POPPUR爱换

 找回密码
 注册

QQ登录

只需一步,快速开始

手机号码,快捷登录

搜索
查看: 1905|回复: 12
打印 上一主题 下一主题

被xx之后胡说八道是AMD的一贯做法,更新中文版

[复制链接]
跳转到指定楼层
1#
发表于 2009-4-9 13:28 | 只看该作者 回帖奖励 |倒序浏览 |阅读模式
本帖最后由 itany 于 2009-4-10 12:15 编辑

AMD hits back at Intel's Nehalem
Throwing a pebble into Goliath's eye
By Sylvie Barak

Tuesday, 7 April 2009, 22:46




IT MAY HAVE taken AMD a few days, but Little Big Chip is finally recovering from its winding at the hands of Intel's new Nehalem server chip, Xeon 5500, and has thrown a few counter-punches of its own.

AMD's server chief Pat Patla led the counter-offensive with an outspoken interview to tech blog TechPulse360.
Asked whether Nehalem's slowest server chips could still beat any Opteron chip hands down, Patla said it seemed incredulous. After all, he pointed out, the slowest Nehalem chip is dual-core, whilst Opteron is quad core and Intel take great care to only buzz about benchmark results from their top-end parts.

Of course, Intel doesn't actually claim that its dual-core Nehalem chip beats Shanghai's fastest, so this is a bit spinful of AMD. What Chipzilla does claim, and is true, is that its slowest quad-core Xeon 5500 outperforms the fastest Shanghai.

Patla goes on to say that both QuickPath Interconnect (QPI) and hyperthreading are overrated, claiming QPI is nothing but a rip-off of open standard HyperTransport made proprietary with speeds which drop dramatically the lower you go on the server chip scale.

Applications which rely on high I/O and high memory throughput but don't need masses of compute power, for instance, would need to cough up for the fastest Nehalem processor to get the sort of high speeds touted by Intel, according to Patla, adding that AMD offers the same HyperTransport speed on all Opteron chips.

Meanwhile, while hyperthreading may appear enviable from afar, "real men use cores" say AMD, whilst pounding its hairy chest.

True, hyperthreading is a bit like a multitasking woman, but so what? SO WHAT?? Echoes AMD in its big, booming, manly voice. 'So, that pretty-looking multitasking woman is only giving you a 10 to 15 per cent performance bump for real applications workload,' says AMD (although we did paraphrase this slightly).

Not only is Nehalem a bit girly, it's also not a cheap date, as Patla points out. Whilst a Dell server with a Shanghai processor at 2.7GHz costs somewhere in the region of $3,000, a Nehalem 2.93GHz-packing server costs about $6,100, a not insignificant difference.

Of course, there are good reasons why Nehalem chips are so ludicrously expensive. For one thing, says Patla, the DDR3 memory they sport are still far too expensive and power-sucking. AMD reckons it will wait until 2010 when the latency has been lowered, and the price drops before going the DDR3 route.

Second of all, Nehalem counts three channels of memory whilst Opteron has only two, apparently making them 50 per cent more expensive in DIMMs and 50 per cent more power guzzling from a memory perspective.

AMD also poo-poos Intel's boasts that it can consolidate nine single-core servers on just one Nehalem server, noting, "They're not the only platform that runs virtualisation."

Patla notes that AMD's support for virtualisation platforms like VMware, Microsoft HyperV and Xen allow one dual-socket server to support on average 5 to 10 virtual machines.

As for Intel's claims of an eight-month ROI, AMD calls it "disingenuous" because it's not only about the hardware, it's also about software, lifecycle management, licensing, power and security.

"If your hardware is about 10 per cent of the cost of the total solution, how are they coming up with an ROI of eight months?", queries Patla, adding, "I'm sure they are doing the math thinking 'if you're buying the server today and you unplug 10 single core servers, the amount of power that you'd save would pay off this server'."

Intel, of course, claims Nehalem is actually a cash machine, with spinner Nick Knuppfer telling the INQ that its "extraordinary performance can be turned into actual dollars for the IT manager."

Knupffer reckons consolidating old single-socket servers achieves a 9:1 ratio while keeping the same level of performance, enthusing, "This can turn into a payback of just eight months! After that, Nehalem becomes a cash machine". WHOA!!!!

AMD, curbing Knupffer's enthusiasm a bit, does admit Nehalem has greatly reduced its idle power, but goes on to say that's just not very useful in a data centre, where parameters are typically turned up to 11.

But Knupffer, never happy unless he gets the last word, told us that, when it came to Nehalem, it really wasn't about anything other than the core.

"The uncore is a bit like a car gearbox, but the core itself is the engine. And Nehalem features an astonishingly powerful core, and the results speak for themselves," he said before we hung up on him and went to make some dinner. µ
2#
发表于 2009-4-9 13:39 | 只看该作者
已经见怪不怪了
回复 支持 反对

使用道具 举报

3#
发表于 2009-4-9 13:56 | 只看该作者
AMD及其拥趸都死鸭子嘴硬
回复 支持 反对

使用道具 举报

4#
发表于 2009-4-9 14:03 | 只看该作者
这位经理的素质可以和某些极端fans一拼了。
回复 支持 反对

使用道具 举报

5#
发表于 2009-4-9 14:32 | 只看该作者
我记得桑德斯说:“Real men have xx”, 自从xx没有了以后AMD越来越不像男人了
回复 支持 反对

使用道具 举报

6#
发表于 2009-4-9 15:10 | 只看该作者
"The uncore is a bit like a car gearbox, but the core itself is the engine. And Nehalem features an astonishingly powerful core, and the results speak for themselves," he said before we hung up on him and went to make some dinner

把uncore去掉,不就剩下K7了么

AMD在间接吹捧Alpha的强大啊
回复 支持 反对

使用道具 举报

7#
发表于 2009-4-9 15:14 | 只看该作者
True, hyperthreading is a bit like a multitasking woman, but so what? SO WHAT?? Echoes AMD in its big, booming, manly voice. 'So, that pretty-looking multitasking woman is only giving you a 10 to 15 per cent performance bump for real applications workload,' says AMD (although we did paraphrase this slightly).


回复 支持 反对

使用道具 举报

8#
发表于 2009-4-9 17:25 | 只看该作者
额,很久没见神仙了
回复 支持 反对

使用道具 举报

9#
发表于 2009-4-9 17:27 | 只看该作者
看看,躍然看不懂
回复 支持 反对

使用道具 举报

10#
 楼主| 发表于 2009-4-10 12:16 | 只看该作者
AMD高层首次回应Nehalem至强发布
驱动之家[原创] 作者:D3D 编辑:D3D 2009-04-10 09:54:49 2540 人阅读 [投递]
随着英特尔号称15年来最大革命的Nehalem架构Xeon处理器正式的发布,Intel 对该平台的性能、价格等方面的宣传也达到了一个高潮。近日记者得机采访了AMD负责全球服务器和工作站业务拓展的总监John Fruehe,对英特尔推出Nehalem时所声称的性能优势等给出了回应。 下面是与John Fruehe访谈的内容:

Q: 英特尔声称最慢的Nehalem Xeon 5500处理器也要比最快的皓龙四核处理器速度要快,是这样的吗?

John Fruehe:这怎么可能?最慢的Nehalem是一块双核架构的处理器。他们的双核架构处理器怎么可能比我们的四核处理器速度快呢?他们(Intel)刚刚发表的这些言论没有任何证据予以支持。Intel只在他们的高端产品上公布了基准测试。低端产品上根本没有。Intel在营销方面做得很好。但我并不认为他们在为客户创造价值方面做得好。

Q: 但是Intel在Nehalem中采用了超快的QuickPath Interconnect (QPI) 技术?

John Fruehe:QPI实际上是对超传输总线(HyperTransport)的复制。事实上,他们本来可以采用已成为公开标准的HyperTransport,但他们最终却决定使用他们自己的专有基础架构。

现在,你只有购买高端产品才可以享受到Intel极力宣扬的QPI性能。如果你购买他们的中端产品,QPI的速率和性能将会降低;如果你购买他们的低端产品,QPI的速率和性能会更低。

这就意味着:如果你有一个依赖于高I/O和高内存吞吐量但不需要大量运算能力的应用,例如Web服务器、文件服务器或者网络基础架构这些当今数据中心的主要应用时,你就必须购买最快的Nehalem处理器来获得最快的QPI!相反,我们在我们所有的皓龙处理器上都提供相同的超传输总线(HyperTransport)速度。

Q: 英特尔在Nehalem中使用了超线程技术,你怎么看呢?

John Fruehe:我们要使用的是实际的物理的“核”。并且我们已经在我们所有的产品中使用了真正的“核”。超线程技术最初被设计为像“核”一样工作,但是它只能为真实的应用负载提供10%至15%的性能提升。这是因为超线程技术需要实际的一个“核”来模拟运行2条逻辑通道:标准通道和超线程通道。在一个总的层面上并不会为你提供明确的更高的吞吐量。

Q: 你认为Nehalem处理器的价格过高,是么?
John Fruehe:没错。一个装有Nehalem 2.93 GHz(E5570)处理器的服务器价格(6100美元)比装有AMD四核皓龙(Shanghai)2.7 GHz处理器的相同配置的服务器价格(3000美元)高104%。价格悬殊这么大,人们当然期望它的速度更快。所以如果你正处于经济困难期并且正在努力少花钱多办事,你大概不会去购买Nehalem服务器(同样的价钱所能买到的服务器数量要少一半),而是购买更加节省成本的皓龙服务器。

(Intel)摆出所有的基准测试并声称“我们拥有更好的平台”,却完全忽略了价格因素。

Q: 为什么采用Intel处理器的服务器比采用AMD处理器的服务器更贵呢?
John Fruehe:大概有四点:1. 首先,Nehalem处理器本身的价格就比皓龙处理器贵得多;
2. 其次,他们使用的是价格更贵、功耗更高而且有较高延迟的DDR3 内存。DDR3并不是2009年的理想选择。但是到2010年,DDR3将会具备更低的价格、延迟和功耗,倒那时才是选择DDR3的最佳时机;
3. Nehalem服务器有3个内存通道,而皓龙服务器只有2个。所以我们可以放置2个DIMM,而他们则要放置3个DIMM,因此在DIMM方面就会贵50%,从内存的角度看还会增加50%的功耗;
4. 由于其处理器插槽的大小和采用的3个内存通道,Intel需要在主板上分更多的层(PCB层),再加上特殊的VRM等等,使整个基础架构的构建成本更高。

Q: 英特尔声称其客户可以在一个单独的Nehalem服务器上合并9个单核服务器,你怎么看待?

John Fruehe:我们同样也支持所有的虚拟化平台(VMware、Microsoft HyperV、Xen…),可使一个双路服务器支持平均5至10台虚拟机。所以Intel谈论的实际上是虚拟化,而我们同样也可以做到!照他们的说法似乎这是只有Intel能够实现的独有的功能,但并不是只有他们的平台支持虚拟化。

Q: Intel还宣称在某些情况下,Nehalem服务器只要8个月就可以收回投资?

John Fruehe:人们注重的是完整的解决方案:它的硬件、软件、生命周期管理、许可、功耗、安全……如果您看看任何TCO模型的话(这是您应该用来进行ROI分析的依据),就可以看出来购买成本(硬件和软件)大约占25%。而软件又比硬件贵得多。所以,如果你的硬件大约占解决方案总成本的大约10%,那么他们的ROI怎么会是8个月呢?我肯定他们是在做这样的一道算术题:“如果你今天买了这款服务器,你就会关掉10台单核心服务器,这10台单核心服务器给您节省下来的功耗将会补偿购买这台服务器的钱。”

回复 支持 反对

使用道具 举报

11#
 楼主| 发表于 2009-4-10 12:18 | 只看该作者
[29] 游客 2009-4-10 12:04:45
从这家伙的话里可以看出,4核服务器处理器I的最低端比A的最高端确实要好,最慢的QPI也比HT快
回复 支持 反对

使用道具 举报

12#
发表于 2009-4-10 14:37 | 只看该作者
“口水仗又起 Intel称GM45比NV MCP79强”
既然是娱乐贴就应该多元化
回复 支持 反对

使用道具 举报

13#
发表于 2009-4-10 14:40 | 只看该作者
我是来看楼主的娱乐贴的
回复 支持 反对

使用道具 举报

您需要登录后才可以回帖 登录 | 注册

本版积分规则

广告投放或合作|网站地图|处罚通告|

GMT+8, 2025-8-26 00:40

Powered by Discuz! X3.4

© 2001-2017 POPPUR.

快速回复 返回顶部 返回列表