AWS Graviton4 CPU benchmarked against AMD and Intel processors — faster than predecessors and more cost-effective

AWS
(Image credit: AWS)

Graviton processors from Amazon Web Services can only be accessed in the cloud, but Phoronix managed to benchmark the latest Graviton4 and compare it to rivals from AMD and Intel. As it turns out, the AWS Graviton4 chip offers massive generation-to-generation improvements over its predecessor and can beat AMD's EPYC 'Genoa' and Intel Xeon 'Sapphire Rapids' in a variety of benchmarks.   

Amazon's Graviton4 packs 96 Arm Neoverse V2 cores with 2MB of L2 cache per core and features 12 channels for DDR5-5600 memory, making it a very powerful CPU for a variety of workloads. Amazon Web Services offers Graviton4 for R8g instances, which provide up to three times more virtual CPUs (vCPUs) and triple the memory compared to the existing R7g instances. 

TOPICS
Anton Shilov
Contributing Writer

Anton Shilov is a contributing writer at Tom’s Hardware. Over the past couple of decades, he has covered everything from CPUs and GPUs to supercomputers and from modern process technologies and latest fab tools to high-tech industry trends.

  • bit_user
    Edit: Oops! I assumed he was talking about today's round of benchmarks! My comments were written against this Phoronix article:
    https://www.phoronix.com/review/graviton4-96-core
    A key detail of these benchmarks is that all instances had SMT disabled. I thought it was impressive to see the (lower-clocked?) Graviton 4 manage a few decisive victories over EPYC (both with the same core count). If you excluded the benchmarks where AVX-512 plays a significant role, I think the results would've tipped even more in Graviton 4's favor.

    It's great to see Emerald Rapids and Sierra Forest in the mix, even with the former competing at a core-count disadvantage (and the latter obviously leaning far in the opposite direction, with 144 E-cores).

    BTW, the author (Anton) neglected to mention the final Geomean, which went 21.3% in favor of EPYC 9684X. The EPYC 9654 even beat it by 11.5%.


    Regarding the Phoronix tests actually discussed in the article, I have only two observations I'd like to note:
    The Intel CPU (Sapphire Rapids Xeon 8488C) was the only processor with SMT/Hyperthreading enabled, putting it at a substantial disadvantage.
    The Geomean of EPYC 9R14 was 24.9% greater than that of the Graviton 4, which is a much better win for AMD at 64 cores than the 11.5% they managed with the non-X3D 96-core CPU (above).
    Reply