Jeff S. (fakity.delete@this.fake.com) on August 14, 2018 5:06 am wrote:
> none (none.delete@this.none.com) on August 14, 2018 1:43 am wrote:
> > Jouni Osmala (a.delete@this.b.com) on August 13, 2018 8:04 pm wrote:
> > > In the single threaded benchmarks 2990WX got numbers that put it deeply in the
> > > category of flock of chickens in several peoples theoretical arguments.
> > > Here are the single threaded benchmarks of Anandtech. Comparison to best CPU in each category.
> > > Others may have low threads, but they are not explitely named as single threaded.
> > > y crucher 122 seconds vs 53 seconds.
> > > Geekbench 4250 vs 5846
> > > 3DPM 106 vs 156
> > > Cinebench v11.5: 1.9 vs 2.25
> > > Cinebench v10: 8825 vs 9677
> > > On average the fastest single threaded is 58% faster. (Didn't count Cinebench twice).
>
> > y-cruncher is very peculiar in its heavy use of AVX2 and AVX-512. For instance it got a
> > speedup of 20-30% with AVX-512.
>
> There were multiple things that seemed off to me about Ian's review (mostly around the totally
> unexplained power measurements and analysis), but the y-cruncher results don't look weird to
> me whatsoever. Alex, the author of y-cruncher and coincidentally also my colleague, also knows
> Ian I think, so I may have a back channel in getting parts of the review clarified.

Just to clarify, I didn't say the y-cruncher results are wrong or demonstrate a poor software implementation. It's just that it seems heavily tuned to benefit the most from
multiple FMA (FFT-based multiplication) and the author is very good at that :-)

So what this test shows is that Intel cores are much better at heavily tuned FP (FMA)
than AMD cores.