MySQL Performance on Modern CPUS - Intel, ARM, AMD
CC Attribution 2.0 Belgium:
You are free to use, adapt and copy, distribute and transmit the work or content in adapted or unchanged form for any legal purpose as long as the work is attributed to the author in the manner specified by the author or licensor.
Zaitsev, Peter
For years CPU choice for MySQL was pretty boring - just chose what Intel Made CPU you want. In recent years the situation changed with AMD producing very competitive Server grade CPUs and ARM going from being the leading CPU manufacturers for low-power gadgets to being inside some of the highest performance server chips. In this presentation, we will look into current CPU choices through MySQL Lense - which CPUs provide the best performance for single threaded and high concurrency workloads and which help to achieve the best price/performance.
 Hello everyone. Today we'll talk about the topic which is very exciting for me, and it is my school performance on the modern CPUs Intel arm and AMD. This is the topic where it pays of being kind of old, because I remember being involved with those CPUs for now more than two decades. I remember in my early days when I was teenager we had the CPUs numbered, not names, and in 486 days, AMD was quite a big deal, and they're kicking Intel butts in many cases. But this is before I started to be involved in a databases in more professional, professional level. And I think before that was very meaningful for history of my squirrel. What is relevant for my squirrel, I think starts with Intel of Pentium pro. And at that time, that is, I think their Intel was really establishing a lot of dominance in the server CPU space, and the really AMD was not really much to be found around. Intel though, it looks like follow exactly the innovators dilemma trajectory, and really tried to serve some of their biggest customers and focused on going up the market with introduction of Intel, etanium in 2001. And this was Intel bets on 64 bit CPUs. Intel Pentium Intel Pentium Pro were all 32 bits CPUs. And this was really revolutionally CPUs with completely different architecture approach approach, their instruction set and so on and so forth. And it could not really run the old applications very well and it was really only designed for some very large and powerful servers. And so, Intel kind of made a bet sort of abandoning more smaller and scrappy companies and customers, and leaving them without good 64 bit CPU. And that is their AMD came about. I think it is very interesting what it is AMD, which is the company which designed 64 bit extensions for our traditional x86 instruction set and introduced that in AMD opter on and related CPUs. Wow, that was quite a success. I remember that was at the time maybe a few years later when we were looking at the professional use of Linux and my school, and really breaking off the boundaries of 32 bits address space was completely life changing for such as a memory hungry applications such as a memory hungry databases. And that also performed quite well. Well, especially perform quite well compared to what Intel had at that time. What Intel did in the in those years is after the Pentium pro, which was called the end, you know, Pentium two, which was called P set P six architecture. Which was called the net, net burst, and that architecture, it allowed to get very high clock rate for C for CPUs right which was like wow that is very high clock rate. And that is what a lot of consumers thought about system performance from marketing standpoint, but that didn't really work very well. It really had much worse performance, their clock cycle, and especially for applications such as a database for code codes that really played well for for opt around and a DCP use and it was days AMD was really working much better. It was not until 2006 and then Intel introduced the core CPUs when they could really get a lead in benchmarks. And this is a very interesting benchmarks which folks and other tech did in 2006, then their wood crest, which is a core based CPU was introduced, and you can see at those graphs, it really has much better performance. And double performance, compared to the event Dale, even if the in the real this kind of net burst based CPU is the, the, at the higher frequency. You can also see here what they'll have the, though, the AMD CPUs kind of green lines, they are somewhere in between, right there. Intel was quite a lager. It was really become very good CPU. At the time, before core releases, what is also very interesting in this benchmark is this son T1, like or Niagara, the CPU core and you can see how at least for my school workloads that was absolutely horrible CPU, having the abysmal single thread performance and even at the very high concurrency scoring scoring lowest. I remember that as something which son tried to market as a CPU for my school workloads and that was, oh my gosh, I think one of the worst cases trying to pick their square peg in around hole which I've seen. Here are some of the benchmarks, which we have done in 2011 between that generation of for Intel and up to Ron, and you can see what Intel and up to Ron they have a same, they have quite similar peak performance, but then Intel really played worse at the high, high concurrency, which makes it for a better performance overall. Now I would point out something, then you are measuring any software performance on a given CPU. It is not just about that CPU. It can be also about software, which can be optimized for one or another CPU architecture. It also could be your development test stacks. For example, Intel for years invested a lot in making sure compilers optimize stuff for Intel CPUs. They do very well. So in generally, so you can see software even now optimized more for Intel CPUs. Here is some interesting data, which corresponds to, to that, that times I mentioned, you can see what at the time what after on was, was in was released, and Intel was dealing with that horrible. It was a horrible CPU architecture of net burst. It's market share was dropping. It still was dominant. And see from this grass what there is a lot of inertia in the market especially, you know, enterprise server market space right but it was losing the market until when their core CPUs were released and Intel started to get market share. And if you were looking at middle of the last decade, where this graph kind of terminates, you would think what it's all over, and AMD is dead, and Intel has complete dominance. And that is not how really things have played out. We can see what if AMD really have a very small market share in the server markets, there have been for all those years. AMD based the inexpensive laptops, or, you know, this desktop CPUs but it had a very small market or small presence on the server market share. We can see things have been changing in the last year, or a couple of years. And that is really the driving factor here. Well, the driving factor is what the AMD have introduced completely new micro architecture called Zen in 2017. And this architecture was also branded as epic for their server brand CPUs like kind of similar to sound is presentation of Intel core architecture and epic is how Zen architecture is implemented on Sarah marketplace. And you could see what in those Zen architecture, it was actually first time in years, there, it could really beat raw performance of some of the best Intel CPUs available at that point in time, and it was all surprised substantially cheaper. And even though it did not quite play out the same way for my scroll. You can see what the my scroll performance, unlike the Java was still substantial lower for that shows generation, epic CPUs, compared to dual zones. And some CPU architecture purists would be right to notice what that is not AMD fault that is my scroll fault. In a lot of cases where my squirrel synchronization primitives and have been finally tuned for behavior of Intel. And because of that, it does not have as good performance on AMD, and especially on armor CPUs. That is the optimization work which is, which is, which is ongoing, but the situation at my scroll in 2017 was this right. And if you are a consumer who needs to run databases you frankly typically don't care. That's maybe your operating system that maybe, you know, database that's maybe hardware. It really does not matter because all you need is to get the best performance out of your database right. And then meanwhile, while they had this bottle of the giants ongoing, there have been some other CPUs lurking in the shadows. One set of CPUs is power CPUs. And this is kind of very interesting because every so many years on the of the last decade or so, you can see some kind of good benchmarks and some announcements coming up and saying oh power PC CPUs are coming and they are like much better faster cheaper, there is no really good ecosystem support. I know some people who run Linux my square and wherever on power, and they're quite happy, they believe that they're getting very good outcomes on that but this is kind of exotic still so far, it never quite reach their mature into market acceptance. But another CPU did arm CPUs. Right. If you think about the story of arm CPUs, it's kind of interesting because that follows the same sort of innovators dilemma, but more of a disruptor game. For years, arm CPUs were CPUs which would see in a mobile device cell phones tablets, internet of things devices, they're not very high performance. What arm was really focusing on is having a very good power efficiency, and also it has a different licensing model, where people would license their design from arm and they could produce their customized silicon, where in case of Intel, only Intel, as far as I know, produces Intel CPUs right and you can just buy design you have to buy CPU. And of course that costs costs much more. And that's interesting, because with the evolution of the CPUs, what we're finding is what even for server CPUs, the power efficiency becomes limited factor. And now can pack so many transistors in the silicone. Right. The, to the point, what we just cannot call it enough for that to operate at the peak performance and because of that, all the service CPUs have to be very careful and operating at this, you know, very minimal budget, if you will. And that is there. The aim is for our arms skills of making sure they are able to build the CPUs you don't run as hot, really transform in them being able to become good at building server CPUs as well. And there are some market developments, which happened in this place, which were also quite interesting. Back in 2015, Amazon acquired a company on a partner labs which specialized at building server grade arm chips. And that is which brought us, gravity on and gravity on to CPUs, which are arm based CPUs which are now available at Amazon, Amazon cloud, and which is obviously a very good deal for Amazon, because it costs a fraction of what it has to pay for Intel CPUs. And so they are really very interested in promoting this solution. And Amazon, in this case, is not alone. And you may not hear a lot of this in Europe or US very arm is also pretty big in China with Huawei investment and some other companies as well. And I think for China that is also in particularly important because that allows them to reduce dependence on their on the American chips. And especially with Huawei and always kind of tensions between Huawei and, and US, the kind of decoupling for for a server market from Intel or AMD both US companies was quite, you know, quite important for them. And they have been investing a lot and building a lot of stuff. Finally, you can see most recently, Apple, who had been really building very powerful arm based CPUs for mobile devices and for tablets. Now brought M one arm CPU to desktop as well. And I think what we've shown with the modern laptops and even desktop devices. AMD can produce better performance and better price performance compared to to Intel. And I think that is really been creating a lot of interest to their AMD. And in the other corner we have been getting a lot more request for AMD build, not particularly for server deployment by that list for development deployments at one. Okay. Let's see some, some benchmarks. What you can see here are the benchmarks we have done on meat size. We have 40 agent 64 vcp use, or you can see from this numbers is what actually the performance results are rather compatible between all the, all the CPUs. And what you can see especially the high number or concurrency of the last generation Intel is the fastest, but AMD and gravity on are not that that far away. And the mindful here is what we thought Amazon pricing arm is about 20% less expensive than Intel, and AMD is 10% less expensive. And you are thinking about about margin, right because both the CPU production cost and more and power costs. I would expect what Amazon gets much better deal when it sells you arm, compared to AMD or Intel, right and and that is just a price that is not enough to, to drive arm adoption at this point. Now at your corner we also recently did benchmarks on GCP. In this case, between Intel is on an AMD epic. And here are results what you can see here, which is quite interesting is what if you look at the second generation of those nodes and to write you can see what Intel, which is and and to is substantially faster than AMD, which is and to D. But if you look at and one the previous generation of Intel, it is, of course, well substantially slower than what AMD used to have. So again, the numbers are quite comparable. So as a summary, what we can see is what the Intel is still dominated player on the market and still cannot offer a very good performance if the raw performance is what you care about. So the AMD and arm can be feasible alternatives for my squirrel. And especially if you're looking at the price performance for some workloads. They may offer you a better value. And what really excites me is, we have a competition, which will surely push innovation and drive down the costs, as it always does. And that's, that's all I have, and enjoy the rest of the conference. Thank you.
 Hello everyone.  Today we'll talk about the topic which is very exciting for me, and it is my school performance on the modern CPUs Intel arm and AMD.  This is the topic where it pays of being kind of old, because I remember being involved with those CPUs for now more than two decades.  I remember in my early days when I was teenager we had the CPUs numbered, not names, and in 486 days, AMD was quite a big deal, and they're kicking Intel butts in many cases.  But this is before I started to be involved in a databases in more professional, professional level. And I think before that was very meaningful for history of my squirrel.  What is relevant for my squirrel, I think starts with Intel of Pentium pro. And at that time, that is, I think their Intel was really establishing a lot of dominance in the server CPU space, and the really AMD was not really much to be found around.  Intel though, it looks like follow exactly the innovators dilemma trajectory, and really tried to serve some of their biggest customers and focused on going up the market with introduction of Intel, etanium in 2001.  And this was Intel bets on 64 bit CPUs.  Intel Pentium Intel Pentium Pro were all 32 bits CPUs. And this was really revolutionally CPUs with completely different architecture approach approach, their instruction set and so on and so forth.  And it could not really run the old applications very well and it was really only designed for some very large and powerful servers.  And so, Intel kind of made a bet sort of abandoning more smaller and scrappy companies and customers, and leaving them without good 64 bit CPU.  And that is their AMD came about. I think it is very interesting what it is AMD, which is the company which designed 64 bit extensions for our traditional x86 instruction set and introduced that in AMD opter on and related CPUs.  Wow, that was quite a success.  I remember that was at the time maybe a few years later when we were looking at the professional use of Linux and my school, and really breaking off the boundaries of 32 bits address space was completely life changing for such as a memory hungry applications such as  a memory hungry databases. And that also performed quite well.  Well, especially perform quite well compared to what Intel had at that time.  What Intel did in the in those years is after the Pentium pro, which was called the end, you know, Pentium two, which was called P set P six architecture.  Which was called the net, net burst, and that architecture, it allowed to get very high clock rate for C for CPUs right which was like wow that is very high clock rate.  And that is what a lot of consumers thought about system performance from marketing standpoint, but that didn't really work very well. It really had much worse performance, their clock cycle, and especially for applications such as a database for  code codes that really played well for for opt around and a DCP use and it was days AMD was really working much better.  It was not until 2006 and then Intel introduced the core CPUs when they could really get a lead in benchmarks.  And this is a very interesting benchmarks which folks and other tech did in 2006, then their wood crest, which is a core based CPU was introduced, and you can see at those graphs, it really has much better performance.  And double performance, compared to the event Dale, even if the in the real this kind of net burst based CPU is the, the, at the higher frequency.  You can also see here what they'll have the, though, the AMD CPUs kind of green lines, they are somewhere in between, right there. Intel was quite a lager.  It was really become very good CPU.  At the time, before core releases, what is also very interesting in this benchmark is this son T1, like or Niagara, the CPU core and you can see how at least for my school workloads that was absolutely horrible CPU, having  the abysmal single thread performance and even at the very high concurrency scoring scoring lowest.  I remember that as something which son tried to market as a CPU for my school workloads and that was, oh my gosh, I think one of the worst cases trying to pick their square peg in around hole which I've seen.  Here are some of the benchmarks, which we have done in 2011 between that generation of for Intel and up to Ron, and you can see what Intel and up to Ron they have a same, they have quite similar peak performance, but then Intel  really played worse at the high, high concurrency, which makes it for a better performance overall.  Now I would point out something, then you are measuring any software performance on a given CPU. It is not just about that CPU.  It can be also about software, which can be optimized for one or another CPU architecture. It also could be your development test stacks. For example, Intel for years invested a lot in making sure compilers optimize stuff for Intel CPUs.  They do very well. So in generally, so you can see software even now optimized more for Intel CPUs.  Here is some interesting data, which corresponds to, to that, that times I mentioned, you can see what at the time what after on was, was in was released, and Intel was dealing with that horrible.  It was a horrible CPU architecture of net burst. It's market share was dropping. It still was dominant.  And see from this grass what there is a lot of inertia in the market especially, you know, enterprise server market space right but it was losing the market until  when their core CPUs were released and Intel started to get market share. And if you were looking at middle of the last decade, where this graph kind of terminates, you would think what it's all over, and AMD is dead, and Intel has complete dominance.  And that is not how really things have played out.  We can see what if AMD really have a very small market share in the server markets, there have been for all those years.  AMD based the inexpensive laptops, or, you know, this desktop CPUs but it had a very small market or small presence on the server market share.  We can see things have been changing in the last year, or a couple of years.  And that is really the driving factor here. Well, the driving factor is what the AMD have introduced completely new micro architecture called Zen in 2017.  And this architecture was also branded as epic for their server brand CPUs like kind of similar to sound is presentation of Intel core architecture and epic is how Zen architecture is implemented on Sarah marketplace.  And you could see what in those Zen architecture, it was actually first time in years, there, it could really beat raw performance of some of the best Intel CPUs available at that point in time, and it was all surprised substantially cheaper.  And even though it did not quite play out the same way for my scroll.  You can see what the my scroll performance, unlike the Java was still substantial lower for that shows generation, epic CPUs, compared to dual zones.  And some CPU architecture purists would be right to notice what that is not AMD fault that is my scroll fault.  In a lot of cases where my squirrel synchronization primitives and have been finally tuned for behavior of Intel. And because of that, it does not have as good performance on AMD, and especially on armor CPUs.  That is the optimization work which is, which is, which is ongoing, but the situation at my scroll in 2017 was this right.  And if you are a consumer who needs to run databases you frankly typically don't care. That's maybe your operating system that maybe, you know, database that's maybe hardware. It really does not matter because all you need is to get the best performance out of your database right.  And then meanwhile, while they had this bottle of the giants ongoing, there have been some other CPUs lurking in the shadows.  One set of CPUs is power CPUs. And this is kind of very interesting because every so many years on the of the last decade or so, you can see some kind of good benchmarks and some announcements coming up and saying oh power PC CPUs are coming and they are like much better faster cheaper,  there is no really good ecosystem support. I know some people who run Linux my square and wherever on power, and they're quite happy, they believe that they're getting very good outcomes on that but this is kind of exotic still so far, it never quite reach their mature into market acceptance.  But another CPU did arm CPUs.  Right. If you think about the story of arm CPUs, it's kind of interesting because that follows the same sort of innovators dilemma, but more of a disruptor game.  For years, arm CPUs were CPUs which would see in a mobile device cell phones tablets, internet of things devices, they're not very high performance.  What arm was really focusing on is having a very good power efficiency, and also it has a different licensing model, where people would license their design from arm and they could produce their customized silicon, where in case of Intel,  only Intel, as far as I know, produces Intel CPUs right and you can just buy design you have to buy CPU. And of course that costs costs much more.  And that's interesting, because with the evolution of the CPUs, what we're finding is what even for server CPUs, the power efficiency becomes limited factor.  And now can pack so many transistors in the silicone. Right. The, to the point, what we just cannot call it enough for that to operate at the peak performance and because of that, all the service CPUs have to be very careful and operating at this, you know,  very minimal budget, if you will. And that is there. The aim is for our arms skills of making sure they are able to build the CPUs you don't run as hot, really transform in them being able to become good at building server CPUs as well.  And there are some market developments, which happened in this place, which were also quite interesting. Back in 2015, Amazon acquired a company on a partner labs which specialized at building server grade arm chips.  And that is which brought us, gravity on and gravity on to CPUs, which are arm based CPUs which are now available at Amazon, Amazon cloud, and which is obviously a very good deal for Amazon, because it costs a fraction of what it has to pay for Intel CPUs.  And so they are really very interested in promoting this solution.  And Amazon, in this case, is not alone.  And you may not hear a lot of this in Europe or US very arm is also pretty big in China with Huawei investment and some other companies as well.  And I think for China that is also in particularly important because that allows them to reduce dependence on their on the American chips.  And especially with Huawei and always kind of tensions between Huawei and, and US, the kind of decoupling for for a server market from Intel or AMD both US companies was quite, you know, quite important for them.  And they have been investing a lot and building a lot of stuff.  Finally, you can see most recently, Apple, who had been really building very powerful arm based CPUs for mobile devices and for tablets. Now brought M one arm CPU to desktop as well.  And I think what we've shown with the modern laptops and even desktop devices.  AMD can produce better performance and better price performance compared to to Intel. And I think that is really been creating a lot of interest to their AMD.  And in the other corner we have been getting a lot more request for AMD build, not particularly for server deployment by that list for development deployments at one.  Okay.  Let's see some, some benchmarks. What you can see here are the benchmarks we have done on meat size.  We have 40 agent 64 vcp use, or you can see from this numbers is what actually the performance results are rather compatible between all the, all the CPUs.  And what you can see especially the high number or concurrency of the last generation Intel is the fastest, but AMD and gravity on are not that that far away.  And the mindful here is what we thought Amazon pricing arm is about 20% less expensive than Intel, and AMD is 10% less expensive.  And you are thinking about about margin, right because both the CPU production cost and more and power costs. I would expect what Amazon gets much better deal when it sells you arm, compared to AMD or Intel, right and and that is just a price  that is not enough to, to drive arm adoption at this point.  Now at your corner we also recently did benchmarks on GCP. In this case, between Intel is on an AMD epic. And here are results what you can see here, which is quite interesting is what if you look at the second  generation of those nodes and to write you can see what Intel, which is and and to is substantially faster than AMD, which is and to D.  But if you look at and one the previous generation of Intel, it is, of course, well substantially slower than what AMD used to have. So again, the numbers are quite comparable.  So as a summary, what we can see is what the Intel is still dominated player on the market and still cannot offer a very good performance if the raw performance is what you care about.  So the AMD and arm can be feasible alternatives for my squirrel. And especially if you're looking at the price performance for some workloads. They may offer you a better value. And what really excites me is, we have a competition, which will surely push innovation and drive down the costs, as it always does.  And that's, that's all I have, and enjoy the rest of the conference. Thank you.
mysql_cpu_0_155.png mysql_cpu_156_1307.png mysql_cpu_1308_1943.png mysql_cpu_1944_2111.png mysql_cpu_2112_2183.png mysql_cpu_2184_2423.png mysql_cpu_2424_2579.png mysql_cpu_2580_3071.png mysql_cpu_3072_4607.png mysql_cpu_4608_4751.png mysql_cpu_4752_5123.png mysql_cpu_5124_6275.png mysql_cpu_6276_7955.png mysql_cpu_7956_11207.png mysql_cpu_11208_13187.png mysql_cpu_13188_18287.png mysql_cpu_18288_20411.png mysql_cpu_20412_20699.png mysql_cpu_20700_21995.png mysql_cpu_21996_22259.png mysql_cpu_22260_25355.png mysql_cpu_25356_25823.png mysql_cpu_25824_26783.png mysql_cpu_26784_30191.png mysql_cpu_30192_30443.png mysql_cpu_30444_31595.png mysql_cpu_31596_32747.png mysql_cpu_32748_34259.png mysql_cpu_34260_35219.png mysql_cpu_35220_35315.png mysql_cpu_35316_35423.png mysql_cpu_35424_35545.png