Message boards :
Number crunching :
System upgrade
Message board moderation
Author | Message |
---|---|
Fullsus Send message Joined: 7 Apr 08 Posts: 32 Credit: 2,737,590 RAC: 0 |
I've decided to upgrade my cruncher over the next couple of months. At the moment I have an AMD Athlon 2x 4600+ which is struggling to complete some of the bigger WU from SETI, CERN and others. I always tended to buy AMD kit but they really do look to be a good bit behind intel at the moment so would be looking to build an i7 system using a 2011 socket CPU. I Have a GeForce GTx 650 ti and might add a second card down the line. I'm trying to work out whether a 4 core Like the 3820 would be more than ample power for my needs or should I wait to pick up a 6 core CPU like a 3930. My system isn't churning 24/7 hence why I struggle to finish some WUs. Lol Any thoughts would be welcome. Cheers Fullsus |
OzzFan Send message Joined: 9 Apr 02 Posts: 15691 Credit: 84,761,841 RAC: 28 |
I always tended to buy AMD kit but they really do look to be a good bit behind intel at the moment so would be looking to build an i7 system using a 2011 socket CPU. The only thing the Socket 2011 platform gives you is tremendous memory bandwidth (quad-channel). If you are not memory-bandwidth constrained, you might want to consider a Socket 1150 for the latest 4th generation Core iN architecture. I'm trying to work out whether a 4 core Like the 3820 would be more than ample power for my needs or should I wait to pick up a 6 core CPU like a 3930. My system isn't churning 24/7 hence why I struggle to finish some WUs. Lol If you're struggling to complete work due to lack of uptime, having two extra cores will not help achieve deadlines better. It will simply give you more work to do to fulfill all cores. It is also important to note that the 3xxx series Socket 2011 chips are not actually third-generation Core i7s (Ivy Bridge), but rather a modified second-generation (Sandy Bridge-E). You would likely do yourself a favor and go with the current 4th generation Core i5 or i7 using the Socket 1150 platform and getting a motherboard with 2 PCIe x16 slots. OzzFan |
Cruncher-American Send message Joined: 25 Mar 02 Posts: 1513 Credit: 370,893,186 RAC: 340 |
I would ask you, what are your "needs"? I'm running an i7-3820 with HT on, and the 8 threads seem happy. The 6-core 3930 would (I assume it is HT) run 12 threads. What is the relative cost of the 2 CPUs? Does it matter to you? |
HAL9000 Send message Joined: 11 Sep 99 Posts: 6534 Credit: 196,805,888 RAC: 57 |
If you are concerned about completion times. Then the quad core with the higher clock rate would probably be the better way to go. The Ivy Bridge-E chips are suppose to be released in September. Which will use the same 2011 socket as the Sandy Bridge-E you are checking out now. SETI@home classic workunits: 93,865 CPU time: 863,447 hours Join the [url=http://tinyurl.com/8y46zvu]BP6/VP6 User Group[ |
Fullsus Send message Joined: 7 Apr 08 Posts: 32 Credit: 2,737,590 RAC: 0 |
Cheers for the guys.. I don't use anything that is memory intensive. My thinking behind buying socket 2011 was that it a more likely upgrade path down the line.. Does ivy bridge e look like a better option when it comes around? I've had 2 cores for long enough so an so 8 or 12 is huge difference.. Just trying to maximise my SETI rig whilst I have some spare cash. An extra 4 cores in ht at the speed of an i7 might just be worth it
|
Ianab Send message Joined: 11 Jun 08 Posts: 732 Credit: 20,635,586 RAC: 5 |
More Cores isn't going to solve your issues, although any modern CPU will get through SETI work as long as it's running for maybe an hour a day? So any new CPU is going to work better than what you have now. Heck even an I3 with HT turned off will run two tasks as well, or possibly faster, than an I5 or I7. Just the higher spec chips will run more tasks concurrently. It seems a bit excessive to spend hundreds of $$ on a high end CPU, that's only going to run for a few hours a day? Unless you have other needs for the computing power. In that case a cheapo CPU and a better graphics card will give you more bang for the buck anyway. A 6 core I7 will be just as obsolete in 5 years as a 2 core I3 that only cost you 25% of the $$. Ian |
Fullsus Send message Joined: 7 Apr 08 Posts: 32 Credit: 2,737,590 RAC: 0 |
I play about with my website so have adobe CS3.. So some graphics work and more and likely video editing down the line.. Apart from that I intend to play the odd game like assassins creed. But I'm not a big gamer. Cheers again.
|
Wiggo Send message Joined: 24 Jan 00 Posts: 34744 Credit: 261,360,520 RAC: 489 |
An i5 or i7 K series CPU on a socket 1150/1155 platform would be a better solution for you and the money saved there, over a socket 2011 platform, is your other video card. ;-) Cheers. |
Fullsus Send message Joined: 7 Apr 08 Posts: 32 Credit: 2,737,590 RAC: 0 |
Good point about using the savings for another graphics card. So maybe the 3770 or a 4770 then?
|
Wiggo Send message Joined: 24 Jan 00 Posts: 34744 Credit: 261,360,520 RAC: 489 |
Good point about using the savings for another graphics card. Either 1 will just blow your old rig away, but other than the later having a better video core there really isn't all that much performance wise between them though there are savings to be had again going with the 1st. Cheers. |
spitfire_mk_2 Send message Joined: 14 Apr 00 Posts: 563 Credit: 27,306,885 RAC: 0 |
never mind. |
HAL9000 Send message Joined: 11 Sep 99 Posts: 6534 Credit: 196,805,888 RAC: 57 |
Good point about using the savings for another graphics card. Personally I am looking at replacing my C2D E8400 with an i5-4670. In comparing the choices the extra $100 isn't worth it to me for HT, +2MB of cache, & +100MHz on the 4770K. I feel like the 4670 is a better "bang for the buck". SETI@home classic workunits: 93,865 CPU time: 863,447 hours Join the [url=http://tinyurl.com/8y46zvu]BP6/VP6 User Group[ |
arkayn Send message Joined: 14 May 99 Posts: 4438 Credit: 55,006,323 RAC: 0 |
Good point about using the savings for another graphics card. I am looking at the 4430, just as much bang for the buck and I really only need it to drive the video cards and play games. |
HAL9000 Send message Joined: 11 Sep 99 Posts: 6534 Credit: 196,805,888 RAC: 57 |
Good point about using the savings for another graphics card. I had the 4430, 4570, & 4670 in my sights at first, but the 4570 is only $5 more in the shops. With the 4670 $25 over the 4570 it is a tougher choice. Honestly they are all good choices. SETI@home classic workunits: 93,865 CPU time: 863,447 hours Join the [url=http://tinyurl.com/8y46zvu]BP6/VP6 User Group[ |
Fullsus Send message Joined: 7 Apr 08 Posts: 32 Credit: 2,737,590 RAC: 0 |
Yea the I5 certainly has become very powerful. I have a 4 core Xeon X3430 in another system and even the i5 4570 is probably at least twice as powerful as that. I love progress Just think how much more an i7 would give me... MOOORRRE POOOWWWEEER!!!!! as the say. ;-) cheers, Steven
|
HAL9000 Send message Joined: 11 Sep 99 Posts: 6534 Credit: 196,805,888 RAC: 57 |
Yea the I5 certainly has become very powerful. I have a 4 core Xeon X3430 in another system and even the i5 4570 is probably at least twice as powerful as that. I love progress The i7 does give a bit more. For some the extra expense is worth it. http://www.cpu-world.com/Compare/436/Intel_Core_i5_i5-4670_vs_Intel_Core_i7_i7-4770.html It just comes down to what you want. With loading up a GPU the HT might serve a bit better. As it is often suggested to leave a core free to feed the GPU. SETI@home classic workunits: 93,865 CPU time: 863,447 hours Join the [url=http://tinyurl.com/8y46zvu]BP6/VP6 User Group[ |
zoom3+1=4 Send message Joined: 30 Nov 03 Posts: 65709 Credit: 55,293,173 RAC: 49 |
If you are concerned about completion times. Then the quad core with the higher clock rate would probably be the better way to go. That means a new X99 motherboard and DDR4 memory, since Intel said the new cpus won't work on older x79 motherboards, should be interesting what the motherboard designers decide what to do though. Also from Ivy Bridge up Intel has been using cheap heatsink compound in between the IHS and the cpu die instead of solder like in Sandy Bridge and before, so the cpus run hotter as a result, this can be fixed, but the fix is up on youtube and requires a box knife and steady hands, plus better heatsink compound. Oh and this fix voids the cpu warranty. The T1 Trust, PRR T1 Class 4-4-4-4 #5550, 1 of America's First HST's |
OzzFan Send message Joined: 9 Apr 02 Posts: 15691 Credit: 84,761,841 RAC: 28 |
If you are concerned about completion times. Then the quad core with the higher clock rate would probably be the better way to go. Actually, all signs point to the Ivy Bridge-E chips as being compatible with the current generation Socket 2011 - but the chips are only expected to be about 5-10% faster over Sandy Bridge-E chips. There may be a newer Socket 2011 chipset to support a full range of SATA 6Gbps ports as well as native USB 3.0, but that remains to be seen. |
JB Send message Joined: 21 Jul 09 Posts: 46 Credit: 7,891,307 RAC: 0 |
I guess you should wait with a new 1150- board until INTEL fixed the usb3.0 bug. |
Grant (SSSF) Send message Joined: 19 Aug 99 Posts: 13722 Credit: 208,696,464 RAC: 304 |
I guess you should wait with a new 1150- board until INTEL fixed the usb3.0 bug. If your system never enters the S3 sleep state just as a request for data from a device connected to a USB3 port is made, it wouldn't be an issue. Grant Darwin NT |
©2024 University of California
SETI@home and Astropulse are funded by grants from the National Science Foundation, NASA, and donations from SETI@home volunteers. AstroPulse is funded in part by the NSF through grant AST-0307956.