thelastword
Banned
It's been silly out there......I know how many persons like to defend devs and companies implicitly, saying "don't talk down to devs" or too many conspiracy theories, even in the face of numerous evidence (Ubisoft anyone? Liberterte Fraternite, Egalite)...….The fact is, big companies with monopolies have and will do things to maintain such monopolies or their position......We have persons defending Intel or Nvidia to death when their track record and anti-consumer behavior is well documented and there's a huge blood trail that leads to their camp......…It's similar to "PAP-EA" buying original PC devs, taking them out back and pulling the hammer...…..These big companies have one thing on their minds...."Kill the competition". smother them, create false narratives for years ongoing through forums and various channels.......Like even recently you would still hear 'AMD has bad drivers", that is why I go with NV........"All I ever had was an Intel CPU, they're the best"......Well Bub, that's why there are reviews and research articles...…You want to know what's going on and has been going on in this industry, read, read read......
-----------------------------------------
"One of the difficulties of CPU reviews is that they represent the best time to evaluate new features and software — while simultaneously representing the worst possible time to attempt to do a deep dive on any specific piece of software. Sometimes, reviewers adopt tests because a vendor has recommended them, without considering whether the test will perform identically on an Intel versus an AMD system.
Sometimes, the vendor fails to disclose that an application is compiled in a manner that will lead to tests running much faster on one platform as opposed to another. This is one of those times. When I published Matlab data in our Threadripper 3970X / Cascade Lake X joint review, it was because Intel had recommended this test and workload as a showcase for Intel’s HEDT desktop line. I specifically asked for recommendations, hoping that Intel would have some applications in mind that would show relatively light scaling at or above the 18-core mark with AVX-512 integration.
Even professional apps don’t scale perfectly forever, and I knew going into this review that there was going to be a performance “island” for Intel to stand on at the intersection of higher clocks and lightly threaded applications. “Lightly,” in this context, should be understood to mean “apps that don’t scale all the way to 64 threads” as opposed to “apps that don’t scale past 4-8 threads,” which is usually what we mean when we call an app lightly threaded. It was obvious that Threadripper 3960X and 3970X were going to beat the 10980XE in every app that could scale to match their thread counts, especially in the 3970X’s case. With that as a given, it was worth exploring the areas that had historically been the strongest for Intel to see how performance would compare.
Intel recommended four workloads for this review: AIXPRT, Adobe Premiere Pro, Matlab, and Sony Catalyst. I wanted to spend more time evaluating AIXPRT before I started running it on systems, which made it less appealing. Adobe now requires that you provide them with a credit card in order to launch a 7-day free trial of their software, so that’s right out. I opted to test Matlab and Sony Catalyst. I was not aware of this investigation and report by redditor Nedflanders1976, made some eight days ago."
He writes.....
There’s a way to disable this behavior in Matlab. Flanders writes. If you are a Windows user with Matlab installed, create a batch file with the following data:
Start the application using this batch file. You can make this permanent by entering: “MKL_DEBUG_CPU_TYPE=5” into the System Environment Variables. Nedflanders1976 also has details on how to perform this task for Linux. We played around with testing some variant ideas, including setting “MKL_DYNAMIC=FALSE” and “MKL_NUM_THREADS=64” to see if these settings would improve performance. They did not. Best performance was obtained using the settings above.
Updated Matlab Results
"I have updated our Matlab results with new data, showing the impact of running the application in this mode. I display the total summary time for the entire workload at the bottom of each set of results. The top results show the performance of our three compared CPUs without any changes, the bottom chart shows the impact with the “set MKL_Debug_CPU_Type=5” flag. This may work for other applications that use the MKL library as well. It should be noted that in many cases, the CPU is only ~53-55 percent loaded during this test — a load level that correlates to 17-18 processor threads. In this case, however, these settings proved faster than forcing the MKL to use a higher number of threads. Telling the machine to use 48 or 64 threads only increased total execution time on the 3970X.
AMD’s performance improves by 1.32x – 1.37x overall. Individual test gains are sometimes much larger. Obviously these results are much worse for Intel, changing what looked like a narrow victory over the 3960X and a good showing against the 3970X into an all-out loss."
https://www.extremetech.com/computi...ss-matlab-cripple-amd-ryzen-threadripper-cpus
----------------------------------------------
The question is. for how many applications is this a reality? I'd wager many......I still remember so many applications just not making use of cores or something intrinsic in the coding that prevented better performance on AMD CPU's for one reason or another...…When you would think higher IPC CPU's, higher cache and cores should perform better.....I still remember ADOBE Premier on Ryzen +, I think it should have done better even then.......With Ryzen 3 it performs better of course, but there's just alot of questions you raise when you see such irregularities.......Fortnite is another, still performs better on Intel and before 2.0 had a huge gulf in favour of NV too, I watch this game, especially on the CPU side and I'm thinking this game should be loving AMD cores and cache, but something is still amiss there........Well I said amiss, "but you get it".......
-----------------------------------------
"One of the difficulties of CPU reviews is that they represent the best time to evaluate new features and software — while simultaneously representing the worst possible time to attempt to do a deep dive on any specific piece of software. Sometimes, reviewers adopt tests because a vendor has recommended them, without considering whether the test will perform identically on an Intel versus an AMD system.
Sometimes, the vendor fails to disclose that an application is compiled in a manner that will lead to tests running much faster on one platform as opposed to another. This is one of those times. When I published Matlab data in our Threadripper 3970X / Cascade Lake X joint review, it was because Intel had recommended this test and workload as a showcase for Intel’s HEDT desktop line. I specifically asked for recommendations, hoping that Intel would have some applications in mind that would show relatively light scaling at or above the 18-core mark with AVX-512 integration.
Even professional apps don’t scale perfectly forever, and I knew going into this review that there was going to be a performance “island” for Intel to stand on at the intersection of higher clocks and lightly threaded applications. “Lightly,” in this context, should be understood to mean “apps that don’t scale all the way to 64 threads” as opposed to “apps that don’t scale past 4-8 threads,” which is usually what we mean when we call an app lightly threaded. It was obvious that Threadripper 3960X and 3970X were going to beat the 10980XE in every app that could scale to match their thread counts, especially in the 3970X’s case. With that as a given, it was worth exploring the areas that had historically been the strongest for Intel to see how performance would compare.
Intel recommended four workloads for this review: AIXPRT, Adobe Premiere Pro, Matlab, and Sony Catalyst. I wanted to spend more time evaluating AIXPRT before I started running it on systems, which made it less appealing. Adobe now requires that you provide them with a credit card in order to launch a 7-day free trial of their software, so that’s right out. I opted to test Matlab and Sony Catalyst. I was not aware of this investigation and report by redditor Nedflanders1976, made some eight days ago."
He writes.....
There’s a way to disable this behavior in Matlab. Flanders writes. If you are a Windows user with Matlab installed, create a batch file with the following data:
Start the application using this batch file. You can make this permanent by entering: “MKL_DEBUG_CPU_TYPE=5” into the System Environment Variables. Nedflanders1976 also has details on how to perform this task for Linux. We played around with testing some variant ideas, including setting “MKL_DYNAMIC=FALSE” and “MKL_NUM_THREADS=64” to see if these settings would improve performance. They did not. Best performance was obtained using the settings above.
Updated Matlab Results
"I have updated our Matlab results with new data, showing the impact of running the application in this mode. I display the total summary time for the entire workload at the bottom of each set of results. The top results show the performance of our three compared CPUs without any changes, the bottom chart shows the impact with the “set MKL_Debug_CPU_Type=5” flag. This may work for other applications that use the MKL library as well. It should be noted that in many cases, the CPU is only ~53-55 percent loaded during this test — a load level that correlates to 17-18 processor threads. In this case, however, these settings proved faster than forcing the MKL to use a higher number of threads. Telling the machine to use 48 or 64 threads only increased total execution time on the 3970X.
AMD’s performance improves by 1.32x – 1.37x overall. Individual test gains are sometimes much larger. Obviously these results are much worse for Intel, changing what looked like a narrow victory over the 3960X and a good showing against the 3970X into an all-out loss."
https://www.extremetech.com/computi...ss-matlab-cripple-amd-ryzen-threadripper-cpus
----------------------------------------------
The question is. for how many applications is this a reality? I'd wager many......I still remember so many applications just not making use of cores or something intrinsic in the coding that prevented better performance on AMD CPU's for one reason or another...…When you would think higher IPC CPU's, higher cache and cores should perform better.....I still remember ADOBE Premier on Ryzen +, I think it should have done better even then.......With Ryzen 3 it performs better of course, but there's just alot of questions you raise when you see such irregularities.......Fortnite is another, still performs better on Intel and before 2.0 had a huge gulf in favour of NV too, I watch this game, especially on the CPU side and I'm thinking this game should be loving AMD cores and cache, but something is still amiss there........Well I said amiss, "but you get it".......
