| Forum Home | ||||
| Press F1 | ||||
| Thread ID: 62243 | 2005-10-01 08:00:00 | What CPU? | robsonde (120) | Press F1 |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 392606 | 2005-10-01 08:00:00 | I am starting to think about the design of a new system. the system it is replacing is a 300MHz box and will be used as a server. main requiremnet is low power use and low heat, that means less fan noise in the cooler choice and less hit to the power bill. 1 watt in power saving over 365 days = $1 per year :-) I am thinking about AMD64, i have heard that one scoket/core design is much lower power than the other. anyone know which is lower power? socket 939 or 754 and what is this i hear about socket 940. cost is no big deal as i want quite and i am willing to pay more to get it. motherboard will be selected after i have decided about the CPU, case will be custom, OS will be some kind of unix (free BSD or solaris-10) I hope to get some big heat pipe cooler that can run with out a fan. |
robsonde (120) | ||
| 392607 | 2005-10-01 10:01:00 | You'll only chew the power if you are using the full capabilities of the cpu. A dual core, for eg, barely brealing a sweat may be cheaper and quieter than a single that is struggling to keep pace. So, it really depends on the loads. Is it a web server, just a file server or will it be running apps as well? The later chips have some good power saving features, which I'm not sure you'll get with the 754 chips, which are basically obsolete now. An Opteron will probably have even more of the features you want, they'll run on either 939 or 940, but I don't know what benefits you gain by one over the other. |
Murray P (44) | ||
| 392608 | 2005-10-01 10:05:00 | it will be a web server but may run apps too. | robsonde (120) | ||
| 392609 | 2005-10-01 10:06:00 | The AMD 939 is the way to go... the 754 is going to become extinct in the near future. No idea about socket 940. The AMD 64 3000+ venice core (90nm) runs cooler and quieter than the standard CPUs and overclocks well if that's what you want to do. They do a 3500+ version as well, but quite a jump up in price. The 3000+ has wattage of 67W as opposed to 89W for the standard 3000+ and slightly lower voltage 1.5V/1.4V. Also the 64 CPUs come with 'cool n quiet' technology... alters voltage/fan speed/wattage etc to lower heat and noise (you can't hear the fan on mine at all and it runs constant 27deg with the stock CPU fan) |
Shortcircuit (1666) | ||
| 392610 | 2005-10-01 12:59:00 | My mate has a 754, half the time his CPU fan switches off, meaning it's not hot enough for the fan to be running. | Rob99 (151) | ||
| 392611 | 2005-10-01 14:31:00 | Also the 64 CPUs come with 'cool n quiet' technology... That's the stuff I was thinking of, couldn't remeber the name. Looks perfect for you Derek. Leave the 754, it's deaded. |
Murray P (44) | ||
| 392612 | 2005-10-01 20:30:00 | if you want cool running and low power usage, for a basic server, look at via processors or even some of the mobile processors which can run in desktops. | tweak'e (69) | ||
| 392613 | 2005-10-01 22:55:00 | i will look more into the 939 stuff, i did think about mobile processors but i think that might be more than i need. | robsonde (120) | ||
| 392614 | 2005-10-02 00:14:00 | You'll only chew the power if you are using the full capabilities of the cpu. A dual core, for eg, barely brealing a sweat may be cheaper and quieter than a single that is struggling to keep pace. So, it really depends on the loads. Is it a web server, just a file server or will it be running apps as well? The later chips have some good power saving features, which I'm not sure you'll get with the 754 chips, which are basically obsolete now. An Opteron will probably have even more of the features you want, they'll run on either 939 or 940, but I don't know what benefits you gain by one over the other. I am sorry but 1. First off you haven't even asked him "what he is doing with this unit" server could mean anything. How can you say Opteron will probably have more features he wants?. I have a "server" that feeds two machines as a gateway, I hardly think I need Opteron. 2. Opteron's are more expensive especially there motherboards. 3. Dual cores- There is currently only a very few apps and no games that support dual core (except synthetic benchmarks) and the general consensus is a year away before the true benefits start to come through. They consume about the same power as single core, next to no consideration to be made here. They are considerably more expensive, It he has the money sure go for it. Amd 64's are beating the P4 in virtually all games and use less power, but they are often behind in apps due to there lack HT ability, however unless you are doing some heavy encoding etc the difference is not worth considering. With home users the choice should generally be 939 AMD64 over P4 (at the moment anyway), and AMD 64,s will also go very nicely in smaller domain controllers or file servers etc. |
Battleneter (60) | ||
| 392615 | 2005-10-02 02:51:00 | 1 . First off you haven't even asked him "what he is doing with this unit" server could mean anything . How can you say Opteron will probably have more features he wants? . I have a "server" that feeds two machines as a gateway, I hardly think I need Opteron . the system will be a webserver . apache and perl on unix, mysql backend . I would rather pay an extra $100 on chip and mobo cost to get 50 watts less power use . noise and power are my big issues, onboard network is fine, onboard video is fine too as I dont care about video at all . |
robsonde (120) | ||
| 1 2 | |||||