|
feedmegin posted:Exactly what regular consumer software do you think can make use of 22 cores? Using 4 is a bit of a struggle for most things. Cores aren't magic, having more of them is only useful if you have parallelisable work and that's just not true of the average word processor or whatever. Chrome!  
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2016 16:50
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 23, 2024 17:03 |
|
|
What if I want to have 20+ VMs all running some instance of a free MMO trying to mine gold/currency/items?
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2016 16:58
|
|
|
Until every application run gets put into a CPU-isolated VM by OSes for some reason, I doubt that consumer applications using tons of cores will make much sense. Furthermore, since activating a core results in increased power consumption and consumer user experience is very power conscious now I see little consumer demand to scale beyond several cores without some Killer App game changer or order of magnitude improvements in battery technology. Even if we put neural net software on every other computer it'll be more power efficient to use an SPD or GPU to do it as well compared to a general purpose CPU with n more cores as well.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2016 17:53
|
|
|
feedmegin posted:Exactly what regular consumer software do you think can make use of 22 cores? Using 4 is a bit of a struggle for most things. Cores aren't magic, having more of them is only useful if you have parallelisable work and that's just not true of the average word processor or whatever. It would sure be stupid of most consumer software to optimize towards massive amounts of cores when massive amounts of cores aren't available to consumers. The argument you're making is like it was the late 80s and someone was saying that since DOS doesn't currently support more than 32 MB in a partition, no hard drive manufacturers should offer larger drives.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2016 17:57
|
|
|
I LIKE TO SMOKE WEE posted:Isn't socket3647 intended for their server garbage?
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2016 20:52
|
|
|
necrobobsledder posted:Until every application run gets put into a CPU-isolated VM by OSes for some reason, I doubt that consumer applications using tons of cores will make much sense. Furthermore, since activating a core results in increased power consumption and consumer user experience is very power conscious now I see little consumer demand to scale beyond several cores without some Killer App game changer or order of magnitude improvements in battery technology. Even if we put neural net software on every other computer it'll be more power efficient to use an SPD or GPU to do it as well compared to a general purpose CPU with n more cores as well. Batteries don't matter for machines that are plugged into a wall, and at that point power arguably doesn't either if it produces a worthwhile improvement. The difference between an 85W processor and a 145W processor is a half a cent an hour, and that's making the generous assumption that you're literally goosing the processor to 100% utilization every second. If you use it for four hours a day every day, then we're talking a worst-case figure of $0.71 per month. That's noise in the grand scheme of a power bill - get your partner to remember to turn off the bathroom light every time and you will make up the difference. Frankly I'm very confident that average utilization wouldn't be that high because of the improvements that have been made in power/clock management. Clocking up is really more of a determinant on power usage than core count. A quad-core 3.5 GHz Xeon (Xeon E5-2637 v4) and a 22-core 2.2 GHz Xeon (Xeon E5-2699 v4) pull the same amount of power despite the fact that the latter has at least 3.5x the throughput. The newer Xeons and i7s use a strategy where they can park cores (reducing the total number) in order to turbo specific cores to higher-than-normal performance. That seems like a great compromise to me - a choice of throughput or single-thread performance on demand. fishmech posted:It would sure be stupid of most consumer software to optimize towards massive amounts of cores when massive amounts of cores aren't available to consumers. The argument you're making is like it was the late 80s and someone was saying that since DOS doesn't currently support more than 32 MB in a partition, no hard drive manufacturers should offer larger drives. It's certainly a chicken-or-the-egg problem. I don't think there's a tremendous need for more power for MS Office on the horizon, and that's how the vast majority of machines are used. But at the same time the "power user" category (i5 and i7) have been stuck on 4C/4T and 4C/8T for a long time. I think a lot of those users could actually use more power, if they realized what they were missing. Being able to multitask multiple compute-intensive tasks at once is absolutely a killer app (x264 streaming while playing games, running a VM in the background, etc), let alone the increase in throughput. Being able to encode x265 at even 1/6th of realtime would be groundbreaking (and to head off the complaint, hardware encoders suck compared to CPU encoders unless you go nuts on the bitrate). I think games have suffered especially badly from this. 99.9% of your users have 8 threads or less on their processor, so there's no reason to aggressively pursue engines that take effective advantage of more threads - especially since doing so may hurt the users with Pentiums and i3s. This trickles all the way down into the APIs - before DX12/Vulkan/Mantle many things were effectively single-threaded, and even after introducing multiple command queues it is still virtually impossible to get non-trivial speedups from threading. DX12 and Vulkan are seriously game-changing in this respect - you're going to see much, much more impact from threading than from scaling CPU clocks at this point. That's super important as we move into an era of >60 Hz monitors - right now the CPU performance just is not there for 165 Hz let alone 200 Hz.  http://www.pcworld.com/article/2900814/tested-directx-12s-potential-performance-leap-is-insane.html Paul MaudDib fucked around with this message at 22:23 on Aug 26, 2016 |
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2016 22:01
|
|
|
WhyteRyce posted:What if I want to have 20+ VMs all running some instance of a free MMO trying to mine gold/currency/items? Then you know what you need and you don't have to ask for confirmation in this thread.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2016 23:49
|
|
|
Paul MaudDib posted:The difference between an 85W processor and a 145W processor is a half a cent an hour, and that's making the generous assumption that you're literally goosing the processor to 100% utilization every second. If you use it for four hours a day every day, then we're talking a worst-case figure of $0.71 per month. That's noise in the grand scheme of a power bill - get your partner to remember to turn off the bathroom light every time and you will make up the difference. But a hotter processor means my room gets hotter, increasing my cooling bill!  No seriously, my study gets really hot for some reason.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2016 05:18
|
|
|
I'm looking to build a gaming PC. I plan to use it mostly for strategy (Stellaris\EU4\Dwarf Fortress) and VR gaming. So beefy CPU and graphics cards are must haves. For the CPU, how do I choose between Haswell i7 4790K vs. Skylake i7 6700K? Most sites are recommending the 6700k but looking at the raw specs 4790K seems slightly better and has lower power draw. Lower power means less heat to me which means my fan doesn't run as often and makes less noise. Is DDR4 better in any real world application than DDR3? Most of the tests I've seen come out a wash with any advantage DDR4 has balanced by DDR3 being better in some other area. SpelledBackwards posted:But a hotter processor means my room gets hotter, increasing my cooling bill!
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2016 23:55
|
|
|
DDR4 seems to me as the real draw of skylake. Otherwise there's not much difference.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2016 00:18
|
|
|
Buy Skylake. You have more pcie lanes and are more future proof.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2016 00:19
|
|
|
Also LGA1151.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2016 00:30
|
|
|
Who cares about the socket? That changes way too often.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2016 00:50
|
|
|
If you can get Haswell at a significant discount then it's fine, the performance difference isn't huge, but Intel doesn't do that because then nobody would buy their newest processors since the consumer line has improved a grand total of 25% in the last 5 years. So you probably just might as well buy Skylake.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2016 01:17
|
|
|
Combat Pretzel posted:Who cares about the socket? That changes way too often. Haha. Like half of this thread self-reports still being on 1150 i5-2500/2600k's. But yeah 5+ years isn't long enough for a socket. e: for content, finally grabbed a 1070 and bothered to overclock my 6700k for the first time last night. With literally no tweaking other than hitting the option that says, "hey, motherboard, don't throttle the bastard when it's idle, and give it whatever juice you think necessary for it to hit 4.6GHz, thanks" I hit 77th percentile on Fire Strike 3d mark. SuperDucky fucked around with this message at 01:28 on Aug 28, 2016 |
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2016 01:24
|
|
LLSix posted:I'm looking to build a gaming PC. I plan to use it mostly for strategy (Stellaris\EU4\Dwarf Fortress) and VR gaming. So beefy CPU and graphics cards are must haves. For the CPU, how do I choose between Haswell i7 4790K vs. Skylake i7 6700K? Most sites are recommending the 6700k but looking at the raw specs 4790K seems slightly better and has lower power draw. Lower power means less heat to me which means my fan doesn't run as often and makes less noise. The 6700k is actually the lower power chip when using a discreet graphics card. This is because TDP measurements are done with the assumption of the whole chip running at full load, that includes the iGPU, the iGPU on skylake is significantly larger and more powerful than the Haswell iGPU meaning that the remaining part, the CPU cores and other parts, consume less power than Haswell overall. Also you should not use TDP as a power draw metric because it's actually a metric of heat dissipation but that's mostly beside the point. Also in some games fast(3000-3400) DDR4 will get you an extra 7-10% FPS over slower DDR4 so memory bandwidth really does matter these days and will probably matter more and more going into the future. Lastly Skylake will give you slightly better IPC, higher minimum frame rates and other benefits over older chips. If you can get a 4790k for like $250 or something, along with a decent mobo to support it since it's a bit of a power hog then feel free, otherwise I would just go with a 6700k since it will be a good bit better in pretty much every way.
|
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2016 02:03
|
|
|
AVeryLargeRadish posted:The 6700k is actually the lower power chip when using a discreet graphics card. This is because TDP measurements are done with the assumption of the whole chip running at full load, that includes the iGPU, the iGPU on skylake is significantly larger and more powerful than the Haswell iGPU meaning that the remaining part, the CPU cores and other parts, consume less power than Haswell overall. Also you should not use TDP as a power draw metric because it's actually a metric of heat dissipation but that's mostly beside the point. Also in some games fast(3000-3400) DDR4 will get you an extra 7-10% FPS over slower DDR4 so memory bandwidth really does matter these days and will probably matter more and more going into the future. Lastly Skylake will give you slightly better IPC, higher minimum frame rates and other benefits over older chips. If you can get a 4790k for like $250 or something, along with a decent mobo to support it since it's a bit of a power hog then feel free, otherwise I would just go with a 6700k since it will be a good bit better in pretty much every way. Thank you. This did a really good job of explaining how I was misreading the raw specs.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2016 02:14
|
|
|
SuperDucky posted:Haha. Like half of this thread self-reports still being on 1150 i5-2500/2600k's. But yeah 5+ years isn't long enough for a socket. --edit: Re: Sockets What exactly is the gain in nearly doubling the amount of pins going from LGA 2011 to LGA 3647? Is this mostly about six channel memory? Combat Pretzel fucked around with this message at 02:33 on Aug 28, 2016 |
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2016 02:26
|
|
|
Hey i have a core i7 860 (generation 2 i believe) that works but the ram slots of the machine i was using all died. Does anyone have recommendations for a new Motherboard thats cheap and could handle that processor along with a A GPU and wireless card? ultimately id like to run Dolphin emulator on this machine, if that helps. Im not too knowlegable with this stuff so any help would be appreciated.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2016 02:37
|
|
|
(Hopefully this is the right place to post this, but am cross posting from the OC thread.)Temperature and overclocking question for you guys: So I have this case + mobo (not my setup in pic but similar layout except for water cooling stuff):  I'm running an i7 6700 with a low profile Noctua NH-L9x65mm air cooler. The case can take up to an 85mm cooler. I've been having some issues with temps getting up into the high 80s and low 90s when stress testing. At idle, temps are at 22-25C in "balanced" mode with windows and 37-40C when in "high performance" windows mode where the processor just runs at 4.2Ghz all the time. I've reapplied thermal paste multiple times and the temps are always in the same range. The low profile cooler seems to be the issue since reviews say it is just not good enough to really cool a 6700k especially if it is overclocked. If I OC to 4.5Ghz with 4.8Ghz turboboost, I easily get 100C temp spikes and throttling. Temps in games are in the 60s-70s at stock speeds so that's good. Any thoughts on what I can do to improve CPU cooling at this point that WOULD NOT involve going the water cooling route? I suppose I could mount a massive air cooler on the thing and just keep the side panel of the case off but that would look pretty awful. Also, any thoughts on just buying a desk/room fan, popping off the side panel, and just blowing a metric fuckton of air into the case when I'm gaming and overclocking? I usually keep the side panel unscrewed anyways and take it off when gaming since I can get temps to go down by about 5C with the glass side panel off. It's my fault for buying this case, but it is sturdy as gently caress, and I just really like it aesthetically.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2016 02:43
|
|
|
Avalanche posted:It's my fault for buying this case, but it is sturdy as gently caress, and I just really like it aesthetically. It sounds like something's hosed architecturally. You might have just gotten a bad chip. That being said, these two options exist as well: http://www.thermalright.com/html/products/cpu_cooler/axp-100_muscle.html http://www.thermalright.com/html/products/cpu_cooler/axp-200_muscle.html
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2016 02:50
|
|
|
DildenAnders posted:Hey i have a core i7 860 (generation 2 i believe) that works but the ram slots of the machine i was using all died. Does anyone have recommendations for a new Motherboard thats cheap and could handle that processor along with a A GPU and wireless card? ultimately id like to run Dolphin emulator on this machine, if that helps. Im not too knowlegable with this stuff so any help would be appreciated. That's an LGA1156 socket processor, and they haven't made new motherboards with that socket in ~5 years, so to keep it, you'd have to look at Craigslist/Ebay/SA-mart. I'd probably try to find a newer chip/mobo combo, that 860 is far slower than any i7 made since SandyBridge came out in 2011.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2016 03:58
|
|
|
JnnyThndrs posted:That's an LGA1156 socket processor, and they haven't made new motherboards with that socket in ~5 years, so to keep it, you'd have to look at Craigslist/Ebay/SA-mart. I'd probably try to find a newer chip/mobo combo, that 860 is far slower than any i7 made since SandyBridge came out in 2011. I appreciate the help, but i dont exactly have the money to get a new one. I reall cant spend more than $60
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2016 04:10
|
|
|
DildenAnders posted:I appreciate the help, but i dont exactly have the money to get a new one. I reall cant spend more than $60 Okay, there's a slew of micro-ATX boards on fleabay for around $50, and full ATX boards for about $75 if you need all the extra slots. Some of the mATX boards are Intel, which tend to be pretty reliable/stable, even if they aren't useful for overclocking.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2016 04:22
|
|
|
JnnyThndrs posted:Okay, there's a slew of micro-ATX boards on fleabay for around $50, and full ATX boards for about $75 if you need all the extra slots. Some of the mATX boards are Intel, which tend to be pretty reliable/stable, even if they aren't useful for overclocking. Yeah i dont think im going to be overclocking. Ive never installed a CPU before, is it difficult?
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2016 04:26
|
|
|
DildenAnders posted:Yeah i dont think im going to be overclocking. Ive never installed a CPU before, is it difficult? Not really, the only really critical part is carefully/gently dropping the CPU into the socket so that no pins are damaged(they're in the socket, not the processor nowadays) and making sure the orientation of the chip is correct(it's square, so theoretically there are three wrong and one correct way to put it in). There are notches on the sides that will line up when it's correct, and I'm sure there's YouTube guides on how to get it right that will be more helpful than I am. Also, the stock Intel heat sinks can be a pain because of the twist-pins, but again, there are visual guides galore online. LinusTechTips has one for your exact CPU on the first page of Google when you search for "how to install an Intel CPU"
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2016 05:05
|
|
|
JnnyThndrs posted:Not really, the only really critical part is carefully/gently dropping the CPU into the socket so that no pins are damaged(they're in the socket, not the processor nowadays) and making sure the orientation of the chip is correct(it's square, so theoretically there are three wrong and one correct way to put it in). Thanks again for the help!
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2016 05:14
|
|
Avalanche posted:(Hopefully this is the right place to post this, but am cross posting from the OC thread.)Temperature and overclocking question for you guys: I think your best bet is an AIO watercooler in the roof of the case, the NH-L9x65mm is already a really good cooler for its size so anything that will fit in that case will not make much difference. The AIOs these days pretty much never leak and the Corsair ones come with 5 year warranties so they should last you a good while. What case is that exactly? I can check compatibility for you if you want.
|
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2016 05:18
|
|
|
LLSix posted:Is DDR4 better in any real world application than DDR3? Most of the tests I've seen come out a wash with any advantage DDR4 has balanced by DDR3 being better in some other area. Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm building a new pc and from what I've read, you have to take latency into account as well as clock speed. So high frequency high latency RAM can actually be slower than low frequency low latency RAM. I assume most of the reviewers don't take this into account and just assume higher frequency is better. http://www.hardwaresecrets.com/understanding-ram-timings/
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2016 05:48
|
|
|
Combat Pretzel posted:
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2016 11:23
|
|
|
Avalanche posted:(Hopefully this is the right place to post this, but am cross posting from the OC thread.)Temperature and overclocking question for you guys: How are you setting the voltages? Manually or auto?
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2016 12:00
|
|
|
AVeryLargeRadish posted:I think your best bet is an AIO watercooler in the roof of the case, the NH-L9x65mm is already a really good cooler for its size so anything that will fit in that case will not make much difference. The AIOs these days pretty much never leak and the Corsair ones come with 5 year warranties so they should last you a good while. What case is that exactly? I can check compatibility for you if you want. LianLi PC06S Here is link to the case from the manufacturer The case DOES support watercooling, but not sure if it will for the AIO Corsair thing. I don't really know much of anything about water cooling. and voltages are set on auto when running stock. When OCing, I was just using some "gaming" pre-made OC profile to get to 4.5Ghz just to make sure the system wouldn't crash when booting. I believe the manual voltages under that profile were like 1.42. Still haven't done a proper overclock of going in and messing with everything myself since I'm more worried about the cooling situation at the moment.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2016 13:04
|
|
Avalanche posted:LianLi PC06S First off try lowering voltages, do some stress testing afterwards to make sure it stays stable. The auto-OC usually overestimates the required voltage by a fair amount and lowering the voltage will also bring temps down somewhat. If you decide to go with a new cooling solution for the CPU the Corsair H100i v2 or any other 240mm AIO should all fit fine in the roof of your case, it's designed to fit everything up to 360mm radiators, just avoid anything using 140mm fans, those would be too wide for the roof, so no 280mm AIOs, just 120mm/240mm/360mm. There is no point in anything over 240mm for your CPU, that will give you plenty of cooling even at fairly high voltages.
|
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2016 13:42
|
|
|
Finally built my new computer, it's amazing how much of a difference a 6600K does when gaming. My old CPU (i5 760) was bottlenecking my 960 quite a bit. Feels good man. Waiting on a 1070 now. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2016 13:58
|
|
|
LLSix posted:Is DDR4 better in any real world application than DDR3? Most of the tests I've seen come out a wash with any advantage DDR4 has balanced by DDR3 being better in some other area. It is, here's an example of DDR3 vs DDR4, DDR4 wins at every test: http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/hardware-canucks-reviews/70775-intel-skylake-ddr3-vs-ddr4-comparison-4.html A lot of comparisons make mistake of comparing DDR3 and DDR4 with same speed which benefits DDR3 because something like DDR3 2133mhz is fast but DDR4 2133mhz is not something you should be buying. Get 3000Mhz or 3200Mhz DDR4.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2016 15:12
|
|
|
E: double post
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2016 15:13
|
|
|
AVeryLargeRadish posted:First off try lowering voltages, do some stress testing afterwards to make sure it stays stable. The auto-OC usually overestimates the required voltage by a fair amount and lowering the voltage will also bring temps down somewhat. If you decide to go with a new cooling solution for the CPU the Corsair H100i v2 or any other 240mm AIO should all fit fine in the roof of your case, it's designed to fit everything up to 360mm radiators, just avoid anything using 140mm fans, those would be too wide for the roof, so no 280mm AIOs, just 120mm/240mm/360mm. There is no point in anything over 240mm for your CPU, that will give you plenty of cooling even at fairly high voltages. Awesome, thanks for this. Also, what would you suggest for stress testing? I like to use FoldingAtHome with max performance, but it's not really recognized as a good stress test and there's no real posted temp numbers out there to compare if I am achieving good temps or not. Is Prime95 still ok with a 6700k? Apparently the new version of Prime95 can break skylake processors, but not if the program is setup a certain way.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2016 01:39
|
|
|
Boiled Water posted:DDR4 seems to me as the real draw of skylake. Otherwise there's not much difference. Not sure why people like it so much, it's pretty much the same thing as DDR3, but at lower voltage. Latency hasn't gone down a lick; and dual-channel DDR3 has had more than enough bandwidth to keep quad core CPUs busy - albeit after quite long delay, which hasn't really gotten any better. If they made a switch away from capacitor DRAM, then that would be something to really get excited about. Upgrading from DDRn to DDRn+1 is just  .
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2016 02:57
|
|
Avalanche posted:Awesome, thanks for this. I like AIDA64, you can grab a trial version off their website. Also try running some games, different programs will stress the CPU differently so a broad variety of tests is useful.
|
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2016 03:14
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 23, 2024 17:03 |
|
|
lDDQD posted:Not sure why people like it so much, it's pretty much the same thing as DDR3, but at lower voltage. Latency hasn't gone down a lick; and dual-channel DDR3 has had more than enough bandwidth to keep quad core CPUs busy - albeit after quite long delay, which hasn't really gotten any better.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2016 11:46
|
|