October 11th, 2024

AMD Zen 5 Epyc Turin dominates previous Zen 4, Intel by 40%

The AMD EPYC 9005 series processors, including the EPYC 9755 and 9965, outperform Intel's Xeon 6980P, offering better performance, power efficiency, and competitive pricing for server deployments.

Read original articleLink Icon
AMD Zen 5 Epyc Turin dominates previous Zen 4, Intel by 40%

The AMD EPYC 9005 series processors, including the EPYC 9755, 9575F, and 9965, have demonstrated exceptional performance across over 140 benchmarks, showcasing significant improvements in power efficiency and value. The EPYC 9755, a 128-core processor, outperformed the dual Xeon 6980P by 40%, while the EPYC 9965, with 192 cores, was 45% faster than its predecessor, the EPYC 9754. The benchmarks revealed that the EPYC 9965 had an average power consumption of 275 Watts, which, despite being 32% higher than the EPYC 9654, resulted in better overall power efficiency due to its superior performance. The EPYC 9005 series not only surpassed the performance of the Intel Xeon 6900P Granite Rapids series but also offered a more competitive price point, with the EPYC 9755 priced at $12,984 and the EPYC 9965 at $14,813, compared to the Xeon 6980P's $17,800. The EPYC 9005 series continues to utilize Socket SP5, suggesting robust availability and competitive pricing. While Intel's Granite Rapids excels in memory bandwidth-intensive tasks, the AMD EPYC 9005 series is positioned as a strong contender for general server workloads and high-performance computing environments.

- AMD EPYC 9005 series processors show significant performance gains over previous generations.

- The EPYC 9755 and 9965 processors outperform Intel's Xeon 6980P in various benchmarks.

- The EPYC 9965 offers better power efficiency despite higher power consumption compared to its predecessor.

- Competitive pricing makes the EPYC 9005 series an attractive option for server deployments.

- AMD's processors are expected to maintain strong availability and support with existing infrastructure.

Link Icon 1 comments