[HN Gopher] Why your next home computer should be an old Xeon wo...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Why your next home computer should be an old Xeon workstation
       (2019)
        
       Author : vmoore
       Score  : 128 points
       Date   : 2022-07-02 12:50 UTC (10 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (tedium.co)
 (TXT) w3m dump (tedium.co)
        
       | green-salt wrote:
       | Might be fun if you're not paying for the electricity or its
       | cheap in your area. I have a Dell T410 and will likely get
       | something a little newer, but it won't be powered on most of the
       | time like I use my Ryzen desktop. They tend to be much louder
       | too.
       | 
       | Having ECC, a SAS backplane and HBA is really nice to host a file
       | server with though. I have a couple 10/40 Gbit NICs that can all
       | work at the same time because it has enough PCIe lanes.
        
       | nonamenoslogan wrote:
       | I completely agree on keeping old gear running but the tradeoffs
       | in power consumption make it worth upgrading to current-gen after
       | a certain amount of time.
        
       | thanatos519 wrote:
       | I <3 my refurbished Thinkstation P500. Solid well-designed case,
       | 4 Xeon cores, nVidia Kepler, 2x SSD, and 64GB ECC RAM for less
       | than the cost of new 64GB ECC. Not as fast or power-efficient as
       | a new workstation, but nothing new had to be manufactured!
        
       | secure wrote:
       | I have been using an HP z440 for years as my work machine. It's
       | fine, performance-wise, and definitely for running a browser,
       | video conferencing, and terminal emulators.
       | 
       | One downside of workstation machines is that _everything_ seems
       | to be custom, even mundane things like fan connectors. See
       | https://michael.stapelberg.ch/posts/2021-08-28-silent-hp-z44...
       | for my experience with swapping the fans against quieter models.
        
       | libertybylaw wrote:
       | I use an old 2013 Xeon Workstation as daily driver and have been
       | very happy with it.
       | 
       | It came with 32 Gigs of cosmic-radiation-shielded RAM, two 16
       | core processers (1.9 GHZ, granted), and all the peripheral ports
       | I could need. I slapped an old 2016 Nvidia graphics card into it
       | and its been able to do all that I can need and more. Considering
       | I got it for free, it's a great deal.
       | 
       | I would easily have paid $200 for this machine though - I can run
       | a dedicated ubuntu VM with 8GB RAM alongside 100+ chrome browsers
       | no problem.
       | 
       | I equate it to semi-truck cab, as compared to sports-cars of the
       | consumer desktop market. It's not that fast and it gets a bit
       | lower gas mileage (electricity consumption), but it can haul 10
       | tons of cargo.
        
         | 2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote:
         | I'm in the overclocked Xeon 1680v2 gang and loving it.
         | 
         | It's quite capable with a more modern GPU and the X79
         | motherboard also supports NVMe drives.
        
           | hexo wrote:
           | What motherboard, please? Can you also boot from NVMe? I was
           | looking into this, have Asus P9X79 PRO.
        
             | 2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote:
             | Ha! I use the Asus X79 Deluxe and yes, I can boot from
             | PCIe. I had a P9X79 Pro before but stupidly wanted TPM
             | support so I replaced with an Asus X79 Deluxe from ebay
             | which had bent CPU pins that I was able to fix.
             | 
             | The TPM support was a waste but I gained the ability to
             | PCIe boot. Before that I was able to boot PCIe on the P9X79
             | Pro by putting the boot partition on a SATA SSD I believe.
             | 
             | I use these for my drives:
             | 
             | https://a.co/d/2jaYUbM
        
               | hexo wrote:
               | Thanks a lot! I hoped i'd be able to boot from PCIe, but
               | boot partition on a SATA drive is quite ok too.
        
         | lmz wrote:
         | Radiation Shielded RAM? Is that an even more expensive kind of
         | ECC?
        
           | LaputanMachine wrote:
           | I think they're mistaking the RAM's heat spreaders for
           | radiation shields.
           | 
           | Heat spreaders were common for DDR2 and DDR3 ECC RAM. Some
           | models, like the KVR667D2D4F5/2G, have temperature warning
           | labels, indicating that it's not a radiation shield.
           | 
           | Such a thin layer of aluminium isn't able stop a significant
           | proportion of gamma radiation.
        
       | whalesalad wrote:
       | I have a few Dell R720 servers in my basement. One of them
       | recently became a dedicated remote dev box due to a client
       | project that had some hefty requirements. It's got 2 processors
       | (24 cores total), 64GB of ECC memory, and 6 SAS drives in a RAID
       | configuration. It'll build the linux kernel in 179 seconds, lol
       | (I genuinely do not know if this is good or bad, but probably not
       | great) Idle it consumes about 120-130 watts of power.
       | 
       | This beast does all the heavy lifting, and then I use my other
       | machines as thin clients to code. Lately my setup includes VS
       | Code w/ the remote SSH extension for developing on the server. I
       | have a love/hate relationship with VS Code. I don't use the
       | built-in terminal, instead I will use iTerm connected via mosh or
       | ssh to the server, where I use tmux to keep a long running
       | session of all my crap. I usually have a few windows for a repl,
       | various app processes, a psql shell open at all times, etc.
       | 
       | It's very nice to be able to roam from my macbook on the couch to
       | my mac mini in my office with zero interruption in flow. I have
       | my own vpn and also run tailscale, so I can hack from anywhere
       | with this setup. Locally, latency has been almost imperceptible.
       | 
       | So this has worked out really great. The only real shortcoming is
       | that the processors are kinda old and run hot, but for $200 I can
       | get a matching pair of newer chips that are a lot quicker. Just
       | haven't pulled the trigger, because I am trying to ascertain
       | real-world benchmarks on just how much my life would improve.
       | 
       | Part of me wants to build a monster Ryzen 5900X workstation to
       | have under my desk, but I enjoy the fact that this server is in
       | my basement where I cannot hear or see it. I don't need a new
       | workstation, these servers are so great, but it would def be fun
       | to have some lightning fast raid/nvme storage.
        
         | bee_rider wrote:
         | Another neat aspect of this sort of setup is that you can even
         | use locked down devices like iPads, as long as the device has
         | an SSH client (which iPads do).
        
       | kristianp wrote:
       | I'm considering getting the oldest motherboard and i7 cpu that
       | supports 64gb of RAM, as an upgrade for my i7-3770 desktop, which
       | still feels fast enough, but only has 16gb.
       | 
       | They're so cheap on ebay, and it would be a way to get avx-2
       | support too. The risk is that 2nd hand may have reliability
       | problems of course.
        
       | chx wrote:
       | I would consider this advice now outdated.
       | 
       | Yes, it was a great advice in the 2010s -- I had such a Dell,
       | too. It's well documented how IPC only has grown 20-25% from
       | Sandy Bridge to Skylake and then the wait was long, long until a
       | new uarch has emerged in 2021. But towards the end of the decade,
       | Ryzen has disturbed the still waters and the number of cores
       | have, well, risen sharply while keeping a competitive IPC and
       | Intel eventually followed suit. Because of this, the equally long
       | time rule of thumb where most apps don't really use multiple
       | cores well so you don't need them on the desktop is also dead by
       | now.
       | 
       | I wouldn't recommend a Haswell Xeon as this article does today.
        
         | TimPC wrote:
         | More important than the raw performance numbers my computer
         | comes with a three year parts and service warrantee and I can
         | even pay a small premium to cover accidents and spills. I'm
         | basically guaranteed my computer works for three years or they
         | replace it. What happens if my used workstation breaks down two
         | weeks after I buy it? Why should I take that risk?
        
           | kube-system wrote:
           | A used workstation will have failure rates at the bottom of
           | the bathtub curve when you buy it. A new PC is more likely to
           | experience failures.
           | 
           | Solid state components are generally very reliable anyway.
        
         | jeffbee wrote:
         | Haswell Xeon is way too outdated in 2022, but there are loads
         | of newer ones. There's a fair inventory of Skylake and Cascade
         | Lake Xeon on ebay, like HP Z4 G4 w/ 32GB and a GPU for ~$750.
         | It's a pretty square deal considering. Since Ice Lake Xeon
         | workstations are so thin on the ground, this is the most recent
         | Xeon you can get second-hand.
         | 
         | The Ryzen story is a joke if you are actually in the market for
         | a workstation, meaning you want ECC that works. The only way to
         | get it is to buy integrated OEM workstations with the TR Pro.
        
           | juergbi wrote:
           | Many retail AM4 motherboards support ECC with retail Ryzen
           | CPUs. At least on Linux it works as expected. ECC UDIMMs can
           | be difficult to find but it shouldn't be necessary to buy a
           | TR Pro for ECC if memory capacity, I/O lanes and the
           | performance of AM4 Ryzen CPUs suffice.
        
             | oso2k wrote:
             | I haven't looked into deeply but I've heard stories from
             | others with Ryzen boxes that ECC features of the RAM are
             | turned off with Ryzen CPUs installed. Supposedly you can
             | see this in Linux w/dmidecode or other tools. I'd
             | appreciate good links if anybody has them.
             | 
             | PS: https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/lh3m42/demystifyi
             | ng_ry...
             | 
             | https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/ggmyyg/an_overview_of
             | _...
        
               | c0l0 wrote:
               | Ryzen APUs (i.e., Socket AM4 CPUs with with integrated
               | AMD graphics) do _not_ support ECC UDIMM, _unless_ they
               | carry a "Pro" in their name.
               | 
               | Ryzen CPUs without an iGPU _will_ support ECC UDIMM,
               | _unless_ the mainboard specs specifically tell you that
               | it won't support ECC, or simply omit mentioning ECC UDIMM
               | at all.
               | 
               | Fwiw, I've enjoyed proper ECC on an ASRock Fatal1ty B450
               | Gaming-ITX/ac with a Ryzen 5 3600 for more than two years
               | now (using GNU/Linux; I am not sure how Windows would
               | fare).
        
           | antisthenes wrote:
           | > Haswell Xeon is way too outdated in 2022
           | 
           | It's outdated if you need a high-performance workstation. As
           | a regular desktop PC, it runs just fine. Would work quite
           | well as a NAS CPU, with ECC support and downclocked to some
           | lower P-state.
           | 
           | However, I don't think these were ever available for $50 as
           | author suggests. It all really depends on the price point. At
           | $50, I would buy 1 right now, just to have as a backup/guest
           | PC in the living room.
        
           | theevilsharpie wrote:
           | ECC is working just fine on my Ryzen-based machine.
           | PS C:\> wmic CPU get Name         Name         AMD Ryzen 9
           | 3900X 12-Core Processor              PS C:\> wmic Baseboard
           | get Product,Manufacturer         Manufacturer  Product
           | ASRock        B450M Pro4              PS C:\> wmic MemoryChip
           | get Manufacturer,PartNumber,BankLabel,Capacity,Speed
           | BankLabel     Capacity     Manufacturer  PartNumber
           | Speed         P0 CHANNEL A  17179869184  Kingston
           | 9965745-002.A00G  2667         P0 CHANNEL A  17179869184
           | Kingston      9965745-002.A00G  2667         P0 CHANNEL B
           | 17179869184  Kingston      9965745-002.A00G  2667         P0
           | CHANNEL B  17179869184  Kingston      9965745-002.A00G  2667
           | PS C:\> wmic MemPhysical get MemoryErrorCorrection
           | MemoryErrorCorrection         6                       # "6"
           | is Multi-bit ECC
        
             | jeffbee wrote:
             | ASRock has universally working implementations. I should
             | not have said "the only way" when I meant "the only
             | reliable way that does not require you to carefully parse
             | thousands of forum comments to figure out which Asus or
             | Gigabyte motherboard does or does not support ECC".
        
         | the_only_law wrote:
         | Yeah I looked at old Xeon workstations a while back because
         | they were dirt cheap for what seemed like a ton of compute, but
         | they were incomparable to just getting a good Ryzen or
         | something. Newer Xeons might be better but I'm not paying for
         | that.
        
           | johnebgd wrote:
           | Ryzen supporting ECC memory really does make the old Xeon
           | argument futile.
        
             | Teever wrote:
             | Does Ryzen actually support ECC though? I bought a first
             | gen Ryzen and couldn't get ECC ram to boot on it, and the
             | reviews I read periodically of new Ryzen CPUs and mobos
             | seem to indicate that it's still hit and miss.
             | 
             | I'd love for it to be plug and play.
        
               | tpolzer wrote:
               | Depending on board support you might get actual error
               | correction or not.
               | 
               | If it doesn't boot, it's very likely that you actually
               | bought registered memory, which is normal in servers, but
               | _not_ supported at all by Ryzen processors, no matter the
               | mainboard.
        
         | DCKing wrote:
         | It is really outdated.
         | 
         | In 2017 buying old Xeons bought you pretty good performance for
         | the buck, as Intel sold you quad cores with minor single core
         | and multicore uplifts for a lot of money, while at the same
         | time old Westmere or Sandy Bridge Xeons had a pretty good
         | balance of many cores with decent enough clock speeds / single
         | core performance. Even I/O options did not improve by a lot in
         | those years.
         | 
         | In 2022 buying old Xeons means you get stuff from the era where
         | Intel started heavily deprioritizing single core performance
         | over having a lot of cores in Xeons. 14+ lowly clocked Haswell
         | cores still do well in synthetic benchmarks, but I don't think
         | they're worth it for any real world workstation loads. Low
         | clocked Haswell cores are outperformed by such things as the
         | Alder Lake efficiency cores (easily) and even modern Android
         | phones. The latest Zen cores and the Alder Lake performance
         | cores will be worth at least twice the per core performance of
         | one of those individual Haswell cores. Even if you say compile
         | code all day it's probably not worth buying into a 200W
         | behemoth that runs Firefox slower than the Android phone in
         | your pocket.
         | 
         | This blog was written in 2019 and was probably already not
         | great advice then, but it is legit bad advice now.
        
           | hsbauauvhabzb wrote:
           | Would you say the same about brand new server processors if
           | click speed was prioritised?
        
         | tambourine_man wrote:
         | >... where most apps don't really use multiple cores well so
         | you don't need them on the desktop is also dead by now
         | 
         | I wish that was true. Lots of code I deal with bottlenecks on a
         | single thread. Mozilla has abandoned Servo, and we are stuck
         | with browsers poorly parallelizing parsing, painting,
         | execution. Photoshop, aside from a few filters and functions,
         | is also poorly parallelized. Not to mention smaller programs
         | who understandably can't justify the complexity of
         | multithreading.
         | 
         | I'd trade single tread performance for cores any day.
        
           | mgbmtl wrote:
           | I don't know if I'm using anything fancy, but Firefox
           | currently is running 20 processes on my computer.
           | 
           | According to pstree:                   3*[Isolated Web Co---
           | 28*[{Isolated Web Co}]]         3*[Isolated Web Co---
           | 29*[{Isolated Web Co}]]         2*[Isolated Web Co---
           | 26*[{Isolated Web Co}]]         Isolated Web Co---
           | 27*[{Isolated Web Co}]         Privileged Cont---
           | 25*[{Privileged Cont}]         RDD Process---2*[{RDD
           | Process}]         Socket Process---4*[{Socket Process}]
           | Utility Process---2*[{Utility Process}]         2*[Web
           | Content---9*[{Web Content}]]         Web Content---10*[{Web
           | Content}]         WebExtensions---28*[{WebExtensions}]
           | chrome-gnome-sh---2*[{chrome-gnome-sh}]         firefox-bin
           | 129\*[{firefox-bin}]
        
             | znpy wrote:
             | Those single processes are still mostly single threaded.
             | 
             | Don't get me wrong, it's still a huge leap forward to have
             | a single webpage running in its own process, but there's
             | ample room for improvement.
             | 
             | That's what GP is referring to.
        
         | kitsunesoba wrote:
         | Yeah, my personal Skylake Xeon (W-2140B) iMac Pro is by no
         | means _bad_ , but it's not amazing either. The company M1 Pro
         | MBP is notably faster in both single-threaded and multithreaded
         | tasks while sipping a fraction of the power. If the iMac Pro
         | weren't mostly silent (which I would guess, most used Xeon
         | workstations are very much _not_ ) thanks to an oversized
         | heatsink I would've traded it in for something better already.
        
         | mise_en_place wrote:
         | I have an Ice Lake Xeon W. It's ok, compiles are pretty decent.
         | Chromium takes a long time though, even with 24 cores/48
         | threads. If you want a lesson in how not to organize your
         | source repo, the chromium project would be it. It's kind of
         | mind boggling how bloated browsers have become.
        
       | ksaj wrote:
       | Don't forget that in order to be secure, you have to turn off the
       | features that make it so fast.
       | 
       | I have an old Mac with Xeon CPU that has not had software updates
       | since before Spectre and Meltdown, et al. I bought it for its
       | performance and have my workflow finely enmeshed, so I don't plan
       | on applying patches that intentionally slow it down.
       | 
       | It sure is good at running Logic Audio. Don't need networking for
       | that, so it is disabled. The CPU performance is more important
       | than connectivity for its use and purposes. So it stays air
       | gapped for the security, and unpatched for the performance.
        
       | kwatsonafter wrote:
       | I love to see others sharing my enthusiasm for making old
       | machines have a useful, "senior citizen" life. It really warms my
       | heart.
        
         | accrual wrote:
         | Installed XP on a K6-III+ 600MHz box this morning. It's indeed
         | having a useful (if only for fun) "retirement". :)
        
       | pgrote wrote:
       | We have done this for workstation refreshes (Windows 10) and it
       | works marvelously.
       | 
       | Reliability has been fantastic. We keep 2 machines as spares for
       | parts and have experienced an issue with one power supply.
       | 
       | PC Health Check reports it doesn't support secure boot, no TPM
       | 2.0 and the CPU isn't supported. We haven't tried to install
       | Windows 11.
       | 
       | The model we went with was Z420s.
        
       | hedgehog wrote:
       | It's a hard sell with modern CPUs getting so much faster. At a
       | previous company most of our office build & test machines were
       | refurb HP Z620 or Z640s from a reseller called TekBoost (no
       | relationship). Worked great back then. It might still make sense
       | if RAM quantity is the main constraint on your workflow, you can
       | get a >256GB machine for under $2000, but otherwise modern
       | machines are going to be faster and less hassle.
        
       | zhala wrote:
       | I think most people would be better suited getting micro form
       | factor PC's like the Dell 7050's or Lenovo M920q. Can be had for
       | ~200 on eBay with a 6th or 7th gen i5/i7 and only draw 10-20w in
       | use.
        
         | dervjd wrote:
         | 100% this. The Dell Optiplex Micro line is fantastic.
         | Servethehome has a pretty good article comparing a bunch of
         | different manufactures/models -
         | https://www.servethehome.com/introducing-project-tinyminimic...
        
       | rybosworld wrote:
       | "Today, these chips sell in used form for as little as $180 on
       | eBay--a more than 90 percent price decrease, a price $100 less
       | than the roughly comparable AMD Ryzen 7 2700X"
       | 
       | A 2700x is ~30% faster and also uses less power. Regardless, you
       | can find it for $210, not $280 as the author claims:
       | https://www.newegg.com/amd-ryzen-7-2700x/p/19-113-499
       | 
       | A better comparison would be the 2700, which is actually a fair
       | bit cheaper than the E5-2667 and still outperforms it.
       | 
       | Benchmark: https://www.cpubenchmark.net/compare/AMD-
       | Ryzen-7-2700X-vs-In...
       | 
       | A 2700 available for $140: https://www.newegg.com/amd-
       | ryzen-7-2700/p/19-113-498
        
         | gravypod wrote:
         | You can also buy TR1900x for ~$90 USD now that the platform is
         | dead. In a few years upgrade to 2990wx
         | 
         | https://www.ebay.com/itm/133925326383?hash=item1f2e924e2f:g:...
        
         | somat wrote:
         | You are comparing the the price of a cpu to the price of an
         | entire entire system.
         | 
         | Add a nice case ~150 a nice power supply ~150 a nice mother
         | board ~150 some ram ~150 storage ~150 and a few nice fans
         | because the fans that come with the case are always terrible
         | ~40 for a fair comparison.
         | 
         | The point is you might be able to build a decent computer for
         | under 1000 USD or you could buy a surplus server for ~200.
        
       | jancsika wrote:
       | > Or maybe there's a quality issue that's imperceptible to you
       | but was enough to prevent that shirt from going to Neiman Marcus.
       | 
       | Or maybe it's a line specifically manufactured for those stores
       | to appear _as if_ it were a decent buy and which is manufactured
       | cheaply.
       | 
       | So get a bunch of "deals" without noticing that you actually
       | loaded up your burrito with mostly lettuce.
        
       | wiseleo wrote:
       | We have ewaste laptops with SSD, Core i7, and 16GB RAM on eBay
       | for less than $100. They will cost less for electricity. I use
       | them for everything.
        
       | cjbprime wrote:
       | An advantage I didn't see specifically mentioned in the article
       | -- some CPUs, especially multi-core, especially Threadripper PRO,
       | aren't released to the individual market, so enterprise surplus
       | can be the only way to get them.
        
       | unixhero wrote:
       | Yup. E5-2697 v2 dual for the win! I have three of those machines
       | on my household.
        
         | kkielhofner wrote:
         | I have a dual 2697 v3 and it's still remarkably capable. Single
         | core perf is "not great" but for my use cases it works
         | fantastically all things considered. Current specs:
         | 
         | - 512GB ECC - x8 16TB spinning rust - x8 4TB NVMe - 1TB Intel
         | P3600 for EFI boot and "misc" - Nvidia RTX 3090 (rare dual
         | slot) - Dual 10gig ethernet + onboard 1gig ethernet
         | 
         | It performs well with just about anything I throw at it - even
         | concurrently. 512GB of RAM really helps.
         | 
         | While this is more-or-less maxed out for my configuration I
         | still couldn't imagine having three of them in my house!
        
           | unixhero wrote:
           | One for a casual gaming rig in the living room
           | 
           | One for a homelab with Plex and other things
           | 
           | One for a proper workstation
           | 
           | I am a happy peep
        
       | JustSomeNobody wrote:
       | Still running my little TS140. Just chugs along...
        
       | iforgotpassword wrote:
       | I think the sweet spot is somewhere around 2018 for used stuff
       | currently, when it comes to performance per money. Got an i5-8400
       | with 8GB a few months ago for 80EUR. Idle consumption is 10W with
       | a spinning disk.
        
       | polshaw wrote:
       | Used chromebooks are another good case of the arbitrage that the
       | article refers to.
        
       | hexo wrote:
       | It already is! I've swapped old i7-3820 @ 4.3GHz for E5-2697v2
       | few months ago. Bought another 32Gigs of RAM, and now I already
       | have PCIe 3 (long overdue). I've also tried to overclock it via
       | BCLK (100-110MHz) and gained ~300MHz. It happily compiles and
       | runs windows in KVM with no problem (GPU over PCIe passthrough,
       | and looking-glass yay!). Overall experience seems a lot smoother
       | than i7, probably due to 30MB L3 and a lot more cores.
        
       | nix23 wrote:
       | My z600 is now ~12yo and still my main workstation, upgraded ram
       | 47gb and a second cpu for pennys. I love that thing.
        
       | accrual wrote:
       | I have experience with this. My main PC is a Haswell Xeon (4C/8T
       | 4GHz), 32GB ECC, 1080Ti, 1TB 860 SSD. I replaced the proprietary
       | power supply with Seasonic and added a Noctua cooler.
       | 
       | For an 8 year old chip, this box rocks and plays most games at
       | 4K60.
        
       | readingnews wrote:
       | And if it gets popular, the price of old Xeon workstations will
       | go through the roof, just like old stereos did. Used to be able
       | to get an old Marantz 2220B for $100 on the bay. Now they are
       | unobtainium or $850, as an example.
       | 
       | I think the same thing happened to old Sun workstations. We used
       | to reuse them a LOT. Could get an ultra 2 decked out for like
       | $200. Now, $800-$1000 with less CPU and ram than a few years
       | back. Could be supply and demand, but it seems to happen a lot.
       | People go "hey, that stuff was great, lets use it again" and the
       | price skyrockets, then the people all go "hey, that old stuffs
       | too expensive".
       | 
       | :)
        
         | danachow wrote:
         | > unobtainium or $850
         | 
         | In fairness the Marantz is being purchased for a collector's
         | aesthetic - not just for a "value" PC which is the whole point
         | of the old Xeon - the price rise is limited by this elasticity
         | in demand.
         | 
         | And $850 I think is illustrative - that's not unobtanium for
         | middle class - it's just happen to be a bit beyond what most
         | people spend on a _side_ hobby.
         | 
         | Similarly old Sun hardware either you're screwed with a
         | backward compat issue or again collecting since they are now
         | vintage. x86 doesn't have the former effect for the most part.
        
           | readingnews wrote:
           | I mean ubobtainium in that at one point they were everywhere
           | on ebay, and now its once in a blue moon. Much like some
           | Xeons the poster is talking about. I remember when supermicro
           | computers, outfitted, were everywhere and cheap. Now, not as
           | prevalent as before.
           | 
           | I get it with the Sun, but the same thing will eventually
           | happen with Xeon for example. We will reach a point where
           | those CPUs with that socket and SCSI / SAS connectors and
           | drives are dang hard to find, or no one makes ram any longer,
           | etc.
        
         | fmajid wrote:
         | It may be companies needing to run legacy software on Solaris
         | versions not supported on more recent hardware.
        
       | lvl102 wrote:
       | I ran a similar set up in the past. HP Proliant server. It was
       | not reliable at all and the lengthy POST on reboot kills the
       | whole experience to use it for home use not to mention that it's
       | actually pricy once you start adding parts.
       | 
       | These days, I just run M1 Mac Minis. Cheap. Fast. Reliable.
        
         | mamcx wrote:
         | Yeah, the M1 is a game changer.
         | 
         | Now my biggest noise generator is my keyboard (mechanical!)
         | that is activated on demand -by me!- and my major heat
         | generator is the sun, as should be!
        
       | admax88qqq wrote:
       | I used a xeon workstation for a while. It was okay. I decided to
       | go back to consumer parts.
       | 
       | It's big and heavy, so no it can't go on my desk but under it.
       | Complicates moving my desk uo and down to stand.
       | 
       | It's loud, like real loud. I started it be concerned over what it
       | was doing to my hearing 8 hours a day.
       | 
       | Replacement parts take a while to arrive cause they're all via
       | random ebay sellers.
       | 
       | And there's some weird compatibility issues now and then. FreeBSD
       | refuses to boot on the machine, no idea why, kernel just hangs
       | during boot.
       | 
       | A few Linux distros do include the driver for the SAS controllers
       | by default, so I had to build and manage my own kernel across
       | upgrades.
       | 
       | Overall it was a cool experience but I'm more comfortable back on
       | consumer parts. I built a quiet workstation, I can replace any
       | part quickly from Amazon or by going to the local computer store.
       | 
       | My machine is smaller, lighter quieter, easier to maintain and
       | has better software compatibility
        
         | loeg wrote:
         | I ran a current gen (at the time) Xeon-D microATX for a while,
         | for ECC support. Biggest downside was it didn't have a
         | soundcard. Now I use AMD for ECC and it has all the consumer
         | niceties.
        
       | ChuckNorris89 wrote:
       | From an environmental efficiency perspective I cannot recommend.
       | The power consumption of old server chips, even in idle, is
       | pretty big compared to modern, more efficient 10-7nm desktop
       | chips.
       | 
       | If your energy bills are a rounding error in your monthly budget
       | then go ahead, but then you can actually afford modern and more
       | efficient chips.
       | 
       | And then there's the extra heat and noise you'll have to deal
       | with.
        
         | bojangleslover wrote:
         | Who cares? Compared to heating and A/C (in the US and Japan),
         | 10 Xeons probably aren't even a drop in the bucket.
        
         | 2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote:
         | Reduce > Reuse > Recycle
        
         | 35mm wrote:
         | Also they tend to be quite loud
        
         | icegreentea2 wrote:
         | Comparing system idle across large generations is somewhat
         | tricky, but we can pull some ballpark comparisons.
         | 
         | A ~2013 workstation Xeon has a system idle of ~75W
         | (https://www.anandtech.com/show/7852/intel-
         | xeon-e52697-v2-and...). This should be similar to the HP system
         | from the start of the linked article.
         | 
         | Modern system idles sit in the ~50W range
         | (https://www.techpowerup.com/review/intel-
         | core-i9-12900k-alde...). Yeah, I know the components aren't
         | matched... but that's what you get hunting for data.
         | 
         | 25W isn't nothing, but it's not gigantic either.
         | 
         | It's hard to get precise figures about the embodied energy of
         | consumer electronics, but we have a range of 2000-6000MJ
         | (https://energyeducation.ca/encyclopedia/Embodied_energy). At
         | 2000MJ, the payoff time for 25W of idle saving is quite large -
         | on the order of 900 days. That's a lot of time to play with to
         | try to design a hardware refresh approach to minimize total
         | energy expenditure over your lifespan.
         | 
         | And obviously from a $$$ standpoint, even taking some of the
         | higher energy costs (~50cents/kWH), the cost delta over an
         | entire year is pretty modest - $110 over a year. Once again,
         | not insignificant, but given the discount factors involved (you
         | can possibly get a $400 dollar used machine instead of a $1000
         | new), still quite possibly worth while.
         | 
         | Obviously all of these are modified by what your actual system
         | loading is, what your hardware refresh cycles look like, and
         | local cost of electricity.
        
           | 60Vhipx7b4JL wrote:
           | A Dell T110-II with a quad core xeon and 4x4GB RAM and and a
           | 3.5" HDD idles around 21W. It really depends on the systems.
        
             | jeffbee wrote:
             | People fail to grasp that a thing drawing power at idle is
             | the memory, which doesn't have a useful idle state. It must
             | be refreshed constantly. 16GB is pretty reasonable. 8GB
             | would be more efficient if you can get away with it. If you
             | lard up a workstation with tons of RAM you don't need, you
             | pay for it on your power bill.
        
             | Felger wrote:
             | Had almost the same setup and saw about 32W idle on mine.
             | T110 II with Xeon E3 1220, 4 Gb RAM ECC, 1x 128 GB SATA SSD
             | + 1x 6 To HDD IronWolf on a PERC H200 PCIe card.
             | 
             | With a WD 10 GB external HDD, the UPS gives me a 50W load.
        
         | api wrote:
         | If you have unusually expensive energy then this is correct.
         | Globally though this neglects embodied energy. A new machine
         | with all new chips takes a _ton_ of energy to produce. It 's
         | usually most efficient to reuse old stuff as long as it's
         | useful rather than pitching it as e-waste and buying new.
         | 
         | Also keep in mind that a desktop can usually be put to sleep or
         | turned off when not in use. Doesn't need to run 24/7.
        
         | ekianjo wrote:
         | Erm, reusing is more effective than building a new computer
         | from scratch. New chips are not environmentally friendly to
         | make, use large amount of pure water, etc...
         | 
         | related article from a few years ago about the Z400:
         | 
         | https://boilingsteam.com/gaming-on-a-cheap-xeon-the-hp-z400-...
        
           | wiseowise wrote:
           | They're going to be made regardless of whether you buy them
           | or not.
        
           | Wowfunhappy wrote:
           | In a world where we had a reasonable tax on carbon,
           | environmental friendliness and individual economic
           | rationality would be one and the same.
           | 
           | But we don't live in that world. So they are not.
        
             | abraae wrote:
             | If ever there was a glove perfectly fitted for the
             | invisible hand of the market, it's saving our planet by
             | taxing carbon.
             | 
             | Yet here we remain, whining about why it can never work.
        
           | iasay wrote:
           | Not when you're paying the electricity bill it's not.
           | 
           | My old workstation cost me a 14" MacBook Pro in power in 5
           | years.
           | 
           | Plus you can get new in box Lenovo mini PCs with 11th gen i5
           | in for less than the price of a second hand Xeon desktop
           | that's actually usable now. They pull average 30 watts.
        
             | iforgotpassword wrote:
             | Op specifically said environmental perspective, so it
             | doesn't matter whether you pay 5ct or 90ct per kWh.
        
               | naniwaduni wrote:
               | It absolutely matters if those kWh are backed by
               | environmental damage. Also if you can spend that money
               | elsewhere to reduce environmental damage.
        
               | iasay wrote:
               | It does however depend on how much coal you shovel into
               | it.
               | 
               | The point is you can't go "the environment" and throw
               | half the concerns out of the window. It's way more
               | nuanced than that.
        
               | iforgotpassword wrote:
               | That however is a fair point. I would be genuinely
               | interested in the actual numbers. Gut feeling tells me
               | buying a new computer has to be much much worse than
               | running a ten year old machine even on coal, since a lot
               | of these components come from all across the world, get
               | produced in countries some of which have lax to no
               | regulation regarding pollution, use of toxic substances,
               | and so on. The hard thing is probably trying to break
               | this down to one individual computer being made.
        
             | hexo wrote:
             | OK, let's calculate! Old PC amortized to 130W constantnly,
             | 24/7, @ 20c per kWh = 0.624$ per day, that is 227.76 per
             | year. New workstation today is like ~4000$. So that means
             | you'd have to run it more than 17 years at that price of
             | electricity to be on par with price of new computer, not
             | counting electricity for new PC.
             | 
             | I've actually was able to turn off all heaters during
             | winter and heat my house using computers only! I'd say,
             | "higher" TDP of older CPU was really an advantage here.
             | And, let's be real, new high performance CPUs arent low-TDP
             | either (270W for new AMDs), or GPUs (350W range for high
             | end gaming card).
             | 
             | So, I'd really say it's environmentally friendlier to use
             | waste heat as house heating than using "space heaters"
             | only. (I really do have to heat using electricity, as I
             | don't have gas nor any other source.)
        
               | loeg wrote:
               | Your $4000 figure is way too high for something
               | comparable with the ancient workstation. Try $800. And
               | 130W might be low.
        
               | znpy wrote:
               | I thought the same. We're not comparing old workstations
               | to new workstations, we're comparing old workstations to
               | current day desktop computers.
               | 
               | An average build is more likely in the range of $1250 +/-
               | 250$
        
               | maccard wrote:
               | 130w is definitely low. My Xeon workstation is closer to
               | 250w.
        
               | hexo wrote:
               | I've just measured it with wattmeter. Xeon E5-2697v2,
               | 64GB ram, SSD + 2x HDD, GTX1080. Excluding monitor, that
               | might add another 15W according to its "energy usage bar"
               | which sits at about 25%.
               | 
               | 110W "idle" with firefox running + few opengl programs.
               | 
               | 160W at steam startup, then it jumps between 120W and
               | 160W. It stabilizes at 110W in about 2 minutes.
               | 
               | 130-230W when compiling emacs (takes about 30 seconds).
               | 
               | 150W when loading Facebook in Firefox. Then stable at
               | 110W again.
               | 
               | 175W-180W running Prison Architect. Very safe to add
               | another 220W when running GPU heavy game (thats not very
               | relevant here, new GPUs consumes ~same or more power).
               | 
               | I'd say my "randomly guessed" 130W amortized is pretty
               | OK. And remember, this guess was for reference only,
               | scale it to your needs.
               | 
               | Of course it can get higher when having a lot of things
               | up and running, with a lot of active tabs in firefox.
        
               | ac29 wrote:
               | It runs at 250W 24/7?
        
               | maccard wrote:
               | Welli turn it off out of working hours but it idles at
               | 250w yeah. Peak power draw is much higher.
        
               | metadat wrote:
               | 170w to 300w for an older (2010-2015 era) dual-processor
               | Xeon idling is what I've measured at my house across
               | numerous Supermicro builds.
               | 
               | 2018 and newer server chips may have better low-power
               | idle mode support.
        
               | TimPC wrote:
               | If your computers produce so much heat that they heat
               | your house during winter you should also factor in the
               | extra AC costs in summer.
        
               | schwartzworld wrote:
               | Can't speak for OP, but if you leave your windows open in
               | the summer, waste heat would be a non-issue
        
               | hexo wrote:
               | It's not "that much heat", it's that good insulation.
               | Also, I don't really need or want AC, I love hot weather.
        
               | iasay wrote:
               | Where does your 20c/kWh come from?
               | 
               | In summer what to you do with that excess heat?
               | 
               | Far more nuanced than trite calculations chosen to back
               | up your conclusion.
               | 
               | Also you're rebasing the argument on a new $4000 spend
               | when you can spend $400 on a mini PC with the same
               | performance as an old Xeon as suggested.
        
               | hexo wrote:
               | 20(euro)cents used to be average price in my country. I
               | actually have much lower price (about one third of that)
               | because I don't have other energy source. It does not
               | really matter where that price came from, as it can
               | nicely serve as reference point and you can easily scale
               | it according to your price of electricity.
               | 
               | Also, $400 mini PC have performance nowhere near
               | workstation, since RAM only costs more, not even thinking
               | about gaming GPU or price of decent SSDs and HDDs.
               | 
               | What did I do with excess heat? Opened window and turned
               | off POWER8 energy hog.
        
               | iasay wrote:
               | $400 mini PC gets you an i5-11500T with NVME SSD that
               | will take 128Gb of RAM. Some of them even pop up with
               | NVidia T400 in them. New with Lenovo warranty on eBay.
               | 
               | The i5-11500T has better single and multi thread
               | performance.
               | 
               | Sure you won't get an RTX in it but that's a 1% case
               | really when we're talking software engineering.
               | 
               | That's a hell of a lot better value proposition than a 5+
               | year old Xeon which is what we're seeing suggested here.
        
               | hexo wrote:
               | Just that 128GB DDR4 is more than 550usd in my country.
               | 
               | GPU with 2GB of VRAM is not much today, my 4k desktop
               | consumes 1.6G vram and i'm not even running any game.
        
               | iasay wrote:
               | Fits in your $4000 workstation budget :)
        
               | hexo wrote:
               | Also, have you seen high-end laptop prices? Dell XPS is
               | easily 3k+$.
        
               | iasay wrote:
               | Yeah I have a fully loaded XPS 5500 and a 14" MBP
        
               | ChuckNorris89 wrote:
               | We have them at work, XPS are overpriced garbage machines
               | that just look and cost premium. Do avoid.
               | 
               | Midrange machines <1000EUR from Lenovo and HP make great
               | workhorses at a fraction of the price.
        
               | iasay wrote:
               | As an owner of one I completely agree with this.
        
               | ChuckNorris89 wrote:
               | _> my 4k desktop consumes 1.6G vram and i'm not even
               | running any game_
               | 
               | What desktop is that? I ran Windows 11 desktop with
               | youtube and bluray rips fine even while allocating only
               | 512MB of VRAM, though the more you allocate it the more
               | it will use, to cache and speed up various frequently
               | used apps, but even with 512MB it still worked fine.
        
             | stigz wrote:
             | It's not about you, bud. Speaking at a global level it is
             | more efficient.
        
               | iasay wrote:
               | Show me the calculation.
        
             | scns wrote:
             | My plan was upgrading my i5 4460 and get the best bang for
             | my buck. Was eyeing an i7 4790K which would have cost
             | 140EUR. Got a workstation with a xeon equivalent to the
             | 4770, with a quadro K2200, an intel dc ssd (RSP new ~400$,
             | a 2TB HD and 32GB RAM for 180EUR instead.
        
           | dtgriscom wrote:
           | Citation? There's a cost to generating/transmitting energy,
           | there's a cost to building/shipping new computers. Any idea
           | which is "worse" for the environment (for some definition of
           | "worse")?
           | 
           | I'm not being snippy; I honestly don't know. Personally, if I
           | need a solution that's good for a number of years, I'd go for
           | a new, efficient computer rather than reuse an old toaster.
        
             | johnfernow wrote:
             | No figures for a Xeon machine in particular, but some other
             | figures for a general idea (from The Carbon Footprint of
             | Everything by Mike Berners-Lee, 2020 second edition, page
             | 140):
             | 
             | Manufacturing a computer:
             | 
             | * 326 kg CO2e: 13-inch MacBook Pro, 128GB storage
             | 
             | * 475 kg CO2e: 15-inch Dell Precision 5530, 256GB storage
             | 
             | * 620 kg CO2e: 16-inch MacBook Pro, 1TB storage
             | 
             | Using it:
             | 
             | * 4g CO2e per hour on 13-inch MacBook Pro
             | 
             | * 6g CO2e per hour on 16-inch MacBook Pro
             | 
             | * 20g CO2e per hour on average-efficient laptop
             | 
             | * 98g CO2e per hour on desktop computer with screen
             | 
             | * 130g CO2e per hour on gaming PC with screen
             | 
             | The figures for using it are based on the US grid's typical
             | mix of coal, renewables, nuclear, etc. In places with a
             | greener grid, such as the UK, the figures are different
             | (there's a different edition of the book for the US and UK
             | version, and possibly other regions as well.)
             | 
             | So we don't have figures for the emissions for a Xeon
             | machine, either in manufacturing or usage. And these
             | figures are estimates, of course, not precise measurements.
             | But they help us to get a good picture of the scale of the
             | impact.
             | 
             | Let's assume that you use your computer 12 hours a day, 365
             | days a year. On a standard gaming PC with a screen, that'd
             | be 569400g CO2e per year, or 569kg. The big question then
             | is how much more inefficient is a Xeon machine than a
             | standard gaming PC. If the Xeon machine emits 1.33x more
             | than a standard gaming PC, that'd put its yearly usage
             | emissions at 757kg CO2e, so if you used your machine for 5
             | years, than the difference in emissions would be 940kg CO2e
             | between the Xeon and standard gaming PC, which would
             | probably be enough to justify buying a new machine. But if
             | it's only 1.1x more inefficient, than that difference would
             | be 285 kg, not nearly enough to justify a new machine (and
             | probably still the case even if you use the machine for 10
             | years.)
             | 
             | Ultimately, I'm not sure that we have the information
             | necessary to definitively answer this, but all other things
             | being equal, I'm skeptical that the CPU alone will make an
             | enormous difference in power draw in day to day usage. A
             | newer CPU will be more efficient when at 100% usage, but
             | does it draw significantly less power when at idle? I don't
             | know. But if anyone else has found any information that
             | could help, I'd love to check it out. That said, there are
             | plenty of second-hand machines that are more efficient than
             | a Xeon machine. Once there are no second-hand efficient
             | machines left, it'd be worthwhile to dig in deep on the
             | emissions of old Xeon machines versus newer more efficient
             | machines, but right now you can just buy used and
             | refurbished efficient machines, so I'd probably just
             | recommend that.
        
               | gpapilion wrote:
               | A typical server tdp will vary a lot depending on the
               | components buts it's a safe bet to look at 1u being right
               | around 1000w for a recent Xeon.
               | 
               | It's also the opposite older equipment for servers. There
               | are lower tdps for older equipment and for a haswell or
               | broadwell it may use 20-30% less energy than a typical
               | server sku. The compute per watt has increased, but the
               | power draw of modern server cpus are probably much higher
               | than you would expect.
        
         | peoplefromibiza wrote:
         | a refrigerator, ironing clothes, heating or AC consume at least
         | 3-5 times as much (assuming they are latest generations, which
         | usually are not, and the CPU is running full throttle all the
         | time, which is not usually the case).
         | 
         | I don't think that a Xeon is a real threat in the context of
         | environmental damages.
         | 
         | Switching to newer CPUs would save a few kWs per year, the
         | difference is negligible in the grand scheme of things.
        
           | maccard wrote:
           | My fridge uses practically no energy for 23.5 hours a day,
           | and for those 30 minutes it's active, it's a heat pump which
           | tends to be incredibly efficient. Many parts of the world
           | (huge parts of Europe for example) don't need or have AC, and
           | for 9 months of the year I don't need heating in my home -
           | despite living in a 130 year old stone building in Scotland.
           | 
           | Short of the 3kw electric kettle I have, my workstation is
           | the single most energy intense appliance in my house, and
           | it's used for 8 hours a day, 5 days a week, 47 weeks a year.
        
         | Something1234 wrote:
         | You're not wrong if your only calculation is my power usage
         | rather than the roundtrip of making the new chips and the new
         | computer. There's a reason it's reduce, reuse and recycle.
         | Reduce the amount of junk. Reuse existing junk. If neither
         | work, then dispose of.
        
           | iasay wrote:
           | At some point there's an energy efficiency trade off which
           | needs to be considered. It's way more complicated and depends
           | on where you get your energy from and the efficiency of the
           | device.
           | 
           | Using something until it dies is not always the best outcome.
        
         | pdpi wrote:
         | Even if you don't care about the environmental side, power
         | consumption is still very important. When I'm playing games,
         | the temperature at my desk is 2-3 degrees higher than the other
         | end of the room, and the fans get pretty damn loud. I'm
         | actively trying to figure out how to at least keep my current
         | performance while getting that heat under control.
        
           | bowsamic wrote:
           | > Even if you don't care about the environmental side
           | 
           | Why wouldn't you?
        
             | wizofaus wrote:
             | Is there an IT equivalent of coal rolling?
        
               | ChuckNorris89 wrote:
               | Crypto mining.
        
               | [deleted]
        
               | elteto wrote:
               | Yes, programming in dynamic languages like Python.
        
               | 2III7 wrote:
               | Running all cores on turbo even when idle.
        
               | iasay wrote:
               | I think this entire thread is about doing that.
               | 
               | My MacBook I'm typing this on is sitting here at 9.2W
               | (battery full, running off mains).
        
             | pdpi wrote:
             | I thought that was a more polite than saying "even if
             | you're a selfish asshole, there's still a reason to do it
             | out of pure self-interest".
        
               | peyton wrote:
               | Wow, fifty years of oil company rhetoric has really
               | gotten to people. Individual behavior change hasn't
               | worked at scale, nor should anyone expect it to. I'll
               | continue to use as much electricity as I'd like while
               | advocating for nuclear and renewables.
        
             | ipdashc wrote:
             | I mean, on the scale of things, typical computer usage is
             | just not that _much_ energy, right? Compared to stuff like
             | air conditioning and transportation.
             | 
             | My server, which is old and probably somewhat power-hungry,
             | uses ~125W. A house-sized AC unit is in the kilowatts
             | range, that's 10x more (of course, the AC is only on for
             | parts of the day).
             | 
             | If I operate that 125W computer for a year, that's ~1,000
             | kWh. EVs use around 0.3 kWh/mi, so running that computer
             | for a year is the equivalent of driving an EV 3,333 miles.
             | (Most people drive 10,000 miles a year or more.)
             | 
             | And if your gas gar gets 34 MPG, then it gets (via MPGe)
             | about 1 mile per kWh. So using the 125W computer for a year
             | is like driving a gas car 1,000 miles - and that ignores,
             | of course, that the gas car spews pollution, while
             | electricity can be gotten from renewables or nuclear.
             | 
             | So it's not like the energy usage of computing doesn't
             | matter, but it's somewhat insignificant. Like someone else
             | said above, it costs energy to manufacture new chips and
             | computers too, so you might be better off just staying on
             | old ones.
        
           | n4bz0r wrote:
           | Have you considered water cooling? The heat is, of course,
           | still going to get dissipated, but the noise should become
           | much less of an issue. As a bonus, idle temps should drop
           | close to room temperature.
           | 
           | I don't like the idea of maintaining an open loop myself
           | (changing the liquid every 6-12 months), but there are also
           | half-measure options like all-in-one (AIO) coolers. Most of
           | them aren't serviceable (can't refill them), but they should
           | still last for five years or so. That mostly for CPUs,
           | though, AIO GPUs are somewhat rare (but they do exist!).
           | 
           | edit: confused open and closed loops
        
             | iasay wrote:
             | You can use a fan to cool a computer or you can introduce a
             | Rube Goldberg machine to cool a computer with a fan.
             | 
             | Bar some extreme cooling requirements liquid cooling is
             | about showing off.
        
               | matheusmoreira wrote:
               | Isn't liquid cooling much higher performance? I've seen
               | some liquid cooled PCs with parts below 40 C under load
               | and very quiet fans. I wonder if we could take it even
               | further by placing the radiators out of the air
               | conditioned room or even outside the house.
        
               | iasay wrote:
               | I was running my air cooled parts at 60oC without the
               | complexity. If you use large fans it makes the same
               | noise. And approximately the same energy is burned off.
               | 
               | Ultimately I moved to M1 because it did the same workload
               | with less watts.
               | 
               | Either way you're paying money for compute. Do you want
               | to spend that on compute or heat as a side effect?
        
               | phs2501 wrote:
               | Or overall less noise, especially in smaller cases where
               | you can't fit an extremely large (read: large fan) direct
               | attached air cooler. Larger fans mean more cooling per
               | dB.
               | 
               | Also, water coolers have a lot more thermal mass
               | (because, water), which means that the fan noise that
               | remains can be less annoying as it doesn't ramp up and
               | down as fast with CPU usage, assuming you're driving your
               | fan curve from water temp and not CPU temp.
               | 
               | So it's not fair to say they're just about "showing off"
               | IMHO. There's actual quality of life benefits if you care
               | about noise.
        
               | iasay wrote:
               | I've built several air cooled and water cooled PCs. The
               | benefits are over spoken by a mile. You can run CPUs at
               | far higher temperatures with no net noise increase. And
               | it costs a lot less and has less maintenance.
               | 
               | The larger Be Quiet coolers are far quieter than the best
               | water cooling solutions out there and the only
               | maintenance is vacuuming out the crap once a year.
               | 
               | Edit: also as a friend found the air coolers don't pee
               | all over your RTX2060 and blow it and the power supply
               | up.
        
               | kube-system wrote:
               | Arguing over everyone's favorite equipment without a
               | particular application and set of goals in mind is silly.
               | It's like a formula one driver and a truck driver arguing
               | over which vehicle is best. There's no "benefits" to one
               | over the other. They have different characteristics which
               | make them suitable for different applications.
               | 
               | I have a PC on my desk with a GPU which already comes
               | with the largest air cooler that will fit on it. I wanted
               | to make to it quieter. Water cooling accomplished that.
               | 
               | I have servers in a closet where I don't care about noise
               | and I don't want to maintain them. I use air coolers
               | there.
               | 
               | Use the right tool to accomplish the goals you want to
               | accomplish.
        
               | n4bz0r wrote:
               | In this case, water cooling is not so much about cooling,
               | but more about noise reduction.
               | 
               | One could go really fancy with glass panels, solid tubes,
               | colored liquids and such - yeah, that's where you start
               | showing off (or geeking out, it doesn't always have to be
               | negative). But an open loop can be done in much simpler
               | manner while still providing benefits of better
               | performance and, consequentially, considerably lower
               | noise levels.
               | 
               | Hide the loop in a good noise-oriented case. For
               | instance, I like my Fractal Design Define C [0] with
               | thick steel walls with additional layer of noise-
               | dampening foam. Use soft tubing and some quick-disconnect
               | fittings for the ease of maintenance. As a result you get
               | relatively simple to maintain yet effective cooling
               | setup.
               | 
               | [0] https://www.fractal-
               | design.com/products/cases/define/define-...
               | 
               | [1] https://www.amazon.com/Alphacool-Quick-Release-
               | Connector-Kit...
        
               | iasay wrote:
               | I've built the same thing. Fractal Define case with Be
               | Quiet Dark Rock, Be Quiet PSU and 120mm slow fans and it
               | was inaudible under full load of a Ryzen 3700X.
               | 
               | Without water cooling.
        
               | n4bz0r wrote:
               | Ryzen 3700x is only 65W, of course you wouldn't need to
               | water cool it.
               | 
               | I have Dark Rock Pro 4 installed on top of a 120+ TDP
               | CPU. The fans surely speed up under extensive load, and,
               | although they are fairly quiet, I wouldn't call them
               | inaudible. The post is about CPUs which could in fact
               | utilize the efficiency water-cooled setups offer.
        
           | greggyb wrote:
           | If you are near a window or other hole in the wall, you can
           | duct your exhaust outside pretty easily. If you are near a
           | lesser used room, you can shove your desktop on the other
           | side of the wall and run the cables you need through.
           | 
           | Or you can combine these by putting the desktop in a closet
           | and ducting the exhaust outside.
        
         | raverbashing wrote:
         | I would also not recommend because of overall support
         | 
         | For example, does these support AVX? Newer software might
         | require it, even if it works fine for 99% of the stuff you do
         | elsewhere
         | 
         | If you want to get used stuff then get some 2/3 yr old laptop.
        
           | Felger wrote:
           | AVX is supported since 1st gen Xeon E3 (Sandy Bridge),
           | launched Q2 '11.
        
           | api wrote:
           | I've never seen anything that actually requires AVX. SSE yes,
           | but virtually all 64-bit x64 chips have SSE.
        
             | [deleted]
        
             | nix23 wrote:
             | Star citicen needs avx...z600 sadface here
        
       | zwieback wrote:
       | I work at hp where we get new PCs every few years but I also have
       | two maxed-out z800 workstations, one for Linux, one for Windows.
       | For the most part this works great but the one downside is that
       | the ancient BIOS and older slots prevent some upgrades.
        
       | nine_k wrote:
       | It could be a good peak load computer, which you turn on when you
       | have a large number-crunching job, like compiling a large
       | codebase.
       | 
       | They are great at running at top speed, but not great at idling.
        
       | pjmlp wrote:
       | Full in sync with the advice, except for playing with modern
       | graphics, my 2009 laptops are perfectly alright.
       | 
       | It also helps that I don't do anything container related at home,
       | and at work I am more a fashion victim than anything.
       | 
       | So they are perfectly alright for home workloads.
        
       | voltagex_ wrote:
       | I pay 34c/kWh and likely more in the future. No thanks.
        
         | joenathanone wrote:
         | 58c/kWh in CA
         | https://www.reddit.com/r/TeslaLounge/comments/vpjcz5/what_in...
        
         | zbrozek wrote:
         | You might be in California?
         | 
         | The general rate cases for the next year-and-change are posted.
         | The CPUC rubber stamps them, so we already know that there are
         | upcoming rate hikes of around 16% within the next year.
         | 
         | https://www.pge.com/en_US/about-pge/company-information/regu...
         | 
         | Soon your bill will be linked to how much you make. So if
         | you're in the top half of income earners, then you'll be
         | charged more.
         | 
         | https://www.nrdc.org/experts/merrian-borgeson/cas-energy-tra...
        
           | heretogetout wrote:
           | > Soon your bill will be linked to how much you make. So if
           | you're in the top half of income earners, then you'll be
           | charged more.
           | 
           | That's already the case where I'm at (not California). The
           | electric bill often comes with inserts explaining how I could
           | save money if my income is below some threshold. Same goes
           | for my other utility bills.
        
           | josephcsible wrote:
           | > Soon your bill will be linked to how much you make. So if
           | you're in the top half of income earners, then you'll be
           | charged more.
           | 
           | What if everything worked like this? Income would have no
           | meaning anymore. If we thought this labor shortage is bad, I
           | can't imagine how we'd get through the one that would cause.
        
             | bitwize wrote:
             | Imagine all the people, sharing all the world...
        
               | [deleted]
        
             | BenjiWiebe wrote:
             | I'd assume something like: double your income, rates go up
             | by 20%.
             | 
             | That way you are still incentivized to make more money.
        
               | zbrozek wrote:
               | I'm getting to the point, at 34 years old, that I think I
               | should sell out and move to a low cost of living place
               | that doesn't penalize me and retire. What happens to an
               | economy if lots of other prime earning years people did
               | the same thing?
        
         | teh_klev wrote:
         | Same situation here in the UK.
         | 
         | - 2018: 16.75p/kWh + 5% VAT
         | 
         | - 2021: 20.9p/kWh + 5% VAT
         | 
         | - 2022: 27.99p/kWh + 5% VAT
         | 
         | And there seems to be no end in sight. To add insult to injury
         | my energy supplier also bumped the "Standing charge" from
         | 30.61p/day to 53.45p/day.
         | 
         | There isn't a lot of choice at the moment to try and reduce
         | costs due to the idiotic state of the UK energy market right
         | now.
        
           | odiroot wrote:
           | We can totally expect another 40-50% raise in October.
        
         | sam345 wrote:
         | Wow, where is that?
        
           | namecheapTA wrote:
           | Northern California is not much different. It actually makes
           | most plug in hybrids cheaper to run on gas than electric at
           | around $3.50 a gallon and below.
           | 
           | https://www.pge.com/en_US/residential/rate-plans/rate-
           | plan-o...
        
           | ttyyzz wrote:
           | Germany. I know this because I pay the same.
        
             | Roritharr wrote:
             | Same here, it's actually one of the reasons I am looking to
             | move to Canada now.
             | 
             | Our country has been mismanaged in this regard to a point
             | where I don't see this being solved in the next 20 years,
             | also ideologically the majority does think low energy
             | prices are bad now, so don't event want this fixed.
        
               | [deleted]
        
               | OJFord wrote:
               | I'm surprised to see market efficiency/management as a
               | reason to move to Canada - usually in such context it's
               | protectionism, milk tokens, etc. being (negatively)
               | discussed.
               | 
               | Is the 'hydro' (as they call it) cheap there? I heard the
               | opposite, but that from a Canadian, so perhaps it's just
               | that it's gone up a lot (as everywhere) and they didn't
               | appreciate their lower starting point.
               | 
               | Edit: oh, _very_ variable between provinces -
               | https://www.energyhub.org/electricity-prices/
        
               | mrshadowgoose wrote:
               | Yep, highly variable based on the province. In Quebec
               | it's so cheap that electric heat is common.
               | 
               | But yeah, the corruption is pretty bad here (of course,
               | relatively speaking in the context of first world
               | countries). A few dozen large corporations basically own
               | our government.
        
             | radicalbyte wrote:
             | Germany's energy market is a huge mess, I read that
             | consumers are heavily subsidising extremely cheap energy
             | for commercial users.
        
       | 1970-01-01 wrote:
       | Data point: I have been doing exactly this with a X3430 45nm
       | system for over a decade. Old Xenon systems are very power hungry
       | compared to modern servers. Expect to pay tens of dollars per
       | month if you want 24h uptime. I just checked the Kill-A-Watt
       | behind the UPS and it's reading 170KWh for 2054 hours. I'll leave
       | the exercise of determining if this is cheap or expensive to the
       | reader.
        
       | gjvc wrote:
       | hp Z240 SFF quad-core xeon w/ 64G RAM here, NVidia K1200
       | graphics. works great for Debian.
        
       | mmalachowski wrote:
       | I went a little further in 2020 and started working on HP Server.
       | They are even cheaper than Workstations but need some upgrades to
       | be comfortably used at home (silent fans etc).
       | 
       | I use 2x westmere cpu (x5670) as performance vs price is still
       | excellent. DDR3 ram is dirt cheap. Combined with nvme drive it
       | just really fast machine for any developer task I do, even some
       | graphics.
       | 
       | Power consumption is 140W at idle, up to 350W at full load. I use
       | it few hours a day, so the electricity bill is not something to
       | consider here.
       | 
       | My conversion: https://www.instructables.com/Convert-HP-
       | DL380-G6-to-Cheap-G...
        
       | dervjd wrote:
       | Take it from someone who has done this - it's a terrible idea.
       | 
       | I bought a HP Z620 off of eBay for $500 in 2019. Spec'd with 2x
       | Xeon E5-2680 @2.7GHZ & 96GB of RAM, and had a 1TB SSD. Bought a
       | RX570 graphics card, and away I went.
       | 
       | It's been an absolute pain in the ass: heavy, huge, tempermental,
       | and sucks an enormous amount of power. Idles at 250-300watts just
       | sitting at the login screen. My home office temperature goes up
       | by several degrees when it's on.
       | 
       | It's also noisy, but not from the fans. There's noticeable coil
       | whine/high pitched sounds when the computer is not idling. You
       | probably wouldn't hear it over the background noise in a normal
       | office, but you definitely hear it at home. And of course it
       | sounds like a rocket when the fans are going full blast, which
       | I'll admit is kind of fun.
       | 
       | Reliability has been a crapshoot - motherboard died and I had to
       | source another from eBay. Pretty sure one of the RAM sticks is
       | dying too - every few months it crashes hard (with an error
       | screen mentioning a memory issue) but HP's hardware testing tools
       | find nothing. Upside: very easy to take apart and replace the
       | motherboard - everything is modular and slots out.
       | 
       | Software wise - all kinds of weird driver issues, especially with
       | power management. Sleep mode usually crashes the machine. Of
       | course none of the drivers have been updated in years, and
       | Windows 11 isn't officially supported. ESXi works well enough
       | after some BIOS tinkering - could not get GPU passthrough to
       | work, and some of the system sensors aren't detected. Bare metal
       | Windows 11 install works after some minor registry changes, but
       | not officially supported.
       | 
       | The most irritating part of this tale is that I didn't buy this
       | to be my daily driver.
       | 
       | I've always had a home server, and thought it would be fun to
       | have the extra CPU/RAM power on tap to spin up VMs with reckless
       | abandon. Well after all the issues with the Z620, I ended up
       | buying a Dell OptiPlex Micro with 32GB of RAM & an i5-10500T.
       | It's the size of a book, cost about the same as the Z620, is
       | silent, sips power, and has been dead reliable. Granted, it's not
       | as powerful - the E5-2680 has a 12,500 passmark score (and
       | there's two of them) versus the i5-10500T's 10,319 passmark
       | score. However this has never actually been an issue for me.
       | 
       | Tldr: There's a reason these dinosaurs are cheap. Power hogs,
       | noisy, unreliable, and a giant hassle.
        
         | fmajid wrote:
         | Gresham's law at work. If a company is shedding half its
         | workstations due to upgrades, the stable and reliable ones used
         | by non-smokers are not going out first.
        
         | watmough wrote:
         | As much as love Z620's in particular, my experience of a used
         | one wasn't that great. In particular, watch for v1.0/v2.0
         | motherboard versions that prevent you from using the faster
         | Xeons, and in general, the model seems to suffer from power
         | supply problems. Just as I got my dual-processor 64Gig Z620
         | working under macOS, the 2nd processor daughterboard quit.
         | Similar experience on my work Z620 at the time. Exact same
         | failure. Better just to reset and build the fastest thing you
         | can afford. My fast box runs a Ryzen 9 5900x and is 4x faster
         | than my 2019 Razer Blade 15" for building the software I work
         | on.
        
       | coredog64 wrote:
       | I had an old Nehalem/Westmere PC kicking around and what kept
       | biting me was the instruction set support. I couldn't use PyTorch
       | because some Python dependency had a C library that assumed AVX.
        
       | Synaesthesia wrote:
       | I had a Xeon workstation, 1st gen Core architecture, similar to
       | the first Mac Pro. Yes I managed to buy it cheaply, but the noise
       | was pretty loud. Especially during POST it would spin the fans at
       | max for 30 seconds which sounded like a vacuum cleaner! Not great
       | for nighttime use.
        
         | landemva wrote:
         | After a few boot cycles, I usually change BIOS setting to skip
         | the POST. It just takes too long and the results don't have
         | much value on a stable machine - if it broke during last
         | shutdown, I know anyways on startup.
         | 
         | Have an older Xeon which I use as remote desktop. Is solid.
        
         | fmajid wrote:
         | HP Z workstations are pretty good and have specified acoustic
         | levels. In places like Germany I believe it's a workplace
         | safety requirement.
        
         | virtuallynathan wrote:
         | I got a 3 or 4U chassis and hacked in Noctua fans, made it
         | silent.
        
       | whalesalad wrote:
       | Question for those who have a beefy box as a dev workstation: do
       | you run a hypervisor and try and compartmentalize the way the
       | machine is used, or do you just run/drive a bare OS install? I
       | like that a VM can be started, stopped, moved around,
       | snapshotted, rolled back, etc.
       | 
       | Also, anyone daily drive Linux and then have a sidecar/utility VM
       | for windows-related stuff like specific apps or gaming care to
       | comment on that experience?
        
         | blep_ wrote:
         | I just run bare Linux on mine. Sometimes containers on top of
         | that, but only for specific things, not for general use.
         | 
         | I was going to do the Windows VM thing but then the gaming
         | laptop I sold when I did this got returned so I just use that
         | instead.
        
         | jasomill wrote:
         | I sort of do the opposite; my main Windows dev box is a dual-
         | socket HP Z820 ESXi host with multiple GPUs, a large SAS SSD
         | RAID 10 array, and an additional SSD and pair of large SATA
         | hard drives for ESXi scratch/swap and local backups,
         | respectively.
         | 
         | While I don't actually use it for gaming, the main Windows dev
         | VM, with 18 cores, 32GB RAM, a Quadro P1000 (read: underclocked
         | GTX 1050 with a few extra driver features; ideal for my
         | purposes, would use something beefier for a gaming box), and a
         | physical USB 3.0 controller, runs games as well as any
         | similarly-equipped hardware box, with the caveat that, if you
         | play online multiplayer games (I don't), some anti-cheat
         | software apparently detects and refuses to run under
         | virtualization.
         | 
         | Alongside this "always-on" main VM, I regularly run multiple
         | Linux (both with and without AMD GPU), Windows, and FreeBSD
         | VMs.
         | 
         | This configuration works great for me, but it probably helps
         | that my home office infrastructure includes a vCenter Server
         | and mostly runs on two additional ESXi hosts, and that, on a
         | semi-regular basis, I have applications that require connecting
         | old Fibre Channel and even parallel SCSI hardware, so the
         | workstation's extra PCIe slots and "tool-free" case design come
         | in handy.
         | 
         | While I wouldn't buy a Z820 today, I'm in no hurry to replace
         | this one; ideally, I'll swap in a similarly-configured Z8 in
         | 2-3 years.
        
       | csdreamer7 wrote:
       | Reduce, reuse, recycle.
       | 
       | But... with hardware mitigations slowing down pre-Skylake
       | hardware and new ARM chips (M1 for now, hopefully others in the
       | future). It really feels like anything older than Kabylake feels
       | un-competitive and not worth the power draw for this generation.
       | For years we only got low single digit increases each generation
       | from Intel. Then AMD, and later Apple, disrupted this.
       | 
       | With the IPC of the new M1s, I honestly wonder if it would use
       | less energy for these server parts to be (barely) recycled and
       | manufactured into M2s from Apple or whatever Qualcomm is brewing
       | with those Apple CPU designers they hired.
        
       | iasay wrote:
        
       | pcdoodle wrote:
       | I'd go for a SFF workstation, You can get a CPU with a passmark
       | above 8,000 to idle under 10w for the whole system.
       | 
       | We decommissioned a dual xeon setup after realizing it was
       | sucking over 200w while doing nothing. YMMV.
        
         | immigrantheart wrote:
         | Can you give me an example of those CPUs? I am thinking of
         | building a home server/NAS.
        
           | InvaderFizz wrote:
           | i5-6500 Optiplex is under $100 shipped on eBay. Scores 5600
           | passmark. Step up to the $200 i5-8500 Optiplex and now you
           | are looking at 9500 passmark.
           | 
           | The 8500 is a great CPU. It is what runs my home Docker setup
           | with Plex (hardware video transcode).
        
           | dervjd wrote:
           | Keep in mind that unless you're doing something like
           | transcoding for a Plex server, you don't really need much in
           | the way of CPU for a home NAS.
           | 
           | I have a Synology DS1618+ that uses the Intel Atom C3538, and
           | run a few other services on it (AdGuard/Sonarr/Radarr/Sabnzbd
           | etc). Just looked at the performance history, and CPU
           | utilization seems to sit around 5-10% with a few spikes to
           | 40-50%.
        
           | pcdoodle wrote:
           | My current setup is a HP EliteDesk G3 w/i7 6700 CPU. The PSU
           | inside is 80+ rated and I've seen the externally measured
           | power consumption as low as 9W idling Windows Server 2019. I
           | have no spinning disks inside so add at least a few watts
           | average for each.
           | 
           | Another advantage to using Business Workstation SFF units is
           | they're cheap and take up little space, you can have a backup
           | unit ready to swap parts with.
        
       | Havoc wrote:
       | >Xeon E5-2667 v2
       | 
       | ....and promptly lose in performance benchmarks against a last
       | generation minipc....which in turn are basically laptop class
       | chips of the kind so low power you can passive cool them. [0] Not
       | in the same price class sure, but that should give most people
       | pause anyway.
       | 
       | Unless you have a specific need for ECC / out-of-band / server
       | practice / TBs of RAM this a questionable proposition. Plus you
       | need space, cheap electricity, noise tolerance and heat
       | dissipation.
       | 
       | That said it is good to create awareness of it. More options is
       | good.
       | 
       | I reckon there might be some really good opportunities coming up
       | with Zen 2 AM4 second hand though - some of those configurations
       | are (unofficially) ECC capable, plenty powerful and loads of
       | gamers will be looking to dump their rigs shortly.
       | 
       | [0]
       | https://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=Intel+Xeon+E5-2667+...
       | 
       | https://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=AMD+Ryzen+7+4700U&i...
        
       | CraigJPerry wrote:
       | If you're UK based, that famous auction site has had a glut of
       | Dell T3610s for a while with 32Gb and a basic nvidia quadra for
       | PS140 delivered which i thought was alright.
       | 
       | I took 4 of them and i can't complain about the boxes - support
       | both legacy bios and uefi (so netboot + gpt disks = easy
       | rebuilding between os's), they're quiet (except when working hard
       | obv).
       | 
       | But... the power consumption! Each box is another PS12/mo on the
       | electricity bill. So i end up just having them on a smart plug
       | and turned on only when i'm actually using them.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2022-07-02 23:01 UTC)