Where to go help and Newbie questions?

A

Andyk5

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jul 27, 2011
Messages
1,154
I always wanted to build a dual cpu system but never have. Now I go through the dually pics thread and itching to build one on my own. I am failry competent at building computers from ground up but they always have been single cpu systems. I am currently using a 2600k oc'ed to 4.5, cooling with a corsair H-1000, 16 gig ram, raid 400gig SSD's and raid 4 TB storage drives, and also a Radeon 6970.

For my next rig, I have two options. I am either going to build it from ground up or repalce the motherboard and cpu combo on my current rig.

My questions are :
1) What kind of cpu combo am i looking for if I want to have almost twice the computing power that I have now?
2) Is a dual cpu rig going to just add additional core's to be used in parallel computing or each individual core gets faster? I mean 2 8 core cpu's make one very fast 8 core cpu or 2 normal cpus with a total of 16 cores? If it's the second, I may consider not building the rig because I need single core speed more than I need the amount of cores. In that case, I may just go get the fastest single chip I can get.
3)Some mobo recommendations?
4) Can you guys give me some example builds such as just a basic cheap one and an over the top expensive one?
5) Is it feasible to go quad cpu? Is it extremely expensive? Does it scale good?
6) Can dual Cpu system's cause trouble with software or games? As an example I use a stream conversion and uploading software called Xsplit and it does not play nice with dual chip GPU's. I am wondering if that is a common problem with dual cpu users.

Again if you guys can answer some or all of these questions, I would appreciate it.
 
1.Dual Xeons 1366 socket or 2011s.
2. Just think about what your asking. Your going to get more cores. Not faster single core.
3. EVGA SR2
4. Its not going to be cheap at all. 400 per proc 300-500 for a board and then 100-200 for RAM.
So like 1200-1500 or so new as a base. This does not include Hard drives, a PSU or an OS or a video card.
5. Quad CPU? Yes you can. Is it expensive? Yes. Does it scale well? Yes, depending on what your doing.
6. It could, depending on the program.

What are you going to use this for?
 
Last edited:
I run programs such as Matlab for simulating digital filters and signal processing systems. As an example my overclocked sandybridge 2600k can do a 12500th order butterworth filter max. To give a bit background without broing you guys to death, it basically calculates all the required coefficients in real time as a signal is playing in the time frame. Uses that information to attenuate certain range of frequencies in the frequency domain. This requires a lot of CPU resources if the order of the filter is really high. Anything beyond 12500, my simulation gets messed up and gets out of sync because the CPU can't keep up with the time domain. As a comparison, my MBPr ivybridge 2.3Ghz can do 5000th order and my I7 920qm in my vaio can do 2600th order.

The problem is I think my simulation program is coded to use one core only so I don't think I would get any benefit from it if it is just adding more physical cores.

The second thing that I need the system for is to encode and upstream videos in realtime to twitch tv, while playing Starcraft 2. Starcraft 2 is CPU heavy game and it can make use of the multi cores. Xsplit, which is the program that I use for streaming is also a CPU heavy software, but I am not sure about it's multi core capabilities. When I have Starcraft2 running with xsplit encoding and uploading 1080p video in the background, things do slowdown . I do want to keep a minimum of 120fps or more while everything is blasting at full speed without dropping any frames in the encoding. This problem unfortunately can not be solved by throwing $1000 SLI GTX680 combo since even my single Radeon 6970 is sitting at %60 usage while all this is happening ( I play at low settings in order to have high response).
So basically I need more CPU computing power than GPU in my opinion.
 
Not going to help Matlab if its single threaded.

For Starcraft 2:

What is your CPU usage during Starcraft 2 while not streaming?

What is your CPU usage when just streaming?

What does your CPU usage look like when your streaming and playing?

Could possibly be an I/O speed issue?

Have though about buying a capture card?
That would be considerably cheaper than throwing 1500 bucks worth of hardware at the problem.
Or even building a second lower spec computer for capture and streaming?
 
Great ideas, but I have been told that a capture card would not help in my case since Xsplit does not make use of it or something. I actually have my laptop with the 6 gig ram and the I720Qm that I can use for streaming but for that I need to buy some hardware that I am not familiar with. I don't really know how I would actually transfer the video from my desktop to laptop and then stream from the laptop.

Although more expensive of a solution, since I always wanted a multi cpu system, I thought i would kill two birds with one stone.
 
xsplits site mentions capture cards as an option when your computer is slowed by recording.
Honestly if you want to build a multi cpu system go for it but don't expect it to resolve your issue.
A capture card works by capturing the video out on your video card. Think of it like a splitter one signal goes to your monitor and the other to your capture device.
 
Last edited:
When you guys said capture cards I thought about an internal card that would help Xsplit do the capturing on a hardware level instead of software taking up computing space in the cpu. The ones that you guys are talking about splits video out in to two puts one on the monitor the other to a device and then to another computer through USB or or something? That could solve my issue with frame rates. I would rather still be interested in a dual processor system just for the fun of it.
What are some uses of dual processor rigs except hosting multiplayer gaming servers?

By the way way there is no link on your message docta45
 
From having built a 4p system a few months ago. I thought I would give you some insight.
My 4p system was build specifically for folding but I did you it for regular computing stuff.
The boards are expensive 400-800
The ram $200
The cpu's 500each, I used AMD 6180se
The cooler are like 80 bucks each if you go with the high end, but remember they still make some noise
Then you need atleast a 1000 watt p/s with is like 200
and then comes the problem with a case , or where to store it. its huge, and lastly it makes some serious heat, When under load I could fell the heat by just placing my hand over the heatsinks.
Then the programs you are running have to be coded to accept multi thread systems,
so all in all great computer 2 chips are 4 but make sure you know what you are getting into , its a whole different animal.
 
Well, now I want a 4 processor system lol. I think I really like the idea of owning extreme ( by home standards) computing capability.
Some more questions. I think I know the answers to some but for clarification. Does a cpu has to be made in a way so i can operate in a multi cpu enviroment? You cant just take 4 2600k's put them on a motherboard and expect them to work right?

If that is the case, where can I look, ( like a look up table) and compare pricing and performance on multi configurable cpu's? I think then I can make a decision on what I want to go with. My biggest concern is the motherboard and cpu's, the rest seems just like any other pc.
 
Andyk5 said:
My questions are :
1) What kind of cpu combo am i looking for if I want to have almost twice the computing power that I have now?
Click to expand...
An expensive one :(, you would probablly have to look at six core CPUs to make up for the lower clock speed or older cores.

I mean 2 8 core cpu's make one very fast 8 core cpu or 2 normal cpus with a total of 16 cores?
Click to expand...
The latter. Indeed the speed of individual cores is likely to end up slower than you have now.

The trouble is that the last overclockable dual socket capable chips were the 56xx series on LGA1366. Current dual socket capable chips are not overclockable.

If it's the second, I may consider not building the rig because I need single core speed more than I need the amount of cores. In that case, I may just go get the fastest single chip I can get.
Click to expand...
If you are prepared to overclock and individual core speed matters more to you than total cores but you would still like to increase total cores you are probablly better off looking at a single 3930K than a dual CPU setup.

3)Some mobo recommendations?
Click to expand...
Supermicro boards are apparently reasonably priced and reliable but don't expect overclocking or SLI support on them.

If you are going with the older 5600 series and want to overclock them then afaict your only choice is the EVGA classified SR2, it's pretty expensive though.

IRIC there are a couple of manufacturers making SLI capable dual socket LGA2011 boards (ASUS and EVGA I think) but they won't be overclockable.

5) Is it feasible to go quad cpu? Is it extremely expensive? Does it scale good?
Click to expand...
Expect to pay even more for the CPUs and motherboard than with dual socket. Also expect to need a special case.

Unless you have a workload that can use lots of cores but can't spread across multiple boxes quad is probably not for you.

6) Can dual Cpu system's cause trouble with software or games? As an example I use a stream conversion and uploading software called Xsplit and it does not play nice with dual chip GPU's. I am wondering if that is a common problem with dual cpu users.
Click to expand...
Not that i've heard of, from a software point of view there isn't much difference between multiple cores in one CPU and multiple CPUS.

Does a cpu has to be made in a way so i can operate in a multi cpu enviroment? You cant just take 4 2600k's put them on a motherboard and expect them to work right?
Click to expand...
Indeed, CPUs sold for use in desktops and single socket server systems either don't have the multiprocessor features at all or have them permanently disabled in the factory.

With LGA1366 you need the xeon 55xx or 56xx series for dual socket. With LGA1356 (uncommon low end dual socket platform) you need the xeon E5-24xx series and with LGA2011 you need the E5-26xx series for dual socket and the E5-46xx series for quad socket.
 
plugwash said:
An expensive one :(, you would probablly have to look at six core CPUs to make up for the lower clock speed or older cores.


The latter. Indeed the speed of individual cores is likely to end up slower than you have now.

The trouble is that the last overclockable dual socket capable chips were the 56xx series on LGA1366. Current dual socket capable chips are not overclockable.


If you are prepared to overclock and individual core speed matters more to you than total cores but you would still like to increase total cores you are probablly better off looking at a single 3930K than a dual CPU setup.


Supermicro boards are apparently reasonably priced and reliable but don't expect overclocking or SLI support on them.

If you are going with the older 5600 series and want to overclock them then afaict your only choice is the EVGA classified SR2, it's pretty expensive though.

IRIC there are a couple of manufacturers making SLI capable dual socket LGA2011 boards (ASUS and EVGA I think) but they won't be overclockable.


Expect to pay even more for the CPUs and motherboard than with dual socket. Also expect to need a special case.

Unless you have a workload that can use lots of cores but can't spread across multiple boxes quad is probably not for you.


Not that i've heard of, from a software point of view there isn't much difference between multiple cores in one CPU and multiple CPUS.


Indeed, CPUs sold for use in desktops and single socket server systems either don't have the multiprocessor features at all or have them permanently disabled in the factory.

With LGA1366 you need the xeon 55xx or 56xx series for dual socket. With LGA1356 (uncommon low end dual socket platform) you need the xeon E5-24xx series and with LGA2011 you need the E5-26xx series for dual socket and the E5-46xx series for quad socket.
Click to expand...

lots of info tnx, now need to digest all of this.
 
Best bang for buck seems to be the G34 AMD 4P boards. The F@H community is quite good at stretching a dollar to get the most CPU performance, and 32/48 core G34 rigs were the way to go

4x 6128s: $350
16GB RAM: $50
Supermicro board: $550
PSU: AX1200, $200
HDD: use a flash drive lol
Coolers: native noctuas or "adapted" noctuas $100 if you're wise

$1300 cheapest 4p possible.
 
dmanstasiu said:
Best bang for buck seems to be the G34 AMD 4P boards. The F@H community is quite good at stretching a dollar to get the most CPU performance, and 32/48 core G34 rigs were the way to go

4x 6128s: $350
16GB RAM: $50
Supermicro board: $550
PSU: AX1200, $200
HDD: use a flash drive lol
Coolers: native noctuas or "adapted" noctuas $100 if you're wise

$1300 cheapest 4p possible.
Click to expand...

$1300 for a 4 way? that is very tempting. Excuse my ignorance but compared to my current setup of the 4.5 oc'ed I72600k, what kind of computing power increase am I looking at?
 
Well if we take the example of F@H ...

The average 2600k puts out 30-40k, whereas a 6128 4p puts out 230-260k PPD.

Andyk5 said:
$1300 for a 4 way? that is very tempting. Excuse my ignorance but compared to my current setup of the 4.5 oc'ed I72600k, what kind of computing power increase am I looking at?
Click to expand...

Keep in mind that's without a hard drive, without a case, etc.
 
Andyk5 said:
$1300 for a 4 way? that is very tempting. Excuse my ignorance but compared to my current setup of the 4.5 oc'ed I72600k, what kind of computing power increase am I looking at?
Click to expand...

Are you only talking about the Star Craft 2 while streaming improvement or something else now?
 
A couple of bits to add, Asus and EVGA do make dual CPU boards for LGA 2011 that will overclock, its intel that has designed the chips to block overclocking

Oh and you can overclock a 4p G34 rig, i believe the current record is about 3ghz and watercooled:)

Dual cpu systems work fine with most games - i use one every day and it works fine.

Dual LGA1366 can be set up for about $1500 - thats for a pair of quickish hex cores, mobo and ram, adding more toys jacks the price up as does clock speed on the cpu's. A pair of x5670's or even 80's are still pretty quick.
Dual LGA 2011 - a lot will depend on the qty of cores per cpu, if you want raw clock speed thaen you are looking at top end cpu's - either quad,hex or octo - not cheap but you might get a good one for $2k
 
Andyk5 said:
$1300 for a 4 way? that is very tempting. Excuse my ignorance but compared to my current setup of the 4.5 oc'ed I72600k, what kind of computing power increase am I looking at?
Click to expand...

For average daily desktop use, and in matlab that 4p will be SLOWER.

For top end E5's look at spending $2000 each CPU, for a 2p, the 2687w's are the fastest 2p E5's. Even those would be slower at single thread perf than your oc'd 2600k.
 
Tnx for the reply's guys. I am going to try to address everyone in one post because my quoting skills are not that great.

Docta, if I built this system then it would be my main desktop. I would transfer the RAM ( if it fits the mobo), the whole 4 hard drive Raid setup, the 6970, power source and the case to the new setup and I would sell the current mobo and the 2600k, so I would end up playing SC2 on it while streaming it on Twitch tv @1080p. There will also be additional load on the CPU because I'll have the twicth tv stream monitor on one side screen and an chrome window with the actual stream live coming in on another screen. So that is 2 more 1080p decoding for the cpu to handle. When I turn those windows off, my frame rates jump by 50 or so usually so I am sure they are putting significant stress on something in the system. If this whole thing does not go through, then I am going to buy the external capture device and use my laptop for streaming.

dmanstasiu : Those are insane numbers, more than 6 times the speed than a 2600? So If you had 4 2600k computers side by side and added their work together that 4p system would still beat it? I though it would be 4 times the performance at best since 4 cpu's with slower individual core's on each. And yes I am aware that cost is bare without any other required hardware.

Nathan: I am not looking to overclock the multi way system. I was actually hoping that I could make great leaps and bounds on all my computing needs by switching to a multi processor way. I though to my self, if you can SLI or Crossfire and get almost %90 scaling, why not with cpu's? I kinda understand now that it is a marketing scheme by Intel to milk more money out of people by disabling already embedded functions in processors. Same thing happened to me with my I5/I7 purchase. I initially bought an i5 2500k but then quickly realized I would need hyperthreading for my virtual machines. I ended up returning it and paying much more for the I7 just so I can have almost the same chip with the hyperthreading bit enabled...


Extide: Does what you said hold true for the 2 way system?

So lets see if I get this right.
1) 4p AMD is better bang for the buck than 2p Intel, but needs a special case and cooling solution, also eats gobbles of power and runs like a heater on the corner of a room.
2) 2p Intel, although less cost effective, will have faster individual cores.
3) My current OC'ed setup is better and faster for my daily needs because of the faster individual clocks because most applications I use ( Pspice, Matlab) use single core processing.
4) From the statement above, it can be deduced that if I spend my money building a top of the line Ivy bridge system or wait for the Haswell, my setup will be "way better" than the 2p Intel or 4p AMD solutions, but it will not Fold well if I wanted to. ( I don't really care that much about folding)


Questions still in the air for me and not clear.
A) Apparently SC2 uses either 2 or 3 cores, Xsplit uses as many as you can throw at it either natively or with a couple tweaks.I am not sure what the browsers do , but hoping that SC2, the browser and Xsplit won't share any core's. At this point and for this reason only, is the 2600k or 3930 a better choice, even though I am doing a lot of multitasking for a home user?

B) A little off topic but is the Haswell going to worth it over the latest Ivy bridges if the above statement is true?

C) If not for gaming or streaming or Folding, what do home users use multi cpu setups for. I can understand a server environment with multiple users accessing resources at the same time can require many more cores and physical cpu's than just one, but what if not.
 
With folding, the 4p amd setups can ear a LOT more points for a number of reasons. One being they work on different work units worth more points, and two being that the points system (on QRB units) is not linear, the points per day goes up exponentially as time per workunit goes down. So halve the time to solve a workunit, and you are looking at roughly 4x the points. That is only a rough calculation because each type of workunit is calculated a little bit differently. Folding scales across lots of cores very well, but most desktop applications do not. So, it's not really a good idea to use the folding performance as a metric for a desktop computer performance. An AMD 4p system may be the best bang/buck for folding, but that same thing doesnt necessarily apply to desktop/content creation/etc use.

OP: You will be best served by the highest clockspeed ivy or sb-e setup. FWIW, a 3930k at 4.6-4.8Ghz is also a folding monster, at least for a 1p system.

Now, if you could overclock LGA2011 xeons.... then I would say a 2P 2011 setup would be the way to go, but LGA2011 xeon setups are very expensive right now, and for that reason the AMD quad do-deca setups are a better value in terms of ppd/$. For example, a 4p LGA2011 xeon can be significntly faster than a 4p amd setup, but it is also WAY more expensive. The fact that the [H]orde has figured out how to overclock the 4p AMD setups can significantly increase their ppd/$ ratios as well.

Typically server cpu's and multi proc servers are what I would say "wide" setups with a lot of cores but each one isnt super fast on it's own. This is pretty much the opposite of desktop systems where you have far fewer cores but significantly faster cores. In the server world 3Ghz is ~top of the line, where as on the desktop you can regularly see chips nearing 4Ghz stock and easily passing that mark with an overclock.
 
For the folding it doesn't quite work that way - they way the points structure is currently you get rewarded more the quicker you return a work unit, put the same WU on a 2600k and a 4p and the 4p will get the work done quicker as the softweare is fully multithreaded. Whetehr it does more work is a difficult question to answer, 4 machines are doing 4 work units at the same time, the question is can the 4p rip through the same 4 units in the same or less time - something that hasn't really been tested AFAIK

I can only offer a part answer to question C, I fold and I game so for me its a moot point, but there are others who run multiple vm's on them, heavy rendering/cad work that is multithreaded, heavy coding and others just because they can
 
I think I may end up being a part of the group who does it because they can. I am getting convinced that unless almost all software that I use starts to get updated with multi thread coding, multi cpu system is not cost effective for me at all, unless of course I purchase a used system and play around with that. By the time everything becomes multi thread, then there probbaly will be a surge of people trying to build multi cpu systems, and then Intel and AMD will come up with home/enthusiast type cpu's that work in pairs or quads etc.. etc.. as the demand increases.

So two more questions and one comment.

Comment: You guys have been excellent. I mean [H] overall is a great place to come ask questions without getting flamed much, but this thread has been a complete learning experience for me from ground up.

Question 1: How does Mac and Mac applications fare on multi cpu systems? Are there any body here who managed to get Mac OSX work on a multi cpu system? If you did, how is the multi core support of MAc and mac applications compared to windows?

Question 2: For my current setup, is there a way I can control/find out , which program is using which core? When I have SC2 and xsplit on, I see some cores being maxed out and some cores not being used at all under the task manager. When I turn one off, it is still the same cores that are being used but less, so I have a feeling they are getting on top of each other.
 
For average daily desktop use, and in matlab that 4p will be SLOWER.
Click to expand...

Agreed. That 4P system will be way slower than the i7 you currently have for most applications that do not use a crazy amount of threads.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top