(My random musings...)
I have to think that there is something seriously wrong in that setup. That's under-performing a dual Ice Lake 8380 setup (80 cores total, 160 threads) which achieves 74630 (
https://www.tomshardware.com/news/a...-record-heres-a-10nm-ice-lake-xeon-comparison). Either Intel has drastically dropped the ball in some unprecedented way, or there's something hamstringing this setup behind the scenes in ways that we can't see.
Looking at some details, the Ice Lake processors should be operating at least at 2.3Ghz (their base Ghz config), so they have a 15% frequency advantage over the reported 2.0Ghz in task manager during the instant shown. Assuming that CB23 in this instance is frequency bound in this case (no stalls for memory access), a 15% improvement for SPR should give roughly 80,000 points total. That's an improvement for 2S throughput over Ice Lake, but at the expense of 40% more cores for about 8% more throughput. That still doesn't sound right, and, if the understood specs of the processor are correct, and it has a base frequency of 2.0Ghz, it isn't really going to be an improvement if SPR can't consistently boost above it's base frequency.
Looking at the bench, it seems to me that the issue here is likely that SPR is running at it's max power draw or is thermal limiting to it's base frequency (at least according to what I believe the UEFI is seeing). Looking at all of the UnCore that's on each of the SPR tiles, and the cost of the interconnect between the tiles, it is not unreasonable for the UnCore power draw to be much higher than Ice Lake. From past benchmarking, the 10nm ESF process advantage over 10nm+ was more apparent at higher frequencies, and should pay dividends on boosting performance, which we see in the desktop space. At the lower frequencies that servers operate at, this shouldn't be as pronounced, at least given my understanding. That being the case, the near idle power draw on SPR should be higher than Ice Lake for any given performance tier, and fully loaded performance like we see here should really exacerbate the above speculated issue. This should be more of an issue for the workstation space than the generic server space as I don't usually see servers with every core pegged at 100% usage constantly, which leads me to believe that, while we do see SPR underperforming here a bit, for actual server workloads, we may see SPR significantly outstrip Ice Lake in many areas given it's improved I/O, its likely better boosting behavior, the greater number of physical cores and threads available, and the larger amount of processor cache.
The disappointing part in the score is that Golden Cove is supposed to be a big update over Sunny Cove, so I would have expected a greater improvement in per-clock-cycle improvement than what we're seeing here...
Again, this is all just speculation on my part...
Facebook
Twitter