AM (myname4rwt.delete@this.jee-male.com) on October 16, 2018 10:18 am wrote:
> anon (anon.delete@this.anon.com) on October 14, 2018 3:29 pm wrote:
> > AM (myname4rwt.delete@this.jee-male.com) on October 14, 2018 8:58 am wrote:
> > > anon (anon.delete@this.anon.com) on October 13, 2018 2:20 am wrote:
> > > > AM (myname4rwt.delete@this.jee-male.com) on October 12, 2018 4:48 am wrote:
> > > > > anon (anon.delete@this.anon.com) on October 11, 2018 3:49 pm wrote:
> > > > > > AM (myname4rwt.delete@this.jee-male.com) on October 11, 2018 11:02 am wrote:
> > > > > > > Foo_ (foo.delete@this.nomail.com) on October 11, 2018 10:22 am wrote:
> > > > > > > > AM (myname4rwt.delete@this.jee-male.com) on October 11, 2018 9:15 am wrote:
> > > > > > > > > And considering Cloudflare's well-known stance wrt ARM vs x86 (see e.g. https://www.datacenterknowledge.com/design/cloudflare-bets-arm-servers-it-expands-its-data-center-network)
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I suspect -- assuming Cloudflare folks are negotiation-smart -- they got these rejects not just for
> > > > > > > > > free, but for a hefty subzero price, part of their deal being this blog post mentioning they're upgrading
> > > > > > > > > their fleet to an off-roadmap/custom Intel CPU "offering considerable value in performance per watt".
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Why would Intel pay to advertise a CPU model that they don't want to sell?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Not to advertise a "CPU model", but for Cloudflare staying with
> > > > > > > Intel -- their ARM intentions are well-known (link above).
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > With Centriq, ThunderX2, and finally Ampere eMAG servers available (https://insidehpc.com/2018/10/ampere-augments-arm-servers-new-developer-platform/),
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I guess the value of such PR project targeted at various business execs is well worth
> > > > > > > > > selling rejects at negative price to prevent someone size of Cloudflare switching to
> > > > > > > > > ARM.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > There are not many companies "size of Cloudflare" (in # of servers) around the world, I think.
> > > > > > > > And I doubt those companies make CPU architecture decisions by reading blog posts.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Nothing more than sloppy wording on my part -- companies who consider, or are forced to consider,
> > > > > > > power efficiency and computer density are surely not limited to size of Cloudflare.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > They're all already looking at ARM, AMD, some even POWER.
> > > > > > They all have a strong interest to make non-Intel look
> > > > > > good on their workloads even if they don't switch, to negotiate with Intel. PR has nothing to do with it.
> > > > >
> > > > > The thing is, regardless of whether Intel had PR-related considerations in this deal or not,
> > > > > there's no denial they exist -- it simply wouldn't be smart for them not to take any PR advantage
> > > > > out of a deal like that.
> > > >
> > > > What PR are you talking about? You were saying there was some
> > > > PR issue as though other companies of similar scale
> > > > would look at this posting and suddenly get the bright idea
> > > > to test ARM CPUs. Now it's pointed out how ridiculous
> > > > that was, you claim to be giving me a clue! The nerve. Since
> > > > you went crazy a while back and insisted I was several
> > > > other people, I'll go ahead and call you Maynard because that's a leaf right out of his book.
> > >
> > > You clearly have issues with taking some posts too personal for some reason;
> >
> > You are the person who had a huge meltdown a few months
> > ago and started accusing people of being other people
> > because the internet was making him angry, are you not? I just want to confirm I didn't mix up my facts.
>
> Indeed, and you'll have a very hard time trying to change my opinion on
> this one -- your posting pattern doesn't seem to be changing much.
>
> > [snip paranoid delusions]
> >
> > >
> > > Anyway, if you really happen to believe that Intel made a custom part for Cloudflare
> > > specifically tuned to their workload as they did for Amazon, FB, Google --
> > > keep believing, I don't buy that as figures suggest otherwise.
> >
> > And if I don't, then you have nothing, because that strawman seems to be the only thing you're
> > still clutching at. I never said that or thought that, thanks for your concern though.
> >
> > >
> > > > > Just like it wouldn't be smart for Cloudflare not to do a bit of digging
> > > > > and tell Intel upfront they are being offered rejects of commercial bins.
> > > >
> > > > ?
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > 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 (they
> > > > > may have claimed whatever they wanted to Cloudflare in private talks when they approached
> > > > > them to keep them as a customer, but claims are one thing, facts are another).
> > > >
> > > > So you take them at their word when they say good things about ARM, but they
> > > > must be lying when they said something good about Intel. Interesting logic.
> > >
> > > No, you're definitely not friends with logic (as I think I mentioned to you before):
> >
> > I don't think you're qualified to keep track of what you mention to who,
> > considering you can't distinguish people. But we'll ignore that.
> >
> > > I don't dispute
> > > their measurements regardless of whether they are x86 or ARM; but trivial math shows that power efficiency
> > > of this SKU is worse than anything Intel sells, and had Cloudflare run comparisons vs Intel's commercial
> > > bins of 24-core chips rather than their G8 hw, it would become obvious even to you.
> >
> > The end result was that they said to be appeased by the performance of the part, wherever it came from.
> >
> > >
> > > > >
> > > > > And, quite frankly, after their notorious 28-core 5 GHz demo at Computex last summer the assumption
> > > > > of Intel doing a custom part for Cloudflare which some posters here seem to take for granted, is
> > > > > downright dumb. A nice video in this regard https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ozcEel1rNKM
> > > > >
> > > > > Interestingly enough, my comment to their blog post which says literally
> > > > > "There's likely more to this story than meets the eye from the post
> > > > > [link to this thread on RWT]"
> > > > >
> > > > > clearly did not pass the moderation.
> > > > >
> > > > > I posted another one mainly to check whether it would be blocked
> > > > > as well, but it's early to decide yet on this one:
> > > > > "Considering that both ThunderX2 servers and Ampere eMAG server-type development systems are
> > > > > available for purchase (https://developer.amperecomputing.com), why don't you guys get hold
> > > > > of them and publish some performance and power consumption benchmarks as you did before? "
> > > >
> > > > You hold a great chip on your shoulder, but sadly for you none of that had
> > > > anything to do with me or my comment to your post about this PR nonsense.
> > > >
> > > > You have to argue what's in front of you, not against all the people you perceive have wronged
> > > > you in the past on this and various other swamps around the internet. It's just ridiculous
> > > > having a big tantrum like this when some small things is pointed out and starting to cry about
> > > > how you must have been right all those other times and the big meanies were wrong.
> > > >
> > >
> > > My post was mainly about figures, and as long as PR point is concerned, there's
> > > no nonsense. You're missing a simple fact that Cloudflare is significant enough
> > > today that their choice of hardware can influence many others' decisions.
> >
> > No your nonsense about PR was just that -- utter nonsense. Sorry, no other way to sugar coat it,
> > I cat copy and paste the exact parts that were nonsense if you've conveniently forgotten them.
>
> There are posts which concentrate on the PR aspect of this news much more
> than mine, e.g. https://www.realworldtech.com/forum/?threadid=180652&curpostid=180785
> so how come you're arguing the PR point just with me then?
>
> Anyway, if you want to reconvince me on the subject of PR, then simply try harder with
> your arguments (I prefer facts and figures), or don't expect me to waste time with
> you (funnily, this time around your troll-mode switch was triggered by the (otherwise
> rather neutral) post with linked Youtube video mocking Intel's Computex demo).

Step 1: Claim that multiple different posters are the same person.
Step 2: Point out that this virtual person is not consistent in their arguments and views.
Step 3: You've won your argument against a person that doesn't exist.

Good job.