I wanna see some Sandy Bridge Results

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Movieman

I can't give you lots of numbers as I had LOTS of issues with my board BUT I did get a 2600 non K SB chip to crunch for app 3 days and it turned in a average of 33,700PPD at 3492MHz while drawing 118.5w from the wall.
Temps with a TRUE w/113cfm Delta were in the mid 40's in a 71F room( open case)
Now as sweet as that 118.5w figure is it could be lowered even more.
My setup had this:
Intel Burrage board
2600 SB chip at 3492( 8 threads with HT on)
2x4 gig GSKill DDR3-1600
PCP+C 610w Silencer
1-36 gig WD Raptor
EVGA 260GTX
Bottom line is it's really a sweet cruncher even at 3500mhz.
Not that expensive, low electrical use and nice temps.
Also damn it's fast in just about anything you'd want to do.
Make for a great daily driver also.:up:

---

yeah get rid of the raptor (replace with ssd) and the video-card and find a 120 watt high efficiency psu and well you'll have about the draw of a sossaman with much more production, but I got a question does it really make sense for us crunchers to buy one with hyper-threading I mean think about it all that does is half the processing power for each workunit sharing the core, I mean that's great if your using the thing and multi tasking but otherwise I mean I have hyper-threading enabled on my dual core atom 330, but I told wcg to only use two threads and the processing time for each unit halved. :)
terramir

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by shoota

of course if the 2600K/P67 is going to be your main rig then it's a moot point because you're more than likely going to have a discrete card anyway.

---

True but we are still paying for an IGP that we can't use.
That's a lot of unused silicon.
There's ample room for more crunching coars in that spot :p:

http://images.anandtech.com/reviews/...iew/die_sm.jpg

Image linked from Anand review.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by terramir

yeah get rid of the raptor (replace with ssd) and the video-card and find a 120 watt high efficiency psu and well you'll have about the draw of a sossaman with much more production, but I got a question does it really make sense for us crunchers to buy one with hyper-threading I mean think about it all that does is half the processing power for each workunit sharing the core, I mean that's great if your using the thing and multi tasking but otherwise I mean I have hyper-threading enabled on my dual core atom 330, but I told wcg to only use two threads and the processing time for each unit halved. :)
terramir

---

Short version of a long explanation:
Can't compare to a atom as they are minimal at best.
On a i7-920 you get app 30-35% more with HT on vs off.
Now to get "speed" you need the 2500K or 2600K
Remembering it's a one time cost of app $100.00 between the two your going to benefit that 30-35% every day for say 2 years for a $100.00 one time cost.

@Mezcal
Don't get me wrong I'm not disagreeing with you one bit. Just looking at all angles. Of course if you did buy this combo then when the newer chips and chipsets come out it'll give you a good reason to buy another board :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Movieman

Short version of a long explanation:
Can't compare to a atom as they are minimal at best.
On a i7-920 you get app 30-35% more with HT on vs off.
Now to get "speed" you need the 2500K or 2600K
Remembering it's a one time cost of app $100.00 between the two your going to benefit that 30-35% every day for say 2 years for a $100.00 one time cost.

---

how can this be if they both use the same processing core?
terramir

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by terramir

how can this be if they both use the same processing core?
terramir

---

I assume you mean between the 2500K and 2600K?
It's because HT takes advantage of "downtime"between processes and if you have any doubts on that look at the temps of your cpu's at 100% load with HT on and off.
Much higher with HT on as it's working harder..

No worries, Shoota. Just weighing the pros and cons. :up:

From the Anand review I linked above:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Anand

By the end of the year we’ll have a six core version as well for the high-end desktop market, not to mention countless Xeon branded SKUs for servers.

---

Now we're talking :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mezcal

No worries, Shoota. Just weighing the pros and cons. :up:

From the Anand review I linked above:


Now we're talking :)

---

amen to that. here's to hoping they don't cost $1000

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by shoota

if you've skipped i7 and are now skipping early SB, then i expect you to have the first dual socket SB platform when available!! :rofl:

---

that's exactly what I'm planning on... :cool:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by [XC] Hicks121

Well for a $550.00 upgrade I cant go wrong brother. Been on 4 cores for way too long. Also...the electrical savings from my current rig will be nice to see. Then when the new socket comes out in 3rd quarter, I might see another upgrade. I'll just have to wait & see.

---

yeah, I don't disagree with you honestly. It's more because of my timing and how recently I bought my quad (~4 months before i7's came out). If I had a q6600 or something, I'd probably be looking into it but for now I can't justify the cost/performance upgrade so I'll just have to have a little patience for the next SR2 equivalent to come along :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Movieman

Short version of a long explanation:
Can't compare to a atom as they are minimal at best.
On a i7-920 you get app 30-35% more with HT on vs off.
Now to get "speed" you need the 2500K or 2600K
Remembering it's a one time cost of app $100.00 between the two your going to benefit that 30-35% every day for say 2 years for a $100.00 one time cost.

---

So basically the 2600K is our CPU to buy. But I'm eyeballing that 2600S [Turbo speed is still 3.8GHz] that is a 65W jobber. I wonder how well that will overclock...no unlocked multiplier though :shakes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by retro77

So basically the 2600K is our CPU to buy. But I'm eyeballing that 2600S [Turbo speed is still 3.8GHz] that is a 65W jobber. I wonder how well that will overclock...no unlocked multiplier though :shakes:

---

Go with the K vs the S. They are the same price and you can always down-clock that unlocked multi and under-volt and get the same results as a S and can always overclock if you want or sell the CPU for more than the S.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by retro77

So basically the 2600K is our CPU to buy. But I'm eyeballing that 2600S [Turbo speed is still 3.8GHz] that is a 65W jobber. I wonder how well that will overclock...no unlocked multiplier though :shakes:

---

K easily, the S is only limited somewhat, Really only overclock the blck .. Highest ive seen is like 110 blck lol

I'm not an overclocker, so I don't really understand all that blck stuff. But it seemed like a good low power consumption, low heat solution. I don't know if I'll get it or not though. Are they going to be the same price as the k?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by terramir

how can this be if they both use the same processing core?
terramir

---

Ok, so as far as Hyperthreading goes, it actually really good for this type of task. (that is a consistent task that can keep a constant load.)

For those interested, Intel's hyper-threading is actually simultaneous multi-threading (SMT). Most modern chips today are designed to utilize instruction level parallelism by running multiple micro-operations concurrently through the same core, but unfortunately, branch prediction and memory calls can interfere with this and only let some of the hardware be utilized in any given clock cycle as those issues are resolved. What SMT does is allows multiple threads to issue micro-operations on the same core in the same instruction cycle, increasing your hardware utilization and increasing your overall output.

While this makes a big difference on the Nehalem arch that allows for many micro-ops to run concurrently, the issue you are seeing with your atom processor is that since these science applications fit mostly in cache and have few branch instructions, they fill most of the available resources of the core by themselves. Because of this, the threads end up "taking turns" and trade off using the processor's resources, only actually interleaving a little bit - but it still will interleave if at all possible.

So the moral of that- disabling SMT will improve the latency (decrease run time) of WUs on every processor, but will unfortunately decrease throughput (total number of units crunched) on ALL modern processors*.

Since we crunchers are after lots of results and not time sensitive results, always enable and use hyperthreading. The only caveat to that is if your computer cannot compete the WU within the deadline with the hours you let it run. :up:

*not sure how netburst is affected by this... does that even use SMT or is it fine/coarse grained?

Sorry about my sleep deprived techno-bable. Hope it makes sense if anyone even cares. :p:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by retro77

I'm not an overclocker, so I don't really understand all that blck stuff. But it seemed like a good low power consumption, low heat solution. I don't know if I'll get it or not though. Are they going to be the same price as the k?

---

And sandy bridge doesn't really let you overclock blck significantly to my understanding... you simply bump the multiplier and voltage till you get what you want. It's really simple enough there's no reason not to learn unless you really just don't want to - especially with the excellent team we got here.
(but I do feel ya, I suck at OCing :rofl:)

And power consumption and heat don't seem to be a terrible issue... I mean people are getting 4.5 Ghz on the stock air coolers. Since heat is directly related to power consumption, I can only assume that doesn't rise to much...

That powerconsumption.... @stock idle 84W and full speed 125W. @5,1GHz idle 139W and full speed 257W...
Got those numbers here... Intel New Generation Performance-i7 2600K with BIOSTAR TP67XE (5.1GHz) Test by windhwithme.

uhhh if it can do 5ghz stable then I WILL be upgraded :rofl:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Madidas

That powerconsumption.... @stock idle 84W and full speed 125W. @5,1GHz idle 139W and full speed 257W...
Got those numbers here... Intel New Generation Performance-i7 2600K with BIOSTAR TP67XE (5.1GHz) Test by windhwithme.

---

Just read his article, very well done BUT two points:
1) He used a D1 chip,much different than D2
2) A biostar board..I won't say any more on that.:p:

Then that 257w showing at 5100mhz.
Yea, didn't surprise me.
You all know that to top out a chip you get to the point where you need huge voltage increases for minimal gains.
I wished he'd showed those numbers at 4Ghz and at 4500MHz as I think they'd be much less.
From what I saw at 3492MHz on the plain 2600 chip making 33,700 WCG PPD I still think that 40K a day is doable with very little electrical draw.
Say in the 135-145w range
For two machines thats 80K/day drawing 270-290w and thats impressive.
Beats my dual X5680 westmere making 80K/Day and drawing 330w and for a lot less money.:D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rise

uhhh if it can do 5ghz stable then I WILL be upgraded :rofl:

---

It won't, not for 24/7 work..Maybe on GOOD water but I think 4700-4800 will be max stablefor 24/7 work.

OOPS, forgot. Finally receiving a replacement for my dead Intel board next Tuesday..and just heard from another source that a second one will be arriving the same day..:D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Movieman

OOPS, forgot. Finally receiving a replacement for my dead Intel board next Tuesday..and just heard from another source that a second one will be arriving the same day..:D

---

Still messing around with crappy intel boards? :rolleyes: I would have thought you might have scrounged up a UD5 or something a bit better by now... :p:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rise

uhhh if it can do 5ghz stable then I WILL be upgraded :rofl:

---

I will let you know next week! :p:

Mobo due here today, unfortunately my ram & back plate wont be here til Monday. :(

Is there a simple bench is estimate crunching/folding power for a CPU? I'd like to compare in my upcoming article....but I haven't found a benching program. One that doesn't require internet is preferred ;)

In Boinc there is an included benchmark...just dl here.

Why not run WCG why your at it with some of that horsepower you have brother!! See how stable your rigs really run.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by '[XC

See how stable your rigs really run.

---

I know my rigs are probably not stable enough to run WCG....but that's OK....I don't run WCG :p: If I were going to run it, it would be for the cause....not to test stability ;)

edit - thanks for the link :up:

Then how about running it for the cause?

The other option is to keep a cache of workunits and re-run them at different settings, etc. You have to make sure that they aren't uploaded, but that's not a big deal :).

Does anyone have any thoughts on what the ideal "cruncher" board will be?