44 comments

[ 7.5 ms ] story [ 65.3 ms ] thread
1341 PLN / 371 USD isn't "cheap" for 25% more cores. That's almost double the price.

Q64-22 on eBay (US) for $150-200 USD / 542-723 PLN.

https://www.ebay.com/itm/365380821650

https://www.ebay.com/itm/365572689742

He clearly refers to that and states they did not respond.

Also, CPU was hardly the biggest cost here.

25% more cores and 36% more clock. It amounts to paying 85% more for 70% more perf. Not too bad.
GHz/MHz wars and ultra-deep pipelines lead to long pipeline stalls and low efficiency. Clock != (IPS) cycle efficiency. What matters is measured performance. There's little point in buying the most expensive option, it's usually throwing money away.

Sometimes though, option are limited but there are also traditional and alternative channel vendors besides secondary markets. For example, a vendor or the mfgr might be willing to sample a part.

Those auctions are where we looked at. No answer from seller - probably they did not wanted to deal with sending packages outside of USA.
Offtopic, I'm so confused why this is top1 on my HN? Just a pretty normal build?
Normal ARM64 80 core system with $1000 EATX motherboard? How is this typical?
Depends on how you look at it.

Would you call Threadripper system "a normal build"? For many people they are normal builds because they need more computing power or more PCIe lanes than "normal user" desktop has.

On the other side you have those who pretend to use raspberry/pi 3 as "an Arm desktop" despite only 1GB of ram and 4 sluggish cores.

I haven’t been following hardware for a while, granted, but this is the first time I see a desktop build with an arm64 cpu. Didn’t know you can just… buy one.
It's not "your" HN, HN doesn't do algorithmic/per-user ranking. (Ed.: Actually a refreshing breath of wide social cohesion on a platform, IMHO. We have enough platforms that create bubbles for you.)

It's top1 on everyone's HN because a sufficient number of people (including myself) thought it a nice writeup about fat ARM systems.

A few years ago I was working at a place that needed to do builds targeting the Jetson platform, and was somewhat allergic to tossing it into the cloud due to cost. We ran the numbers and the Altra paid for itself pretty quickly. Great thing, it ripped through our C++ builds + Docker image creation - I think we ended up with a 64 core version (don't remember through who, but we needed a server form factor). Ended up still moving our release builds to the cloud, due to some dicey internet situations but for local builds this thing was A+. I hope they're still using it.
Sounds good, but also sounds odd that a dicey internet situation caused you to move to the cloud as opposed to local (I guess could be dicey uplink for remote team or similar)
The robots that needed to pull the builds weren't local - they were out on farms and stuff - and even with crappy 3G internet, our upload was still the problem. Comcast was really screwing us.
I never bought used computer parts. Are these parts generally reliable for ~2 years when bought used?
those are server-grade stuff, it's normal for them to work 10 years continuously.
I regularly buy used hardware. It fails when it fails, same as the new stuff. Is there a higher probability? Possibly, but at the small sample sizes I'm at I can't feel the difference. Feels random either way.
Built a gaming desktop for a friend almost 2 years ago; used GPU and CPU (maybe a few others things too), everything's going great. It helps that our local Cragslist offers efficient buyer protection.

Server-side, I also bought used Xeons for an old box and recertified 10TB Exos. No issues there neither.

The HDDs are a bit of a gamble, but for anything else I can only encourage you to buy used!

    > It helps that our local Cragslist offers efficient buyer protection.
What does this mean?
Used professional hardware (servers, workstations) are made with higher quality standards so they last fairly long.
Plus if they're from a data center, they will have been in a cooled, filtered, and stable space for their lifetime, vs a desktop that may have been in a dusty room getting moved or kicked from time to time.
My current computer is from more than 10 years ago, and I found it in a dumpster. Works fine.
You're not going to leave us hanging with the specs, right?
I haven’t bought new hardware since I was a teenager. Second hand is cheap and good for the environment. I never received a broken part and everything has worked reliably for me.

2-3 years is not a lot. My daily driver laptop is from 2011 and still going strong.

Sure, there are “lemons” out there, but there are also a lot of people who just replace their hardware often.

I work at an e-waste recycling company. People throwing out old but still working servers, desktops, and laptops is pretty common. Companies regularly decommission and throw out their IT assets after some number of years, even if the stuff still works (which most of it still does).
The main failure points in electronics are by far power supply and batteries.

Non-polymer electrolytic capacitors can dry out, but just about all decent modern motherboards use polymer-based since years ago.

My current NAS is my previous desktop, which I bought in 2015. I tended to keep my desktop on 24/7 due to services, and my NAS as well, so it's been running more or less continuously since then. It's on its second PSU but apart from that chugging along.

I've been using older computer parts like this for a long time, and reliability increased markedly after they switched to non-polymer caps.

Modern higher-end GPUs due to their immense power requirements can have components fail, typically in the voltage regulation. Often this can be fixed relatively cheaply.

If buying a desktop I'd check that it works, it looks good inside (no dust bunnies etc), seller seems legit, and I'd throw a new PSU in there once I bought it.

> I never bought used computer parts.

I was taken aback by this.

I almost never buy new parts, except phones, and not always then.

I don't think I've bought a new computer since about 2001 or 2002, and then, that was because someone else was paying and her stipulation was new only. Before then... the 1980s?

Computer hardware is like a car: when you exit the shop, 25% of the value just dissipates like a puff of steam. Within about 3 years, another 50-60% is gone. So, I always try to buy kit that's more than about 3Y old, because that's when it becomes cost-effective.

When you pay 10% of the new price, that means you are getting at least 10x the price:performance ratio. It's almost impossible to buy anything new that is 10x faster than something ~3 years old and it has been for 20-25 years or more now.

I've always wondered why there isn't a bigger market / offering for dedicated servers with Ampere at their heart (apart from Hetzner)

If anyone knows of any, let me know!

A lot of software is built and optimized for x86 and EPYC processors are really good so it is hard to get into arm, don’t think that many companies use it.
I am running an ARM64 build of Ubuntu on my MacBook Air using Multipass. I've never had a problem due to missing support/optimisation for ARM - at least I didn't notice any. I even noticed that build times were faster on this virtualised machine than they were natively on my previous Tuxedo laptop which had an Intel i7 that was a couple of years old. Although, I blame this speed mostly on the sheer horsepower of the newest Apple chips
(comment deleted)
They're slow and the arch is less compatible? Arm cores in web hosting are typically known as the shit-tier.

I think the main use case for these is some sort of Android build farm, as a CI/CD pipeline with testing of different OS versions and general app building, since they don't have to emulate arm.

Oracle OCI?

Their Ampere A1 free tier is pretty good. 4 core ARM and 24gb ram webserver for free.

I realize the Ampere Altra Q features the Armv8.2-a ISA. Does anybody know if there are chips with Armv8.6-a (or above) or even SVE that one can buy? I did some research but couldn't find any.
(comment deleted)
Armv8.6-A is almost the same as Armv9.1-A, except that a few features are not mandatory.

There have been no consumer chips with Armv9.1-A, but only with Armv9.0-A and with Armv9.2-A. The only CPU with Armv8.6-A that has ever been announced publicly was the now obsolete Neoverse N2. Neoverse N2 has been skipped by Amazon and I do not know if any other major cloud vendor has used it.

So what you really search for are CPUs with Armv9.2-A (i.e. a superset of Armv8.6-A), i.e. with Cortex-A520 or Cortex-A720 or Cortex-X4 or Cortex-A725 or Cortex-X925.

There are many smartphones launched last year or this year with these CPU cores, but except for them the list of choices is short, i.e. either the very cheap Radxa Orion O6 (Cortex-A720 based), which is fine, but its software is immature, or a very expensive NVIDIA DGX development system (Cortex-X925 based; $4000 from NVIDIA or $3000 from ASUS), or one of the latest Apple computers, which support Armv8.7-A (which do not have SVE, but which have SME).

For the latest Qualcomm CPUs, I have no idea what ISA is supported by them, because Qualcomm always hides very deeply any technical information about their products.

If all you care about is the CPU, then a mid-range Android smartphone in the $400-$500 price range could be a better development system, especially if its USB Type C connector supports USB 3.0 and DisplayPort, like some Motorola Edge models, allowing you to use an external monitor and a docking station.

If you also care about testing together with some standard desktop/server peripherals, the mini-ITX motherboard of Radxa Orion O6 is more appropriate, but encountering bugs in some of its Linux device drivers is likely, which may slow down the development until they are handled.

AmpereOne CPUs are 8.6A+ but do not have SVE2 - that is coming in our next processor, designed specifically for AI workloads, AmpereOne Aurora.
[flagged]
> And the latest one, an Apple MacBook Pro, is nice and fast but has some limits — does not support 64k page size. Which I need for my work.

I wonder where this requirement comes from ...

I think the best thing happened to that system is having an Arctic Cooling device on board. These things are as reliable as it gets.

None of the Arctic Cooling fans I had ever failed or lost performance over the years. Even their first generation desktop fan (Breeze) which runs multiple 8-12 hour shifts with me for the last decade shows any age.

(comment deleted)
OK, I tend to ignore HN but got link to this post from several people so will go and comment.