Originally Posted by p-dawg86 Hmm. Interesting. One hell of a price though. Oh and quad-sockets do exist. I used to see them on Newegg all the time with AMD's F series.
How can the power consumption be 1.13KW when the TDP of each CPU is supposed to be 130W? 4 x 130 = 520W... What on earth is eating the remaining 600W!!!????
Originally Posted by yanglu How can the power consumption be 1.13KW when the TDP of each CPU is supposed to be 130W? 4 x 130 = 520W... What on earth is eating the remaining 600W!!!????
There's a lot more hardware in the system than just the CPUs. For example, there are two chipsets on the motherboard, not one. There are also 16 AMBs and a lot more memory.
Originally Posted by yanglu How can the power consumption be 1.13KW when the TDP of each CPU is supposed to be 130W? 4 x 130 = 520W... What on earth is eating the remaining 600W!!!????
I wouldn't be surprised if the massive 128GB RAM drained in excess of 350W on it's own.
If you recall the "Energy Efficient Hardware Investigated" article you can see that dropping an intel platform from 2x2GB 1.5v 1333MHz memory to 1.35 drops the overall power consumption 11W. So it's fair to say the 4GB consume more than 11W.
The nehalem system embarks 32 times as much memory, granted it's only 1066Mhz but you can see where I'm going:
32x11=352W
So we have 130W (TDP) x 4 and 350W that brings the total to 840W.
Add to this the motherboard itself, the efficiency of the PSU (+20%) and you wouldn't be very far off.
Is it me or overall did the 2 x AMD Opteron 6174 seem lke the better way to go? and Im sure for a hell of a lot less making it a better choice for at least the small time server out of your home or small business the way to go.
However staring at all those threads on the performance screen shot still makes you want to drool a bit. :)
Originally Posted by HourBeforeDawn Is it me or overall did the 2 x AMD Opteron 6174 seem lke the better way to go? and Im sure for a hell of a lot less making it a better choice for at least the small time server out of your home or small business the way to go.
Yes, a quad-processor server is complete overkill for any small business - both in terms of the hardware cost and the running cost (power, cooling, space). That said, depending on your requirements, a pair of Xeon X5650s would probably be better than a pair of Opteron 6174s.
Quote:
Originally Posted by HourBeforeDawn However staring at all those threads on the performance screen shot still makes you want to drool a bit. :)
Why run the LightWave test on only 2 threads on a 32 thread monster? No wonder this machine underperformed. If you get a chance to retest this machine, possibly you could set Multithreading to "Automatic" (under Render Globals). It might give a clearer idea of the power of this machine.
The Lightwave test was run with the automatic setting, so was rendering on 16 threads (the maximum that 9.6 supports. I presume you thought it was run on two threads because of the screenshot? If so, that's a generic shot (actually my desktop work PC), not the Nehalem EX system.
Originally Posted by Lizard The Lightwave test was run with the automatic setting, so was rendering on 16 threads (the maximum that 9.6 supports. I presume you thought it was run on two threads because of the screenshot? If so, that's a generic shot (actually my desktop work PC), not the Nehalem EX system.
My mistake. I'm kind of surprised as I find it scales pretty well with more cores. Anyway thanks for clearing that up.
Comments 1 to 22 of 22
Replyhttp://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&N=2010200302%201071330126&name=Quad%201207(F)
Good spot, but that motherboard is for older Socket F Opterons, not the the new G34 Opterons which launched last week.
Anyone have a wad of dosh they want to blow on scientific research?
As F@H has roughly 75% efficiency with addition of 1 more core (I calculated based on the PPD), I guess...
114958 * 64 * 75% = 5517984
No, simply the wrong benchmarks to run on a system like this.
There's a lot more hardware in the system than just the CPUs. For example, there are two chipsets on the motherboard, not one. There are also 16 AMBs and a lot more memory.
I wouldn't be surprised if the massive 128GB RAM drained in excess of 350W on it's own.
If you recall the "Energy Efficient Hardware Investigated" article you can see that dropping an intel platform from 2x2GB 1.5v 1333MHz memory to 1.35 drops the overall power consumption 11W. So it's fair to say the 4GB consume more than 11W.
The nehalem system embarks 32 times as much memory, granted it's only 1066Mhz but you can see where I'm going:
32x11=352W
So we have 130W (TDP) x 4 and 350W that brings the total to 840W.
Add to this the motherboard itself, the efficiency of the PSU (+20%) and you wouldn't be very far off.
You'll never see that. Isn't practical at all.
However staring at all those threads on the performance screen shot still makes you want to drool a bit. :)
Yes, a quad-processor server is complete overkill for any small business - both in terms of the hardware cost and the running cost (power, cooling, space). That said, depending on your requirements, a pair of Xeon X5650s would probably be better than a pair of Opteron 6174s.
Grin :)
My mistake. I'm kind of surprised as I find it scales pretty well with more cores. Anyway thanks for clearing that up.
For example from our folding rigs:
2x xenon 5650 at 4ghz yield 11 mins frame time or 179,000 points per day
4x opteron 6172 at 2.1ghz yield 6'10 frame time or 400,000 points per day
http://f.tkaraoke.com/bd.png
What the review means to me is, it's a waste of money to buy this system
-
« Previous
-
1
-
Next »
Discuss in the forums