Memory Performance of AMD EPYC Rome and Intel Cascade Lake SP Server Processors — mentioned by magicalhippo

Sat, 19 Oct 2024 15:16:50 GMT

Curious about the latency of this. This[1] page, which is from 2022, seems to indicate that the CLX memory controllers adds about 200ns, and you got some retimers which add a few tens of ns. Then there's the cabling, assuming 2/3 the speed of light that's 5ns per meter. With the memory latency itself it seems this adds up about 350ns, while a local memory hit is about 100ns[2][3]. For random access workloads this is certainly better than not having stuff in memory, but I guess for streaming workloads a sled full of NVMe drives might be just as good. [1]…

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

Memory Performance of AMD EPYC Rome and Intel Cascade Lake SP Server Processors — HN submission

Tue, 10 May 2022 15:39:16 GMT

Memory Performance of AMD EPYC Rome and Intel Cascade Lake SP Server Processors

3 points; 0 discussion replies on HN. Paper and source history. A submission is not an endorsement.

Memory Performance of AMD EPYC Rome and Intel Cascade Lake SP Server Processors · HackerPapers discussions

Memory Performance of AMD EPYC Rome and Intel Cascade Lake SP Server Processors — mentioned by magicalhippo

Memory Performance of AMD EPYC Rome and Intel Cascade Lake SP Server Processors — HN submission