Enthusiasts and apologists: Why AMD?

[EarthDog]

Workstation and server CPUs support AVX-512. So officially the lowest CPU is Xeon-W.

Good. Makes sense to me it has a home where the advantages can be/are utilized by a lot more customers. If I happen to need to use them as a general consumer, there are crossover options available.

...almost makes me miss Intel HEDT (AMD Enthusiast platform has plenty of cores/threads and IO flexibility, lol).

Before AMD launched Zen benchmarks had convinced the world that 4 cores was enough. For better or worse when Zen was launched with 8 cores that changed.

FTFY....

In 2016, 4c/8t parts were the shiz. If you needed more, the HEDT platform was there before servers/xeon.

 

[Woomack]

It wasn't AMD who convinced anyone to have more cores. It was because both brands hit a wall with frequency, so both went the multithreading way adding more cores, also pushing software developers to focus on more threads (it didn't work well as we still don't need so many cores). It was a must to give people any point in buying new hardware, and marketing was working hard to convince everyone that more cores = better.

 

[mackerel]

For me weird is that all Alder Lake and Rocket Lake CPUs support AVX-512, but depends on the revision, it's software or hardware locked. If Intel wanted, they could enable it on all current i series CPUs.
Workstation and server CPUs support AVX-512. So officially the lowest CPU is Xeon-W.

Some early Alder Lake had it enabled in silicon, but disabled in microcode. When mobo makers offered hacked support in bios, Intel fused off the functionality on newer production. The problem Intel had was that for hybrid architecture to work with Windows, both P and E cores had to support the same instructions. E cores lacked AVX-512, so it can't be enabled in P cores at the same time. Hence my earlier comment I hope Intel can add support to E cores, thus allowing them to work on P cores also. The other alternative is for the software environment to behave better, but it would probably take work from both MS and software support, which I can't see happening.

Server CPU support was from Skylake-X, but I don't know if all CPUs support it. If it wasn't for mobo pricing I'd love to try a Sapphire Rapids WS build as natural replacement for my Skylake-X.

Post magically merged: May 22, 2023

...almost makes me miss Intel HEDT (AMD Enthusiast platform has plenty of cores/threads and IO flexibility, lol).

HEDT is dead on both sides What do you mean by "AMD Enthusiast platform"? Threadripper is unofficially dead with the last one released being Zen 2. Threadripper Pro is workstation where Intel also still offer. Current consumer tier platforms offer similar feature set between Intel and AMD.

 

[EarthDog]

HEDT is dead on both sides What do you mean by "AMD Enthusiast platform"? Threadripper is unofficially dead with the last one released being Zen 2. Threadripper Pro is workstation where Intel also still offer. Current consumer tier platforms offer similar feature set between Intel and AMD.

I know, lol. I never missed it on AMD's side.

X670/E... AMD's enthusiast platform...isn't that what they call their top chipsets "enthusiast" for enthusiasts? "Mainstream" for B650/E.. etc?

 

[mackerel]

X670/E... AMD's enthusiast platform...isn't that what they call their top chipsets "enthusiast" for enthusiasts? "Mainstream" for B650/E.. etc?

The term "enthusiast" I don't feel is well defined in usage, so it wasn't obvious to me you meant the top chipset consumer boards. What confused me was you picking out AMD, since the equivalent Intel Z chipset platform is pretty much the same. Neither take the place of HEDT of past.

 

[EarthDog]

The term "enthusiast" I don't feel is well defined in usage

Sorry man, I thought that was on their slides (enthusiast nomenclature), lol.

 

[mackerel]

@EarthDog You're right. Now that you mention it, they have used "enthusiast" as marketing terms for the higher end chipset offerings. Intel have also done similarly. From a marketing perspective it might be the case the top end whatever is "enthusiast". As a former engineer, marketing is my natural enemy

From a more personal perspective, I feel that isn't a great usage as an enthusiast is just someone more interested in how stuff works and tinkering with it. The mid tier AMD chipsets still offer OC of CPU and ram for example.

 

[EarthDog]

Yeah, not going to get into poor naming conventions...they're all around us, lol!

An enthusiast, as defined, is someone very interested or involved in a particular subject. You don't have to tinker(overclock) to be a PC enthusiast (especially these days when they're nearly maxed out from the factory) though that (tinkering) is a logical progression.

 

[unsafesteagle]

How about gaming 4k@144hz broadcasting 1080p onto the net , think 6 cores are enough?
id say no thats just me tho

 

[EarthDog]

How about gaming 4k@144hz broadcasting 1080p onto the net , think 6 cores are enough?
id say no thats just me tho

Depends on the game.

Some activities can utilize more cores and threads, theres no doubt. Twitch recommends a 8-core+ config to stream following the logic of two cores to stream and four+ cores for games. Some can use more, but it can be enough for streaming plenty of games. My son(s) game and stream at 1080p. One with a 2700X and 2080 super, the other on a 5500 and few gens 4c/8t intel (Fortnite, Apex, and some low end things like Among Us).

 

[MisterEd]

Some early Alder Lake had it enabled in silicon, but disabled in microcode. When mobo makers offered hacked support in bios, Intel fused off the functionality on newer production. The problem Intel had was that for hybrid architecture to work with Windows, both P and E cores had to support the same instructions. E cores lacked AVX-512, so it can't be enabled in P cores at the same time. Hence my earlier comment I hope Intel can add support to E cores, thus allowing them to work on P cores also. The other alternative is for the software environment to behave better, but it would probably take work from both MS and software support, which I can't see happening.

Server CPU support was from Skylake-X, but I don't know if all CPUs support it. If it wasn't for mobo pricing I'd love to try a Sapphire Rapids WS build as natural replacement for my Skylake-X.

Post magically merged: May 22, 2023

HEDT is dead on both sides What do you mean by "AMD Enthusiast platform"? Threadripper is unofficially dead with the last one released being Zen 2. Threadripper Pro is workstation where Intel also still offer. Current consumer tier platforms offer similar feature set between Intel and AMD.

Is it that AMD's 7000 series consumer desktop CPUs are good enough that enthusiasts can't justify the cost of the Threadripper any more? There must still be a market for them because you can buy them on Amazon.

The AMD Threadripper PRO 5000 series is based on Zen 3.
Cores (threads)
5945WX 12 (24)
5955WX 16 (32) $1,299
5965WX 24 (48) $2,399
5975WX 32 (64) $3,299
5995WX 64 (128) $6,499

The AMD Threadripper PRO 7000 series is based on Zen 4. It is expected to be launched in late 2023.

 

[mackerel]

What did historic HEDT give you over the mainstream offerings? Based on a cut down server offering, they had more cores, more PCIe lanes, more memory channels than consumer CPUs. The higher core counts we've seen since the release of Ryzen only really hits one of those three benefits: more cores. Personally, this is the worst case scenario. IMO the memory subsystem was stretched even in the quad core era, and the ratio of execution potential to ram bandwidth is getting worse, not better. AMD have a partial workaround in X3D caches. My "want" is more memory bandwidth. Arguably with higher end DDR5 we can get comparable bandwidth to quad channel DDR4, but CPUs have got much faster so demands have likewise increased.

Historic HEDT was also far more affordable. I only had some during X99 and X299 era. Motherboard costs were not that different from the Z chipset of the time. Lower end CPU costs were not that different from consumer offerings. Around 2015 I recall debating between 5820k and 6700k. CPU + mobo cost between them was very close. I ended up with both. Likewise in 2017, Skylake-X era, 7800X and 8700k were similarly priced 6 core offerings.

What we have today are not "affordable" in the same way. Intel WS and AMD Threadripper Pro are targeted at higher end workstations. They are not the same as traditional HEDT which was more consumer friendly. What a WS mobo costs now could have got you a HEDT CPU+mobo in those old times.

 

[unsafesteagle]

id have to say i find the extra pcie lanes and memory channels more than an attractive sale point.
price tag , not so much. or pardon me. lolol

 

[Haider]

AVX-512 is barely supported by software, and in home/office environment no one really needs it. Disabling it in desktop CPUs, probably gives users a point in workstation/server chips which were often replaced by desktop CPUs in the last few years. I'm not really sure what was Intel thinking. For sure AVX-512 was pretty much pointless in desktop CPUs since release. There will be still <1% of users who will use it for something.
I'm not really sure what 7800X3D CPU has to do with high series graphics cards. X3D CPUs are mainly good for competitive online gaming, where you use lower display resolution and go for max FPS. Since CPU is not affecting FPS so much at higher display resolution and bumped up details, then it doesn't really matter if you use X3D, Intel CPU or non-3D cache AMD, as you will be much more limited by the graphics card's performance than the CPU's.

All the big AI libraries support it - TensorFlow, PyTorch etc... and it makes big gains compared to CPU without (AVX-512)...I'm not really working in the AI space but you never know when a project comes up, a bit of swotting/refreshing you memory at home will pay dividends...

 

[EarthDog]

All of this is true. It's just an extreme edge case for personal use was the point.