Intel 海光鯤鵬920 飛騰2500 CPU性能對比為了讓程式能快點，特意瞭解了CPU的各種原理，比如多核、超線程、NUMA、睿頻、功耗、GPU、大小核再到分支預測、cache_line失效、加鎖代價、IPC等各種指標（都有對應的代碼和測試數據）都會在這系列文章中得到答案。當然一定會有程式員 ...

Intel 海光鯤鵬920 飛騰2500 CPU性能對比

為了讓程式能快點，特意瞭解了CPU的各種原理，比如多核、超線程、NUMA、睿頻、功耗、GPU、大小核再到分支預測、cache_line失效、加鎖代價、IPC等各種指標（都有對應的代碼和測試數據）都會在這系列文章中得到答案。當然一定會有程式員最關心的分支預測案例、Disruptor無鎖案例、cache_line偽共用案例等等。

這次讓我們從最底層的沙子開始用8篇文章來回答各種疑問以及大量的實驗對比案例和測試數據。

大的方面主要是從這幾個疑問來寫這些文章：

同樣程式為什麼CPU跑到800%還不如CPU跑到200%快？
IPC背後的原理和和程式效率的關係？
為什麼資料庫領域都愛把NUMA關了，這對嗎？
幾個國產晶元的性能到底怎麼樣？

系列文章

Intel PAUSE指令變化是如何影響自旋鎖以及MySQL的性能的

Intel、海光、鯤鵬920、飛騰2500 CPU性能對比

一次海光物理機資源競爭壓測的記錄

飛騰ARM晶元(FT2500)的性能測試

本篇是收尾篇，橫向對比一下x86和ARM晶元，以及不同方案權衡下的性能比較

CPU基本信息

海光

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50

#lscpu Architecture: x86_64 CPU op-mode(s): 32-bit, 64-bit Byte Order: Little Endian CPU(s): 64 On-line CPU(s) list: 0-63 Thread(s) per core: 2 //每個物理core有兩個超線程 Core(s) per socket: 16 //每路16個物理core Socket(s): 2 //2路 NUMA node(s): 4 Vendor ID: HygonGenuine CPU family: 24 Model: 1 Model name: Hygon C86 5280 16-core Processor Stepping: 1 CPU MHz: 2455.552 CPU max MHz: 2500.0000 CPU min MHz: 1600.0000 BogoMIPS: 4999.26 Virtualization: AMD-V L1d cache: 32K L1i cache: 64K L2 cache: 512K L3 cache: 8192K NUMA node0 CPU(s): 0-7,32-39 NUMA node1 CPU(s): 8-15,40-47 NUMA node2 CPU(s): 16-23,48-55 NUMA node3 CPU(s): 24-31,56-63 Flags: fpu vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic sep mtrr pge mca cmov pat pse36 clflush mmx fxsr sse sse2 ht syscall nx mmxext fxsr_opt pdpe1gb rdtscp lm constant_tsc rep_good nopl nonstop_tsc cpuid extd_apicid amd_dcm aperfmperf pni pclmulqdq monitor ssse3 fma cx16 sse4_1 sse4_2 movbe popcnt xsave avx f16c rdrand lahf_lm cmp_legacy svm extapic cr8_legacy abm sse4a misalignsse 3dnowprefetch osvw skinit wdt tce topoext perfctr_core perfctr_nb bpext perfctr_llc mwaitx cpb hw_pstate sme ssbd sev ibpb vmmcall fsgsbase bmi1 avx2 smep bmi2 MySQLeed adx smap clflushopt sha_ni xsaveopt xsavec xgetbv1 xsaves clzero irperf xsaveerptr arat npt lbrv svm_lock nrip_save tsc_scale vmcb_clean flushbyasid decodeassists pausefilter pfthreshold avic v_vmsave_vmload vgif overflow_recov succor smca #numactl -H available: 4 nodes (0-3) node 0 cpus: 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 node 0 size: 128854 MB node 0 free: 89350 MB node 1 cpus: 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 node 1 size: 129019 MB node 1 free: 89326 MB node 2 cpus: 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 node 2 size: 128965 MB node 2 free: 86542 MB node 3 cpus: 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 node 3 size: 129020 MB node 3 free: 98227 MB node distances: node 0 1 2 3 0: 10 16 28 22 1: 16 10 22 28 2: 28 22 10 16 3: 22 28 16 10

這CPU據說是膠水核，也就是把兩個die拼一塊封裝成一塊CPU，所以一塊CPU內跨die之間延遲還是很高的。

64 個 core 的分配策略

1 2 3 4 5

physical core processor 0 0~15 0~15 1 0~15 16~31 0 0~15 32~47 1 0~15 48~63

Intel CPU

Cascade Lake架構相對Broadwell L1沒變，L2從256K增加到1M增加了4倍，L3從2.5下降到1.38M每core

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77

#lscpu Architecture: x86_64 CPU op-mode(s): 32-bit, 64-bit Byte Order: Little Endian CPU(s): 104 On-line CPU(s) list: 0-103 Thread(s) per core: 2 Core(s) per socket: 26 座： 2 NUMA 節點： 1 廠商 ID： GenuineIntel CPU 系列： 6 型號： 85 型號名稱： Intel(R) Xeon(R) Platinum 8269CY CPU @ 2.50GHz 步進： 7 CPU MHz： 1200.000 CPU max MHz: 2501.0000 CPU min MHz: 1200.0000 BogoMIPS： 5000.00 虛擬化： VT-x L1d 緩存： 32K L1i 緩存： 32K L2 緩存： 1024K L3 緩存： 36608K NUMA 節點0 CPU： 0-103 Flags: fpu vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic sep mtrr pge mca cmov pat pse36 clflush dts acpi mmx fxsr sse sse2 ss ht tm pbe syscall nx pdpe1gb rdtscp lm constant_tsc art arch_perfmon pebs bts rep_good nopl xtopology nonstop_tsc aperfmperf eagerfpu pni pclmulqdq dtes64 monitor ds_cpl vmx smx est tm2 ssse3 sdbg fma cx16 xtpr pdcm pcid dca sse4_1 sse4_2 x2apic movbe popcnt tsc_deadline_timer aes xsave avx f16c rdrand lahf_lm abm 3dnowprefetch epb cat_l3 cdp_l3 intel_ppin intel_pt ssbd mba ibrs ibpb stibp ibrs_enhanced tpr_shadow vnmi flexpriority ept vpid fsgsbase tsc_adjust bmi1 hle avx2 smep bmi2 erms invpcid rtm cqm mpx rdt_a avx512f avx512dq rdseed adx smap clflushopt clwb avx512cd avx512bw avx512vl xsaveopt xsavec xgetbv1 cqm_llc cqm_occup_llc cqm_mbm_total cqm_mbm_local dtherm ida arat pln pts pku ospke avx512_vnni spec_ctrl intel_stibp flush_l1d arch_capabilities # numactl -H available: 1 nodes (0) node 0 cpus: 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 node 0 size: 785826 MB node 0 free: 108373 MB node distances: node 0 0: 10 //志強E5 #lscpu Architecture: x86_64 CPU op-mode(s): 32-bit, 64-bit Byte Order: Little Endian CPU(s): 64 On-line CPU(s) list: 0-63 Thread(s) per core: 2 Core(s) per socket: 16 Socket(s): 2 NUMA node(s): 2 Vendor ID: GenuineIntel CPU family: 6 Model: 79 Model name: Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2682 v4 @ 2.50GHz Stepping: 1 CPU MHz: 2500.000 CPU max MHz: 3000.0000 CPU min MHz: 1200.0000 BogoMIPS: 5000.06 Virtualization: VT-x L1d cache: 32K L1i cache: 32K L2 cache: 256K L3 cache: 40960K NUMA node0 CPU(s): 0-15,32-47 NUMA node1 CPU(s): 16-31,48-63 Flags: fpu vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic sep mtrr pge mca cmov pat pse36 clflush dts acpi mmx fxsr sse sse2 ss ht tm pbe syscall nx pdpe1gb rdtscp lm constant_tsc arch_perfmon pebs bts rep_good nopl xtopology nonstop_tsc aperfmperf eagerfpu pni pclmulqdq dtes64 ds_cpl vmx smx est tm2 ssse3 fma cx16 xtpr pdcm pcid dca sse4_1 sse4_2 x2apic movbe popcnt tsc_deadline_timer aes xsave avx f16c rdrand lahf_lm abm 3dnowprefetch ida arat epb invpcid_single pln pts dtherm spec_ctrl ibpb_support tpr_shadow vnmi flexpriority ept vpid fsgsbase tsc_adjust bmi1 hle avx2 smep bmi2 erms invpcid rtm cqm rdt rdseed adx smap xsaveopt cqm_llc cqm_occup_llc cqm_mbm_total cqm_mbm_local cat_l3 #numactl -H available: 2 nodes (0-1) node 0 cpus: 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 node 0 size: 262008 MB node 0 free: 240846 MB node 1 cpus: 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 node 1 size: 262144 MB node 1 free: 242774 MB node distances: node 0 1 0: 10 21 1: 21 10

鯤鵬920

鯤鵬920-4826的L1比8269C 大一倍，但是L2小一倍。L3鯤鵬為1M/core 8269為1.38M/core(物理core）

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51

#lscpu Architecture: aarch64 Byte Order: Little Endian CPU(s): 96 On-line CPU(s) list: 0-95 Thread(s) per core: 1 Core(s) per socket: 48 Socket(s): 2 NUMA node(s): 1 Model: 0 CPU max MHz: 2600.0000 CPU min MHz: 200.0000 BogoMIPS: 200.00 L1d cache: 64K L1i cache: 64K L2 cache: 512K L3 cache: 49152K NUMA node0 CPU(s): 0-95 Flags: fp asimd evtstrm aes pmull sha1 sha2 crc32 atomics fphp asimdhp cpuid asimdrdm jscvt fcma dcpop asimddp asimdfhm #numactl -H available: 4 nodes (0-3) node 0 cpus: 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 node 0 size: 192832 MB node 0 free: 187693 MB node 1 cpus: 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 node 1 size: 193533 MB node 1 free: 191827 MB node 2 cpus: 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 node 2 size: 193533 MB node 2 free: 192422 MB node 3 cpus: 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 node 3 size: 193532 MB node 3 free: 193139 MB node distances: node 0 1 2 3 0: 10 12 20 22 1: 12 10 22 24 2: 20 22 10 12 3: 22 24 12 10 #dmidecode -t processor | grep Version Version: Kunpeng 920-4826 Version: Kunpeng 920-4826 以上四個鯤鵬920的四個NUMA node之間的距離描述如下： node 0 <------------ socket distance ------------> node 2 | (die distance) | (die distance) node 1 node 3 要註意node1到node3比node0到node3要大，猜測Socket之間的UPI只接上了node1和node2

鯤鵬920架構參考這裡

Though Huawei has been keeping a tight lip on the chip design itself, the Hi1620 is actually a multi-chip design. Actually, we believe are three dies. The chip itself comprise two compute dies called the Super CPU cluster (SCCL), each one packing 32 cores. It’s also possible the SCCL only have 24 cores, in which case there are three such dies with a theoretical maximum core count of 72 cores possible but are not offered for yield reasons. Regardless of this, there are at least two SCCL dies for sure. Additionally, there is also an I/O die called the Super IO Cluster (SICL) which contains all the high-speed SerDes and low-speed I/Os.

下圖是6426型號，我測試用的是4826型號，也就是一個CPU內是48core，一個CPU封裝3個Die，兩個Die是 core，還有一個是Super IO Cluster

鯤鵬命令規範：

鯤鵬 RoadMap

鯤鵬 Kunpeng 920-4826 跨numa性能比較

綁24core，跨numa0、numa3，是numactl -H看到的比較遠距離。兩分鐘的 Current tpmC: 69660

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30

#taskset -a -cp 12-23,72-83 20799 #perf stat -e branch-misses,bus-cycles,cache-misses,cache-references,cpu-cycles,instructions,stalled-cycles-backend,stalled-cycles-frontend,L1-dcache-load-misses,L1-dcache-loads,L1-dcache-store-misses,L1-dcache-stores,L1-icache-load-misses,L1-icache-loads,branch-load-misses,branch-loads,dTLB-load-misses,dTLB-loads,iTLB-load-misses,iTLB-loads,cpu-migrations -p 20799 ^C Performance counter stats for process id '20799': 2,866,418,154 branch-misses (59.84%) 549,673,215,827 bus-cycles (59.89%) 2,179,816,578 cache-misses # 2.360 % of all cache refs (59.93%) 92,377,674,343 cache-references (60.04%) 549,605,057,475 cpu-cycles (65.05%) 229,958,980,614 instructions # 0.42 insn per cycle # 1.31 stalled cycles per insn (65.05%) 146,201,062,116 stalled-cycles-backend # 26.60% backend cycles idle (65.08%) 301,814,831,043 stalled-cycles-frontend # 54.91% frontend cycles idle (65.08%) 2,177,062,319 L1-dcache-load-misses # 2.35% of all L1-dcache hits (65.04%) 92,481,797,426 L1-dcache-loads (65.11%) 2,175,030,428 L1-dcache-store-misses (65.15%) 92,507,474,710 L1-dcache-stores (65.14%) 9,299,812,249 L1-icache-load-misses # 12.47% of all L1-icache hits (65.20%) 74,579,909,037 L1-icache-loads (65.16%) 2,862,664,443 branch-load-misses (65.08%) 52,826,930,842 branch-loads (65.04%) 3,729,265,130 dTLB-load-misses # 3.11% of all dTLB cache hits (64.95%) 119,896,014,498 dTLB-loads (59.90%) 1,350,782,047 iTLB-load-misses # 1.83% of all iTLB cache hits (59.84%) 74,005,620,378 iTLB-loads (59.82%) 510 cpu-migrations 9.483137760 seconds time elapsed

綁72-95core，在同一個numa下，但是沒有重啟進程，導致有一半記憶體仍然在numa0上，2分鐘的Current tpmC: 75900

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42

#taskset -a -cp 72-95 20799 #perf stat -e branch-misses,bus-cycles,cache-misses,cache-references,cpu-cycles,instructions,stalled-cycles-backend,stalled-cycles-frontend,L1-dcache-load-misses,L1-dcache-loads,L1-dcache-store-misses,L1-dcache-stores,L1-icache-load-misses,L1-icache-loads,branch-load-misses,branch-loads,dTLB-load-misses,dTLB-loads,iTLB-load-misses,iTLB-loads,cpu-migrations -p 20799 ^C Performance counter stats for process id '20799': 2,665,583,722 branch-misses (59.90%) 500,184,789,050 bus-cycles (59.95%) 1,997,726,097 cache-misses # 2.254 % of all cache refs (59.94%) 88,628,013,529 cache-references (59.93%) 500,111,712,450 cpu-cycles (64.98%) 221,098,464,920 instructions # 0.44 insn per cycle # 1.35 stalled cycles per insn (65.02%) 105,957,124,479 stalled-cycles-backend # 21.19% backend cycles idle (65.02%) 298,186,439,955 stalled-cycles-frontend # 59.62% frontend cycles idle (65.02%) 1,996,313,908 L1-dcache-load-misses # 2.25% of all L1-dcache hits (65.04%) 88,701,699,646 L1-dcache-loads (65.09%) 1,997,851,364 L1-dcache-store-misses (65.10%) 88,614,658,960 L1-dcache-stores (65.10%) 8,635,807,737 L1-icache-load-misses # 12.30% of all L1-icache hits (65.13%) 70,233,323,630 L1-icache-loads (65.16%) 2,665,567,783 branch-load-misses (65.10%) 50,482,936,168 branch-loads (65.09%) 3,614,564,473 dTLB-load-misses # 3.15% of all dTLB cache hits (65.04%) 114,619,822,486 dTLB-loads (59.96%) 1,270,926,362 iTLB-load-misses # 1.81% of all iTLB cache hits (59.97%) 70,248,645,721 iTLB-loads (59.94%) 128 cpu-migrations 8.610934700 seconds time elapsed #/root/numa-maps-summary.pl </proc/20799/numa_maps N0 : 8220658 ( 31.36 GB) N1 : 38620 ( 0.15 GB) N2 : 480619 ( 1.83 GB) N3 : 8281759 ( 31.59 GB) active : 28797 ( 0.11 GB) anon : 17015902 ( 64.91 GB) dirty : 16990615 ( 64.81 GB) kernelpagesize_kB: 9076 ( 0.03 GB) mapmax : 760 ( 0.00 GB) mapped : 5754 ( 0.02 GB)

重啟進程後繼續綁72-95core，在同一個numa下，先進成充分熱身，然後2分鐘的 Current tpmC: 77880

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38

#perf stat -e branch-misses,bus-cycles,cache-misses,cache-references,cpu-cycles,instructions,stalled-cycles-backend,stalled-cycles-frontend,L1-dcache-load-misses,L1-dcache-loads,L1-dcache-store-misses,L1-dcache-stores,L1-icache-load-misses,L1-icache-loads,branch-load-misses,branch-loads,dTLB-load-misses,dTLB-loads,iTLB-load-misses,iTLB-loads,cpu-migrations -p 49512 ^C Performance counter stats for process id '49512': 1,849,313,199 branch-misses (59.99%) 319,122,053,367 bus-cycles (60.02%) 1,319,212,546 cache-misses # 2.238 % of all cache refs (59.95%) 58,950,581,370 cache-references (60.02%) 319,088,767,311 cpu-cycles (65.01%) 146,580,891,374 instructions # 0.46 insn per cycle # 1.32 stalled cycles per insn (65.01%) 61,109,919,226 stalled-cycles-backend # 19.15% backend cycles idle (65.04%) 193,963,590,196 stalled-cycles-frontend # 60.79% frontend cycles idle (65.06%) 1,319,593,051 L1-dcache-load-misses # 2.24% of all L1-dcache hits (65.03%) 58,967,303,454 L1-dcache-loads (65.04%) 1,318,842,690 L1-dcache-store-misses (65.13%) 58,988,059,583 L1-dcache-stores (65.07%) 5,769,871,870 L1-icache-load-misses # 12.25% of all L1-icache hits (65.12%) 47,085,299,316 L1-icache-loads (65.10%) 1,850,419,802 branch-load-misses (65.03%) 33,687,548,636 branch-loads (65.08%) 2,375,028,039 dTLB-load-misses # 3.12% of all dTLB cache hits (65.08%) 76,113,084,244 dTLB-loads (60.01%) 825,388,210 iTLB-load-misses # 1.75% of all iTLB cache hits (59.99%) 47,092,738,092 iTLB-loads (59.95%) 49 cpu-migrations #/root/numa-maps-summary.pl </proc/49512/numa_maps N0 : 5765 ( 0.02 GB) N1 : 41599 ( 0.16 GB) N2 : 566 ( 0.00 GB) N3 : 16955491 ( 64.68 GB) active : 30430 ( 0.12 GB) anon : 16997663 ( 64.84 GB) dirty : 16989252 ( 64.81 GB) kernelpagesize_kB: 9020 ( 0.03 GB) mapmax : 745 ( 0.00 GB) mapped : 5758 ( 0.02 GB)

IPC從0.42到0.44再到0.46，tpmC也不斷增加，整體壓力都不大隻壓了25%的CPU，所以跨NUMA大概有10%的性能差異. IPC也是0.42 VS 0.46 。測試場景是DRDS Server服務。

如果跨4core綁定core的話最好和最差綁法性能會下降25-30%，四個core綁不同numa的性能比較

被壓進程綁定的core id	tpmC
72,73,74,75	14460
48,49,72,73	13800
24,25,72,73	11760
0,1,72,73	11940
0,24,48,72	10800

飛騰2500

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89

#lscpu Architecture: aarch64 Byte Order: Little Endian CPU(s): 128 On-line CPU(s) list: 0-127 Thread(s) per core: 1 Core(s) per socket: 64 Socket(s): 2 NUMA node(s): 16 Model: 3 BogoMIPS: 100.00 L1d cache: 32K L1i cache: 32K L2 cache: 2048K L3 cache: 65536K NUMA node0 CPU(s): 0-7 NUMA node1 CPU(s): 8-15 NUMA node2 CPU(s): 16-23 NUMA node3 CPU(s): 24-31 NUMA node4 CPU(s): 32-39 NUMA node5 CPU(s): 40-47 NUMA node6 CPU(s): 48-55 NUMA node7 CPU(s): 56-63 NUMA node8 CPU(s): 64-71 NUMA node9 CPU(s): 72-79 NUMA node10 CPU(s): 80-87 NUMA node11 CPU(s): 88-95 NUMA node12 CPU(s): 96-103 NUMA node13 CPU(s): 104-111 NUMA node14 CPU(s): 112-119 NUMA node15 CPU(s): 120-127 Flags: fp asimd evtstrm aes pmull sha1 sha2 crc32 cpuid node distances: node 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 0: 10 20 40 30 20 30 50 40 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 1: 20 10 30 40 50 20 40 50 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 2: 40 30 10 20 40 50 20 30 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 3: 30 40 20 10 30 20 40 50 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 4: 20 50 40 30 10 50 30 20 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 5: 30 20 50 20 50 10 50 40 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 6: 50 40 20 40 30 50 10 30 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 7: 40 50 30 50 20 40 30 10 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 8: 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 10 20 40 30 20 30 50 40 9: 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 20 10 30 40 50 20 40 50 10: 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 40 30 10 20 40 50 20 30 11: 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 30 40 20 10 30 20 40 50 12: 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 20 50 40 30 10 50 30 20 13: 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 30 20 50 20 50 10 50 40 14: 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 50 40 20 40 30 50 10 30 15: 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 40 50 30 50 20 40 30 10 #dmidecode -t processor # dmidecode 3.0 Getting SMBIOS data from sysfs. SMBIOS 3.2.0 present. # SMBIOS implementations newer than version 3.0 are not # fully supported by this version of dmidecode. Handle 0x0004, DMI type 4, 48 bytes Processor Information Socket Designation: BGA3576 Type: Central Processor Family: <OUT OF SPEC> Manufacturer: PHYTIUM ID: 00 00 00 00 70 1F 66 22 Version: FT2500 Voltage: 0.8 V External Clock: 50 MHz Max Speed: 2100 MHz Current Speed: 2100 MHz Status: Populated, Enabled Upgrade: Other L1 Cache Handle: 0x0005 L2 Cache Handle: 0x0007 L3 Cache Handle: 0x0008 Serial Number: 1234567 Asset Tag: No Asset Tag Part Number: NULL Core Count: 64 Core Enabled: 64 Thread Count: 64 Characteristics: 64-bit capable Multi-Core Hardware Thread Execute Protection Enhanced Virtualization Power/Performance Control

申威3231

申威系列微處理器的開發主要是被中華人民共和國用於軍事方面[來源請求]。根據部分公開信息表明，此系列的微體系架構基於DEC Alpha派生而來。[1][2]而SW-3/SW1600處理器則是基於Alpha 21164。[3]

不過申威系列最新的SW26010處理器，目前沒有詳細的信息表明它是基於DEC Alpha微架構的派生品。[4][5]不過處理器的處理器核心結構佈局，則是類似於基於POWER指令集架構的Cell微架構)。

申威 3231處理器是基於第三代“申威 64” 二次優化版核心（C3B）的國產高性能多核處理器。3231的內核與1621屬於同一代，採用新一代工藝，最高主頻2.5Ghz，32核心，3231基本上可以視為1621換工藝後的32核版本，主要面向高性能計算和高端伺服器應用。

申威 3231採用“申威64”自主指令系統；

基於第三代“申威 64”二次優化版核心（C3B）的32核64位通用處理器;

採用CC-NUMA多核結構和SoC技術，片內包含8路DDR4存儲控制器介面以及40lane的PCI-E 4.0標準I/O介面；

集成3路直連介面，可構建2路或4路伺服器系統；

計算性能：雙精度浮點性能可達1280GFlops，整數性能可達880Gops；

訪存性能：最大傳輸率為3200Mbps，最大總存儲器容量2TB；

I/O性能：雙向聚合有效帶寬可達到160GB/s，支持I/O虛擬化。

3232推出的時間會比3231遲一些，採用新一代CPU核，IPC會非常驚人，保底10/G，爭取12/G，考慮倒申威團隊一向嚴謹，以及過去基本沒有讓大家失望過，因而對3232的IPC，可以採用就高原則。

申威 3231架構

申威 6B 晶元結構的主要特點如下：

全晶元集成 32 個物理核心，每個物理核心支持 1 個線程，軟體可見 32 個邏輯核心；
每個物理核心集成 32KB L1 指令 Cache（ICache）、32KB L1 數據 Cache（DCache）和 512KB 的 L2 Cache（SCache），核心內的所有 Cache 為核心私有 Cache；
全晶元集成 64MB 的 L3 Cache（TCache），本晶元內所有核心分佈共用，TCache 由16 個體組成，每個體跟2 個物理核心及其對應的管理部件（LCPM）一起組成一個核組，連接在環網節點上，核心訪問不同 TCache 體中的副本延遲略有不同；
存儲器介面：全晶元集成 8 個 DDR4 存儲器通道，每個通道數據寬度為 72bit（含 8 位 ECC），支持 UDIMM、RDIMM 和 LRDIMM，單通道記憶體容量最大支持 256GB 容量，單通道帶寬可達 25.6GB/s（DDR4-3200）；每4 個存儲器通道對應一個主存代理部件（GCPM），所有核心和 IO 設備都可訪問；
PCIe 介面：全晶元集成 40 Lane 的 PCIe 4.0 鏈路，支持 x4、x8 和 x16 靈活配置，最大支持 6 個 RC；
直連介面：全晶元集成 3 路直連介面，可構建 2 路或 4 路伺服器系統，每路直連介面為9 個lane的serdes 介面，介面速率為28Gbps；
維護調試測試介面：維護控制部件實現晶元配置、初始引導以及提供各種維護和調試支持。維護控制部件支持晶元的上電初始化、配置載入、存儲器讀寫或 IO 讀寫、維護中斷以及內部狀態的掃描觀測等。支持外部維護通過 Jtag 介面進行初始引導；支持通過 SPI Master 介面從 SPI Flash中進行自舉引導；
集成三套 I2C 介面、一套 Uart、GPIO 和 LPC 低速介面。

申威1621處理器是基於第三代“申威64”核心（增強版）的國產高性能多核處理器，主要面向高性能計算和中高端伺服器應用。目前，該處理器已經實現量產。

申威1621採用對稱多核結構和SoC技術，單晶元集成了16個64位RISC結構的申威處理器核心，目標設計主頻為2GHz。晶元還集成八路DDR3存儲控制器和雙路PCI-E3.0標準I/O介面。

#dmidecode -t processor # dmidecode 3.0 Getting SMBIOS data from sysfs. SMBIOS 3.2.0 present. # SMBIOS implementations newer than version 3.0 are not # fully supported by this version of dmidecode. Handle 0x0022, DMI type 4, 48 bytes Processor Information Socket Designation: CPU 0 Type: Central Processor Family: Other Manufacturer: SW3231 ID: 28 00 C8 80 01 00 00 00 Version: Product Voltage: 3.3 V External Clock: 200 MHz Max Speed: 2400 MHz Current Speed: 2400 MHz Status: Unpopulated Upgrade: Other L1 Cache Handle: 0x2000 L2 Cache Handle: 0x2002 L3 Cache Handle: 0x2003 Serial Number: ....... Asset Tag: Asset Tag#To Be Filled By O.E.M. Part Number: Part Number#To Be Filled By O.E.M. Core Count: 32 Core Enabled: 32 Thread Count: 0 Characteristics: 64-bit capable Handle 0x0023, DMI type 4, 48 bytes Processor Information Socket Designation: CPU 1 Type: Central Processor Family: Other Manufacturer: SW3231 ID: 28 00 C8 80 01 00 00 00 Version: Product Voltage: 3.3 V External Clock: 200 MHz Max Speed: 2400 MHz Current Speed: 2400 MHz Status: Unpopulated Upgrade: Other L1 Cache Handle: 0x2000 L2 Cache Handle: 0x2002 L3 Cache Handle: 0x2003 Serial Number: ....... Asset Tag: Asset Tag#To Be Filled By O.E.M. Part Number: Part Number#To Be Filled By O.E.M. Core Count: 32 Core Enabled: 32 Thread Count: 0 Characteristics: 64-bit capable [[email protected] /root] 193E_OPS1 #numactl -H available: 2 nodes (0-1) node 0 cpus: 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 node 0 size: 259482 MB node 0 free: 121171 MB node 1 cpus: 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 node 1 size: 260091 MB node 1 free: 88564 MB node distances: node 0 1 0: 10 20 1: 20 10 #lscpu Architecture: sw_64 CPU op-mode(s): 64-bit Byte Order: Little Endian CPU(s): 64 On-line CPU(s) list: 0-63 Thread(s) per core: 1 Core(s) per socket: 32 Socket(s): 2 NUMA node(s): 2 Vendor ID: sw CPU family: 6 Model: 6 Model name: sw CPU MHz: 2400.00 BogoMIPS: 4800.00 NUMA node0 CPU(s): 0-31 NUMA node1 CPU(s): 32-63

openssl speed aes-256-ige性能比較

測試腳本

openssl speed aes-256-ige -multi 1

單核能力

Intel (52物理core)	aes-256 ige 89602.86k 97498.37k 98271.49k 98399.91k 89101.65k
海光（32物理core）	aes-256 ige 76919.66k 77935.81k 79201.88k 79529.30k 79555.24k
鯤鵬920（96物理core)	aes-256 ige 133174.89k 140578.99k 142156.46k 142663.34k 143196.16k

測試32個線程並行

Intel (52物理core)	aes-256 ige 2642742.25k 2690638.98k 2703860.74k 2734114.82k 2680422.40
海光（32物理core）	aes-256 ige 2464568.75k 2499381.80k 2528665.34k 2544845.14k 2550723.93k
鯤鵬920（96物理core)	aes-256 ige 4261589.92k 4501245.55k 4552731.56k 4570456.75k 4584330.58k

將所有核跑滿包括HT

Intel (52物理core)	aes-256 ige 4869950.82k 5179884.71k 5135412.14k 5211367.08k 5247858.60k
海光（32物理core）	aes-256 ige 2730195.74k 2836759.53k 2865252.35k 2857900.71k 2884302.17k
鯤鵬920（96物理core)	aes-256 ige 12788358.79k 13502288.53k 13657385.98k 13710908.76k 13751432.53k

單核計算 7^999999” 的性能對比

測試命令：bash -c ‘echo “7^999999” | bc > /dev/null’

	執行時間(秒)	IPC	主頻
海光	26.729972414	0.92	2.5G
鯤鵬920	24.604603640	1.84	2.6G
飛騰2500	39.654819568	0.43	2.1G
Intel	18.603323495	2.19	2.5G
710	15.832394912	2.64	2.75G

當然也可以通過計算pi值來測試

bash -c ‘ echo “scale=5000; 4*a(1)” | bc -l -q >/dev/null ‘

	執行時間(秒)	主頻
海光	31.061s	2.5G
鯤鵬920	23.521s	2.6G
飛騰2500		2.1G
Intel	22.979s(8163)	2.5G
710	15.570s	2.75G

多核一起跑的話可以這樣:

for i in {0..95}; do time echo “scale=5000; 4*a(1)” | bc -l -q >/dev/null & done

perf stat -e branch-misses,bus-cycles,cache-misses,cache-references,cpu-cycles,instructions,stalled-cycles-backend,stalled-cycles-frontend,L1-dcache-load-misses,L1-dcache-loads,L1-dcache-store-misses,L1-dcache-stores,L1-icache-load-misses,L1-icache-loads,branch-load-misses,branch-loads,dTLB-load-misses,dTLB-loads,iTLB-load-misses,iTLB-loads –

710

耗時15.83秒，ipc 2.64

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17

perf stat -e branch-misses,bus-cycles,cache-misses,cache-references,cpu-cycles,instructions,stalled-cycles-backend,stalled-cycles-frontend,alignment-faults,bpf-output,context-switches,cpu-clock,cpu-migrations,dummy,emulation-faults,major-faults,minor-faults,page-faults,task-clock,L1-dcache-load-misses,L1-dcache-loads,L1-icache-load-misses,L1-icache-loads,LLC-load-misses,LLC-loads,branch-load-misses,branch-loads,dTLB-load-misses,dTLB-loads,iTLB-load-misses,iTLB-loads -- bash -c 'echo "7^999999" | bc > /dev/null' Performance counter stats for 'bash -c echo "7^999999" | bc > /dev/null': 985,496,277 branch-misses (29.97%) 43,509,183,948 bus-cycles # 2748.210 M/sec (29.97%) 7,068,868 cache-misses # 0.020 % of all cache refs (29.96%) 35,165,185,942 cache-references # 2221.170 M/sec (29.97%) 43,508,579,063 cpu-cycles # 2.748 GHz (34.97%) 114,779,081,188 instructions # 2.64 insn per cycle # 0.04 stalled cycles per insn (34.99%) 4,913,750,141 stalled-cycles-backend # 11.29% backend cycles idle (35.02%) 4,255,139,235 stalled-cycles-frontend # 9.78% frontend cycles idle (35.02%) 0 alignment-faults # 0.000 K/sec 0 bpf-output # 0.000 K/sec 24 context-switches # 0.002 K/sec 15,831.82 msec cpu-clock # 1.000 CPUs utilized

intel

耗時18.60秒，ipc 2.19

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37

鯤鵬920

耗時24.6秒, IPC 1.84

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27

#perf stat -e branch-misses,bus-cycles,cache-misses,cache-references,cpu-cycles,instructions,stalled-cycles-backend,stalled-cycles-frontend,L1-dcache-load-misses,L1-dcache-loads,L1-dcache-store-misses,L1-dcache-stores,L1-icache-load-misses,L1-icache-loads,branch-load-misses,branch-loads,dTLB-load-misses,dTLB-loads,iTLB-load-misses,iTLB-loads -- bash -c 'echo "7^999999" | bc > /dev/null' Performance counter stats for 'bash -c echo "7^999999" | bc > /dev/null': 1,467,769,425 branch-misses (59.94%) 63,866,536,853 bus-cycles (59.94%) 6,571,273 cache-misses # 0.021 % of all cache refs (59.94%) 30,768,754,927 cache-references (59.96%) 63,865,354,560 cpu-cycles (64.97%) 117,790,453,518 instructions # 1.84 insns per cycle # 0.07 stalled cycles per insn (64.98%) 833,090,930 stalled-cycles-backend # 1.30% backend cycles idle (65.00%) 7,918,227,782 stalled-cycles-frontend # 12.40% frontend cycles idle (65.01%) 6,962,902 L1-dcache-load-misses # 0.02% of all L1-dcache hits (65.03%) 30,804,266,645 L1-dcache-loads (65.05%) 6,960,157 L1-dcache-store-misses (65.06%) 30,807,954,068 L1-dcache-stores (65.06%) 1,012,171 L1-icache-load-misses (65.06%) 45,256,066,296 L1-icache-loads (65.04%) 1,470,467,198 branch-load-misses (65.03%) 27,108,794,972 branch-loads (65.01%) 475,707 dTLB-load-misses # 0.00% of all dTLB cache hits (65.00%) 35,159,826,836 dTLB-loads (59.97%) 912 iTLB-load-misses # 0.00% of all iTLB cache hits (59.96%) 45,325,885,822 iTLB-loads (59.94%) 24.604603640 seconds time elapsed

海光

耗時 26.73秒, IPC 0.92

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

sudo perf stat -e branch-instructions,branch-misses,cache-references,cpu-cycles,instructions,stalled-cycles-backend,stalled-cycles-frontend,L1-dcache-load-misses,L1-dcache-loads,L1-dcache-prefetches,L1-icache-load-misses,L1-icache-loads,branch-load-misses,branch-loads,dTLB-load-misses,dTLB-loads,iTLB-load-misses,iTLB-loads -a -- bash -c 'echo "7^999999" | bc > /dev/null' Performance counter stats for 'system wide': 57,795,675,025 branch-instructions (27.78%) 2,459,509,459 branch-misses # 4.26% of all branches (27.78%) 12,171,133,272 cache-references (27.79%) 317,353,262,523 cpu-cycles (27.79%) 293,162,940,548 instructions # 0.92 insn per cycle # 0.19 stalled cycles per insn (27.79%) 55,152,807,029 stalled-cycles-backend # 17.38% backend cycles idle (27.79%) 44,410,732,991 stalled-cycles-frontend # 13.99% frontend cycles idle (27.79%) 4,065,273,083 L1-dcache-load-misses # 3.58% of all L1-dcache hits (27.79%) 113,699,208,151 L1-dcache-loads (27.79%) 1,351,513,191 L1-dcache-prefetches (27.79%) 2,091,035,340 L1-icache-load-misses # 4.43% of all L1-icache hits (27.79%) 47,240,289,316 L1-icache-loads (27.79%) 2,459,838,728 branch-load-misses (27.79%) 57,855,156,991 branch-loads (27.78%) 69,731,473 dTLB-load-misses # 20.40% of all dTLB cache hits (27.78%) 341,773,319 dTLB-loads (27.78%) 26,351,132 iTLB-load-misses # 15.91% of all iTLB cache hits (27.78%) 165,656,863 iTLB-loads (27.78%) 26.729972414 seconds time elapsed

飛騰

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

time perf stat -e branch-misses,bus-cycles,cache-misses,cache-references,cpu-cycles,instructions,L1-dcache-load-misses,L1-dcache-loads,L1-dcache-store-misses,L1-dcache-stores,L1-icache-load-misses,L1-icache-loads,branch-load-misses,branch-loads,dTLB-load-misses,iTLB-load-misses -a -- bash -c 'echo "7^999999" | bc > /dev/null' Performance counter stats for 'system wide': 2552812813 branch-misses (38.08%) 602038279874 bus-cycles (37.54%) 1742826523 cache-misses # 2.017 % of all cache refs (37.54%) 86400294181 cache-references (37.55%) 612467194375 cpu-cycles (43.79%) 263691445872 instructions # 0.43 insns per cycle (43.79%) 1706247569 L1-dcache-load-misses # 2.00% of all L1-dcache hits (43.78%) 85122454139 L1-dcache-loads (43.77%) 1711243358 L1-dcache-store-misses (39.38%) 86288158984 L1-dcache-stores (37.52%) 2006641212 L1-icache-load-misses (37.51%) 146380907111 L1-icache-loads (37.51%) 2560208048 branch-load-misses (37.52%) 63127187342 branch-loads (41.38%) 768494735 dTLB-load-misses (43.77%) 124424415 iTLB-load-misses (43.77%) 39.654819568 seconds time elapsed real 0m39.763s user 0m39.635s sys 0m0.127s

perf 數據對比

Intel

intel的cpu隨著線程的增加，ipc穩定減少，但不是線性的

海光

如下數據可以看到在用滿32個物理core之前，ipc保持穩定，超過32core後隨著併發增加ipc相應減少，性能再也上不去了。

鯤鵬920

可以看到鯤鵬920多核跑openssl是沒有什麼爭搶的，所以還能保證完全線性

小結

intel的流水線適合跑高帶寬應用，不適合跑密集計算應用，也就是intel的pipeline數量少，但是記憶體讀寫上面優化好，亂序優化好。跑純計算，不是intel的強項。

資料庫場景下鯤鵬920大概相當於X86的70%的能力

prime計算一般走的fpu，不走cpu

intel x86 cpu bound和memory bond數據

測試代碼

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31

#include <stdlib.h> #include <emmintrin.h> #include <stdio.h> #include <signal.h> char a = 1; void memory_bound() { register unsigned i=0; register char b; for (i=0;i<(1u<<24);i++) { // evict cacheline containing a _mm_clflush(&a); b = a; } } void cpu_bound() { register unsigned i=0; for (i=0;i<(1u<<31);i++) { __asm__ ("nop\nnop\nnop"); } } int main() { int i=0; for(i=0;i<10; ++i){ //cpu_bound(); memory_bound(); } return 0; }

測試結果

cpu_bound部分飛騰只有intel性能的30%

如下測試perf數據可以看到IPC的明顯差異

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69

# sudo perf stat -e branch-instructions,branch-misses,bus-cycles,cache-misses,cache-references,cpu-cycles,instructions,ref-cycles,L1-dcache-load-misses,L1-dcache-loads,L1-dcache-stores,L1-icache-load-misses,LLC-load-misses,LLC-loads,LLC-store-misses,LLC-stores,branch-load-misses,branch-loads,dTLB-load-misses,dTLB-loads,dTLB-store-misses,dTLB-stores,iTLB-load-misses,iTLB-loads,node-load-misses,node-loads,node-store-misses,node-stores -a ./memory_bound Performance counter stats for 'system wide': 36,162,872,212 branch-instructions (14.21%) 586,644,153 branch-misses # 1.62% of all branches (12.95%) 4,632,787,085 bus-cycles (14.40%) 476,189,785 cache-misses # 17.714 % of all cache refs (14.38%) 2,688,284,129 cache-references (14.35%) 258,946,713,506 cpu-cycles (17.93%) 181,069,328,200 instructions # 0.70 insn per cycle (21.51%) 456,889,428,341 ref-cycles (22.31%) 3,928,434,098 L1-dcache-load-misses # 7.46% of all L1-dcache hits (14.21%) 52,656,559,902 L1-dcache-loads (14.31%) 26,711,751,387 L1-dcache-stores (14.30%) 2,618,739,340 L1-icache-load-misses (18.05%) 154,326,888 LLC-load-misses # 8.60% of all LL-cache hits (19.84%) 1,795,112,198 LLC-loads (9.81%) 66,802,375 LLC-store-misses (10.19%) 206,810,811 LLC-stores (11.16%) 586,120,789 branch-load-misses (14.28%) 36,121,237,395 branch-loads (14.29%) 114,927,298 dTLB-load-misses # 0.22% of all dTLB cache hits (14.29%) 52,902,163,128 dTLB-loads (14.29%) 7,010,297 dTLB-store-misses (14.29%) 26,587,353,417 dTLB-stores (18.00%) 106,209,281 iTLB-load-misses # 174.17% of all iTLB cache hits (19.33%) 60,978,626 iTLB-loads (21.53%) 117,197,042 node-load-misses (19.71%) 35,764,508 node-loads (11.65%) 57,655,994 node-store-misses (7.80%) 11,563,328 node-stores (9.45%) 16.700731355 seconds time elapsed # sudo perf stat -e branch-instructions,branch-misses,bus-cycles,cache-misses,cache-references,cpu-cycles,instructions,ref-cycles,L1-dcache-load-misses,L1-dcache-loads,L1-dcache-stores,L1-icache-load-misses,LLC-load-misses,LLC-loads,LLC-store-misses,LLC-stores,branch-load-misses,branch-loads,dTLB-load-misses,dTLB-loads,dTLB-store-misses,dTLB-stores,iTLB-load-misses,iTLB-loads,node-load-misses,node-loads,node-store-misses,node-stores -a ./cpu_bound Performance counter stats for 'system wide': 43,013,055,562 branch-instructions (14.33%) 436,722,063 branch-misses # 1.02% of all branches (11.58%) 3,154,327,457 bus-cycles (14.31%) 306,977,772 cache-misses # 17.837 % of all cache refs (14.42%) 1,721,062,233 cache-references (14.39%) 176,119,834,487 cpu-cycles (17.98%) 276,038,539,571 instructions # 1.57 insn per cycle (21.55%) 309,334,354,268 ref-cycles (22.31%) 2,551,915,790 L1-dcache-load-misses # 6.78% of all L1-dcache hits (13.12%) 37,638,319,334 L1-dcache-loads (14.32%) 19,132,537,445 L1-dcache-stores (15.73%) 1,834,976,400 L1-icache-load-misses (18.90%) 131,307,343 LLC-load-misses # 11.46% of all LL-cache hits (19.94%) 1,145,964,874 LLC-loads (16.60%) 45,561,247 LLC-store-misses (8.11%) 140,236,535 LLC-stores (9.60%) 423,294,349 branch-load-misses (14.27%) 46,645,623,485 branch-loads (14.28%) 73,377,533 dTLB-load-misses # 0.19% of all dTLB cache hits (14.28%) 37,905,428,246 dTLB-loads (15.69%) 4,969,973 dTLB-store-misses (17.21%) 18,729,947,580 dTLB-stores (19.71%) 72,073,313 iTLB-load-misses # 167.86% of all iTLB cache hits (20.60%) 42,935,532 iTLB-loads (19.16%) 112,306,453 node-load-misses (15.35%) 37,239,267 node-loads (7.44%) 37,455,335 node-store-misses (10.00%) 8,134,155 node-stores (8.87%) 10.838808208 seconds time elapsed

飛騰

ipc 大概是intel的30%，加上主頻也要差一些，

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

#time perf stat -e branch-misses,bus-cycles,cache-misses,cache-references,cpu-cycles,instructions,L1-dcache-load-misses,L1-dcache-loads,L1-dcache-store-misses,L1-dcache-stores,L1-icache-load-misses,L1-icache-loads,branch-load-misses,branch-loads,dTLB-load-misses,iTLB-load-misses -a ./cpu_bound Performance counter stats for 'system wide': 10496356859 branch-misses (37.60%) 2813170983911 bus-cycles (37.58%) 17604745519 cache-misses # 3.638 % of all cache refs (37.55%) 483878256161 cache-references (37.54%) 2818545529083 cpu-cycles (43.78%) 1280497827941 instructions # 0.45 insns per cycle (43.78%) 17623592806 L1-dcache-load-misses # 3.65% of all L1-dcache hits (43.78%) 482429613337 L1-dcache-loads (41.83%) 17604561232 L1-dcache-store-misses (37.53%) 484126081882 L1-dcache-stores (37.52%) 17774514325 L1-icache-load-misses (37.50%) 641046300400 L1-icache-loads (37.50%) 10574973722 branch-load-misses (39.45%) 273851009656 branch-loads (43.76%) 9457594390 dTLB-load-misses (43.77%) 1813954093 iTLB-load-misses (43.77%) 31.172754504 seconds time elapsed real 0m31.284s user 0m31.096s sys 0m0.165s

unixBench 5.1.3 性能對比

測試命令： ./Run -c 1 -c 4

晶元	架構	邏輯核數	單核能力	4核能力	單核比值	4核比值	整機對比
Intel 4114	x86	40	1150	3095	100%	100%	100%
海光 7165	x86	48	1586	2533	138%	82%	98%
華為鯤鵬920	arm	96	1168	2066	102%	67%	160%
飛騰2000	arm	64	731	1902	64%	61%	98%
申威1621	alpha	16	445	1065	39%	34%	14%

以上CPU除了Intel，其它都沒有HT，也就是Intel 4114實際是20個物理核。以上數據來自ata，僅供參考

ARM 和 X86的總結

對比硬體：

ARM：泰山ARM 雙路 128核心64核心/路），2.5G，4指令/周期，8個記憶體通道/路，mips體系架構。
X86: intel 8163伺服器雙路 48核心（24核心/路），2.5GHZ， 6指令/周期，96smt， 6個記憶體通道

用 Geabase(C++) 測試所得 ARM是X86 性能的1.36倍，接近理論值的1.4倍

理論值的計算公式：

CPU性能驗證公式：頻率 x 核數 x 發射數/周期 x 1.3/1.5(smt2/smt4) (smt是指超線程數量)

ARM 優勢的來源主要是工藝領先一代(7nm VS 14nm)

總結

對純CPU 運算場景，併發不超過物理core時，比如Prime運算，比如DRDS(CPU bound，IO在網路，可以加併發彌補)
- 海光的IPC能保持穩定；
- intel的IPC有所下降，但是QPS在IPC下降後還能完美線性
在openssl和MySQL oltp_read_only場景下
- 如果併發沒超過物理core數時，海光和Intel都能隨著併發的翻倍性能能增加80%
- 如果併發超過物理core數後，Intel還能隨著併發的翻倍性能增加50%，海光增加就只有20%了
- 簡單理解在這兩個場景下Intel的HT能發揮半個物理core的作用，海光的HT就只能發揮0.2個物理core的作用了
海光zen1的AMD 架構，每個core只有一個fpu，綜上在多個場景下HT基本上都可以忽略
飛騰2500性能比較差
國產CPU：飛騰、鯤鵬、龍芯、申威、海光(AMD授權)、兆芯(威盛via 授權x86)
CPU性能驗證公式：頻率 x 核數 x 發射數/周期 x 1.3/1.5(smt2/smt4) (smt是指超線程數量)
大吞吐量計算由多核CPU數量決定，多核CPU數量由製程工藝決定，製程工藝由資本決定，製程工藝資本由主流消費電子決定, 摩爾定律仍在持續