I'm curious why they didn't go with the larger 64 core Epyc. I mean it's double the cost, but I suspect that the huge amount of NVMe SSDs is by far the largest part of the cost anyway. And it seems like CPU was the previous bottleneck as it was at 90%.
We didn't go with the 64-core chips because they have significantly lower clock speeds.
Dual 32-core chips give us plenty of cores while keeping clocks higher for single-threaded performance.
You are correct that the price of the CPUs is almost irrelevant to the overall cost of a system with this much memory and storage. We were picking the ideal CPU, not selecting on CPU price.
Thanks for the answer. I would have guessed that the higher core count outweighs the lower frequence for database usage, but obviously I don't know the details. I think the 90% CPU usage graph just made me nervous enough to want the biggest possible CPU in there.
