AMDs marketing is just as sketchy. Their new Zen6 server page claims 3.3x performance per watt over vera on "agentic workloads" for a 100 kW rack. Maybe they are comparing a CPU heavy rack to an nvidia vera rack with 50 kW of GPUs sitting idle, who knows?
That doesn't clarify it and AMD says as much "Because these estimates rely on published results, internal measurements and projection-based
scaling factors, they are intended to provide directional comparison rather than direct measured rack benchmarks."
It's marketing after all and nobody should make buying decisions based on that.
Comments
AMDs marketing is just as sketchy. Their new Zen6 server page claims 3.3x performance per watt over vera on "agentic workloads" for a 100 kW rack. Maybe they are comparing a CPU heavy rack to an nvidia vera rack with 50 kW of GPUs sitting idle, who knows?
https://www.amd.com/en/products/processors/server/epyc/9006-...
You could try reading the footnotes, which include a link to https://www.amd.com/content/dam/amd/en/documents/solutions/a...
That doesn't clarify it and AMD says as much "Because these estimates rely on published results, internal measurements and projection-based scaling factors, they are intended to provide directional comparison rather than direct measured rack benchmarks."
It's marketing after all and nobody should make buying decisions based on that.