Looks like a server CPU to me. You can't get much faster than that.
I have 2 AMD Ryzen Threadrippers and they are only 12/24 core cpu's and they run at 3.5ghz, lots of standard desktop cpu's are now faster and have more cpu cores than those things, though I'm not giving up on them anytime soon.
Looks like a server CPU to me. You can't get much faster than that.
After now running TR CPUs for a couple weeks now (both threadripper 2975wx and then two of the current Pro line models 24 core and 64 core) I feel they fall somewhere in-between "prosumer" and server-level. Is the 64 core TR Pro really similar (and even better) than some EPYCs and Xeons? Yes- for sure (but not all of them).
I think what IS different (along with a few differences on the CPU itself) is the motherboards that are made for the CPUs. After spending WEEKS looking for a motherboard for the threadripper 2975wx, I can tell you that the MB is definitely not server level, and doesn't have the features of a server MB. It is 100% consumer-level and event meant for "gamers". Are there now some MB for the new TR Pro line that are closer to what we would see in a server- yes, for sure. The older TR line was really targeted at gamers and now AMD is moving away from that and marketing it to industry uses.
I think the current TR Pro line has blurred the lines between a "server" CPU and "prosumer" CPU. I don't even think there are that many uses for the 64 core TR Pro for any individuals and only some uses in industry. I do think there are lots of individuals who could use the lower core count TRs for everyday usage though.
But, all of this is just my opinion, which doesn't mean I am right.
Looks like a server CPU to me. You can't get much faster than that.
I think the current TR Pro line has blurred the lines between a "server" CPU and "prosumer" CPU. I don't even think there are that many uses for the 64 core TR Pro for any individuals and only some uses in industry. I do think there are lots of individuals who could use the lower core count TRs for everyday usage though.
But, all of this is just my opinion, which doesn't mean I am right.
I think you are spot on with your conclusions. I would add though that running Boinc as a hobbyist and having more cpu cores in a box is much better than having 2 or 3 boxes with the same amount of cpu cores with the small exception of the number of gpu's you can pack into one MB. There are several Boinc Projects that thrive on lots of cpu cores and one, YAFU, even has tasks specifically designed for pc's with lots of cpu cores, with tasks for single, 4, 8, 16, 32, 64 and even 128 cpu cores. The other advantage more cpu cores gives you is the ability to do the 'shotgun' approach to crunching which is running multiple Projects at the same time on the same machine, the only thing it takes is enough ram to handle all your Project App choices.
Unfortunately Folding@Home (which is the thing with the bottleneck I wanted to test with the mining MB) doesn't like the mining motherboard (I assume). It's playing silly, Boinc sees all the GPUs and runs just fine, but Folding sees them ok, then when I instruct it to run a task on one, it shoves it on the Intel HD built in GPU instead! When I instruct it to use a 2nd GPU, it complains thus:
16:24:47:I1::WU28:Failed to create OpenCL context:
16:24:47:I1::WU28:Illegal value for DeviceIndex: 2
16:24:47:I1::WU28:ERROR:125: Failed to create a GPU-enabled OpenMM Context.
16:24:47:I1::WU28:Saving result file ..\logfile_01.txt
16:24:47:I1::WU28:Saving result file science.log
16:24:47:I1::WU28:Folding@home Core Shutdown: BAD_WORK_UNIT
16:24:48:W ::WU28:Core returned BAD_WORK_UNIT (114)
I don't suppose anyone understands those error messages? Specifically "Failed to create a GPU-enabled OpenMM Context" might mean something? AFAIK both Boinc and Folding use OpenCL. I've never heard of OpenMM.
If this page takes an hour to load, reduce posts per page to 20 in your settings, then the tinpot 486 Einstein uses can handle it.
It sounds like you should also post your question in the problems section of folding@home.
If this is boinc I would do a project reset. That would clear out the project folder and redownload everything. When I get errors I don't understand at all that sometimes clears the problem.
HTH,
Tom M
A Proud member of the O.F.A. (Old Farts Association). Be well, do good work, and keep in touch.® (Garrison Keillor)
It looks like FAH ships its own environment for its tasks. OpenMM is the common package used for molecular modeling which is of course what FAH does primarily.
The work unit package did not get installed correctly it seems. Usually a problem with directory locations and permissions.
Ian&Steve C.
)
Looks like a server CPU to me. You can't get much faster than that.
If this page takes an hour to load, reduce posts per page to 20 in your settings, then the tinpot 486 Einstein uses can handle it.
Peter Hucker
)
I have 2 AMD Ryzen Threadrippers and they are only 12/24 core cpu's and they run at 3.5ghz, lots of standard desktop cpu's are now faster and have more cpu cores than those things, though I'm not giving up on them anytime soon.
Peter Hucker
)
After now running TR CPUs for a couple weeks now (both threadripper 2975wx and then two of the current Pro line models 24 core and 64 core) I feel they fall somewhere in-between "prosumer" and server-level. Is the 64 core TR Pro really similar (and even better) than some EPYCs and Xeons? Yes- for sure (but not all of them).
I think what IS different (along with a few differences on the CPU itself) is the motherboards that are made for the CPUs. After spending WEEKS looking for a motherboard for the threadripper 2975wx, I can tell you that the MB is definitely not server level, and doesn't have the features of a server MB. It is 100% consumer-level and event meant for "gamers". Are there now some MB for the new TR Pro line that are closer to what we would see in a server- yes, for sure. The older TR line was really targeted at gamers and now AMD is moving away from that and marketing it to industry uses.
I think the current TR Pro line has blurred the lines between a "server" CPU and "prosumer" CPU. I don't even think there are that many uses for the 64 core TR Pro for any individuals and only some uses in industry. I do think there are lots of individuals who could use the lower core count TRs for everyday usage though.
But, all of this is just my opinion, which doesn't mean I am right.
Boca Raton Community HS
)
I think you are spot on with your conclusions. I would add though that running Boinc as a hobbyist and having more cpu cores in a box is much better than having 2 or 3 boxes with the same amount of cpu cores with the small exception of the number of gpu's you can pack into one MB. There are several Boinc Projects that thrive on lots of cpu cores and one, YAFU, even has tasks specifically designed for pc's with lots of cpu cores, with tasks for single, 4, 8, 16, 32, 64 and even 128 cpu cores. The other advantage more cpu cores gives you is the ability to do the 'shotgun' approach to crunching which is running multiple Projects at the same time on the same machine, the only thing it takes is enough ram to handle all your Project App choices.
YAFU?
)
YAFU?
A Proud member of the O.F.A. (Old Farts Association). Be well, do good work, and keep in touch.® (Garrison Keillor)
Tom M wrote: YAFU?
)
https://yafu.myfirewall.org/yafu/
There are several non listed Boinc Projects
Unfortunately Folding@Home
)
Unfortunately Folding@Home (which is the thing with the bottleneck I wanted to test with the mining MB) doesn't like the mining motherboard (I assume). It's playing silly, Boinc sees all the GPUs and runs just fine, but Folding sees them ok, then when I instruct it to run a task on one, it shoves it on the Intel HD built in GPU instead! When I instruct it to use a 2nd GPU, it complains thus:
16:24:47:I1::WU28:Failed to create OpenCL context:
16:24:47:I1::WU28:Illegal value for DeviceIndex: 2
16:24:47:I1::WU28:ERROR:125: Failed to create a GPU-enabled OpenMM Context.
16:24:47:I1::WU28:Saving result file ..\logfile_01.txt
16:24:47:I1::WU28:Saving result file science.log
16:24:47:I1::WU28:Folding@home Core Shutdown: BAD_WORK_UNIT
16:24:48:W ::WU28:Core returned BAD_WORK_UNIT (114)
I don't suppose anyone understands those error messages? Specifically "Failed to create a GPU-enabled OpenMM Context" might mean something? AFAIK both Boinc and Folding use OpenCL. I've never heard of OpenMM.
If this page takes an hour to load, reduce posts per page to 20 in your settings, then the tinpot 486 Einstein uses can handle it.
I shall try Tom's 8 way riser
)
I shall try Tom's 8 way riser on my Ryzen 9 3900X machine tomorrow. Folding likes that machine, so it will be a good test of bandwidth.
If this page takes an hour to load, reduce posts per page to 20 in your settings, then the tinpot 486 Einstein uses can handle it.
Peter, It sounds like you
)
Peter,
It sounds like you should also post your question in the problems section of folding@home.
If this is boinc I would do a project reset. That would clear out the project folder and redownload everything. When I get errors I don't understand at all that sometimes clears the problem.
HTH,
Tom M
A Proud member of the O.F.A. (Old Farts Association). Be well, do good work, and keep in touch.® (Garrison Keillor)
It looks like FAH ships its
)
It looks like FAH ships its own environment for its tasks. OpenMM is the common package used for molecular modeling which is of course what FAH does primarily.
The work unit package did not get installed correctly it seems. Usually a problem with directory locations and permissions.