By: AM (myname4rwt.delete@this.jee-male.com), October 14, 2018 9:00 am
Room: Moderated Discussions
Wes Felter (wmf.delete@this.felter.org) on October 12, 2018 2:42 pm wrote:
> AM (myname4rwt.delete@this.jee-male.com) on October 12, 2018 4:48 am wrote:
>
> > Besides, the whole assumption that Intel went out of its way and made a custom part for
> > Cloudflare tuned to suit their workloads is way too fishy to consider it seriously
>
> Intel is doing dozens of "custom" bins for various customers; do you think they're all fishy or
> just this one? Especially in this case, CloudFlare is getting a lower frequency and higher TDP so
> effectively it's a "worse" chip than standard bins and it should be easy for Intel to provide.
Well, exactly! "Co-innovating" a custom CPU "specifically made for our workload offering considerable value in Performance per Watt" as their blog post says on one hand and a throwaway bin whose perf/W is worse than everything Intel offers on the other, which is evident from figures, are clearly not the same thing.
> AM (myname4rwt.delete@this.jee-male.com) on October 12, 2018 4:48 am wrote:
>
> > Besides, the whole assumption that Intel went out of its way and made a custom part for
> > Cloudflare tuned to suit their workloads is way too fishy to consider it seriously
>
> Intel is doing dozens of "custom" bins for various customers; do you think they're all fishy or
> just this one? Especially in this case, CloudFlare is getting a lower frequency and higher TDP so
> effectively it's a "worse" chip than standard bins and it should be easy for Intel to provide.
Well, exactly! "Co-innovating" a custom CPU "specifically made for our workload offering considerable value in Performance per Watt" as their blog post says on one hand and a throwaway bin whose perf/W is worse than everything Intel offers on the other, which is evident from figures, are clearly not the same thing.
