AMD Demos Naples Server SoC, Launches Q2 2017

16

Latest Videos FromTom's Hardware
Paul Alcorn
Editor-in-Chief

Paul Alcorn is the Editor-in-Chief for Tom's Hardware US. He also writes news and reviews on CPUs, storage, and enterprise hardware.

  • redgarl
    Well, I just hope gaming at 1080p benches are not going to worry investors... just cmon...
    Reply
  • aldaia
    Any data on CPU frequency and TDP?

    Xeon E5-2699A v4 is a 145W and runs at 2.4 Ghz. 2x the performance with same number of cores sugests that Naples is running at higher frequencies.
    Reply
  • Infidel_2016
    The datacenter I just worked in had 5400 servers in it. Just over half were running dual and quad AMD 16 core chips. Old tech, but nice to see AMD in the farm.
    Reply
  • aldaia
    Answering to myself, just realized the 2x could also be due to the benchmark being memory bound. Naples has 2x the chanels, and it gets to 2.5x the performance when memory freq is increased.
    Cores seem to be relatively irrelevant in this particular benchmark.

    2x the performance with same number of cores sugests that Naples is running at higher frequencies.
    v4
    Reply
  • spiketheaardvark
    As glad as I am to see a decent AMD desktop chip, it is pretty clear AMD's real priority is servers. Those TDP numbers everyone glossed over in the Ryzen reviews are more important to AMD than I think most people gave credit to.
    Reply
  • drajitsh
    Conservatism of data center managers might well nullify any advantage that amd has. Like it did in the p4/ opteron days, when AMD did have a brief lead.
    Reply
  • firefoxx04
    When AMD had their lead, massive cloud companies were not around. Google, Microsoft, IBM, Amazon are always adding servers to their cloud systems. I am sure there will be buyers.
    Reply
  • Hand__
    Power consumption alone will be the reason data centers dump Intel.
    An under-clocked Ryzen at 30w scoring 850 in cinebench, that is less power than Intel Atom processors under load at 33w.

    That will be millions of dollars in power savings for companies with large data centers.
    Intel is scared to death that people don't figure this out. AMD Desktop Ryzen cpu is beating their low power Atom processors.
    https://forums.anandtech.com/threads/ryzen-strictly-technical.2500572/
    Reply
  • bit_user
    According to this, Naples is just 4x desktop Ryzen dies, in a single package. This suggests there might be only 64-96 lanes of true PCIe bandwidth to the CPU cores, themselves.

    http://www.anandtech.com/show/11183/amd-prepares-32-core-naples-cpus-for-1p-and-2p-servers-coming-in-q2


    It'd be interesting to see this thing go head-to-head with a KNL Xeon Phi.
    Reply
  • genz
    19392660 said:
    Answering to myself, just realized the 2x could also be due to the benchmark being memory bound. Naples has 2x the chanels, and it gets to 2.5x the performance when memory freq is increased.
    Cores seem to be relatively irrelevant in this particular benchmark.

    2x the performance with same number of cores sugests that Naples is running at higher frequencies.
    v4

    Doubling memory channels equates to a less than 20% performance advantage even in the most biased applications. AMD would have had to write their own benchmark specifically to get the figures you claim. Also with AMD still not having 3200 memory running on (already released) Ryzen at the time of this article what makes you believe that they would have it running on Naples multisocket engineering samples that they don't even have finalized chips on... especially when the competition is with top of the range 50+ core multisocket Intel hardware which is so much more difficult to get fast memory stable on than a comparitively simple i7.

    19395495 said:
    According to this, Naples is just 4x desktop Ryzen dies, in a single package. This suggests there might be only 64-96 lanes of true PCIe bandwidth to the CPU cores, themselves.

    http://www.anandtech.com/show/11183/amd-prepares-32-core-naples-cpus-for-1p-and-2p-servers-coming-in-q2


    It'd be interesting to see this thing go head-to-head with a KNL Xeon Phi.

    I would call false on that. PCI lanes are not that hard to test for and we would quite easily see if they lied on that point when the GPU cards start dropping to x8 speeds over 96 lanes. Without a major press release before launch (which would be major because of the all the bad press it would generate in combination with the precarious time it is right now for investors with the rating downgrade) AMD stands to be sued by business purchasers that expected 128 PCI lanes and got 96. With that kind of press release, AMD is still at threat of having major financial issues. What else could they have lied about is the next obvious question and the recalls will be much stronger than with the competition because they have a new product and a bad track record going back nearly 10 years (performance wise). Look at the fallout with GTX 970s having slower access to one side of the RAM and you'll see. I RMA'd mine because I had it mated to a 4K display.

    You just don't do that kind of stuff to server buyers that are purchasing trays full of CPUs at $2000 a unit. You can get sued for millions in losses, lose huge business customers, and then get sued for millions more in damages because your lack of PCI lanes caused Google servers to run slowly and had to be worked around by a God level $15000 an hour tech team and revision of the load balancing code for the entire Google system. Big firms can't wait to redeploy and software solutions to hardware problems are not only expensive, but clearly not the fault of the company that makes them.

    In short, FUD is being spread.
    Reply