AMD EPYC 8534P / EPYC 8534PN Benchmarks - Siena Delivers Incredible Value & Energy Efficiency For Linux Servers

Written by Michael Larabel in Processors on 29 November 2023 at 04:20 PM EST. Page 3 of 6. 9 Comments.
ClickHouse benchmark with settings of 100M Rows Hits Dataset, First Run / Cold Cache. Xeon Platinum 8468 was the fastest.
ClickHouse benchmark with settings of 100M Rows Hits Dataset, Third Run. Xeon Platinum 8468 was the fastest.

With the ClickHouse database server, the Xeon Platinum 8468 when running in six DDR5 memory channels like the AMD EPYC 8534P(N) delivered similar performance while going up to the full eight memory channels of Sapphire Rapids delivered a 29% advatage. The Xeon Platinum 8468 as a reminder has a peak turbo frequency of 3.8GHz to the EPYC 8534P(N) at 3.1GHz for its boost frequency.

ClickHouse benchmark with settings of 100M Rows Hits Dataset, Third Run. Xeon Platinum 8468 was the fastest.
ClickHouse benchmark with settings of 100M Rows Hits Dataset, Third Run. Xeon Platinum 8468 was the fastest.

But when looking at the performance per Watt with ClickHouse, it again leans heavily in favor of EPYC Siena.

ClickHouse benchmark with settings of 100M Rows Hits Dataset, Third Run. Xeon Platinum 8468 was the fastest.

With ClickHouse the Xeon Platinum 8468 did manage to have a narrow advantage over the EPYC processors in the best performance per dollar when that Sapphire Rapids CPU was running with all eight memory channels.

Apache IoTDB benchmark with settings of Device Count: 500, Batch Size Per Write: 100, Sensor Count: 800, Client Number: 100. Xeon Platinum 8468 was the fastest.
Apache IoTDB benchmark with settings of Device Count: 500, Batch Size Per Write: 100, Sensor Count: 800, Client Number: 100. Xeon Platinum 8468 was the fastest.

Apache IotDB was a similar story to ClickHouse where the Xeon Platinum processor at six memory channels performed similar to the EPYC Siena processors but was able to benefit from going up to eight memory channels. Except when it came to looking at the CPU power consumption, Siena was delivering competitive performance at significantly lower power consumption.

Apache IoTDB benchmark with settings of Device Count: 500, Batch Size Per Write: 100, Sensor Count: 800, Client Number: 100. Xeon Platinum 8468 was the fastest.

The EPYC Siena processors continued showing better performance per dollar.

Memcached benchmark with settings of Set To Get Ratio: 1:100. EPYC 8534PN - Power was the fastest.

Switching gears to Memcached, the EPYC 64-core Siena processors in power determinism mode were enough for these CPUs to shoot past the Xeon Platinum 8468 in raw performance.

Memcached benchmark with settings of Set To Get Ratio: 1:100. EPYC 8534PN - Power was the fastest.
Memcached benchmark with settings of Set To Get Ratio: 1:100. EPYC 8534PN - Power was the fastest.

The EPYC Siena 64-core processors were delivering more than twice the performance per Watt of the Xeon Platinum comparison processor.

Memcached benchmark with settings of Set To Get Ratio: 1:100. EPYC 8534PN - Power was the fastest.

The EPYC Siena processors again delivered the best value.


Related Articles
Ampere Computing 2024 Roadmap Update: 256 Core 3nm CPU In 2025
Benchmarking The First RISC-V Cloud Server: Scaleway EM-RV1 Performance
AMD Announces Ryzen PRO 8840 & PRO 8000G Series CPUs
Intel Announces Gaudi 3 AI Accelerator, Intel Xeon 6 Brand
AMD Zen 4 vs. Zen 4C Performance, Zen 4C Core Scaling With Ryzen 5 8500G
Intel Core i3 14100 / i5 14500 vs. AMD Ryzen 5 8500G / 8600G In 500+ Benchmarks