blade
       | racks.
        
       | ksec wrote:
       | This will put Zen 4c head to head with ARM Server. I am wondering
       | if this is a request from Google and Microsoft Azure.
       | 
       | Hopefully we get much cheaper cloud computing because of it.
        
       | brandmeyer wrote:
       | Zen4 has been widely rumored* to support AVX-512. Did AMD confirm
       | or refute the rumor in this press release? Is it perhaps only
       | available on one of the two core types?
       | 
       | * through a data leak at Gigabyte
        
         | phkahler wrote:
         | >> Zen4 has been widely rumored* to support AVX-512.
         | 
         | I've been hoping AVX-512 goes away. Intel doesn't even seem to
         | be embracing it very well, probably due to the huge increase in
         | power consumption.
         | 
         | I look forward to RISC-V Vectors, which allow scaling the
         | hardware without changing the instruction set.
        
           | mhh__ wrote:
           | This huge increase in power consumption was mainly with the
           | earliest CPUs to feature it, unless I'm mistaken.
        
           | yxhuvud wrote:
           | The increased instruction set included in AVX-512 would
           | hopefully stay though, even if the 512 wide processing unit
           | goes away.
        
             | phkahler wrote:
             | To keep the instructions also means keeping the extra wide
             | registers. Not sure how big a deal that is. I suspect the
             | wider vector registers aren't such a big deal but there are
             | also twice as many of them. The old AMD strategy of running
             | a 4-element vector through 2 units of half size (or
             | sequentially through one unit of half size) could work but
             | the increased register set is still a burden to some
             | extent.
        
               | kimixa wrote:
               | My understanding is that for general purpose registers,
               | register renaming and other hazard-avoiding optimisations
               | means that the register file is significantly larger than
               | the total of (register width * number of registers).
               | 
               | Do the SIMD units have similar register duplications? If
               | so, reducing the duplication count would do pretty much
               | that (Reducing the area at the cost of lower
               | performance).
               | 
               | Even if not, the large general purpose register
               | duplication count likely means that the SIMD registers
               | are actually a lower proportion of the register file on
               | chip than the register width would imply, making it less
               | of a saving.
               | 
               | But generally I agree, I'm much more interested in the
               | extra instruction vocabulary and things like masking
               | lanes than the increased register width. I also wonder at
               | what point the cut off of when a use case would be worth
               | pushing to a more dedicated accelerator (like a dsp or
               | gpu).
        
           | ac29 wrote:
           | > probably due to the huge increase in power consumption.
           | 
           | Alder Lake more or less fixed this according to Anandtech,
           | with AVX512 using less than the rated turbo power of the CPU
           | and running at the same frequency as non AVX code:
           | https://www.anandtech.com/show/17047/the-intel-12th-gen-
           | core...
           | 
           | Unfortunately, AVX-512 isnt officially supported on Alder
           | Lake, so it might be another generation before its widely
           | available.
        
         | rbanffy wrote:
         | Is Intel planning to release future CPUs with AVX-512? Didn't
         | they remove it from Adler Lake?
        
           | mhh__ wrote:
           | I think they said it was gone so they could keep the software
           | simpler i.e. switching a process from a big to little core
           | could require a fair amount of logic if they have completely
           | different instruction sets.
           | 
           | It's also possible it's buggy.
        
           | opencl wrote:
           | It's still there in the server chips, they just removed it
           | from consumer parts.
           | 
           | It's actually there in Alder Lake's performance cores and can
           | be used on at least some motherboards if the efficiency cores
           | are disabled.
        
           | halz wrote:
           | Disabling the E-cores apparently activates AVX-512. So it was
           | planned and engineered to be there all along, but was
           | disabled to match the marketing talking points.
           | [https://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=30664]
        
             | brandmeyer wrote:
             | Despite years of talk about heterogeneous computing, I
             | don't think there are any production kernels for any
             | general-purpose operating system that are instruction-set-
             | feature aware.
             | 
             | Linux and Windows both have partitioned schedulers,
             | available through per-process and per-thread affinity
             | masks. So it doesn't seem like it should be all that hard
             | to implement. Its "just" a matter of expressing the
             | process's (thread's?) requirements.
        
             | mastax wrote:
             | I expect it was disabled so that the P&E cores have the
             | same ISA support and threads can be moved freely between
             | them. A large portion of people, especially at launch,
             | would be running on a scheduler which isn't optimized for
             | ADL which would be a disaster. Also complicated to market
             | and explain: "supports AVX512 but only on windows 11." This
             | way they don't have to characterize the AVX512 units and it
             | makes binning easier.
             | 
             | A shame because the ADL AVX512 units are much more
             | efficient.
        
               | rbanffy wrote:
               | > P&E cores have the same ISA support and threads can be
               | moved freely between them.
               | 
               | Wouldn't an illegal instruction fault suffice to flag a
               | thread running on a mismatched core and allow it to be
               | moved to a suitable one? Or do they lose state when the
               | fault occurs?
        
               | mastax wrote:
               | People are going to be running existing software (Windows
               | 10 and Linux) which do not have support for Alder Lake.
               | These schedulers don't know to handle the SIGILL. What
               | you'd get instead is applications randomly crashing as
               | their threads migrate to the E-cores. I'm sure they'll
               | get there eventually, but they probably just didn't have
               | enough time.
        
               | wmf wrote:
               | Maybe OSes could do that but they don't today.
        
               | rbanffy wrote:
               | At the moment they also don't differentiate between fast
               | and slow cores either. It's interesting to route
               | processes that need to be more responsive to the faster
               | cores and dedicate the slower ones to more lag-tolerant
               | things, a bit how mainframes route IO tasks to
               | specialized processors or macOS routes system threads to
               | the efficient cores, leaving the good ones to the user.
        
               | jdsully wrote:
               | They would also need to know which specific instructions
               | are really invalid and which just don't exist on this
               | specific core.
               | 
               | X86 doesn't make that easy.
        
               | gpderetta wrote:
               | But the OS should be able to handle it by masking out the
               | feature bits in cpuid (and/or preventing threads using
               | AVX512 from being migrated to the E cores).
               | 
               | Yes, you need OS support, but then again, you need
               | support for the ThreadDirector anyway.
        
               | rbanffy wrote:
               | Wouldn't this break a lot of kernel-level code?
               | 
               | OTOH, this could allow us to have _very_ heterogeneous
               | processors in a single system, each with an ISA tailored
               | to a kind of task and the OS knowing which core can run
               | which program.
        
             | IanCutress wrote:
             | To clarify here, it requires both the E-cores disabled and
             | a specific option enabled in the BIOS. The option was
             | removed from the Intel firmware provided to vendors, but
             | all the motherboard vendors found what bit to flip to get
             | it to work. MSI played safe and initial BIOSes didn't have
             | the option, the rest put it in there from launch. MSI are
             | now releasing BIOSes with the AVX-512 option.
             | 
             | Beyond that, AVX-512 is not POR. It's not validated,
             | checked for IEEE accuracy, and YMMV on whether it works at
             | what frequency with the correct outputs.
             | 
             | Source: AnandTech.... where I wrote about it :)
        
               | merb wrote:
               | > Source: AnandTech.... where I wrote about it :)
               | 
               | if you wrote it, it I wouldn't count it as a source /s
               | 
               | isn't that than a bit risky to put something into the
               | bios which might disable intels advances? and especially
               | if not even intel tested it correctly? I mean as a
               | consumer what would happen if I enable it and something
               | breaks?
        
       | siscia wrote:
       | Does anybody know why AMD is picking Italian city names for the
       | EPYC line?
        
         | qalmakka wrote:
         | I for one can't take "EPYC Bergamo" seriously.
         | 
         | Come on, Bergamo? For real? I guess it could sound "cool" to
         | non-Italian speakers, but here in Italy I think that Bergamo is
         | one of the most forgettable cities ever. Which is sad, because
         | its historical city centre is very beautiful, but the rest of
         | the city is kind of dull and boring.
        
           | dagw wrote:
           | Outside of Italy, Bergamo is probably most famous for being
           | the place you end up if you book a cheap flight to "Milano".
           | 
           | Of course, once this hits the market it won't actually be
           | sold as the EPYC Bergamo, but rather the EPYC 9873 or
           | whatever
        
           | matja wrote:
           | I wonder how many people in charge or purchasing actually
           | consider the name, unconsciously or not. It could be called
           | Thready McThreadface for all I care.
        
         | unethical_ban wrote:
         | My first custom PC back in 2004 was an Athlon 64 3000+ "Venice"
         | 1.8GHz single core with 512kb L2 cache. The "San Diego" was
         | better because it had 1MB cache. I managed to overclock it to
         | 2.8GHz. What a time to be alive.
         | 
         | So it's something they've been doing to some extent for almost
         | 20 years.
        
         | gsnedders wrote:
         | I imagine it's about as exciting as most codenames: "we needed
         | to decide some naming scheme, and someone suggested those place
         | names because they like the places".
        
           | jjoonathan wrote:
           | "What's red that we could name a CPU after?"
           | 
           | "Blood?"
           | 
           | "Too gross, and not enough variations."
           | 
           | "Rubies?"
           | 
           | "People would find a way to confuse the CPUs with the
           | programming language, and besides, if Twitter digs up _those_
           | tech demos of ours we 're totally gonna get cancelled."
           | 
           | "Romans?"
           | 
           | "Sure, Romans are cool, and they conquer things, like we're
           | going to conquer Intel. I like it."
           | 
           | "How about emperors?"
           | 
           | "Fine in principle, but they each did at least a few
           | scandalous things... besides, we probably don't want the
           | "history class" vibe, or the energy of the weird uncle who
           | always wants to talk about Roman battle tactics at dinner."
           | 
           | "Yeah, fair enough. Cities, then? I visited Milan the other
           | year..."
           | 
           | (30 minutes later)
           | 
           | "Cities it is!"
        
         | OldHand2018 wrote:
         | > "Well", he said, "cities are OK, but not little cities that
         | nobody's ever heard of. They ought to be WORLD CLASS cities!"
         | 
         | https://www.folklore.org/StoryView.py?story=World_Class_Citi...
        
         | leetcrew wrote:
         | someone else already took most of the world's lakes.
        
         | jagger27 wrote:
         | All of Intel's codenames are real place names as well, and have
         | been that way for a long time.
         | 
         | For example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alder_Lake
         | 
         | Apple does the same thing with recent macOS releases, which are
         | all places in California.
        
         | thereddaikon wrote:
         | Same reason Intel did mountains and then lakes. They needed a
         | theme that had enough names for it to last a good long while.
         | Better choice than Apple's to go with big cats. They ran out
         | too quickly.
        
         | rbanffy wrote:
         | They are beautiful places. Plus, great food.
        
           | acdha wrote:
           | I'd imagine you'd need an extended executive fact-finding
           | trip to decide whether it's a place you want to associate
           | your company with.
        
             | rbanffy wrote:
             | I feel there is a niche for a startup in there somewhere.
             | ;-)
             | 
             | Let's do it so that the executives don't have to.
        
         | neogodless wrote:
         | Because they're giving Intel the boot.
        
           | Ziggy_Zaggy wrote:
           | #rekt
        
         | theandrewbailey wrote:
         | AMD has been using place names for their CPUs for several
         | years, particularly since the K8/Athlon 64 era. They just seem
         | to be using Italian cities this time around.
         | 
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Table_of_AMD_processors
        
           | u320 wrote:
           | Place names avoids trademark conflicts.
        
             | NonEUCitizen wrote:
             | not necessarily:
             | 
             | https://www.champagne.fr/en/comite-
             | champagne/bureaus/bureaus...
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2021-11-10 23:02 UTC)