You won't find any semi-current consumer cpu boards that have more than X8X8X4 slots. You would have to go back to HEDT semi-server motherboards like the X99 class to support more than 3 or more gpus with at least X8 slot bandwidths.
To support 4 or more gpus you need to step up to proper server class motherboards like Xeon or Epyc.
To add to what Keith said- you could also look at Threadripper CPUs. Lots of lanes available. Current and last gen MB will still run you ~$900 but I have become very attached to Threadrippers... they are absolutely awesome.
Let's say you are running 8 gpus. I've been told that E@H needs x4 on the pcie bus. A quick look around tells me that motherboards capable of running that many gpus are populated with x1 slots.
Is that OK, or is it even an issue? Is it going to affect crunch times?
I'm just trying to see the bigger picture. I don't want to buy some very expensive parts and have them bogged down by bottlenecks.
My goal is to buy one m/b, one cpu, etc., and then just add gpus as funds become available. Is this reasonable or am I out in left field here? I am aware of how all the hardware goes together, that's easy. Just not sure about how it would all work together.
If you wanted to run 8 GPU's and they each take 4-PCIe lanes to "effectively" crunch, you would need more than 32 PCIe lanes within your CPU. I'm not aware of a 'commercially' available CPU that provides more than 24 PCIe lanes. How many PCIe lanes would you need? It would depend on what else you are running; i.e. - RAM, SSD/HDD, & other items that also take up at least one PCIe lane.
My opinion would be to get an EPYC or Threadripper. A dual EPYC CPU system would be most ideal. I have a dual EPYC CPU system, 2x EPYC 7532 w/128 lanes PCIe (each). Personally, I'd stay away from Intel. But that's just my opinion.
My old HEDT system with an ASUS X99-E-10G-WS X99 board with dual PLX chips to fan out the available 40 PCIE lanes from my Xeon E5-1660V4 cpu could support 7 gpus with X16X8X8X8X8X8X8 lane widths. PCIe Gen. 3 DDR4
But I agree a Threadripper system would be ideal as a more current choice for hardware.
Thanks to all for your answers. I'm really leaning towards a Threadripper system.
Lots to think about.
Phil
Indeed- lots to consider. Word of advice- stay away from the 2xxx line. Although they do well on CPU work with low memory requirements, they do not "shine" on E@H work. If you can afford it, the 5xxx line is great, anything newer (the 7xxx series) is great too, but you would pay extra for the newest CPU. The 9xxx series is upcoming (maybe a year or so). Rumors of a 3D stacked V cache on the 9 series- but VERY much a rumor at this point.
Thanks to all for your answers. I'm really leaning towards a Threadripper system.
Lots to think about.
Phil
Indeed- lots to consider. Word of advice- stay away from the 2xxx line. Although they do well on CPU work with low memory requirements, they do not "shine" on E@H work. If you can afford it, the 5xxx line is great, anything newer (the 7xxx series) is great too, but you would pay extra for the newest CPU. The 9xxx series is upcoming (maybe a year or so). Rumors of a 3D stacked V cache on the 9 series- but VERY much a rumor at this point.
In the interest of somewhat future proofing without spending the really big bucks, what do ya'll think of this?
My old brain is not as good at this as I used to be. So here's your chance to set me right. I'm looking to build a really nice cruncher without going broke. I know some of the specs are overkill, but what about 5 or 10 years from now?
Thanks to all for your answers. I'm really leaning towards a Threadripper system.
Lots to think about.
Phil
Indeed- lots to consider. Word of advice- stay away from the 2xxx line. Although they do well on CPU work with low memory requirements, they do not "shine" on E@H work. If you can afford it, the 5xxx line is great, anything newer (the 7xxx series) is great too, but you would pay extra for the newest CPU. The 9xxx series is upcoming (maybe a year or so). Rumors of a 3D stacked V cache on the 9 series- but VERY much a rumor at this point.
In the interest of somewhat future proofing without spending the really big bucks, what do ya'll think of this?
My old brain is not as good at this as I used to be. So here's your chance to set me right. I'm looking to build a really nice cruncher without going broke. I know some of the specs are overkill, but what about 5 or 10 years from now?
And how much memory would you suggest?
Thanks a bunch, everyone.
Phil
This would be a monster of a system (in a good way). In my opinion, still VERY powerful 5 years from now and still "good" 10 years from now (assuming it's running stock speeds, etc).
Fill all of the memory channels with as fast of memory as you can afford. Total amount won't matter much for E@H. 64 GB minumum with 48 threads.
My old brain is not as good at this as I used to be. So here's your chance to set me right. I'm looking to build a really nice cruncher without going broke. I know some of the specs are overkill, but what about 5 or 10 years from now?
And how much memory would you suggest?
Thanks a bunch, everyone.
Phil
I would fill every memory slot you can with as fast and as much as you can afford, ie the Yoyo ECM P2 tasks use 8gb of memory for each task, Rosetta tasks use a bit but they aren't crazy like the ECM P2 tasks. Even 32gb won't be enough for alot of tasks because of the 48 threads, so I would say 64 to 96 or even 128gb if you can swing it.
Solid choice of board and cpu. Though the board does not like high density DIMMS. So you can't go wild with memory much larger than 32GB per stick. 16GB would be easier to train. There are tons of forum build comments with this board over in the Level1Tech forums for you to research.
You won't find any
)
You won't find any semi-current consumer cpu boards that have more than X8X8X4 slots. You would have to go back to HEDT semi-server motherboards like the X99 class to support more than 3 or more gpus with at least X8 slot bandwidths.
To support 4 or more gpus you need to step up to proper server class motherboards like Xeon or Epyc.
To add to what Keith said-
)
To add to what Keith said- you could also look at Threadripper CPUs. Lots of lanes available. Current and last gen MB will still run you ~$900 but I have become very attached to Threadrippers... they are absolutely awesome.
Phil wrote: Here's a
)
If you wanted to run 8 GPU's and they each take 4-PCIe lanes to "effectively" crunch, you would need more than 32 PCIe lanes within your CPU. I'm not aware of a 'commercially' available CPU that provides more than 24 PCIe lanes. How many PCIe lanes would you need? It would depend on what else you are running; i.e. - RAM, SSD/HDD, & other items that also take up at least one PCIe lane.
My opinion would be to get an EPYC or Threadripper. A dual EPYC CPU system would be most ideal. I have a dual EPYC CPU system, 2x EPYC 7532 w/128 lanes PCIe (each). Personally, I'd stay away from Intel. But that's just my opinion.
Proud member of the Old Farts Association
My old HEDT system with an
)
My old HEDT system with an ASUS X99-E-10G-WS X99 board with dual PLX chips to fan out the available 40 PCIE lanes from my Xeon E5-1660V4 cpu could support 7 gpus with X16X8X8X8X8X8X8 lane widths. PCIe Gen. 3 DDR4
But I agree a Threadripper system would be ideal as a more current choice for hardware.
Thanks to all for your
)
Thanks to all for your answers. I'm really leaning towards a Threadripper system.
Lots to think about.
Phil
Phil
I thought I was wrong once, but I was mistaken.
Phil wrote: Thanks to all
)
Indeed- lots to consider. Word of advice- stay away from the 2xxx line. Although they do well on CPU work with low memory requirements, they do not "shine" on E@H work. If you can afford it, the 5xxx line is great, anything newer (the 7xxx series) is great too, but you would pay extra for the newest CPU. The 9xxx series is upcoming (maybe a year or so). Rumors of a 3D stacked V cache on the 9 series- but VERY much a rumor at this point.
Boca Raton Community HS
)
In the interest of somewhat future proofing without spending the really big bucks, what do ya'll think of this?
ASUS Pro WS TRX50-SAGE Motherboard
AMD Ryzen Threadripper 7960X 350W SP6 - Zen 4 24-Core/48-Threads
My old brain is not as good at this as I used to be. So here's your chance to set me right. I'm looking to build a really nice cruncher without going broke. I know some of the specs are overkill, but what about 5 or 10 years from now?
And how much memory would you suggest?
Thanks a bunch, everyone.
Phil
Phil
I thought I was wrong once, but I was mistaken.
Phil wrote: Boca Raton
)
This would be a monster of a system (in a good way). In my opinion, still VERY powerful 5 years from now and still "good" 10 years from now (assuming it's running stock speeds, etc).
Fill all of the memory channels with as fast of memory as you can afford. Total amount won't matter much for E@H. 64 GB minumum with 48 threads.
Quote:Phil In the interest
)
I would fill every memory slot you can with as fast and as much as you can afford, ie the Yoyo ECM P2 tasks use 8gb of memory for each task, Rosetta tasks use a bit but they aren't crazy like the ECM P2 tasks. Even 32gb won't be enough for alot of tasks because of the 48 threads, so I would say 64 to 96 or even 128gb if you can swing it.
Solid choice of board and
)
Solid choice of board and cpu. Though the board does not like high density DIMMS. So you can't go wild with memory much larger than 32GB per stick. 16GB would be easier to train. There are tons of forum build comments with this board over in the Level1Tech forums for you to research.