New AMD EPYC-based Compute Engine family, now in beta

What are the implications? Higher perf and/or lower price?

Basically. This is the best server processor.

Big claim there. On what basis?

This article goes into great detail: https://www.servethehome.com/amd-epyc-7002-series-rome-deliv...

Another follow-up article: https://www.servethehome.com/amd-epyc-7702p-review-redefinin...

AMD is offering incredible performance on every metric: single threaded, multithreaded, total RAM per socket, PCIe 4.0, power consumption, total performance, total price, performance for price, etc.

Outside of some very niche applications, the only reason someone would choose Intel for servers right now is because "no one ever got fired for choosing Intel."

AMD's Epyc Rome processors are truly excellent, best-in-class processors.

There are literally no server benchmarks anywhere in those articles. Unless you are planning to run a distributed C build node there's nothing in these articles that can inform your choice. Distributed building is an extremely narrow, niche use case. Where are the nginx and mysql and grpc benchmarks?

There's absolutely no way you could've read those articles in the last four minutes. They go into great detail about what makes the Rome processors so important -- it's not just some random amalgamation of benchmarks, but the benchmarks serve to provide hard numbers that back up the textual analysis.

The benchmarks are not just "distributed compilation" either... that's a very misleading characterization. There was one compilation benchmark for the Linux kernel, and that's the only compilation benchmark I remember seeing.

No one benchmarks nginx because nginx can easily saturate the network card on a server without saturating the processor.

Here's a postgres benchmark: https://openbenchmarking.org/embed.php?i=2002066-VE-XEONEPYC...

Or a rocksdb benchmark: https://openbenchmarking.org/embed.php?i=2002066-VE-XEONEPYC...

MariaDB was a rare win for Intel: https://openbenchmarking.org/embed.php?i=2002066-VE-XEONEPYC...

("rare win" is literally the wording used in the Phoronix article: https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=linux55-...)

ServeTheHome had access to more comprehensive Intel hardware, so I preferred to link to their articles, but Phoronix saw more of the same stuff.

Intel was thoroughly destroyed in every Linux review of Rome vs Intel's latest that I've seen. Intel can eke out some rare wins when applications are heavily optimized for the nuances of their CPUs, but it's not guaranteed even then.

If you can't be bothered to read articles to understand the answer to the question you asked, then this is my last reply.

Every morning, I beg my God to make morons stop replying to me on HN. Today is the first day anyone has promised to make my dream come true.

I didn't read those articles in the last 4 minutes because I read them when they were published. A massively parallel run of 7zip was a really stupid benchmark in August and it remains stupid today.

These other benchmarks are certainly more relevant but none of them jumps out at me as a killer claim. An EPYC 7402 with 50% more cores, drawing 80% more power, and costing 35% more dollars than a Xeon Silver 4216 delivers 24% more pgsql ops per second. What TCO equation do you plug that into? I would describe these results as mixed.