"AMD formally announced its new Naples server CPU today, with up to 32 cores, eight memory channels, and its new, 128-lane Infinity Fabric. Ryzen’s consumer performance may be impressive, but this is a straight server play, with AMD hoping to capitalize on strong performance in the 1-2 socket market.
The company’s strategy is similar to the one it adopted eleven years ago. Back in 2006, AMD’s server business was one of the company’s biggest success stories. Beginning in 2001, with the launch of Athlon MP and the 760MP chipset, AMD had slowly taken market share aware from Intel, particularly once Opteron launched. Its share of the worldwide server business peaked in Q2 2006, at just under 25% of the market. Today, AMD has less than 1% of the market, which is one of the reasons it’s so eager to rejoin that particular fight. Intel’s data center business was worth $17.2 billion in 2016, up 8% from 2015. If AMD can capture 5% of that business, that’s $860 million of additional revenue per year, and it’s revenue that comes with a nice margin."
"AMD’s Naples (that’s the design name, not the marketing brand) server CPU is a multi-chip-module design rather than a unified 32-core chip. This makes smart sense for a number of reasons. First, GlobalFoundries has no experience building a 32-core processor on 14nm, and the sheer size of the die would be a bunker-buster. Instead, AMD has glued together multiple four-core CCXs into at least two multi-chip-modules (MCMs). Each MCM has four memory controllers and there are two groups of four in a 32-core chip, which is how AMD hits its 8-channel memory target. Total memory bandwidth per CPU is 170 GB/s."
At its Ryzen tech day, AMD showed demos of its Naples CPU platform performing a sparse matrix calculation on a 3D data set. When both AMD and Intel chips were held to the same configuration — 44 cores, DDR4-1866 — the Intel CPU took 35 seconds to complete a workload where Naples took 18 seconds. When given its head and allowed to run all 64 cores and DDR4-2400, AMD cut another four seconds off its time. That’s fairly significant performance, though we have to note that AMD released no details on how its Naples CPU was clocked, what clock speeds the chip will target, or even how the two servers were specifically configured. All such benchmark results should therefore be taken with a grain of salt.
I believe AMD Ryzen based processors are great, but if Intel released even stronger processors in the not far away future, what about AMD Ryzen then?
I love AMD processors, I purchased them, and use them, not because they are stronger in performance, or value in price, but I just appreciate their unique style and inner beautify. I just wish AMD company could jump out of the endless competition around the performance against their opponents such as Intel and/or some unknown future challengers, but leave the end users a positive and unique style giving them much more reasonable things to buy AMD products!
I remember reading an article a few years ago which said Opteron processors are easier to program for than Xeon, which is why IBM used them as auxillary processors in their supercomputer (Kraken I think), but due to the performance advantage Intel wins out. However, we have seen what Ryzen can do, so there is no reason they can't make a comeback in servers and HPC markets, especially given their cost advantage.
The very reason people choose XEON rather than Opteron to build up their servers for the actually performance and duration. As to the duration, the Opteron processors produce too much more heat than XEON with a comparably low performance. This thing gave the way to those AMD64 clones from Intel. AMD Ryzen processors are designed for Servers initially, and people who are tired of Intel products would have strong purposes to choose Ryzen as test bed for some a long or short term. If they eventually get accustomed with them, they would build up more and more servers based on Ryzen.
But the negative side of AMD Ryzen, for its lack of ARM instruction set support, but merely an enhanced x86-64 processor. This thing is not that very easy to shock the position of Intel Xeon on the server market, even if it brings out the looks better performance through benchmark tools. Allow me to be frank, Intel have the strongest force to do research on the performance not only on the microarchitecture, architecture (ISA) and compilers. They could also manipulate the performance on the semiconductor level. But as to AMD, it is merely a Microarchitecture designer, similar as yesterday's Cyrix. Even the improvements on performance could be seen on their newly coming processors, but there would also exist some problems which might also made AMD themselves to consider for too much. So the things, which AMD Ryzen brings, is not that optimistic! Anyway I still love AMD processors, just like I use AMD processors based machine all the time!