| Pages:
1
2
3
..
7 |
admin
Super Administrator
Posts: 5060
Registered: 7-4-2017
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
what cpu/hardware to run GSB on
If your going to get a new pc, what should you get?
Warning, the AMD 1950x thread ripper is less than 50% of the speed of comparable XEON / I7
Same % reduction if you run 1 GSB or 9 at the same time.
This depends on your budget and what you want to do with GSB.
Consider that if you use 30 min bars, and say use S&P500 from 2001 to now, GSB MIGHT run on 8gb of FREE ram, but could be more.
15 minute bars are going to use a bit more ram to.
However you can run 2 to about 6 copies of GSB to fully use the CPU. So this will multiply the need for ram if you want to do this.
Our long term goal is to have multiple gsbworker.exe running on your local and remote machine(s).
In light of that I would go for a motherboard with 8 ram slots
and use 16gb ram modules. That gives you an option for 128 gb of ram.
As for what CPU.
I dont recommend a xeon unless your in a data center with a 1u box. They are poor bang for buck compared to overclocked i7/i9
Choose your budget and look here.
https://www.cpubenchmark.net/high_end_cpus.html
Im very keen to upgrade my i7-5960 too the i9-7900
Keep in mind its easy and fairly cheap to over clock the i7-i9 just under 50%.
You need a dual fan water cooler, and a big case with good fans.
If overclocking, my i5960 draws 400 watts. That means you need about 800 watt power supply or more. Its much cheaper and more reliable to get a p/s
split-er and use 2 x 500 watt p/s.
Before this Ive blown up a number of very expensive high power, power supplies.
If over clocking get a mid range m/b.
Hard drive is not critical but a samsung m2 512mb drive is by far best bank for buck, and use any sata hdd as backups etc.
ram speed, I dont know if its a bottle neck for GSB, but if you crank up the bus speed, it tends to crank up the ram clock speed. In summary mid range
speed of ram is what I would go for.
|
|
|
cyrus68
Member
Posts: 171
Registered: 5-6-2017
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
The new i7 and i9 are xeons that Intel has reconfigured at a lower price point. The reason is that chipzilla's price gouging has been threatened by
AMD releasing a slew of high-end CPUs.
The problem with i7 and i9 is that they overheat when working under full load - even without overclocking. My preference is for AMD's Threadripper -
16C/32T.
The Mobos will be out in the next month or two and will have 8 dimm slots. I plan on inserting 32 GB initially, in 2 sticks. However, the CPU is 4
channel, which means it is optimal to populate 4 slots. I am not yet sure how much performance I will be giving up.
I agree on mid-range speed for ram. I don't like water cooling and will get a Noctua. A cool case, in both senses, is desirable. I will get another
Fractal Design case.
|
|
|
admin
Super Administrator
Posts: 5060
Registered: 7-4-2017
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
Im very keen to see the Ryzen thread ripper 1950x.
The intel cpu thermal compound is done very poorly - a shame. Yet and the power consumption on intel is much higher.
One plus on GSB, even with a number of copies - cpu is not at 100%. So thats got to help heat.
I think 1950x is out 10 august. Im very keen to see how this goes with GSB.
cpubenchmark seems to be a good approximate for GSB speed. My 36core xeon runs the same speed as i5960 thats over clocked.
I Now love all in one lqiuid cooler. Much easier if you ever need to swap ram out. The noctua is great but gets in the way of ram removal.
Last I tested, using less memory chips didnt affect speed of anything, though I understand why it might.
|
|
|
cyrus68
Member
Posts: 171
Registered: 5-6-2017
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
Check the clearance allowed by the cpu cooler for easy install/uninstall of ram sticks BEFORE buying the cooler. Get low-rise sticks to make life
easier.
An 800w psu should be fine for most builds. But if you are overclocking and have a hefty graphics card, it's better to go for 1000w or 1200w. I'm
unfamiliar with psu splitters, mentioned above.
|
|
|
admin
Super Administrator
Posts: 5060
Registered: 7-4-2017
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
Much cheaper and more reliable to use two power supplies with this setup. 12 volts cpu power gets power from both p/s. This is where most of the power
gets sucked from.
http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/Cable-Dual-24pin-ATX-Power-Supply...
Cable-Dual-24pin-ATX-Power-Supply-Connector-Splitter-Dual-PSU-ATX-Adapter-FB
|
|
|
admin
Super Administrator
Posts: 5060
Registered: 7-4-2017
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
The new AMD is out. This is awesome. Can anyone tell me how this goes being overclocked? It runs much cooler than the intel.
|
|
|
cyrus68
Member
Posts: 171
Registered: 5-6-2017
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
Personally, I don't overclock, but here's one review that looks at the overclocking issue.
https://www.hardocp.com/article/2017/08/10/amd_ryzen_threadr...
The 1950x is essentially a workstation chip that has been enabled for OC. It does support ECC RAM, just like the Xeons in the list.
As a workstation chip, the Mobos are priced accordingly. Any build based on the 1950x is going to be expensive. For a cheaper build, you can go for
the Ryzen 1800x. However, with half the number of cores, you will have to wait longer for GSB to crunch the numbers.
The power draw at load, for the 1950x is a hefty 451W. However, Xeons with equivalent number of cores would do the same.
https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2017/08/amd-threadripper-rev...
|
|
|
admin
Super Administrator
Posts: 5060
Registered: 7-4-2017
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
Quote: Originally posted by cyrus68  | Personally, I don't overclock, but here's one review that looks at the overclocking issue.
https://www.hardocp.com/article/2017/08/10/amd_ryzen_threadr...
The 1950x is essentially a workstation chip that has been enabled for OC. It does support ECC RAM, just like the Xeons in the list.
As a workstation chip, the Mobos are priced accordingly. Any build based on the 1950x is going to be expensive. For a cheaper build, you can go for
the Ryzen 1800x. However, with half the number of cores, you will have to wait longer for GSB to crunch the numbers.
The power draw at load, for the 1950x is a hefty 451W. However, Xeons with equivalent number of cores would do the same.
https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2017/08/amd-threadripper-rev...
|
One copy of GSB doesnt need many cores for max speed, but we are starting work on the client server version next week.
The articles were interesting. It seems the current cooling solutions water blocks are a bit small, though there will be sufficient.
|
|
|
cyrus68
Member
Posts: 171
Registered: 5-6-2017
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
How many clients? This is OK if you have several fast computers on the LAN. Otherwise, a single powerful computer is a better option - both in terms
of processing speed and power draw.
On water blocks - if you like DIY, roll up your sleeves and have mucho $$$ ready.
https://www.ekwb.com/shop/ek-supremacy-evo-amd-threadripper-...
|
|
|
admin
Super Administrator
Posts: 5060
Registered: 7-4-2017
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by cyrus68 | How many clients? This is OK if you have several fast computers on the LAN. Otherwise, a single powerful computer is a better option - both in terms
of processing speed and power draw.
|
Short term all GSB will have client server mode. We started work on this week on it. So if you have one license, you can run x GSB on one computer in
client server mode. A decent i7 does 4 copies ideally. A More powerful machine will do more.
If you have two licensees for GSB, you can then run GSB on the second computer. I expect it to run full speed with no degradation in performance. Will
also not need to be on a lan, and a slow internet connection will not affect speed. Later I may produce a cut down GSB that works as server only. I
may also have a paid service where you pay a bit to get access to GSB cloud power.
There should not be any limits on how many GSB you can as long as you have the license, CPU grunt and ram.
Additional GSB licenses or server?? can be purchased, but I havnt decided on the cost.
Many of us have servers in data centers that sit idle on weekends, and outside day session hours, so I also want to maximize this.
|
|
|
admin
Super Administrator
Posts: 5060
Registered: 7-4-2017
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
Initial results show the amd 1950 to be very slow on GSB. Proceed with caution.
|
|
|
admin
Super Administrator
Posts: 5060
Registered: 7-4-2017
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
Warning, the AMD 1950x thread ripper is less than 50% of the speed of comparable XEON / I7
Same % reduction if you run 1 GSB or 9 at the same time.
Note the intel is standard speed, and the AMD is overclocked to 4ghz
 
|
|
|
cyrus68
Member
Posts: 171
Registered: 5-6-2017
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
What is the clock speed of the Xeon? I notice that it has 4 more threads than the AMD. Still the performance gap is significant. The new high-end i7
chips are derived from Xeons.
In recent tests, the Threadripper CPUs outperformed the Intel i7 chips in number-crunching tasks, such as Excel Monte Carlo simulation. So why the
poor performance with GSB? Will the Threadripper also perform poorly when running Builder or Matlab?
|
|
|
admin
Super Administrator
Posts: 5060
Registered: 7-4-2017
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
its a e5 2699v3 2.4ghz turbo 3.6 ghz. GSB runs about the same speed on my i7 5960 @4.4 ghz (over clocked)
I think the single core benchmark speed its whats most critical, but not yet certain.
|
|
|
cyrus68
Member
Posts: 171
Registered: 5-6-2017
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
A notable difference between the two is that the Xeon is using the available RAM much more effectively than the AMD. I wonder why the AMD isn't using
more of the generous memory available.
Also, I presume both machines were running the same apps, namely GSB only.
|
|
|
admin
Super Administrator
Posts: 5060
Registered: 7-4-2017
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
the xeon had a lot more apps loaded, but nothing signifcant using the cpu. Thats why there was much less free ram on it.
Regardless the xeon was much faster.
|
|
|
admin
Super Administrator
Posts: 5060
Registered: 7-4-2017
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
This article was very useful.
Best bang for buck looks like intel 7900 with good clock speed. 7740 probably will do one copy of GSB the fastestest the clock is higher.7800, 7820
also worth trying.
If anyone has one of the above, let me know as I would like to benchmark it.
http://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-core-skylake-x-specif...
In summary the GSB client server on the same machine should run between 2 to 4.6 times faster.
It varies massively with CPU type. I7 was much faster on 1 copy of GSB, but only twice as fast with 9 copies working.
Xeon was much slower but 4.6 times faster with 9 copies working.
|
|
|
admin
Super Administrator
Posts: 5060
Registered: 7-4-2017
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
The overclocked i9-7920x @ 4700mhz is roughly 8% slower than overclocked i7-5960@4400mhz and about 27% faster running 9 copies of GSB. Both run about
400 watts total power consumption. (overclocking increases power consumption a lot)
the i9 runs at about 76c. Temp is erratic. Thats with a tripple 12 cm fan water cooler, and the 5960 runs a stable 60c with a 2 fan water cooler.
Overclocking the i9 was very easy. Its never crashed yet, but Im not aiming to go any higher than 4700.
|
|
|
curt999
Junior Member
Posts: 51
Registered: 24-7-2017
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
microsoft is going to release a windows 10 workstation version this fall that will support quad motherboards..client server setup will be interesting
on a setup like that..amd opteron or e7 88xx
|
|
|
admin
Super Administrator
Posts: 5060
Registered: 7-4-2017
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
Thats interesting. Keep in mind the i9/i7 is the best cpu for GSB. xeon not as good and amd much worse.
Also 2 CPU's do not run twice as fast. There is a fair bit of internal overhead. Regardless if you get a new high end CPU, it would be good to post
the results.
|
|
|
curt999
Junior Member
Posts: 51
Registered: 24-7-2017
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
right 2 cpu dont run as fast on a single worker but in client server mode you will be faster then a single i7/i9..you can run upto 44 cores with a
dual 2699..quad e7-88xx go as high as 88 cores+..
|
|
|
admin
Super Administrator
Posts: 5060
Registered: 7-4-2017
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
Im interested in any benchmarks should you get something like this. I got the fastest possible i9, but its not the best bang for buck. Would be
interesting to have a decent list of cpu type vs $ per iteration. Keep in mind the i7 5960 was better than the 36 core xeon I have.
|
|
|
curt999
Junior Member
Posts: 51
Registered: 24-7-2017
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
sure thing i have a dell t7910 dual 2696 256ram workstation i use for work here im going to try it now will post results shortly..i see you posted the
37.09 version here i can test it on that if you like..
|
|
|
curt999
Junior Member
Posts: 51
Registered: 24-7-2017
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
hit around 39k but its still going up this was oon 8 workers just your standard setup i just hit the go button..looks like its driving all cores 47gb
ram used etc..probably could do another 2 workers or so
|
|
|
curt999
Junior Member
Posts: 51
Registered: 24-7-2017
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
48k with 10 workers but this time i used the precision optimizer profile to spread the load across all cores more evenly if you see..in theory you
should be able to hit 100k/min on a quad e7 workstation
|
|
|
| Pages:
1
2
3
..
7 |
![[*]](images/davis/default_icon.gif){kind=icon}
