AMD Epyc 9684X vs AMD Epyc 9754
SOURCE ARTICLES
AMD Epyc 9684X and 9754 CPU review: in over 20 years, the fastest chips I have ever tested
www.club386.com
The AMD Epyc 9684X and 9754 CPUs are the fastest chips the reviewer has ever tested. The Genoa-X and Bergamo processors offer different features and performance capabilities. The Genoa-X chips have a larger on-chip L3 cache, while the Bergamo chips have more cores. The Genoa-X 9684X is particularly impressive with its 1,152MB of cache. The Bergamo 9754 with its 128 cores per motherboard offers excellent density. In terms of performance, both the Genoa-X and Bergamo chips outperform previous generations of Epyc processors. The review concludes that these specialized Epyc processors open up new revenue opportunities for AMD in the server market.
Ultimate AMD Genoa-X Workstation Review
www.storagereview.com
The Ultimate AMD Genoa-X Workstation is a powerful and versatile system that combines the AMD Genoa-X 9684X CPU with the NVIDIA A6000 GPU. It features a TYAN Transport HX FT65T-B8050 server with impressive storage capabilities and supports multiple GPUs. The workstation delivers excellent performance in graphics-intensive applications and is well-suited for professional workloads. It also offers extensive storage options, including hot-swappable drive bays and an Apex X1 QLC PCIe SSD RAID Card. The system's power consumption is reasonable considering its high-end hardware configuration. Overall, the AMD Genoa-X Workstation sets a new benchmark for performance and versatility in the workstation market.
AMD Bergamo And Genoa-X Performance Review: EPYC Chips For Big Iron Workloads - Page 3
hothardware.com
- AMD's Genoa EPYC processors perform well in general compute workloads, competing with Intel's Xeon Scalable Processor platform.
- Intel's Sapphire Rapids processors excel in specialized workloads, especially in the AI space, thanks to dedicated accelerators.
- The Genoa-X EPYC 9684X processor, with extra cache, outperforms the Genoa EPYC 9654 in HPC and 3D render workloads.
- The Bergamo EPYC processors have a more conservative approach, optimizing the core Genoa DNA for specific use cases.
- Bergamo excels in raw compute scenarios but has mixed results in workload-to-workload performance.
- AMD's Zen 4 EPYC processors have attractive qualities, including the ability to swap chips without rearchitecting servers.
- Genoa, Bergamo, and Genoa-X have specialized roles and are well-suited to specific markets.
AMD Bergamo & Genoa-X EPYC Server CPUs Crush The Competition With Sheer Performance & Efficiency Dominance
AMD's EPYC Bergamo and Genoa-X CPUs have been praised for their exceptional performance and efficiency. The Genoa-X chips offer up to 96 cores and 1.1 GB of L3 cache, while Bergamo boasts up to 128 Zen 4C cores. Both CPUs outperform Intel's Sapphire Rapids Xeon CPU and offer significant power efficiency improvements. AMD's dominance in the server market is expected to continue with the upcoming Sierra Forrest and Siena lineup.
Running The AMD EPYC 9754 CPUs With A 320W cTDP To Enhance Power Efficiency Review
The AMD EPYC 9754 CPUs can be run with a 320W cTDP to enhance power efficiency. Lowering the TDP to 320W delivers similar performance across workloads while reducing CPU power consumption. The EPYC 9754 2P at 320W runs at around 99% the performance of the default 360W configuration, with up to 5% lower power consumption. This option is beneficial for maximizing power efficiency in server environments. Additionally, switching to a 400W TDP increases performance by about 6% with a 10% power increase. AMD's cTDP options allow for fine-tuning servers for maximum performance or squeezing out the most possible performance.
AMD Bergamo And Genoa-X Performance Review: EPYC Chips For Big Iron Workloads - Page 2
The review compares the performance of AMD's Bergamo and Genoa-X EPYC chips for big iron workloads. The tests were conducted using Ubuntu Server 22.04 with the 5.15.0-76-generic Linux kernel. The AMD EPYC 9754 performed well in Coremark, 7-Zip decompression, and Blender 3D rendering. The EPYC 9684X excelled in 7-Zip compression and Linux kernel compilation. In terms of video encoding, the EPYC 9654 performed best in 4K x264 encoding, while the EPYC 9754 lagged behind. For database processing, the Bergamo and Genoa-X chips outperformed Intel's offerings in both read-only and read-write workloads. However, in web server benchmarks, Intel's chips performed better, particularly in NGINX. Intel's accelerators also provided an advantage in hashing algorithms.
+ 3
AI COMPARISON
Product Comparison Table
| Feature | AMD Epyc 9684X | AMD Epyc 9754 |
|---|---|---|
| CPU Threads | 192 threads | 256 threads |
| Max Memory Bandwidth | 460.8 GB/s | 460.8 GB/s |
| Total Clock Speed | 244.8 GHz | 288 GHz |
| PCIe Version | 5 | 5 |
| Memory Channels | 12 | 12 |
| L3 Cache | 1152 MB | 256 MB |
| DDR Version | 5 | 5 |
| L1 Cache | 6144 KB | 8192 KB |
| L2 Cache | 96 MB | 128 MB |
| L2 Cache per Core | 1 MB/core | 1 MB/core |
| L3 Cache per Core | 12 MB/core | 2 MB/core |
| CPU TDP | 400W | 360W |
| Max Memory Size | 6000GB | 6000GB |
| Max RAM Speed | 4800 MHz | 4800 MHz |
| Multithreading | Yes | Yes |
| Instruction Sets | MMX, SSE 4.1/4.2, AVX, AVX-2, AES, F16C, FMA3 | MMX, SSE 4.1/4.2, AVX, AVX-2, AES, F16C, FMA3 |
| Turbo Speed | 3.7 GHz | 3.1 GHz |
| Memory ECC | Yes | Yes |
Product Summary
-
Performance: The AMD Epyc 9684X features 192 threads and a total clock speed of 244.8 GHz, with a high L3 cache (1152 MB), making it ideal for cache-intensive applications like high-performance computing (HPC) and 3D rendering. The AMD Epyc 9754, on the other hand, has 256 threads and a higher total clock speed of 288 GHz, along with a denser core configuration optimized for multi-threaded performance in compute-heavy tasks like decompression and 3D rendering.
-
Power Efficiency: The Epyc 9754 is noted for its power efficiency, with options to adjust the configurable TDP (cTDP) for power savings, performing nearly as well at 320W as it does at its default 360W, thus offering better energy consumption rates beneficial for large-scale deployments.
-
Cache and Memory: Both CPUs support up to 6000GB of RAM and have a maximum memory speed of 4800 MHz. However, the 9684X has a much larger L3 cache per core (12 MB/core) compared to the 9754's 2 MB/core, which can significantly affect performance in cache-sensitive tasks.
-
Use Cases: The 9684X is better suited for environments where cache size per core is critical, such as detailed simulation tasks and high-detail 3D rendering. The 9754 excels in environments requiring high core counts and thread density, such as virtualized data centers and complex computational tasks.
Recommendations for Potential Buyers
-
For Data Centers and Virtualization: The AMD Epyc 9754 with its higher core and thread count, along with power efficiency features, is recommended for large-scale virtualization and cloud-native applications.
-
For High-Performance Computing and Rendering: The AMD Epyc 9684X, with its higher cache storage per core and slightly higher turbo speed, is better suited for specialized high-performance tasks that benefit from faster cache access, such as scientific simulations and high-resolution rendering in media production.
-
For General Server Upgrade: Both CPUs offer significant improvements over previous generations and are compatible with existing SP5 socket platforms, making them excellent options for upgrading existing server infrastructure with minimal compatibility issues.
PRICES
ASK AI
BestVs.ai
Hello, I'm your AI shopping assistant. How can I help you?
AI can make mistakes. Consider checking important information.
