[HN Gopher] Intel says one of its 13th Gen CPUs will hit 6GHz ou...
___________________________________________________________________
Intel says one of its 13th Gen CPUs will hit 6GHz out of the box
Author : Tomte
Score : 171 points
Date : 2022-09-12 12:18 UTC (10 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.theverge.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.theverge.com)
| mastax wrote:
| Relatedly...
|
| One of the things I'm not happy about on my current machine
| (Ryzen 1800X, RTX 2070S) is the heat and noise. I'm going to
| invest in a better case and fans next time, but new hardware is
| trying to make the problem even worse. The new hardware is
| supposed to be very efficient _if_ you limit the max power, but
| they don 't make it easy to do.
|
| From what I can tell the only way to change power limits and fan
| curves for CPU/GPU are either to reboot into BIOS or use multiple
| separate manufacturer's shitty bloated windows GUI utilities.
| AMD's Ryzen Master software is supposed to be good but it doesn't
| work _at all_ if you have Hyper-V enabled which is basically
| mandatory for developers nowadays. My GPU 's default fan curves
| have them turn on/off around typical idle desktop temperatures so
| they continuously cycle on/off and have worn out the bearings and
| now make a scraping noise every time they do this. The only way
| to fix this is to launch a bloated windows GUI utility every
| boot. I was surprised to _not_ find an open source Linux library
| or kernel driver that lets you read and write fan speeds for GPU
| and motherboard controlled fans.
|
| I want two things:
|
| 1. A simple, unobtrusive button in my system tray that lets me
| toggle power limits of my CPU and GPU from "silent" to
| "performance".
|
| 2. A simple, unobtrusive way to configure fan curves with
| averaging and hysteresis that, crucially, lets the case fan
| speeds be controlled by a combination of GPU and CPU
| temperatures.
|
| As far as I know neither of those are possible today. I've
| considered buying or making a USB fan speed controller and even
| plugging my GPU fans into it because there's no other good way to
| control them.
| mwint wrote:
| > they continuously cycle on/off and have worn out the bearings
|
| Does cycling a fan on/off wear bearings faster than being on
| all the time? Naively I would have assumed that bearing wear is
| a function of time enabled and speed, with # of spinups a
| negligible factor.
| cameronhowe wrote:
| I use this for my radeon RX 5700XT:
| https://gitlab.com/corectrl/corectrl You can use it for cpu as
| well, but i havent felt the need to fiddle with any settings
| there.
| KronisLV wrote:
| Currently using AMD Software Adrenalin Edition (on Windows):
| https://www.amd.com/en/technologies/software
|
| Pretty average as far as bloat goes, ~150-200 MB of RAM used,
| about as much as JetBrains Toolbox takes up in the tray, or
| Mattermost, Discord or other apps like that.
|
| Lets me switch between GPU power/fan profiles (Performance >
| Tuning) so I can run my GPU at 50% of its maximum power most of
| the time (as well as different fan curves), for longevity/noise
| related reasons, especially when dealing with badly optimized
| software/games.
|
| The CPU just seems to do its own thing and throttles up/down
| based on system load, haven't really needed to tune it for any
| particular reason yet.
|
| It's _passable_ but you 're right that things could be way
| better, more usable and user friendly! I guess in a way, when
| everything is bloated, nothing is. Wirth's law at its finest.
| mastax wrote:
| It can't control the speed of case fans though, no?
|
| I suppose I don't care about memory usage for "bloat". I want
| it to be easy and pleasant to use, and to start quickly and
| unobtrusively. No 10 second long splash screen every time I
| boot.
| pohuing wrote:
| 100% depends on your mainboard manufacturer and their
| software support. Once upon a time most Mainboards had Fans
| controllable through SpeedFan
| strich wrote:
| So what you're after re fan control exists, in this bloody
| fantastic app: https://github.com/Rem0o/FanControl.Releases
| mastax wrote:
| I'll look into that, thanks! Too bad it's not open source,
| though.
| twblalock wrote:
| I have found it much more difficult to tune fan curves for
| quiet operation on Ryzen than on Intel chips. There are
| frequent short surges in fan speed, presumably caused by
| frequent short surges in core temperature. This happens at
| normal load just above idle, e.g just web browsing and YouTube.
|
| This has happened with a few different brands of motherboards,
| in multiple chassis with different brands of fans, so I think
| it's a characteristic of the Ryzen platform rather than a
| specific motherboard brand or BIOS.
|
| It's really odd and annoying, and I've resorted to fan curves
| that keep the fan on low RPM until just before the CPU hits 90C
| -- basically flat with a big hockey stick inflection at the
| end.
| SV_BubbleTime wrote:
| > It's really odd and annoying, and I've resorted to fan
| curves that keep the fan on low RPM until just before the CPU
| hits 90C -- basically flat with a big hockey stick inflection
| at the end.
|
| Same. I haven't found much better. I always wonder how it
| doesn't drive other people nuts.
| keepquestioning wrote:
| Are we back to the GHz wars?
| hk1337 wrote:
| Just one though, so some lucky individual will have the fastest
| 13th Generation Intel CPU.
| 2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote:
| Why do we focus so much on TDP or max boost? How often and for
| how long are you running your CPU at max? I'd like to have the
| performance there when I need it but for most of the day I am
| sitting near idle.
| dagw wrote:
| _How often and for how long are you running your CPU at max?_
|
| On my workstation? 8-16 hours at a stretch is common, several
| times a week.
| vlovich123 wrote:
| What are you doing that's pegging your CPU at 100% for 8-16
| hours? Or do you just turn off throttling?
| 867-5309 wrote:
| torrenting linux isos
| exhilaration wrote:
| One word, bro: Docker!
| nuclearsugar wrote:
| Maya or Blender batch rendering
| elheffe80 wrote:
| What happens in the bedroom stays in the bedroom, and we
| don't kink shame here. :P
|
| I would imagine some machine learning/development or video
| editing. Or playing dwarf fortress.
| capableweb wrote:
| If someone is doing ML or video editing and the software
| is not using the GPU for most parts of the workflow, I'd
| like to invite that person to 2022.
|
| Now Dwarf Fortress, that's another beast with no cure...
| KronisLV wrote:
| > If someone is doing ML or video editing and the
| software is not using the GPU for most parts of the
| workflow, I'd like to invite that person to 2022.
|
| That sounds like a pretty strong statement, so I decided
| to try it out on some hardware from the last 5 years (an
| AMD GPU with VCE 3.0 and a 6/12 core/thread AMD CPU), in
| particular, encoding the same video: 1080p, 30fps with
| similar quality settings.
|
| Here are the results for various encoders (using ffmpeg,
| through Handbrake and/or Kdenlive): How
| File Size Time CPU h264 105 MB
| 03:15 GPU h264_amd_vce 198 MB 03:22 CPU h265
| 99 MB 07:44 GPU h265_amd_vce 361 MB 04:36 CPU
| mpeg4 102 MB 02:07 CPU mpeg2 72 MB
| 02:04 CPU vp8 55 MB 06:13 (low CPU usage,
| <50%)
|
| Seems like the quality settings don't actually mean much
| across different encoders, so these results aren't that
| conclusive in regards to comparing the codecs against one
| another, however one can surmise out that GPU isn't an
| order of magnitude ahead of CPU in regards to video
| encoding, at least on mid tier consumer grade hardware.
|
| That probably changes on more specialized or recent
| hardware (something newer than VCE 3.0), or things like
| the aforementioned ML.
| pohuing wrote:
| AMDs Hardware encoders are also notoriously bad. Maybe
| the situation is better on some nvidia cards.
| tjpnz wrote:
| Electron apps.
| P5fRxh5kUvp2th wrote:
| ok, I know you're being snarky, but that legitimately
| made me laugh.
| nottorp wrote:
| Discord Helper (Renderer), Skype Helper (Renderer) and
| Slack Helper (Renderer) are the processes most likely to
| make my laptop unresponsive so i don't see how he's
| snarky there :)
| paulmd wrote:
| aka electron, electron, and electron :)
| pjmlp wrote:
| A possible answer would be running Android Studio, another
| one, piles of Electron apps.
| nibbleshifter wrote:
| Microsoft Teams.
| noobermin wrote:
| Yes, this will only be useful for servers, workstations, and
| performance nodes. I heavy doubt this will be useful for
| generic home computing any time soon.
| devwastaken wrote:
| CPU temps will spike, computer turns into revving jet engine.
| Opening a program is all it takes. Shouldn't have to have the
| biggest noctua cooler on the market to keep a CPU below 90C.
| They're meant to be quiet.
| pc86 wrote:
| Kind of hard to say they're "meant to be quiet" if opening a
| program is all it takes to make them... not quiet.
| babypuncher wrote:
| I collect and rip Blu-Rays. Whenever I buy something big (like
| a complete TV series box set), it usually means my 5900x will
| be churning away in Handbrake non stop for a few days straight.
| It makes my basement a bit toasty.
| notdarkyet wrote:
| Which drive are you currently using? I bought the external
| Archgon drive but never got to the flashing part.
| DaiPlusPlus wrote:
| But given that space is cheap and transcoding means you're
| necessarily compromising image quality, why bother re-
| encoding?
| babypuncher wrote:
| Because I have a lot of shows and space isn't _that_ cheap,
| especially on mobile devices.
|
| Video compression has improved a ton since the introduction
| of Blu-Ray in 2006. I can cut the average size of a 45
| minute TV show from ~8-10GB on the disc to ~2GB with
| minimal or no perceptible quality loss. This makes a huge
| difference when I go to load up my iPad with movies and TV
| shows before I travel.
|
| I do not bother re-encoding anything on a 4K disc, I just
| rip them straight to my NAS and strip out foreign audio and
| subtitle tracks.
| paulmd wrote:
| HEVC can produce extraordinary quality for the size
| (especially on cartoons/anime) but man it is a fucking
| CRUNCH to get it there. It makes even x264 look easy by
| comparison.
|
| And AV1 is a whole 'nother level past that... minutes per
| frame basically. But great size/quality.
|
| Just as a casual observation, you should look at hardware
| AV1 encoders once they come out, because they'll beat
| software HEVC with a hardware (read: fast) encoder. Of
| course you also have to have support in the devices to
| play it back... which can be a problem with HEVC as well.
| babypuncher wrote:
| I may switch to AV1, but not until decoding support is
| ubiquitous within my device ecosystem. The big one is my
| iPad, I don't want to cut my battery life in half by
| watching movies with a software decoder during a long
| flight.
|
| Seeing as the M2 and A16 both still lack AV1 decoders, I
| might be waiting a little while, which is fine since it
| gives encoders and processor speed more time to catch up
| to the speeds I currently get with x265.
| peheje wrote:
| Want to be friends?
| bpodgursky wrote:
| HN is full of Intel bears / AMD bulls so they're going to latch
| onto whatever they can complain about.
| lm28469 wrote:
| big numbers good. we need big numbers. big numbers better than
| small numbers. big numbers please monkey brain. monkey brain
| happy = more sales = more money = bigger number in bank. bigger
| number in bank good
| bhedgeoser wrote:
| Seriously, reading semiconductor news these days feels like
| watching dragon ball z. I won't even be surprised if someone
| announced a cpu that runs at over 9000MHz.
| rowanG077 wrote:
| Daily for a couple of hours at least. TDP max is basically the
| only interesting metric. Because this is what you have to
| design your power delivery and cooling for. Average TDP is only
| interesting for your energy bill.
| pizza234 wrote:
| TDP is correlated with consumption, so a higher TDP is
| indicative of how much the CPU will burn in general.
| formerly_proven wrote:
| Completely false, idle and low load power consumption has
| little to do with TDP. Case in point: Ryzen
| ryanmarsh wrote:
| Literally halt and catch fire.
| etempleton wrote:
| These are crazy frequencies and I am sure they have the thermals
| to match, but this is also the sign that competition is tight.
| Both companies are trying to get every bit of performance out of
| their designs. Advanced cooling systems that are now common on
| enthusiast machines are helping.
|
| Regardless if you think they can pull it off or not, Intel's
| roadmap is fascinating. They expect pretty tremendous growth not
| just in the processor space, but in the US foundry space. They
| are aiming to be able to compete with TSMC and Samsung in this
| space.
| Markoff wrote:
| I read headline as 60 GHz and raised my eyebrows, then I reread
| it as another non news. CPU tech is extremely boring last
| decades.
| zuhsetaqi wrote:
| I wouldn't say that. At least in the last years it way more
| exiting than before since AMD is competitive again and Apple
| does use ARM chips with a whole new tradeoff strategy. The only
| boring part is Intel IMO
| retskrad wrote:
| Intel and AMD are waving the white flag. They're bowing to Apple
| and admitting that they can't compete in the laptop arena.
| neogodless wrote:
| This comment is a bit like saying Telsa is admitting they
| cannot compete in entry level electric cars because they
| announced the Cybertruck's maximum performance figures.
|
| Meanwhile, 9 out of 10 laptops sold... contain Intel or AMD
| chips (or presumably Qualcomm), rather than Apple Silicon.
|
| https://macdailynews.com/2022/01/31/apple-takes-10-share-of-...
|
| Now if the question was... is Apple Silicon much more
| efficient... than an enthusiast level desktop CPU?
| noobermin wrote:
| How is this "waving the white flag." That usually signals
| defeat, this is an attempt to build hype.
| r00fus wrote:
| Can you run this chip on a laptop? How will they hope to
| compete with Apple's M2Pro/Max?
|
| Answer: they won't. It'll be like phone chips where Apple is
| 2+ years ahead of the game for perf/watt.
| andix wrote:
| Does it come with an included nuclear power plant?
| gigatexal wrote:
| And use fifty gigs watts of power or?
| jvanderbot wrote:
| My NUC ECE board can reach 5ghz. But I throttle all cores down to
| 3.2 GHz so it can run without the helicopter sounds from all the
| fans running full tilt. This sounds the same.
| zamadatix wrote:
| I think an underappreciated thing in these conversations is that
| +200W of TDP of top end products nets a very small increase in
| actual performance, especially if you're not maxing out all 24
| cores. The "halo" models are there purely for the enthusiast that
| want the absolute fastest CPU regardless of other tradeoffs not
| those concerned about things like air cooling or electricity
| cost. E.g. the 13700k is a 125W/253W CPU. The 13700T is a
| 35W/~105W? CPU. They have ~identical single thread performance
| and are within <25% on 24 core performance.
|
| What the article doesn't cover is the actual performance uplift
| but that seems a given being an article about this newly rumoured
| model not an overview of 13th gen performance as a whole.
|
| I love my power efficient M1 macbook and I love my number
| crunching Zen 3 CPU. The 2 SKUs I have aren't serving the same
| market and where the architectures overlap the differences aren't
| as profound as comparing extremes from each family would lead you
| to believe.
| AtlasBarfed wrote:
| Yeah, basically unless a piece of laptop hardware comes on x86
| that can match the M1's battery life/efficiency/performance,
| Gigahertz and 13900 k-class unicorn horns and all that is just
| marketing. Generations, X% better than last generation is all
| powerpoint / tech press bulletpoints.
|
| The M1 produced a bigger enduser boost than the introduction of
| SSDs. We're now at 1 year for the M1 essentially, and there is
| no conquerable x86 product yet, and I don't really see it on
| roadmaps.
|
| Microsoft remains too incompetent to make a usable desktop OS,
| and their hardware forays are always spectacular failures, so
| they won't provide the hardware leadership. That leaves Intel
| and AMD, and both appear to be in head-in-sand mode.
|
| And I am no mac zealot. The only thing I like about my M1 work
| laptop is the battery life, but it's such an incredible leap
| over any other laptop experience that it is the gold standard.
| I'd love a linux laptop that was comparable, x86 or ARM, but if
| the M1 is an A+, all other laptops are basically at C or C-
| grade.
| eminence32 wrote:
| I would be pretty amazed if this 6ghz "stock" clock can be
| achieved with just air cooling.
| PragmaticPulp wrote:
| Modern air coolers are extremely performant. The popular Noctua
| NH-D15 can handle these TDPs and more without problem, and has
| been available for years.
| ep103 wrote:
| Wait, what? I've been researching this lately, and have been
| coming to the conclusion that the NH-D15 can NOT handle peak
| head from intel's 12700k.
|
| The NH-D15's max cooling ability is slightly beneath the
| 12700k's max thermal output. So if you're running a 12700k,
| you can get away with it, because the liklihood that you're
| running the 12700k at max thermal output for long periods of
| time are pretty slim, and if you're running under max, then
| you're covered.
|
| I don't remember TDP numbers off the top of my head, but if
| the 13700 is a significantly higher thermal output, and its
| going to be in the same case as the next gen video cards with
| their higher output? That doesn't seem feasible for the
| NH-D15 anymore
| Sohcahtoa82 wrote:
| Heck, I have a cheap Coolermaster air cooler (I think it was
| $30) on my i9-9900K. I've run Prime95's max heat torture test
| on all 8 cores and my CPU will hover around 65 C, well below
| the thermal throttle threshold.
| omni wrote:
| Either you mean 65C above ambient or something's wrong with
| your machine, unless you're running liquid nitrogen there's
| no way that chip's only at 65C under max heat torture.
| Here's Tom's Hardware getting 90C on the blend test (MUCH
| less heat than max heat) with a 240mm AIO.
| https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-
| core-i9-9900k-9th...
| Sohcahtoa82 wrote:
| Hmm...you might be right...
|
| I just tried the test again, and with the max heat test,
| I was in the 95-100 C range and it was throttling to 4.3
| Ghz.
|
| Now I'm wondering exactly what I did. It was years ago
| when I did this, right after I got my CPU.
| exciteabletom wrote:
| I'm sure a big air cooler like the Noctua NH-D15 would be
| enough to stop throttling.
|
| Maybe Intel will include a beefier stock cooler in the box?
| cyber_kinetist wrote:
| Intel's stock coolers were always a joke and people usually
| switched it out for something else. It might be good for them
| to bring some decent stock coolers to the entry-mid level
| models like what AMD does.
|
| But really doesn't make sense including a stock cooler for
| the i9 lineup though, since that monster of a CPU will defeat
| probably every mid-level air cooler and would require a beefy
| Noctua or something similar...
| crest wrote:
| Does the "box" include a 2kW industrial chiller like last time?
| jscipione wrote:
| AMD announces 5.7ghz Ryzen 9 7950X chip retailing for $699 this
| month, meanwhile Intel hints at vapor chip that theoretically
| might hit 6ghz with no release date and no price. This stinks of
| desperation on Intel's part.
| Latty wrote:
| I hope Intel can keep up, actual competition has been so great.
| It does feel like they are really struggling with their process
| issues though.
| Night_Thastus wrote:
| I think we're going to see major shakeups over the next ~10
| years from both companies. Old models of design are quickly
| reaching their limits. Heterogeneous cores and multi-die
| designs are just the start. It's an exciting time!
| nashashmi wrote:
| Please have some sympathy for the pathetic workers who have
| to work overtime to keep up because management failed to keep
| progress for the new and exciting.
|
| Sometimes this competition thing is a distraction. Like now
| there is an emergency meeting for the three year roadmap to
| shrink to 1 year and with less innovation than they planned
| it to have, and the actual three year roadmap becomes 5 years
| because of wasted energy for short term gains.
| mtoner23 wrote:
| Thats how business works. If people dont want to work at
| intel because of this thats ok too. Its the society we
| created and its worked out really well in the CPU industry
| for 50+ years now.
| pinewurst wrote:
| I'm waiting for them to somehow redefine speed, like they
| redefined production geometries. How fast is it? It's Intel 7.
| mhh__ wrote:
| The numbers were always complete bullshit this is like
| complaining about a shop calling a cake tasty.
| jalgos_eminator wrote:
| You laugh, but AMD did that in the mid-2000's with the Athlon
| XP series: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_AMD_Athlon_X
| P_processo... The numbers used to match their clock speed
| (ex. Athlon 1000 was 1000 MHz), but that changed with the XP
| models (ex. Athlon XP 2400+ was 2000 MHz).
| fortran77 wrote:
| And Apple started it with their Megahertz Myth campaign.
| zdw wrote:
| IPC is a thing - clockspeed optimized architectures like
| Alpha and the Pentium 4 just didn't get as much done per
| cycle or had much harsher penalties when the pipeline
| stalled, even though they ticked faster.
|
| Comparing the whole system against an actual task is the
| only way to really measure - everything else, _including_
| the clockspeed, is marketing.
| cyanydeez wrote:
| Certainly, the last two decades prove that raw metrics
| win advertising because the complicated world of
| benchmarks just don't sway many people.
| kllrnohj wrote:
| Bribing companies to avoid selling your competitor's
| product doesn't hurt, either.
|
| https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanced_Micro_Devices,_I
| nc.....
| rzzzt wrote:
| There was an expression floating around for this naming
| scheme, but I can't remember what it was and don't find any
| good search results either for my candidates.
| "Processor/Pentium equivalent rating"?
|
| Edit: found it -
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Performance_Rating
| blibble wrote:
| that 6ghz intel chip will probably use at least 300W too
| (12900ks uses 274W)
| booi wrote:
| that's actually a feature since you don't need to have a
| space heater anymore. checkmate
| stardude900 wrote:
| Sure does... also the Intel announcement is on the same date
| that AMD releases their new chips.
| Melatonic wrote:
| Every few years either AMD or Nvidia comes out with some chips
| that blow away the competition and everyone claims that the chip
| war is dead. Then the gap slowly closes again until they are sort
| of neck and neck until one of them does the same thing.
| HereIGoAgain wrote:
| Yeah but how much actually gets down in each of those cycles?
| tambourine_man wrote:
| For a whole minute before throttling.
|
| Warning: required power station not included.
| hu3 wrote:
| Properly cooled workstations don't throttle, ever.
|
| I run simulations which use 100% of all cores for endless
| hours.
|
| You just gotta use a decent thermal paste and cooling fan. In
| my case it's water cooling so I don't even hear the fans.
| tambourine_man wrote:
| Warning: small lake required for proper cooling not included
| hu3 wrote:
| Haha. It's a closed loop, just plug and play. The radiator
| is 14cm x 14cm and fits nicely inside the case.
| n4bz0r wrote:
| Which model do you use? Just realized that I've only seen
| or heard about 120mm (single fan) AIOs :)
|
| Briefly looked 140mm AIOs up, and have only found Corsair
| XR5 so far. These 140mm rads seem like a rare-ish thing.
| Did you randomly stumble upon one of those or is it,
| like, a new trendy thing?
| aaaaaaaaaaab wrote:
| At what TDP?
| awestroke wrote:
| No more than 1kW
| api wrote:
| Even if that were true, there'd be a niche for these. There
| are still tasks for which single threaded performance
| dominates.
|
| Not sure it'd be a big enough niche to save Intel's market
| share though.
| Karsteski wrote:
| I can finally have the greatest Minecraft server ever
| Vecr wrote:
| Dwarf fortress as well, though not a server unless you
| play over SSH.
| andy_ppp wrote:
| Nice and cheap for us Europeans!
| was_a_dev wrote:
| Might as well be productive while we heat our homes this
| winter!
| aaaaaaaaaaab wrote:
| Resistive heater with a cheeky twist!
| andy_ppp wrote:
| Nearly 100% efficient!
| [deleted]
| dougmwne wrote:
| You can also boil water for tea while you game!
| tibbydudeza wrote:
| Tejas and Jayhawk lives !!!!.
| GeekyBear wrote:
| Welcome back to the failed Pentium 4 strategy.
|
| >Raptor Lake to Offer 'Unlimited Power' Mode for Those Who Don't
| Care About Heat, Electric Bills
|
| https://www.extremetech.com/computing/338748-raptor-lake-to-...
| MuffinFlavored wrote:
| It's true that like... naturally throughout production some
| chips have better "silicon" (for lack of better terms/words)
| and some have worse, leading some to get marked as lower
| frequency chips (because otherwise if you turn the clock
| speed/power/heat up too much on them, they don't perform as
| well/have errors due to... mild defects in manufacturing?)
|
| Am I understanding that correctly or butchering it?
|
| Like how would you describe the fact that not all chips Intel
| producers will be able to hit 6GHz+?
| ender341341 wrote:
| I think more just the fall into "We're having trouble scaling
| performance with sane power usage, so just amp up the power
| usage" as to what was referenced as the Pentium 4 strategy.
| What you described is called binning and as far as I'm aware
| everyone does it (for example nvidia's founders editions tend
| to be the higher quality chips, causing 3rd party cards to
| not always overclock as well as older generations).
| xani_ wrote:
| P4 was just plainly inferior architecture, this is not that.
| "Just" outdated one
| [deleted]
| bilsbie wrote:
| Doubling processor speed over 20 years is still exponential.
| de6u99er wrote:
| Looks like desperation to me.
|
| I believe AMD's technology and furthermore strategy is superior
| to intel's. Now with Xilinx on board I am curious if we will see
| GPU's or APU's with FPGA's which allow custom hardware
| instructions.
| moffkalast wrote:
| I'm really not sure what's the point of this either. Some AMD
| FXs were clocked to 5GHz back in the day and it sure didn't
| help them with performance much, they just had to ship with
| water coolers as stock because they overheated like crazy.
|
| Meanwhile an Intel i5 of the time could run faster at half the
| clock speed. I suspect this'll be a similar blunder but
| companies reversed in some stroke of irony.
| smm11 wrote:
| I'm betting 99 percent of devices using this chip will be used 99
| percent of the time for internet access, meaning the bottleneck
| is now bandwidth.
| uni_rule wrote:
| It seems that if you don't opt for AMD on AMD this new generation
| of PCs will be absolute toaster ovens.
| cyber_kinetist wrote:
| AMD is also in the process of being a toaster oven. The new
| Ryzen 9 7950x will use considerably higher power (105W -> 170W)
| for a smaller die area, which is making people worry about air-
| powered cooling being not enough (previously a Noctua D15 was
| enough to cool a 5950x). And I really don't want high-end CPUs
| to require water cooling since it's more unreliable and
| requires more maintenance.
| throwabro747 wrote:
| > 7950x will use considerably higher power (105W -> 170W)
|
| The 5950X uses 180W at full load. Some measure as high as
| 230W. The 105W figure reported as "TDP" was a mistake.
|
| Not sure why the specs were a big lie but this is well
| documented online.
|
| > air-powered cooling being not enough
|
| If you want to turbo to 4.1GHz or better on all cores on the
| 5950X, you have to spend about $60 on a cooler - water or
| air. The AIOs perform well. A big AIO will give you 4.5GHz.
| No turbo air cooling - 3.4GHz - is a waste of money.
| PaulBGD_ wrote:
| I can definitely confirm this, I tried to air cool my 5950X
| without much luck. Enabling PBO I've seen it go over 200W,
| which a 240mm rad handles very well.
| eyegor wrote:
| There's a small silver lining in that you can set hard power
| limits in the bios and amd claims it's still ~15% faster when
| limited to 105w. It would be nice if they just left it at
| that but it makes them look worse in benchmarks against Intel
| since most people won't check the power consumption.
| I_dev_outdoors wrote:
| keep in mind that is not idle power consumption. If you are
| setting a limit like that it's because of heating or power
| constraints (battery? PSU?)
| halikular wrote:
| Since noctua nh d15 air cooling has been on par or surpassing
| any aio and even all but the high end custom loops.
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PeQX1uhb0iQ
| mibsl wrote:
| Not really. The NH D15 is an impressive cooler, but it
| falls behind 280 AIOs. Even ones cheaper than itself.
|
| https://www.gamersnexus.net/hwreviews/3571-arctic-liquid-
| fre...
| cyber_kinetist wrote:
| Yeah I admit that there are cheaper water coolers than
| Noctua that perform better. But the main issue I have is
| with water cooling itself (can burst or leak if unlucky
| or with poor maintenance, has a more limited life span,
| etc...)
| [deleted]
| paulmd wrote:
| those are base-clock TDPs not the boost TDPs (which AMD calls
| a PPT) too... it's 170W base/230W boost power, and those
| chips are allowed to boost for an unlimited duration (which
| of course has pluses and minuses).
| PragmaticPulp wrote:
| Intel CPUs have better idle power consumption that even the
| latest Ryzen CPUs. It caught me off guard when I switched from
| Intel to AMD and the idle draw of my PC went up by a
| significant amount.
|
| Given that our computers spend more time idle than at 100% peak
| load, my AMD CPU draws more power (and therefore heats up my
| room) more then my Intel setup. That wasn't an outcome I was
| expecting, but then again I was only looking at peak, not idle,
| numbers at the time.
|
| I really hope AMD can start bringing their idle power
| consumption down in this next gen.
| neogodless wrote:
| In Ryzen Master, my Ryzen 9 5900X is showing 11-13W CPU
| Power, 17W SOC Power.
|
| It's largely idle, just lots of background stuff/open
| programs (VS Code, Discord, Excel, Firefox, Teams, Edge,
| MySQL Workbench, Thunderbird, Messenger, Outlook.)
|
| PPT is 30% of 142W = 42.6 W. (Not sure what PPT stands for.)
|
| EDIT: https://www.gamersnexus.net/guides/3491-explaining-
| precision...
|
| > Package Power Tracking ("PPT"): The PPT threshold is the
| allowed socket power consumption permitted across the voltage
| rails supplying the socket.
| adgjlsfhk1 wrote:
| IIUC, this is mainly because the IO die was made on 14nm.
| With Zen 4 moving to 7nm for IO die, I think lower idle power
| draw is expected. We'll see by how much soon.
| formerly_proven wrote:
| It's not just the IO die, but also IF on AM4 seemingly not
| supporting power management - it always runs at full speed,
| unsurprisingly a bus that fast burns a lot of power.
| rhn_mk1 wrote:
| Does this apply also to laptop parts?
| Dalewyn wrote:
| Yes, and even moreso for the laptop/mobile CPUs because
| those generally tend to have more E-cores than P-cores
| compared to the desktop CPUs, which further reduces power
| use in exchange for less absolute performance.
| kcb wrote:
| No it doesn't. Unlike desktop parts the mobile chips are
| single die, it's the separate IO die which seems to be the
| primary reason for the high idle draw. Current gen AMD
| mobile chips are pretty much even with Intel at idle and
| significantly more efficient under any load metric.
| xani_ wrote:
| I see the same thing in Intel vs AMD servers, AMDs are like
| 3x the power on idle
| pizza234 wrote:
| Can you give some details (components and consumption)? I'm
| interested in the topic, and I've done some wall measurements
| as well, in the past and present.
| cypress66 wrote:
| My 3900x is also very inefficient when idling. It never
| goes below 50w according to hwinfo64. My entire pc is
| surely above 100w idle.
| alyandon wrote:
| Interesting, I'm currently running Windows 10 with a
| Ubuntu desktop in a VM and multiple web browsers open
| with lots of tabs. According to Ryzen Master, my 3900X is
| consuming ~25-30 watts.
|
| Edit: Libre Hardware Monitor shows package consumption
| around ~55 watts which looks suspiciously close to CPU +
| chipset power consumption.
| PragmaticPulp wrote:
| I have a 3950X and a 5950X. I thought it was the other
| components at first but then someone pointed me to the
| official Ryzem master software. It shows CPU package power,
| which has a persistently high floor consumption. Idle temps
| are also higher on the same cooler. It's a well-known
| phenomenon on the forums when I searched.
| mrguyorama wrote:
| FYI some programs really fuck with this, even at
| ""Idle"". On my ryzen 5 3600, it idles at a few watts,
| but if I open steam and just let steam idle on my
| library, the CPU now draws 15 watts.
| nottorp wrote:
| My 5600G idles at 22W whole system (wall power). However it
| has the cheaper chipset, not the x prefixed one, no video
| card at the moment and just one NVMe ssd for storage. It
| does have 4 x 16 Gb ram sticks so you can go even lower if
| you get 2 x 32 i guess.
| formerly_proven wrote:
| AM4 APUs are totally different from their CPU brethren
| and are much better behaved in this area, because they're
| socketed versions of the mobile chips.
| Dalewyn wrote:
| Over in Japan, Intel CPUs are sometimes fondly(?) called
| Idlemaster, which is a pun and reference to Idolmaster[1],
| for their superior idling performance. :V
|
| [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Idolmaster
| ridgered4 wrote:
| This is true, it seems like the infinity fabric limits how
| low AMD cpus can idle. Intel invested pretty heavily in power
| saving tech during their 4 core
|
| One other thing that hurts AMD here was the x570 chipset. It
| seems to be a hack job, basically installing the I/O from the
| CPU upside down and running it as a chipset. IIRC it uses
| like double the wattage of the x470 chipset it replaced.
| jeffbee wrote:
| Intel power scaling works very well. My 12th-gen 12700K says
| its is drawing 660mW at the moment, and its complete silence is
| consistent with that estimate. If there's some power level that
| you prefer, you can just enter it in the BIOS and leave it that
| way.
|
| Personally, I do not pretend that CPUs are light bulbs. If my
| CPU could draw 1000W for 10ms and that made short tasks like
| web page rendering twice as fast, that's a trade I would
| happily take. The short-term power consumption of CPUs is pure
| benefit to the user, and the rarer sustained tasks that run all
| the cores flat out for more than 1 second are always going to
| level off at about 125W because of the long-term cooling
| situation.
| Razengan wrote:
| Intel still playing the GHz game, not having learned anything
| from the Pentium 4?
| whoomp12342 wrote:
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qpMvS1Q1sos
| dougmwne wrote:
| They are losing the process manufacturing game so need to make
| up the lost ground somewhere.
| ColonelPhantom wrote:
| Golden Cove (Alder Lake) has been a massive uplift in
| performance-per-clock from the previous generations. This is
| also related to the fact that Intel was reiterating Skylake for
| most of the time until ADL, which itself is barely more than
| Sandy Bridge with a few generations of iterative tweaks. I
| believe Raptor Cove (what will be in 13th gen) is not that big
| of a change from Alder Lake; it's the same but with some
| refinements and mainly larger caches.
|
| Furthermore, the P-core/E-core divide means that they can make
| the P-cores quite large and inefficient, as E-cores will pick
| up the heavily-threaded tasks. So while a Zen core is
| significantly smaller than a Golden Cove core, Gracemont is
| much smaller still.
| pkrumins wrote:
| Nice, that will be my next build!
| sergiotapia wrote:
| I can't wait to see the RPCS3 benchmarks. We are so close to
| perfection with the 12900K already.
| mxaltern wrote:
| When are we getting good alternative to M1?
| wongarsu wrote:
| When you buy AMD instead of Intel.
| yabqk wrote:
| AMD is worse in every regard
| babypuncher wrote:
| That's a pretty bold claim that you're going to need to
| back up. AMD has been beating Intel in performance-per-watt
| for years now, and both are regularly trading blows when it
| comes to fastest consumer chip.
|
| And that's not even talking about EPYC which is pretty
| thoroughly trouncing Xeon in just about every metric.
| mmsnberbar66 wrote:
| https://asahilinux.org/
| dancemethis wrote:
| A fork called Fandaniel Linux is sorely needed. It doesn't
| even need to have anything.
| neogodless wrote:
| If battery life is what you're after, looking at a 1.5
| generation (soon to be 2.5) old 35W Ryzen that gets 11 hours of
| battery life should give you clues. Ryzen 7000 mobile should be
| announced in January, and those will utilize TSMC 5nm.
|
| https://www.laptopmag.com/features/how-amd-ryzen-whooped-int...
|
| https://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-ryzen-4900hs-battery-l...
|
| Or 0.5 generation ago 15W Ryzen getting 17-20 hours...
|
| https://youtu.be/An3OpQ7v0rs?t=546
| mugivarra69 wrote:
| probably never.
| Eridrus wrote:
| Given the fact that x86 instructions are not generally completed
| in a single cycle, how much of this increased clock do we
| actually expect to translate into faster performance? Presumably
| we're not expecting a 50% performance increase here.
| Denvercoder9 wrote:
| X% higher clock gives X% better computation performance,
| regardless of the number of clock cycles each instruction
| takes.
| wmf wrote:
| Most x86 instructions do translate into a single uop that
| executes in a single cycle. Going from 5.5 to 6.0 GHz should be
| around 9% faster; maybe 10% with the larger L2.
| nottorp wrote:
| ... and will it be a 400 W cpu or a 600 W cpu?
|
| Where have I seen this "more megahertz" strategy at Intel? Right,
| with the Pentium 4.
| stardude900 wrote:
| Wow, Raptor Lake's max TDP looks to be 253W. That's crazy high
| https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-13th-gen-raptor-lake...
| ajross wrote:
| That's not a TDP, which is a sustained metric (originally
| designed for board/cooling design integration) and shows 125W
| for that part. The 250W number is a new thing they're calling
| "Processor Boost Power" and I guess it's intended to represent
| some kind of "maximum short term draw" number. That's not
| something that's been historically reported for other parts, so
| it's kinda wrong to try to compare them 1:1.
| paulmd wrote:
| intel's following AMD and introducing a "PPT" terminology for
| the boost value, since they routinely get compared against
| AMD's (non-boost) TDP values.
|
| even in this thread you see people saying "wow intel pulls
| 250W against AMD's 105W processors"... when the comparable
| PPT number for AMD this generation is actually 230W, and
| their previous-gen number was 145W.
|
| It's a huge marketing disadvantage, just like with node
| naming for fabs. Intel's 14nm is hugely better than GF
| 14/12nm or TSMC 16/12nm, and 10ESF is comparable to TSMC 7nm
| (although much later ofc). When the competitors are playing
| marketing games, to some extent you just have to start
| playing them too.
|
| Desktop/HEDT TDPs used to pretty much cover boost clocks, the
| "tau" concept always officially existed but (eg) 5960X has a
| 143W idle-to-prime95 power delta as measured by Anandtech,
| so, the 140W tdp is pretty much sufficient to cover any
| "normal" non-prime95 AVX load at full boost clock. Similarly
| 4770K is a 85W TDP on paper and the measured idle-to-prime95
| is 88W. Overclocked desktop loads could go higher of course,
| but most people overrode tau limits anyway in those cases. So
| in practice, tau limit was pretty much only a thing that
| existed on laptops in the intel world, because there was
| always enough TDP available to cover boost clocks, in a stock
| configuration.
|
| https://images.anandtech.com/graphs/graph8426/67026.png
|
| Then AMD came along with Ryzen and started marketing around
| base TDPs, and made their boost TDP this other higher number
| (but it's not a boost TDP guys, it's, uh, PPT, yeah!!!!)...
| and allowed it to boost to the higher number for an unlimited
| period of time. 9-series really started pushing it and Tau
| limits started becoming a problem, but it looks really bad to
| have a 145W TDP when the competition has 105W... even if it's
| the same actual power consumption in practive. So over time
| Intel more or less had to move to the same "TDP/PPT" concept
| as AMD.
|
| It's really really noxious in laptops where AMD allows
| processors to boost to _50%_ (more than the desktop chips
| even!) above their configured TDP for an unlimited period of
| time. Yeah partners get to pick the cTDP for the particular
| laptop, but either way an AMD chip with a 15W cTDP gets to
| use 50% more power than an Intel with a 15W cTDP, for an
| unlimited duration, which is a huge functional advantage...
| basically a 15W AMD laptop is more comparable to a 25W Intel
| laptop in terms of power draw, and a 25W AMD will pull more
| power than a 35W Intel. So they move themselves up a whole
| power bracket through The Magic Of Technical Marketing (tm).
|
| https://images.anandtech.com/doci/16084/Power%20-%2015W%20Co.
| ..
| m12k wrote:
| All these power hungry beasts coming out of Intel and NVIDIA
| feel quite out of sync with the zeitgeist in a world that's
| worried about the power bill - especially when the M1/M2 is
| there to provide contrast. I'm getting Pentium 4 vs Core
| architecture vibes.
| xani_ wrote:
| They are in development for years, not last 6 months
| justapassenger wrote:
| Power consumption is an issue, but worrying about CPUs of a
| gaming machine is like worrying about straws in the context
| of the pollution.
|
| Electricity needs of an average household in western world
| are going to increase a lot in coming decades, with
| transition to more electric heating, cooking, cars, etc.
| Gaming machine power usage is minuscule compared to those.
| jbkkd wrote:
| The major difference between a CPU and, say, an oven, is
| that the former runs 24/7, whereas an the latter would run
| for a short period of time.
|
| Back of the envelope calculation here:
|
| Assuming an average oven consumes 2kWh, and a CPU 0.1kWh:
|
| Oven for four hours (average weekly usage) would be 2 * 4 =
| 8kWh weekly.
|
| CPU for 24 hours, 7 days a week = 0.1 * 24 * 7 = 16.8kWh
| weekly.
| Dinjector wrote:
| The flaws in your calculations are apparent when we
| realize that modern CPUs clock down when they are not
| busy. You would assume this would be common knowledge on
| a site called Hacker News.
| epolanski wrote:
| Just because energy needs keep increasing it's not a good
| reason to be okay they do.
|
| While most house electronics keep pushing to consume less,
| computers go in the opposite direction.
|
| This also adds tons of heat in my laptops or the air.
|
| Working or gaming in a small room during hot days is
| painful.
|
| Even consoles making noises of a turbo jet are nowadays
| considered normal. It's a disaster.
| babypuncher wrote:
| In Intel's case, they need to push these insane TDPs in order
| to even dream of performance parity with AMD and Apple. All
| those years spinning their wheels on 14nm+++++++++++ are
| biting them in the ass.
| neals wrote:
| I don't know, we found Helium-3 on the moon this week, so I
| think it might be fine.
| agumonkey wrote:
| netburst was the first thing that came to mind
| nimbius wrote:
| arguably it was the same thirst for electricity that was the
| killing stroke for most of the POWER architecture. that, and
| IBM contract fees.
| bee_rider wrote:
| I wonder what % of the overall power bill a PC actually
| consumes. My gut would say it doesn't compare, really, to the
| water heater or air conditioner, but it would be good to see
| numbers.
| Arrath wrote:
| I would love some PSU metering ability, to see actual data
| about how much juice my PC is pulling down. Other than
| getting a kill a watt meter, how could one go about this?
| paulmd wrote:
| They make "digital PSUs" like the Corsair AXi series that
| can talk to your PC over a comm port.
| xen2xen1 wrote:
| Knockoff meters are like $10 on Amazon. Not a bad
| investment.
| brewdad wrote:
| I can say that when my son left for college last fall, our
| electric bill dropped about $30 a month compared to the
| months he was here (after adjusting for seasonal
| heating/cooling costs). He has an i9-12xxx gaming rig with
| two monitors. A Prusa 3D printer that gets a lot of use and
| a few other gadgets and such.
| JonChesterfield wrote:
| Calculate it. You'll have kW/hr costs for electricity which
| depend on where you are and can ballpark power based on
| fraction of the time it's running and the components in it.
|
| My standard dev machine is ~1kW flat out, ~500W most of the
| time, probably 100W idle. Runs for about eight hours a day.
| Say 500W is the average, suggests 4kW/hr a day. That's
| about $2 a day in the UK.
|
| (those power numbers are relatively high - it's an elderly
| threadripper with two GPUs)
| omegalulw wrote:
| I would say that people who regularly invest in top end
| hardware don't care as much about power bills. Otherwise
| power efficient chips is the norm (laptops, phones, etc).
| secondcoming wrote:
| > don't care as much about power bills
|
| Not yet!
| giobox wrote:
| This is slowly changing IMO - I'm seeing concern over
| energy use even on forums discussing high end hardware
| builds as cost of energy mounts in Europe. Previously no
| one really ever mentioned this other than to laugh at poor
| thermals.
|
| If some of Nvidia's next generation 4xxx series GPUs are
| close to 1000w draw as many rumors suggest, the total draw
| of a high spec Intel/Nvidia system is going to probably
| have similar running costs to an electric space heater when
| playing demanding games. The existing 3090ti is already a
| 500w part, which not so long ago was enough to power a
| whole system in addition to the GPU.
| gambiting wrote:
| Yeah exactly this. I have a 3080 with a 5900X, would
| consider myself an enthusiast, and after recent price
| hike to my tariff here in the UK electricity usage is
| definitely something that's on my mind. Like, it hasn't
| stopped me gaming yet, but I'm very acutely aware that
| I'm using PS1 worth of electricity every few hours of
| play - it adds up.
| bufferoverflow wrote:
| > _PS1 worth of electricity every few hours of play_
|
| I hope you make a lot more per hour of work. Stop
| worrying about that.
| epolanski wrote:
| Whether he does or not it's none of your business, and it
| doesn't change the fact that those are high prices and
| sources of environmental issues.
|
| This power draw is getting out of hand on desktop,
| consoles and x86 laptops and is largely a symptom of lack
| of competition and lack of technological advances.
| nightski wrote:
| The power cost of running my enthusiast build is on the
| order of a few dollars a month.
|
| Now I am all for being green but there are things in my
| household that are much more of a concern than this.
|
| Huge datacenters full of these chips is one thing. A
| personal computer for hacking & gaming probably not such
| a big deal.
| barrkel wrote:
| 24h x 30 days x .5kW x 0.25 CHF/kWh gives me 90 CHF a
| month to run my PC, assuming it never sleeps.
|
| Have you run the calculation? It's worthwhile configuring
| suspend for PCs these days. My 3090 never seems to go
| below 120W, for one thing.
| xani_ wrote:
| The fuck are those calculations ? Are you trying to
| mislead people on purpose?
|
| Who is running their computer at 500W 24/7 ?
| nightski wrote:
| I use suspend on my PC and I definitely do not run it
| 24h, or anywhere close to that. Also power is $0.08/kWh
| where I live.
| gambiting wrote:
| That's insanely cheap power, use it while you can. I'm
| paying PS0.40/kWh, so about 46 cents per kWh.
| brewdad wrote:
| Really?
|
| My power is some of the cheapest in the country and we
| pay ~13 cents/kWh. It's a little misleading though since
| my bill breaks out generation and distribution costs into
| separate line items. They are both billed per kWH though
| and add up to 13 cents.
| nightski wrote:
| Yes. We have a fixed basic connection charge of $20. So
| it's really close to your $0.13/kWh when that is taken
| into account.
|
| I wasn't trying to be misleading though because the point
| is the basic charge does not increase with usage. So for
| each additional kWh we add to that it's only $0.089/kWh.
| brewdad wrote:
| No, that's fair. I have an additional basic charge too.
| Congrats on the cheap power.
| [deleted]
| loeg wrote:
| > 500W
|
| 500W is a very high _average_ power consumption. And my
| electricity is 0.13 USD /kWh, which is about half 0.25
| CHF/kWh.
|
| True average power is probably below 100W, for a total
| cost in the realm of 10 CHF or USD per month.
| Someone wrote:
| In the USA, for a significant part of the year, chances
| are you have to add the electricity costs of running your
| airconditioning to get rid of that heat.
|
| If you're living in a colder state, you may have to
| subtract the costs of having lower heating costs.
| loeg wrote:
| Sure, although it's not a ton of heat either way and
| doesn't make a large impact on the net cost.
| epolanski wrote:
| The lowest contract you can get in italy is 40 cents.
|
| Also, consuming more energy is bad and this rush to
| apologize lack of innovation in gpu and cpus weve seen in
| the last decade is ridiculous.
|
| Where does it end? I'm okay with a 5000cc truck because
| airplanes and cruise ships are much worse?
| maccard wrote:
| And double that number if you're in the UK.
| PragmaticPulp wrote:
| > 24h x 30 days x .5kW
|
| No modern PC should be pulling 500W all the time.
|
| Idle power can be as low as 20-30W depending on the
| build.
|
| You should also allow it to sleep, of course.
|
| > My 3090 never seems to go below 120W, for one thing.
|
| Something is wrong. A 3090 should only pull about 20
| Watts at idle: https://www.servethehome.com/nvidia-
| geforce-rtx-3090-review-... . You might have some process
| forcing it into full-speed 3D mode for some reason.
| [deleted]
| bufferoverflow wrote:
| 500W 24/7 consumption? What do you do? Train ML non-stop?
|
| Your example is in now representative of reality.
| black_knight wrote:
| Also, considering that the used power becomes heat, it is
| not such a waste if you already have inefficient
| electrical heating.
| epolanski wrote:
| Conversely, it makes summer much worse.
| gambiting wrote:
| Yeah that's not true, at least here in the UK it isn't.
| My normal build will use 500W when gaming, so every
| couple hours that's PS0.40. Every 10 hours is PS4. That's
| just few days of gaming for me, not including all the
| other computer use, definitely adds up over a month,
| especially since my bills used to be PS100/month now they
| are PS300 a month.
| chris11 wrote:
| It's worse than that. Gamer's Nexus had a video a few
| months ago about power transients becoming a bigger
| problem. Power spikes can double the amount of power
| needed. It doesn't really impact average power useage,
| but it can cause a psu's ocp to shut down the machine.
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wnRyyCsuHFQ
| 2fast4you wrote:
| And probably the heat output of a space heater as well. I
| had to move my tower into another room because it kept
| the whole room way too hot
| xen2xen1 wrote:
| The pilot light on my furnace went out years ago. I only
| noticed because when I opened the door to the room with
| my computer a light but noticeable heat blast hit me. It
| took a second, but I turned around and checked my
| furnace, etc instead of going in the room. It really was
| a revelation about how much heat those things produce.
| musicale wrote:
| > that people who regularly invest in top end hardware
| don't care as much about power bills
|
| It adds up, especially in data centers where you end up
| needing even more megawatts of power and cooling capacity.
| PragmaticPulp wrote:
| > All these power hungry beasts coming out of Intel and
| NVIDIA feel quite out of sync with the zeitgeist in a world
| that's worried about the power bill -
|
| These CPUs aren't consuming 250W _all the time_. Those are
| peak numbers.
|
| Both Intel and AMD are providing huge efficiency gains, too.
| Rumors show the new i7 13700T Raptor Lake part can have a 35W
| mobile TDP and still outperform a Ryzen 7 5800X:
| https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-13700t-raptor-
| lake-a...
|
| Speed scales nonlinearly with power. These high TDP parts are
| halo parts meant for enthusiast builds where it doesn't
| matter that the machine draws a lot of power for an hour or
| two of gaming.
|
| It's also trivially easy to turn down the maximum power limit
| in the BIOS if that's what someone wants. The power
| consumption isn't a fixed feature of the CPU. It's a
| performance/power tradeoff that can be adjusted at use time.
| RedShift1 wrote:
| > for an hour or two of gaming
|
| U gotta pump those numbers up, those are rookie numbers.
| [deleted]
| epolanski wrote:
| I don't really second this perspective.
|
| CPUs and GPUs keep getting hungrier and that is just not
| where we should be heading. I wish the perf increase didnt
| keep coming along consumption increase each gen.
| bhedgeoser wrote:
| You can clock down a 7950x to 105W and it will be 37%
| faster than a 5950x
| epolanski wrote:
| I hardly care, I don't want that heat in my room anyway.
| dcm360 wrote:
| > Both Intel and AMD are providing huge efficiency gains,
| too. Rumors show the new i7 13700T Raptor Lake part can
| have a 35W mobile TDP and still outperform a Ryzen 7 5800X:
| https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-13700t-raptor-
| lake-a...
|
| Don't let the TDP of T-models fool you. Power consumption
| to reach boost clocks can peak up to 100W for T-models of
| the previous generation, and the 13700T probably needs to
| run close to that to outperform a 5800X.
| lr1970 wrote:
| > These CPUs aren't consuming 250W all the time. Those are
| peak numbers.
|
| But they require a heat-sink management designed for that
| peak. And it is insane. Try to keep microwave oven under
| 100C :-)
| zeusk wrote:
| Your toaster uses more than 250W, microwave ovens are far
| above at 1-2kw
| TakeBlaster16 wrote:
| Just adding to what you said, a 24-core CPU won't get
| anywhere near peak power usage during gaming. Most games
| only use a handful of cores. The only way you'll approach
| it is with parallelizable productivity work like video
| encoding or compiling code.
| ForOldHack wrote:
| My nephew, B, got his 16+8 i9, during Path of Exile, to
| peak at 250W, and use all 24 cores. He is running at
| 5.2Ghz, and using air cooled. We are not sure at all how
| it uses e-(efficiency) cores, when it has 16 p-cores w/
| hyper threading, but it all did show up in the new dark
| mode task manager.
| wellthisisgreat wrote:
| What's a new dark mode task manager?
| oktwtf wrote:
| The latest Windows 11 preview finally reads the system
| default paint allowing "dark mode" rendering the ui with
| dark background and light foreground.
| seritools wrote:
| PoE is one of the few games that actually makes use of
| lots and lots of cores/threads.
| staticassertion wrote:
| Any idea what for? I feel like PoE doesn't involve that
| much compute other than what would be offloading to the
| gpu. Maps are static, and I would have assumed that mobs
| are primarily computed server-side based on some sort of
| loosely synchronized state.
|
| I guess I could imagine a few threads for managing
| different 'panes', a thread for chat, a thread for audio
| maybe? It's hard to think of 24 independent units of
| work.
|
| I'm not a game dev, just used to play PoE and curious.
| ace2358 wrote:
| Could it be the gpu driver/framework? I thought DX12 and
| Vulkun were meant to be cpu optimised and be able to use
| heaps of cores.
| staticassertion wrote:
| I guess, but like... how? Like I said, I can't really
| think of 24 things to do lol. I'm reminded of Dolphin,
| the GC/Wii emulator - people would ask for more cores to
| be used and they'd basically be like "for what???", they
| started moving stuff like audio out, eventually they made
| some breakthroughs where they could split more things
| out.
|
| Maybe with these frameworks threads are less dedicated
| and instead are more cooperative, idk. Really not my
| area!
| Traubenfuchs wrote:
| Maybe all it does is produce crazy high, pointless FPS.
| thatguy0900 wrote:
| https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=MWyV0kIp5n4 I'm reminded of
| this poe build that can crash the server with too many
| spell effects
| syntheweave wrote:
| The trick used in AAA is to see each frame as an
| aggregation of core-independent jobs that can be queued
| up, and then to buffer several frames ahead. So you
| aren't working on just "frame A", but also finishing
| "frame B" and "frame C", and issuing the finished frames
| according to a desired pace, which allows you to
| effectively spend more time on single-threaded tasks.
|
| The trade-off is that some number of frames of latency
| are now baked in by default, but if it means your game
| went from 30hz to 60hz with an frame of delay, it is
| about as responsive as it was before, but feels smoother.
| blibble wrote:
| if it's anything like gta5 it's going to be calling
| strlen a billionty times
| Symmetry wrote:
| I think you'll find that modern games use many more cores
| than they used to since mainstream consoles have all
| moved to being octa-core for the last two generations and
| you have things like Vulkan better allowing multi-
| threaded graphics code.
| TakeBlaster16 wrote:
| Many more cores yes, but 100% CPU usage should still be
| rare. If your game uses 100% of a 24C/32T processor, it
| will run poorly on a "mere" 8-core CPU, and most of your
| target audience won't be able to play it. You're right
| though, these aren't your grandma's single-threaded games
| anymore.
| crisdux wrote:
| If you consider the mainstream products of Intel and Nvidia,
| they have way more moderate power consumption. These products
| with massive power draw are ultra enthusiast products. They
| are an outlier. You could build a great PC now with a RTX
| 3060 and a mainstream CPU that would be fine with a 500~ watt
| PSU.
|
| As technologists, we should support manufacturers pushing the
| limit in power and performance. It helps drive overall
| efficiency and move technology forward.
| epolanski wrote:
| Power consumption doubled at least even on mainstream and
| keep increasing gen over gen.
|
| 1070 vs 3070 is +52% average (145 vs 220w) and +66% (154 vs
| 250w) sustained.
|
| 2070 vs 3070 is +10% (195) or +24% (203) sustained.
|
| Even the 3060 you defend draws power as older flagships and
| 500w arent enough even for mainstream gaming.
|
| And it keeps getting worse both on gpu and cpu size.
|
| We aren't technologists but consumers, and reality is that
| x86 and gpus are in near duopolys so the 3 companies
| involved have little reasons to do a better job and it's
| clear Apple socs or more and more cloud moving into arm
| have not been enough of wake up calls.
| risho wrote:
| where is the amd/nvidia/intel product that offers
| comparable performance at a power draw that is anywhere
| near m1?
| crisdux wrote:
| I believe AMD Ryzen 6000 mobile cpus can hold their own
| against the apple m1. They have comparable performance
| and can be set by the manufacturer at a TDP comparable to
| the m1(and still perform well). Except for mainly m1
| optimized apps, GPU performance should be pretty
| comparable too. Ryzen integrated graphics perform better
| in gaming.
| walrus01 wrote:
| These designs pretty much demand a setup with a water cooling
| loop implemented via radiator sized for two 140mm fans (280 mm
| length).
|
| Thankfully all-in-one kits for that which are pre filled and
| sealed are much more commonplace than they used to be, and even
| fairly cheap midtower ATX cases I see on newegg in the $60-70
| range will have a top panel mounting place for a 280mm
| radiator.
|
| And definitely any "gaming" marketed ATX case above that price
| range will have the capability for it.
|
| You possibly could get away with a 240mm length radiator (dual
| 120mm fans) on something like this but I really wouldn't
| recommend it, and the savings for an AIO kit would be only
| $50-60.
|
| From the perspective of noise annoyance, fan pitch and sound is
| somewhat proportional to size. 140mm fans can be a lot quieter
| and move more air than 120mm with less perceptible noise to the
| human sitting next to it.
|
| Higher end stuff will be implemented by 360mm length radiator
| (3 x 140mm) which I am pleasantly surprised to see not
| ridiculously priced ATX cases having options mounting now.
|
| I would figure you have to budget an additional $150-200 on top
| of the CPU cost for a capable water cooling loop setup. Which
| is not absolutely ridiculous considering that a really good
| skived copper heatsink/heatpipe/fan setup for pure air cooling
| on a 130W TDP CPU could easily be $65.
| hulitu wrote:
| Just in time for the winter.
| SketchySeaBeast wrote:
| Between this and the ridiculous TDP expectations for this
| generations latest graphic cards people are going to have to
| start thinking about using dedicated circuits per gaming
| computer.
| gwbas1c wrote:
| Ironically, I have a printer that _really_ needs a dedicated
| circuit. When it warms up the toner, it draws 12 amps for 1-2
| seconds.
|
| Printing often pops the breaker. I had to move the printer
| out of my home office into a bedroom, but even then we've
| popped the breaker when printing while vacuuming.
|
| (It's not a case of bad wiring, either.)
| zerocrates wrote:
| Warming up the laser printer (and its a small one) reliably
| causes the lights throughout my apartment to flicker.
| thehappypm wrote:
| There are types of fuses that have a time delay on them for
| this purpose. A lot of electrical appliances have that kind
| of startup burst of energy. An electrician can tell you
| more
| Marsymars wrote:
| It's not an AFCI breaker, is it? My last house had
| sensitive AFCI breakers that my laser printer would trip
| about a quarter of time when warming up.
| gwbas1c wrote:
| Yes, my electrician was going to change it for me; but
| then I plugged my printer into a kill-o-watt and learned
| that it was pulling 12 amps.
|
| I've been assuming it was current, because if it has the
| circuit to itself, nothing trips.
|
| (My office only has one circuit, which is dedicated to
| the room. I could have asked for 20 amps, but it didn't
| occur to me.)
| birdyrooster wrote:
| I used to own a brother laser printer and it did this, I
| switched to HP LaserJet and this no longer occurs.
| pentae wrote:
| It certainly makes building Mini ITX a lot more interesting
| when you're trying to get the sweet spot for performance to
| thermals/noise ratio.
|
| I did a nCase M1 build recently and my objective for the
| build was small as possible, quiet as possible, and as
| powerful as possible in that order. I still ended up with a
| pretty powerful machine by going with an i3-12100 instead of
| an i5/i7 which uses much less power and puts out less heat.
| The RTX 3080 reference card was the biggest card that could
| fit into the case which I undervolted.
|
| A lot of people are undervolting their RTX GPU's because for
| an only about a ~3% performance loss you get about 10C less
| temp which translates to far less fan noise. I don't know why
| Nvidia doesn't just have a one click button for people.
|
| nCase unfortunately have discontinued this case based on
| 'market factors' which I suspect means that they don't
| anticipate things to be getting smaller and cooler any time
| soon.
| MrBuddyCasino wrote:
| They probably work on a successor. In the meantime, the DAN
| Cases A4-H2O or the FormD T1 are worthy replacements.
| plasticchris wrote:
| Undervolting actually let me over clock my 3070 higher,
| presumably due to extra thermal headroom? I noticed two
| peaks in the timespy results and undrrvolting moved me
| between them, so this must be pretty well known.
| phkahler wrote:
| >> my objective for the build was small as possible, quiet
| as possible, and as powerful as possible in that order.
|
| With the same priorities and a deemphasis on graphics, I
| present to you the Mellori-ITX:
| https://github.com/phkahler/mellori_ITX
|
| Uses the CPU fan as a case fan. By protruding through the
| top we get a lower profile than is possible with any other
| ITX case (well the standoffs can be cut down but that has
| not be optimized).
|
| My next build will be an upgrade of the same design but
| with a Zen 4 or 5 chip with 8 or 16 cores depending what
| fits in the power constraints of the Pico-PSU. It will be a
| while though because that system is still more than enough
| for everything I do with it.
| 5d8767c68926 wrote:
| >A lot of people are undervolting their RTX GPU's because
| for an only about a ~3% performance loss you get about 10C
| less temp which translates to far less fan noise
|
| Bah, this is brilliant. I just upgraded a 1070 to a 3070
| and am flabbergasted at how much heat it dumps into my
| room. One of the reasons I did not go with the 3080 was the
| ~100 watt lower draw.
|
| Do you know of any good tooling to assess the impact of
| undervolting or is it a manual guess-and-check process?
| nottorp wrote:
| I just built a Ryzen 5600G system (without a discrete
| video card atm) and you can set either temperature or
| power consumption limits in the BIOS and it will
| underclock itself (actually turbo boost less) until it
| obeys your limits.
|
| Perhaps I'll wait with the video card until they give me
| the option to do the same there...
| aseipp wrote:
| Trial and error. You need to dial in the right point on
| the voltage/clock frequency curve for your workloads, AKA
| "just play some games and look at the results." Just use
| whatever your overclocking software for your motherboard
| is, and modify the default curve it has. I use MSI
| Afterburner and just set a flat clock frequency (plateau)
| at a certain voltage level to undervolt. I think for
| NVidia GPUs there's a way to modify the curve with the
| default tooling, but third party tools like Afterburner
| can also do it.
|
| You can get great results pretty fast this way. My Mini-
| ITX build is about as thermally compact as possible given
| the parts (3080+Ryzen 5600X, NZXT H1), and I'm pushing my
| PSU to the absolute limits in the stock settings, so
| undervolting is important for safe power margins since
| the 3080 can reach ~360W in my testing. I think 30
| minutes of tweaking got me something like a +80W power
| drop for only 10% FPS in Read Dead Redemption 2 @
| 4k60fps; I never breach 300W now which is within my
| personal safety margins, and can native 4k everything.
|
| Some software like Afterburner have "Overclock Scanner"
| tools that will run benchmarks and repeatedly try to dial
| these settings in for you, but it really is easier to
| just modify the curve manually and test your specific
| workloads.
| jpe90 wrote:
| i use prime95 for cpus and msi kombustor for gpus. if
| they can run for a while without errors i keep my
| settings, otherwise i increase power/voltage and try
| again
| paulmd wrote:
| prime95 isn't a very good test anymore. With the
| changeover from blend to smallfft, it doesn't test the
| frontend or the memory controller or any of the other
| parts of the CPU very well anymore, it loads the kernel
| into instruction cache once and then it just slams the
| AVX units as hard as it can.
|
| so not only does this not test the rest of the cpu at all
| - meaning you can run into problems with other parts of
| the CPU that aren't stable at those frequencies, because
| they're not being tested because it's only running the
| AVX units - but it also doesn't test frequency/power
| state changes at all, so you can run into situations
| where as soon as you _close_ prime95 and it drops to a
| lower p-state, it 'll crash.
|
| gpus have run into similar things with furmark and
| kombuster and other power-virus tests... actually the
| GPUs themselves will detect when they're running and
| throttle down, so they no longer even do the thing
| they're supposed to, but, gpus also change
| power/frequency states under real-world workloads, just
| like CPUs, and they don't under furmark/kombuster. this
| actually caused a crisis at the ampere launch... all the
| testing had been done with a "pre-release bios" that only
| allowed these sorts of power/thermal testing, and it
| turned out that while the chips might be stable at max
| p-state, they weren't stable when they shifted back to a
| lower p-state, or from a lower p-state back to maximum.
| That was the whole "POSCAP vs MLCC" thing.
|
| prime95 and furmark were very very popular 10 years ago
| but that's where they belong, they don't do the job
| anymore these days.
| Melatonic wrote:
| Just use MSI Afterburner and do some tests. I also
| usually setup a fan curve where the fan always runs
| faster than default to keep the temps lower.
| ParksNet wrote:
| Make sure to also cap your FPS or use Vsync. No point
| pumping out 100fps when you have only a 60hz TV, etc.
| debug-desperado wrote:
| This is the correct answer to tackle power draw. Use
| Vsync/Adaptive Sync for fixed refresh monitors, or
| FreeSync/GSync for variable refresh monitors.
|
| For variable refresh rate monitors, it's best to use
| framerate limiters as well: either in-game or in the
| Nvidia control panel. Set the cap at least a few fps
| lower than your monitor's max refresh rate. Even better,
| aim for 90-100 fps cap, beyond which diminishing returns
| kick in and power bills continue to creep up.
| jotm wrote:
| Yeah undervolting is always worth it.
|
| You can also limit your i7 power usage, so no need to go
| for an i3 if you have the money.
| SketchySeaBeast wrote:
| > A lot of people are undervolting their RTX GPU's because
| for an only about a ~3% performance loss you get about 10C
| less temp which translates to far less fan noise. I don't
| know why Nvidia doesn't just have a one click button for
| people.
|
| Yeah, I did exactly that with my 3080. Dropped ~50W
| depending on the game and I was able to keep the same clock
| speeds.
| ChuckNorris89 wrote:
| Mini ITX is also insanely more expensive than building a
| regula tower. Sure, if you're only putting the most
| expensive CPU and GPU in it then probably it doesn't matter
| to you but for value oriented builds, miniITX case, Mobo,
| PSU and cooler add up a lot.
| Marsymars wrote:
| I have an M1 gaming build where I prioritized efficiency;
| 5800X3D and RX 6600 with a 450W PSU.
|
| I also have a mini-ITX Lone L5 build with an i3-12100 and
| no GPU with a 192W PSU. (Effectively - PSU is technically a
| bit more, but the AC/DC adapter is only 192W.)
| TremendousJudge wrote:
| What games can you play on an M1?
| lostlogin wrote:
| I think this is the nCaae M1, a computer chassis and
| case, not the Apple M1.
| [deleted]
| [deleted]
| JustFinishedBSG wrote:
| Already there in Europe... I actually prefer getting the
| Steamdeck out than turning the main computer on for "light"
| games.
| rjbwork wrote:
| I actually did this...I got two dedicated circuits put into
| my room - one for the window unit AC (no point in cooling the
| whole house when I really just need to cool this room most of
| the time), and one for my gaming computer. My work laptop,
| lights, etc. are all on the original main circuit of the
| house.
|
| A friend of mine is an electrician so the price was very
| reasonable, and it has been worth it, especially during this
| hot summer.
| tristor wrote:
| I did something similar for my home lab setup in my
| previous house. It was pretty reasonable having two
| dedicated 20A circuits run w/ surge protected hospital-
| grade outlets and dual function breakers. Each circuit fed
| a different UPS which fed a different PDU so everything had
| redundant power back to the breaker panel, which was all I
| could reasonably do residentially, and it meant none of the
| servers/network gear impacted the rest of my office
| circuits.
|
| It was reasonably cheap, and in my next house I'll do the
| same again. Running additional circuits is pretty easy if
| you have an attic or crawl space.
| nerpderp82 wrote:
| Are you exhausting the gaming computer to the outside or
| into the room you are cooling?
| rjbwork wrote:
| Into the room I'm cooling. I suppose it would be possible
| in theory to do so, but the particular layout of the room
| makes it difficult to impossible to exhaust both the AC
| and computer, I think.
| Arrath wrote:
| In previous heat waves I've seriously considered venting
| my PC through the wall straight to the outside, but alas
| I currently rent.
| xani_ wrote:
| ...no. Average EU circuit is 230V/16A, that's 3.6kW
|
| Even if you ran 1kW (...somehow) you could still connect 3 of
| them and still have 600W left for audio/monitors.
| SketchySeaBeast wrote:
| You're right, I was being North American-centric, which is
| 120V/15A and could only run a single 1000W machine.
| FieryTransition wrote:
| We usually only use that high amperage fuses on high power
| appliances, like ovens or workshop equipment from my part
| of Europe.
|
| I would say it's more normal to be fused to 10A for most
| indoor things, anything else is not normal, as most home
| appliance power cables are not even thick enough to carry
| the 16A 230V power safely.
| PragmaticPulp wrote:
| Not really even close. Even with a 235W CPU and a theoretical
| 600W GPU you wouldn't actually exceed even half the capacity
| of a single 15A circuit in synthetic benchmarks that stress
| the system beyond real-world loads.
| mlindner wrote:
| People often use power strips for their computer. So you
| also have your dual 4K LCD monitor system, as well as maybe
| plugging in a phone to charge as well which can have high
| peak power draws over USB 3.0.
| quickthrowman wrote:
| A 15A circuit is good for 1440w sustained(120*15*.8), not
| 1800w.
| hinkley wrote:
| If you have a circuit in your house that trips for "no
| reason" this is partially why.
|
| With a steady load you can run a circuit breaker past the
| rated amperage on the breaker. But look at it funny and
| it will pop.
|
| The most obvious case of this was when I knew someone who
| would plug a vacuum into a different circuit and blow a
| breaker. Just a little noise on the wires and click.
| ip26 wrote:
| For sustained loads you are only supposed to draw 12A, and
| the PSU has a conversion loss, dropping you to perhaps 10A
| of power for it all. Plus, then you can't run anything else
| on the circuit.
| zrail wrote:
| 10A is ~1200 watts. That's quite a lot.
| dagmx wrote:
| It's easy to go over when you start factoring in other
| things like monitors etc
|
| A beefy CPU, GPU and a couple of high end monitors can
| take you to the edge of that and over.
| tristor wrote:
| > It's easy to go over when you start factoring in other
| things like monitors etc
|
| Why would monitors even be factored in? They shouldn't be
| on the same circuit anyway.
| collinvandyck76 wrote:
| Why wouldn't they be on the same circuit? The monitor and
| computer are in the same room and would generally be
| plugged into the same outlet. I think this would be the
| rule rather than the exception.
| dagmx wrote:
| That's absurd. Most people will not only plug them on the
| same circuit, they'll plug everything into a single multi
| plug feeding from a single wall socket.
|
| I've never seen anyone, in corporate and home
| environments , split their circuit use like you describe.
| xeromal wrote:
| 253W (13th gen intel) + 450W (video card) + 2 monitors +
| a speaker system can easily hit 1000W.
| SketchySeaBeast wrote:
| Sure, you would be able to put smaller power draw items on
| the same circuit, but between the
| CPU/GPU/Motherboard/PSU/Monitors/Peripherals you will not
| be able to put two of these machines onto the same circuit.
| Denvercoder9 wrote:
| For those confused like me, this conversation is about US
| circuits. On a typical European 230V 16A circuit, it's
| not a problem.
| occamrazor wrote:
| Maximum available power for standard domestic users is
| still only 3kW in many places. Might not be enough for a
| gaming PC, washing machine and microwave!
| xani_ wrote:
| Where, in deep russia ?
|
| 3kW is typical kitchen power.
| vetinari wrote:
| You would fit a gaming PC there?
|
| I have a microwave (1270W) and dishwasher (2400W) on the
| same circuit (230V, 16A). It didn't trip yet...
| sebazzz wrote:
| Depends on your country, in the Netherlands 25A and 35A
| main fuses are common.
| xxpor wrote:
| that's it?? that's not enough to even power an electric
| stove
| Denvercoder9 wrote:
| Don't forget that they use 230V, and electric stoves
| often use three-phase power. Even with a 25A fuse that
| gives almost 10 kW of power.
| xxpor wrote:
| So do American stoves. I have a 50A/240V circuit for my
| stove.
|
| Three phase on the other hand is a slight of hand, since
| that gives you more power than what 230V would imply ;)
| sebazzz wrote:
| Exactly, a "cooking fuse" is not uncommon, which is two
| 16A lines to the same stove. That gives you 7360W to play
| with, something you won't reach in practice.
|
| Alternatively, if you already have a multi-phase
| connection, then you would of course have the lines on
| different phases. If you have a 3-phase connection 25A
| main fuse is common, for single phase connections 35A is
| common.
| xxpor wrote:
| Just to clarify here: when you talk about a "main fuse",
| you mean one that sits between the meter and the entire
| rest of the panel, correct? So individual circuits would
| be downstream of the main switch.
|
| For context, most American homes have 240V split phase
| (single phase for all intents and purposes) service with
| a 200A main breaker.
| Denvercoder9 wrote:
| Wtf do residential homes need 48 kW of power for? I guess
| it's nice to charge your car quickly, but other than that
| I'm struggling to think of any uses.
| I_dev_outdoors wrote:
| I think the issue is with older houses that might have 15
| amp circuit breakers compared to the modern standard of
| 20A. One high end desktop computer by itself isn't likely
| to be a problem, but the way these houses are wired, there
| are a lot of outlets on the same breaker since they were
| mostly designed for lighting loads. Our 1950 house in MI
| will flip the breaker if we use the microwave, toser and
| bathroom vent at the same time, and my desktop is also on
| that circuit (with a UPS)
| hinkley wrote:
| 15A vs 20A is a factor of the gauge of the wires as well.
| You can't just swap the breaker for a bigger one. You'll
| get heat and depending where that could burn the house
| down.
|
| I have a relative whose house burnt down due to stapled
| wiring in the attic. Thermal cycling eventually created a
| short. When your attic catches on fire the smoke alarms
| go off in time to save the people, but the moment the
| ceiling starts to cave in the entire house is involved
| and you're mostly trying to keep the neighboring houses
| from burning.
| ForOldHack wrote:
| You have a 15A Fuse. You use a 12A Microwave, a 10A
| Toaster you have blow your breaker right there, and a 10A
| Bathroom vent?
|
| if you run a separate circut for the Microwave, and
| separate your bathroom vent + your bathroom LED lights,
| you can run all of them at the same time with your
| toster. Running circuts is comparatively easy, vs
| installing a new 200A fuse box.
| xani_ wrote:
| If you have bathroom and kitchen on single circuit you
| have bigger fucking problems than powering gaming PC,
| whoever did that abomination needs to be fired.
| brewdad wrote:
| In 1950, that was probably seen as perfectly fine. I used
| to own a 1942 home that had 4 screw in fuses for the
| entire house.
| 404mm wrote:
| This is the definition of "working smart vs. working hard".
| Not everything about the CPU needs to be solved by pushing it
| to the limits of physics. TDP is not linear relative to CPU
| freq.
| thehappypm wrote:
| 253W is only 2 amps in the US, thats like 10-20% of a
| breaker's capacity
| simlevesque wrote:
| With the GPU it's going to reach 51% at this rate. That's
| all it takes to require one per computer.
| hnuser123456 wrote:
| Just realized everyone's gonna have to turn their power
| targets down when running a LAN party. I gave my brother
| my old 2080ti, something would coil whine when he played
| Battlefield. We turned the card's power target down until
| the whine went away. We found at 35%, the whine stopped,
| and the performance difference was not easily discernable
| with a basic FPS counter just flying around a MP game.
|
| Opportunity for software that dynamically adjusts CPU and
| GPU power targets in the middle of various games, learns
| the game's power/performance profile and whether it's
| CPU/GPU bottlenecked, and optimizes perf/watt while
| maintaining a given FPS target?
| xeromal wrote:
| I believe the new 4x nvidia series uses 450-500W.
|
| Throw in 2 monitors and a speaker system and you're coming
| close to overloading your 15amp breaker.
| alasdair_ wrote:
| Peak draw for even a current-gen graphics card is well over
| 500W. There are rumors that a 4090 will need as much as a
| 1500W power supply to run it. That's almost a complete 15A
| circuit just for the PC once you factor in cooling,
| speakers, monitor etc.
|
| I already have issues where the breaker would pop with my
| current gaming PC if it fully spins up and I had to get a
| 20A circuit put in to handle it (mostly because there is
| more than one computer on the circuit).
| grapescheesee wrote:
| I can't lie, the idea of needing a 30amp dedicated CB
| makes me feel happy as a nerd. Makes my power company
| happier..
| neogodless wrote:
| There are cards like that.
|
| But you don't have to buy _those_ cards. I play my games
| in QHD on a Radeon 6700XT 12GB, which tops out at about
| 165W.
| hotpotamus wrote:
| I had a LAN party at my house in 2012 and one lunatic brought
| his 1KW+ PC and tripped a breaker which has seemed really
| twitchy ever since.
| hinkley wrote:
| You should have an electrician check the wiring too. You
| might be leaking a little current due to decaying
| insulation.
|
| If you have to wire a room, ask for a larger gauge of wire
| so have the option of a larger breaker if you want it.
| UseStrict wrote:
| Circuit breakers do degrade after being tripped. Once
| usually isn't enough, but repeated tripping will wear them
| out.
| [deleted]
| mox1 wrote:
| For those of you unaware, most households in the USA have
| 15amp circuits for their wall plugs. With that you can safely
| pull about 1200Watts constantly.
|
| I am unsure what the normal household circuit amperage is in
| the EU or elsewhere...
| quickthrowman wrote:
| Max sustained load on a 15A breaker is not 10A/1200w, it's
| 80% of 15A at 120v, or 12A/1440w.
| kuschku wrote:
| The normal amperage in Germany is 16A at 230V, with a peak
| load of 3500W and a sustained load of 3000W.
| fartsucker69 wrote:
| who cares about these russian gas problems. I will have to
| throttle my cpu so it doesn't get too hot in winter
| cameronh90 wrote:
| My office gets about 5c warmer when I play games on my PC,
| despite being poorly insulated with the window open.
|
| And I've only got a 3900X+2070 Super...
| imdsm wrote:
| feeling a bit cold, gonna turn on my gaming pc for an hour
| thegagne wrote:
| Water cooled? More like water heated, amirite?
| Teknoman117 wrote:
| I popped the breaker when I accidentally connected my gaming
| computer and my car charger (plug-in hybrid) to the same
| circuit.
|
| Probably would've been fine if it were a 20A circuit and not
| a 15A, but it did remind me how much power these things
| draw...
|
| Or with power in SF averaging 40-ish cents per kWh a standard
| evening gaming session can easily cost a non-negligible
| amount of money.
| izzydata wrote:
| And also use the heat from their PC to boil water and then
| spin a turbine to generate electricity to sell back to the
| grid.
| Nextgrid wrote:
| For people who use resistive electric heating I've
| recommended them to run crypto miners on their computer.
| Same efficiency with regards to heating, but you can earn
| some extra money as a bonus.
| nibbleshifter wrote:
| I've done this to heat the small room I use as an office,
| its far more efficient than the shit electric radiator in
| there.
|
| Rented house so can't do much about the absolutely
| useless heating setup.
| undersuit wrote:
| I lived in a little apartment with resistive wall heaters
| and I did just that in the 2018 period. Even had some
| Raspberry Pis mining Aeon, a lightweight offshoot of
| Monero.
| irthomasthomas wrote:
| So, almost 25c an hour at EU electric prices.
| cypress66 wrote:
| Is eu electricity really 1 dollar per kwh?
| birdyrooster wrote:
| Here in downtown San Jose it's around $0.75/kWh
| Symbiote wrote:
| Here are the hourly prices in Denmark, without taxes and
| other charges which are about 1.6DKK/kWh. If you go
| forwards and backwards, you can see the price has
| varied/will vary from about 1kr to 4.5kr, plus tax, or 35C/
| to 81C/. Car chargers can be set to charge at the cheap
| times, and things like dishwashers and washing machines
| have delay timers for people who want to run them at the
| cheaper times.
|
| Straightforward day/night electricity rates have existed
| for decades, hourly rates are more recent, and optional.
|
| 100C//kWh has happened in the last month, but only at a
| peak period. I'm not sure how long or how often it
| happened.
|
| 1.00DKK = 0.14USD
|
| https://andelenergi.dk/kundeservice/aftaler-og-
| priser/timepr...
| hagbarth wrote:
| Depending on the day and hour of the day, yes. At least
| here in Denmark.
| aero-glide2 wrote:
| Solar should be 10x cheaper, why don't more European
| homes have solar?
| spixy wrote:
| because its expensive (installation) and depending on
| country solar panels grands can be difficult to get and
| are practically non existent
| orangepurple wrote:
| Could it be because solar panels are nearly useless in
| northern Europe in November, December, January, and
| February?
|
| Yurop:
|
| https://weatherspark.com/y/68301/Average-Weather-in-
| Hamburg-...
|
| https://weatherspark.com/y/74001/Average-Weather-in-
| Copenhag...
|
| USA:
|
| https://weatherspark.com/y/18622/Average-Weather-in-
| Miami-Fl...
|
| https://weatherspark.com/y/20957/Average-Weather-in-
| Washingt...
| xeromal wrote:
| Cause a lot of europe is on the same latitude as canada.
| [deleted]
| 404mm wrote:
| Coin operated Game systems lol. We have come in the whole
| circle.
| onlyrealcuzzo wrote:
| Or <$0.04 in the US and in most of the EU under normal
| circumstances.
| lotsofpulp wrote:
| Here is US data:
|
| https://www.eia.gov/electricity/monthly/epm_table_grapher.p
| h...
| PragmaticPulp wrote:
| It sounds high, but we've had plenty of AMD and Intel
| workstation CPUs with even higher TDPs for a long time.
| Overclockers have also routinely pushed well past that number.
|
| 235W is well within the range of what a decent air cooler like
| the Noctua NH-D15 can handle without excessive fan noise.
| JustFinishedBSG wrote:
| Justifying the off-the-shelves TDP of new GPUs/CPUs by saying
| it's still lower than what overclockers reach is the same as
| saying a car doing 50L/100KM is completely fine because an M1
| Abraham uses 2000L/100KM offroad.
| PragmaticPulp wrote:
| That's not what I said. I specifically said that AMD and
| Intel have been shipping CPUs with higher TDPs (stock!) for
| a long time. Overclockers have been going _even further_.
|
| AMD's Threadripper PRO CPUs come with up to 280W TDPs.
|
| It's really not a problem with modern air coolers and not a
| problem at all for people running liquid coolers.
|
| A 253W boost TDP isn't really a big deal any more. There
| are plenty of smaller CPUs for people who don't want such
| high overheads.
|
| Some of Intel's new parts can be limited to 35W and still
| outperform a Ryzen 7 5800X:
| https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-13700t-raptor-
| lake-a...
|
| There's a lot of "sky is falling" over these numbers, but
| it's a non-issue for the enthusiast builds these are
| targeted at. Nobody is forced to put a 253W CPU into their
| machine, but it's great that the vendors are making them
| available for those who want them.
| ChuckNorris89 wrote:
| Your comparison is moot as nobody is forcing you to buy the
| most gas guzzling chips Intel and AMD make as those are
| exclusively for enthusiasts who want to have the best of
| the best with no regard for value for money or efficiency.
|
| But Intel and AMD also make enough chips with very good
| efficiency for the average folk who don't need to set
| benchmark records.
| hinkley wrote:
| Wasn't the top of the line DEC Alpha drawing 200 watts at one
| point?
| pdntspa wrote:
| Wow... my whole desktop setup, with 3 screens, a 7-year-old
| intel CPU, a gaming GPU, and a grip of hard drives is showing a
| draw of 143W right now, up to 289W under stress (prime95). 235W
| just for the CPU is nuts.
| jotm wrote:
| TBF the performance per watt is also nuts. 7 year old is
| Haswell-Skylake (same performance mostly)?
|
| Alder Lake impresses me, but Ryzen is the better choice
| because f Intel heh
| pdntspa wrote:
| Yeah, this PC has a Haswell CPU.
|
| As much as I want to agree on Ryzen, Intel is still the
| best platform for low-latency audio stuff. So I hope that
| performance-per-watt is or will be good as I'm beginning to
| get that PC-building itch. I'm curious what its idle usage
| is like.
|
| But my living-room PC has a third-gen Ryzen (I built it
| just before the pandemic hit) and have been super pleased
| with its performance.
| wyager wrote:
| My i9-12900k hovers right around 250W TDP with no overclocking
| or anything. If you keep it under 100C it's happy to do so.
| jeffbee wrote:
| Just to clarify for the audience, there is nothing you can do
| within reason that will cause your CPU to ever self-heat
| above 100deg. They manage their own power to stay below their
| maximum design junction temperature, less a safety margin.
| Even if you ran it without a heat sink, it will not run above
| 100deg. It just won't run very well or very often.
| formerly_proven wrote:
| I damaged some traces on an AMD board which allowed the CPU
| to talk to the VRM (anything related to SVI2 couldn't be
| read when booted) and even that didn't kill anything, it
| just put the system in like a 0.8 V, 400 MHz mode. Windows
| 10 takes an incredible amount of time to do literally
| anything on a system like that btw., even with twelve
| cores. Patched the traces and everything was back to
| normal.
|
| Modern hardware is really difficult to permanently damage
| as long as you don't go full "manual OC" - in that case
| many protections may be disabled, and you can certainly get
| Ryzens to overheat and die like that.
| STRML wrote:
| Looks like that's just for the 5.4GHz chip. To hit 6GHz, it's
| probably going to be this 350W (!!!) turbo mode.
|
| https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-raptor-lake-to-featu...
| kristianp wrote:
| Apparently this is a stopgap until Meteor Lake, which will use
| the "Intel 7" process, hopefully improving on power efficiency.
| However Meteor Lake isn't scheduled until 2nd half of 2023.
|
| These 13 gen are Raptor lake, which uses the same process as
| Alder Lake.
| oblak wrote:
| Incidentally, the chip is code-named Preshott 2
|
| Snark aside, I have a couple of 3700x machines and an itch. Kind
| of split between upgrading my gaming machine (not entirely worth
| it) or changing the mini-ITX and severely undervolting a 7700x.
|
| Or, I can just wait for the zen 5 which was my original plan but
| as I said, I've the captains itch
| jmyeet wrote:
| I look forward to TSMC fabbing it for them.
|
| In all seriousness, hasn't Intel been hanging on to their current
| architecture for way too long at this point? IIRC Ryzen consumes
| less power and does more per Watt on the high end and ARM is
| eating them up on the low end. It feels like Intel is just trying
| to squeeze out a little more from a much-delayed 10nm process and
| their existing architecture.
|
| It sort of reminds me of Pentium 4 just outstaying its welcome.
|
| Genuinely curious: what's on the horizon for Intel as their next
| big change and not something that's just a marketing clock speed
| boost?
| happycube wrote:
| They finally started moving forward in the 11th gen, where they
| backported the core originally meant to 10nm to 14nm. 12th gen
| had a nice IPC boost, pity they didn't keep AVX512 enabled IMO.
| atty wrote:
| Current architecture, no - this big+little architecture just
| started with the last generation, like a year ago I think?
| However, if you mean process node, then yes, I think this is on
| the same one they've been using for awhile. But they have 2-3
| more nodes coming in the next 3-4 years. If they don't screw
| those up, they should be ok. That's a big if, though.
|
| They're also changing to a chiplet-based architecture with
| their next Xeon line which will be interesting.
| ksidudwbw wrote:
| 1 plank meter! 12 GHz!
| whoomp12342 wrote:
| how on earth does this not melt all matter in the known universe?
|
| forgive my laymen knowledge, I am just a humble software person
| but isn't the equation of power -> speed exponential which is why
| CPU speeds clocked out around 4ghz and we moved to multi core
| processing? what sorcery exists that lets us suddenly break that
| barrier?
| jhickok wrote:
| Lots and lots and lots of energy. The tdp of my first i7-920
| was 95 watts, and rumors are this new Intel chip will clock in
| almost 3x higher.
| jeffbee wrote:
| This processor's TDP will likely be 125W just like its
| predecessor and the generation before that and the generation
| before that, too. It's a practical design point that desktop
| cases, coolers, and motherboard power circuitry can hit.
| jlpom wrote:
| Power = Capacitance * Voltage ^2 * frequency ; not exponential
| whoomp12342 wrote:
| thank you! I just had a simple graph in my head. Now that
| there is something I can conceptualize, is it :
|
| Power = Capacitance * Voltage ^(2 * frequency)
|
| or
|
| Power = Capacitance * (Voltage ^2) * frequency
| loa_in_ wrote:
| It's
|
| Power = Capacitance * (Voltage ^2) * frequency
| [deleted]
| shirleyquirk wrote:
| In general you can often work out the answers to questions
| like this by considering units. In this case, we don't need
| to figure out what Watts / Farads is(1), we can see that
| Volts^Hz is not going to give us anything well-behaved.
|
| (1)[m^4 kg^2 s^-7 A^-2]
| InitialLastName wrote:
| The difference in energy stored in a capacitor at two
| different voltages is 0.5*C*(V^2). A chip will burn that
| energy 2*(frequency) times per second, so P=C*(V^2)*F.
|
| Edit: forgot a half
| LeifCarrotson wrote:
| The latter. See also:
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Processor_power_dissipation#S
| o...
|
| and
|
| https://electronics.stackexchange.com/a/33340
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2022-09-12 23:00 UTC)