against Zen3 yep, against Zen4 it will probably lose as both will have probably around the same per core per clock AVX-512 performance .
do you not know how to internet ?
That's not how Nvidia wants CPUs to be used. You can tell by how they advertise Grace. They don't particularly care about any of that stuff, what they care about is how easily they can access system memory via the CPU for large datasets that can't just sit in VRAM alone.
There's also AMX to consider, but I'm inclined to agree with @uzzi38 that Nvidia doesn't want people focusing on that. Perhaps the Data Streaming Accelerator can help?
“/s” means “end of sarcasm”. My comment was meant as a joke!
Source?
What exactly are you expecting me to tell you? Don't ask questions you know you're not going to get the answers to.
I think quoting opinion as fact is quite common on the forum. Nothing personal.
I usually try and be quite clear on what is opinion and what isn't, actually. Same applies in this case.
Nvidia taps Intel’s Sapphire Rapids CPU for DGX H100 system
A win against AMD as a much bigger war over AI compute plays outwww.theregister.com
FWIW nVidia decided on using SPR for the x86 Hopper DGX.
Yeah, Nvidia doesn't really care about the CPUs (only as far as it's no bottleneck but still can be replaced by the upcoming Grace eventually), H100 is the focus. What matters is the platform being up to speed. There SPR with PCIe5 and DDR5 may well come in first in near term availability (at least we can expect Intel gave Nvidia a guaranteed allocation, AMD might not have been able to do that with Genoa already).
Nvidia taps Intel’s Sapphire Rapids CPU for DGX H100 system
A win against AMD as a much bigger war over AI compute plays out
FWIW nVidia decided on using SPR for the x86 Hopper DGX.
Lmao, he thinks the SoC is 10ESF? And that that would be a good thing compared to N3? I question that it's integrated as well. Guy's delusional.
Because he has no idea what he's talking about.
The only thing remotely plausible about what he said would be the idea of an integrated GPU in the desktop SoC die. But it would not be on a different process from the mobile one (and thus not Intel anything), and would probably have to be smaller than 64EU. A distinct desktop SoC is required regardless, but the only real advantage to integrating the GPU would be from an IO shoreline perspective. Maybe a little cost savings.
I’m not here for the sake for meaningless arguing. Learn to read! IGNORED
I went back and read the exchange
Hence the speculation of a monolithic die. 32 cores would be very doable if they so wanted. Would cut total silicon in half.
I vagally remember being told by intel sales channel that the plan was icelake server and SPR would service different markets and exist along side each other not as a direct generational replacement. So it will be interesting to see what happens. icelake server at 32 cores in "enterprise workloads " isn't to bad again Zen2/3 it can sustain solid clocks, but that might be looking a bit average by the time Zen4 comes around.
Glad you think so! LOL. That guy said Intel can’t make 10nm anything. Icelake volume at this point is actually greater than all of AMD server volume. It’s ramping fine, from 1M in Q4‘21 to 2M in Q1’22. It’s not going to outpace Cascade lake overnight. It doesn’t work like that.
You are making invalid assumptions. Do you really believe that XCC tile is the only one Intel will make to cover the entire chip core range from 8 to 60? I have vehemently argued against this in my previous posts. Go back and read them. Or not. No skin off my back.
