Index | Recent Threads | Unanswered Threads | Who's Active | Guidelines | Search |
![]() |
World Community Grid Forums
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
No member browsing this thread |
Thread Status: Active Total posts in this thread: 158
|
![]() |
Author |
|
David Autumns
Ace Cruncher UK Joined: Nov 16, 2004 Post Count: 11062 Status: Offline Project Badges: ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Way back in 2004 I posted in this thread
----------------------------------------http://www.worldcommunitygrid.org/forums/wcg/..._thread,788_offset,0#3345 I said at the time "Remember its cheaper to build 10 Athlon 2500+ PC's than 1 Athlon 64 4000+ machine" Well time has moved on and now everyone would like to be just that bit greener and reduce their electricity bills and despite my views re: Climate Change, there's nothing wrong with trying to do more with less - efficiency being the name of the game today. With this in mind I have built my latest WCG WU Cruncher with the hope of setting a benchmark that I know you will love to beat only one clause - Hyperthreading does not two cores make - just one with 2 workloads of 50% So that said here's my latest build....... It is based around the Phenom II 905e Quad Core processor which runs at stock speed of 2.5Ghz per core and has a TDP of 65W for all 4 cores. Compare this to the 89W TDP of my 2.2Ghz Single Core Barton Socket A of times gone by! I have it sitting in a ASUS M4A79XTD EVO motherboard which has some very pretty passive heatsinks, nice power management and plenty of tweaking opportunities http://xtreview.com/addcomment-id-9565-view-Asus-M4A79XTD-EVO.html But how to get the power to that M4A79XTD EVO in the most efficient manner possible.... I had a look on the 80plus.org site, an organisation that certifies PSU's for efficiency, and based on cost, availability and efficiency rating I plumped for the Corsair HX750W which is Gold rated on the site here http://80plus.org/manu/psu/psu_detail.aspx?id=25&type=2 but Corsair have played safe and claim it to be Silver, but nevertheless it is very efficient and it's unlikely I will ever need another PSU having bought this monster. It's 90.02% efficient which basically means that if your PC takes 100W at the plug 90.02W of it gets to your motherboard to power the components, the rest is blown very gently out of the PSU as heat. So far so good..Where else can I get power savings? I finally took the SSD leap. All that disk spinning and wafting about of the magnetic pickups costs watts so the OS (Win7) and WCG live on a very nice 80Gb Intel X25-M http://www.intel.com/design/flash/nand/mainstream/index.htm Just 150mw active 75mw standby !! I have 4Gb of Kingston DDR3 RAM which operates at 1.5V and I have it running at 6-6-6-20 As I am not much of a gamer I hunted around for a passively cooled graphics card and I turned up a Geforce 9500 GT, which for me is a big step up as my last graphics card was a 4200Ti (yep AGP!) Finally I was hoping I might passively cool that 905e. With that in mind I added to my shopping list this lump of ironwork http://www.scythe-eu.com/en/products/cpu-cooler/mugen-2-rev-b.html it's a Scythe Mugen 2 Rev.B Despite keeping my fingers crossed and it running for a fair while without it's fan the temperature kept going north. So I have had to admit defeat here, despite the arctic silver 5, and attach the fan which keeps the whole system stable by turning at just 400rpm I have had this build running now for over a month and I have overclocked it, underclocked it, undervolted and overvolted it and lost many a work unit in this endeavour for efficiency (Sorry Kevin ![]() Try as I might though I cannot get it to run stable without it taking 99W/h at the socket !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ![]() ![]() ![]() For my 99W I get 2636 Floating Point MIPS per core in the 6.2.28 WCG BOINC CPU benchmark Each core is running slightly overclocked at 2.5875Ghz. 1.1V Core 1.1V North Bridge 1.2V South Bridge All of which works out at 106.5 Floating Point MIPS/W for the main system 4 days a day of crunch time for 2.376KWh per day Result ![]() ![]() Can you do more with less? That's the green challenge Dave p.s. I continued the green theme with my "planet destroying" wide screen monitor ![]() ![]() ![]() [Edit 3 times, last edit by David Autumns at Sep 21, 2010 4:11:50 PM] |
||
|
mikaok
Senior Cruncher Finland Joined: Aug 8, 2006 Post Count: 489 Status: Offline Project Badges: ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Your new rig seems very nice
----------------------------------------![]() As I am not much of a gamer I hunted around for a passively cooled graphics card and I turned up a Geforce 9500 GT, which for me is a big step up as my last graphics card was a 4200Ti (yep AGP!) Here is where I drop out of this contest. My CUDA device is consuming as much energy as your whole system. But then again, I think GPUs have some future in the DC computing. p.s. I continued the green theme with my "planet destroying" wide screen monitor ![]() Finally. Your optician might be broke soon though..
to infinity and beyond
----------------------------------------![]() [Edit 2 times, last edit by mikaok at Jul 4, 2010 7:32:25 PM] |
||
|
David Autumns
Ace Cruncher UK Joined: Nov 16, 2004 Post Count: 11062 Status: Offline Project Badges: ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Hi mikaok the great power brick arrived in a velvet bag! Someone in the marketing dept gone mad I think. But as with most of this system it's an investment for the future. Being massively overated (power wise) it's just above ambient.
----------------------------------------The WCG team quite rightly focus on X86 development as it has greater reach at the moment. But I am sure if a project that came along that required the processing style of a GPU then they would probably embrace it..maybe one day, although AMD64 might be an easier path. As this smiley is uncannily accurate ![]() I'm going to accept 106.5 as the best I can get from this set of components....but the HDT55TWFGRBOX has just made an appearance in Japan http://www.cpu-world.com/CPUs/K10/AMD-Phenom%...GR%20(HDT55TWFGRBOX).html 2.8Ghz a core for 95W TDP and there are 6 of 'em ![]() Now if I do my maths....... It's the green challenge. Can you do more with less? Dave ![]() |
||
|
sk..
Master Cruncher http://s17.rimg.info/ccb5d62bd3e856cc0d1df9b0ee2f7f6a.gif Joined: Mar 22, 2007 Post Count: 2324 Status: Offline Project Badges: ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Not bad, but that PSU was a bit much; at such low wattage it may not be so efficient - their efficiency graphs only go down to 172W! It could well drop steeply below that. A good 250W PSU would have done the trick, saved your wallet.
You could have used a motherboard with a built in GPU and saved there too! The 9800GT was a good card 2 years ago. Although you did not mention the model I expect it uses 25 to 30W idle! No wonder you cant get below 99W! I would have went for a GT240 or a Sapphire Radeon HD 4670 GDDR4. 10W and 9W idle respectively. The GT240 uses a 40nm core (some are GDDR5) and has a 69W TDP. Mind you I would have used it to crunch with (about 17K Boinc points per day). Alternatively a GT220 uses about 6W when idle. I think you could still use that 9800GT over at Folding@home if you wanted. The rest of the system looks good. Unless you underclocked, passively cooling a Quad was a tall ask, even with a 905e. Actually, using a fan can often reduce the power usage, as leakage increases with heat. 2636 Floating Point MIPS is good going (more than my Phenom II 940, native @ 3GHz) but what about the integer MIPS (Dhrystone)? 2.376KWh per day! About 1.8 per h for me ![]() If you used Linux you would get through many more HCC WUs per day. Hope it is 64bit Win7. Good luck, |
||
|
David Autumns
Ace Cruncher UK Joined: Nov 16, 2004 Post Count: 11062 Status: Offline Project Badges: ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Hiya skgiven
----------------------------------------I was surprised when I managed to get under my goal of 100W If you think the processor is taking 65 of those 99 and the power supply is 90.02% efficient then 72.2 of those watts at the socket are just for the 905e That leaves 24.12W for the memory, graphics card, north and south bridge, the gigabit ethernet and the onboard sound card...and the losses in the 8+2 Phase Power arrangement...and the fan. So I am fairly sure the HX750w is keeping up it's efficiency levels at the low loading ![]() Dhrystones at 5800 per core - this is on Win7 64 bit with all the unnecessary services switch off. You have to work hard to get under 100W here's the pic perspective all wonky on the webcam. Antec 300 case. loads of space for more drives. ![]() one of those watts must be going to that green LED ![]() Dave ![]() [Edit 3 times, last edit by David Autumns at Jul 5, 2010 1:32:17 AM] |
||
|
sk..
Master Cruncher http://s17.rimg.info/ccb5d62bd3e856cc0d1df9b0ee2f7f6a.gif Joined: Mar 22, 2007 Post Count: 2324 Status: Offline Project Badges: ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Dave, that looks like a tidy system with good performance.
That leaves 24.12W for the memory, graphics card, north and south bridge, the gigabit ethernet and the sound card...and the losses in the 8+2 Phase Power arrangement...and the fan. So I am fairly sure the HX750w is keeping up it's efficiency levels at the low loading Yeah, looks like it is keeping good efficiency all the way down to 99W. Perhaps that GPU is more efficient than I thought, a revised, more efficient model that the earlier cards?The CPU may not be using the full 65W though! Some tasks are more CPU intensive than others, demonstrating that the actual amount of power used varies. It is probably below 60W, and that board is very efficient too. Glad to hear you have 64bit W7. By comparison I just have the TX650 in my bigest system, but it does only use the one 12V rail. Alas, it is a power hungry i7-920 with a power hungry GTX470 in the bucket, My Phenom II 940 also supports four GT240's, so its fairly power hungry too, as is the Q6600 with the GTX260. I do have a Q8400 which is a bit more reasonable (sub 200W). Only one GT240 in that ![]() |
||
|
David Autumns
Ace Cruncher UK Joined: Nov 16, 2004 Post Count: 11062 Status: Offline Project Badges: ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
My CPU's only ever know 100% flat out crunching
----------------------------------------![]() They think it's normal after a while. It's good for them... better than warming up and cooling down all the time expanding and contracting their silicon substrates. Constantly nice and toasty is where it's at for reliability ![]() The GPU is a 9500 GT I couldn't buy a slower one. I might try the ATI 4350 this one has a 1/4 of the RAM of the Nvidia http://www.lasystems.be/Asus/EAH4350SILENTDI2...MD2LP/product/180945.html The goal is to be as efficient as possible. Slowest card, least RAM, passively cooled With the ATI I could get the AMD Overdrive Utility to do the underclocking as well ![]() It's the CPU that does the crunching ![]() |
||
|
sk..
Master Cruncher http://s17.rimg.info/ccb5d62bd3e856cc0d1df9b0ee2f7f6a.gif Joined: Mar 22, 2007 Post Count: 2324 Status: Offline Project Badges: ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
It's the CPU that does the crunching Win7 can use the GPU to increase system and application performance in some instances. So perhaps just having a DirectX 10.1 card (or better still DirectX 11) would reduce the system burden and expedite crunching with the CPU, especially when you are using the system and applications that can exploit the GPU features; if only because the system does not need to use the CPU as much. |
||
|
David Autumns
Ace Cruncher UK Joined: Nov 16, 2004 Post Count: 11062 Status: Offline Project Badges: ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
So it can! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DirectCompute
----------------------------------------The benefit only showing in Video rendering type programs at the mo written to support it. It's like the good old days of the Maths Coprocessor all over again http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coprocessor Bodes well for the potential of AMD's Fusion and Intel's "Sandy Bridge" That ATI buy by AMD doesn't look quite so crazy now For the minute though I am going save my pennies and spend them on the 6 core Phenom II. 106.5 fp mips/w will be beaten - anyone going to take up the gauntlet? Dave ![]() |
||
|
sk..
Master Cruncher http://s17.rimg.info/ccb5d62bd3e856cc0d1df9b0ee2f7f6a.gif Joined: Mar 22, 2007 Post Count: 2324 Status: Offline Project Badges: ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
I'm guessing the same system as you have, but using that 6 core Phenom II (the 95W version) would beat it. So it is doable.
I had a dual core Lenovo system that used 50W at the wall. It could have taken a quad core, so I expect that would have been sub 90W, but I could only guess the performance. I like the idea of a sub 100W challenge! |
||
|
|
![]() |