[gentoo-user] Another hardware thread

[gentoo-user] Another hardware thread

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1222 bytes --]

It's time for a new desktop, I'd rather the the money to Amazon or Ebuyer
than the Inland Revenue. I'm currently running a Core2Duo system, but use
AMD before that, so I have no real allegiances.

I was thinking of something like an AMD 1100T 6 core CPU, the new
Bulldozers are expensive and initial reports are not that promising, but
an Intel that gives the same bang per buck would do. I'm thinking
Gigabyte for motherboard, based on comments made here in similar threads
(like the one Dale started a while ago). I need lots of SATA ports
(fortunately, I bought a pair of 2TB drives a fortnight ago, just before
the prices went ballistic).

I'm not a gamer, but I want a system with plenty of grunt. Video
performance is not critical, on board would suffice, except I need
something with dual output to drive two monitors. Do any of the onboard
jobbies do this or is a separate Nvidia still the best option?

Thoughts would be welcome, and please feel free to start your own ATI vs
Nvidia and AMD vs Intel flamewars. OK, I'd rather you didn't, but I'm not
about to waste electrons asking for the impossible :)


-- 
Neil Bothwick

Dream as if you'll live forever. Live as if you'll die today.

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Another hardware thread

[Pandu Poluan]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1773 bytes --]

On Nov 12, 2011 7:58 AM, "Neil Bothwick" <neil@digimed.co.uk> wrote:
>
> It's time for a new desktop, I'd rather the the money to Amazon or Ebuyer
> than the Inland Revenue. I'm currently running a Core2Duo system, but use
> AMD before that, so I have no real allegiances.
>
> I was thinking of something like an AMD 1100T 6 core CPU, the new
> Bulldozers are expensive and initial reports are not that promising, but
> an Intel that gives the same bang per buck would do. I'm thinking
> Gigabyte for motherboard, based on comments made here in similar threads
> (like the one Dale started a while ago). I need lots of SATA ports
> (fortunately, I bought a pair of 2TB drives a fortnight ago, just before
> the prices went ballistic).
>
> I'm not a gamer, but I want a system with plenty of grunt. Video
> performance is not critical, on board would suffice, except I need
> something with dual output to drive two monitors. Do any of the onboard
> jobbies do this or is a separate Nvidia still the best option?
>

AFAIK onboards very rarely have support for dual monitor. Besides, having a
separate somewhat-beefier GPU might be usable in some cases. For instance,
Ubuntu's Unity and Windows' Aero both rely on GPU to do their eye candy
stuff.

C'mon, don't be stingy... spare one PCIe slot for a graphic card :-)

> Thoughts would be welcome, and please feel free to start your own ATI vs
> Nvidia and AMD vs Intel flamewars. OK, I'd rather you didn't, but I'm not
> about to waste electrons asking for the impossible :)
>

Honestly, I hate Intel for their tendency to confuse people with their CPU
features (e.g., I must be doubly sure if a new processor supports VT-x).
But then again, AMD still has no answer for Intel's *Bridge juggernaut.

Horrible times :-(

Rgds,

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2088 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Another hardware thread

[Michael Mol]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1505 bytes --]

On Nov 11, 2011 9:13 PM, "Pandu Poluan" <pandu@poluan.info> wrote:
>
>
> On Nov 12, 2011 7:58 AM, "Neil Bothwick" <neil@digimed.co.uk> wrote:
> >
> > It's time for a new desktop, I'd rather the the money to Amazon or
Ebuyer
> > than the Inland Revenue. I'm currently running a Core2Duo system, but
use
> > AMD before that, so I have no real allegiances.
> >
> > I was thinking of something like an AMD 1100T 6 core CPU, the new
> > Bulldozers are expensive and initial reports are not that promising, but
> > an Intel that gives the same bang per buck would do. I'm thinking
> > Gigabyte for motherboard, based on comments made here in similar threads
> > (like the one Dale started a while ago). I need lots of SATA ports
> > (fortunately, I bought a pair of 2TB drives a fortnight ago, just before
> > the prices went ballistic).
> >
> > I'm not a gamer, but I want a system with plenty of grunt. Video
> > performance is not critical, on board would suffice, except I need
> > something with dual output to drive two monitors. Do any of the onboard
> > jobbies do this or is a separate Nvidia still the best option?
> >
>
> AFAIK onboards very rarely have support for dual monitor. Besides, having
a separate somewhat-beefier GPU might be usable in some cases. For
instance, Ubuntu's Unity and Windows' Aero both rely on GPU to do their eye
candy stuff.

The ATI chipsets handle it fine. Well, the DVI and HDMI outputs can be used
at same time. I *think* I used the VGA, DVI and HDMI at the same time.

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1873 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Another hardware thread

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1007 bytes --]

On Sat, 12 Nov 2011 09:06:49 +0700, Pandu Poluan wrote:

> > I'm not a gamer, but I want a system with plenty of grunt. Video
> > performance is not critical, on board would suffice, except I need
> > something with dual output to drive two monitors. Do any of the
> > onboard jobbies do this or is a separate Nvidia still the best option?

> AFAIK onboards very rarely have support for dual monitor. Besides,
> having a separate somewhat-beefier GPU might be usable in some cases.
> For instance, Ubuntu's Unity and Windows' Aero both rely on GPU to do
> their eye candy stuff.
> 
> C'mon, don't be stingy... spare one PCIe slot for a graphic card :-)

I'm not bothered about using a separate card, heck I could even re-use
the one I have.

I use neither Unity nor Windows tough.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

We've all heard that a million monkeys banging on a million
typewriters will eventually reproduce the works of Shakespeare.
Now, thanks to the Internet, we know this is not true.

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Another hardware thread

[Pandu Poluan]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1094 bytes --]

On Nov 12, 2011 5:42 PM, "Neil Bothwick" <neil@digimed.co.uk> wrote:
>
> On Sat, 12 Nov 2011 09:06:49 +0700, Pandu Poluan wrote:
>
> > > I'm not a gamer, but I want a system with plenty of grunt. Video
> > > performance is not critical, on board would suffice, except I need
> > > something with dual output to drive two monitors. Do any of the
> > > onboard jobbies do this or is a separate Nvidia still the best option?
>
> > AFAIK onboards very rarely have support for dual monitor. Besides,
> > having a separate somewhat-beefier GPU might be usable in some cases.
> > For instance, Ubuntu's Unity and Windows' Aero both rely on GPU to do
> > their eye candy stuff.
> >
> > C'mon, don't be stingy... spare one PCIe slot for a graphic card :-)
>
> I'm not bothered about using a separate card, heck I could even re-use
> the one I have.
>
> I use neither Unity nor Windows tough.

Well, those are just examples, illustrating that GPUs are no longer only
used by games and cg renderers. Some BOINC projects also use the GPU, and
who knows what else will utilize the GPU in the future.

Rgds,

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1378 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Another hardware thread

[john]

On Sat, 12 Nov 2011 00:51:29 +0000
Neil Bothwick <neil@digimed.co.uk> wrote:

> It's time for a new desktop, I'd rather the the money to Amazon or
> Ebuyer than the Inland Revenue. I'm currently running a Core2Duo
> system, but use AMD before that, so I have no real allegiances.
> 
> I was thinking of something like an AMD 1100T 6 core CPU, the new
> Bulldozers are expensive and initial reports are not that promising,
> but an Intel that gives the same bang per buck would do. I'm thinking
> Gigabyte for motherboard, based on comments made here in similar
> threads (like the one Dale started a while ago). I need lots of SATA
> ports (fortunately, I bought a pair of 2TB drives a fortnight ago,
> just before the prices went ballistic).
> 
> I'm not a gamer, but I want a system with plenty of grunt. Video
> performance is not critical, on board would suffice, except I need
> something with dual output to drive two monitors. Do any of the
> onboard jobbies do this or is a separate Nvidia still the best option?
> 
> Thoughts would be welcome, and please feel free to start your own ATI
> vs Nvidia and AMD vs Intel flamewars. OK, I'd rather you didn't, but
> I'm not about to waste electrons asking for the impossible :)
> 
> 

Using a 1090t which is one behind the 1100t. It was relatively cheap
and performs excellently. Have had no problems running anything and
compilation time seems to rocket through on gentoo. Much faster than
previous dual core.




-- 
John D Maunder

[gentoo-user] Re: Another hardware thread

[masterprometheus]

Neil Bothwick wrote:

> It's time for a new desktop, I'd rather the the money to Amazon or 
Ebuyer
> than the Inland Revenue. I'm currently running a Core2Duo system, but 
use
> AMD before that, so I have no real allegiances.
> 
> I was thinking of something like an AMD 1100T 6 core CPU, the new
> Bulldozers are expensive and initial reports are not that promising, 
but
> an Intel that gives the same bang per buck would do. 

For AMD I'd recommend to go for a 960T :
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819103995
It's a 95W and as a Zosma it's actually a 6-core. Most of those (not all 
unfortunately) can be unlocked to a 6-core. Has Turbo functionality.

For Intel a 2500K is the way to go but maybe you should wait for Ivy 
Bridge.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819115072

> I'm thinking
> Gigabyte for motherboard, based on comments made here in similar 
threads
> (like the one Dale started a while ago). 

Go for ASUS or Gigabyte. For AMD make sure you pick one that is 
compatible with the Bulldozer Architecture. For example :

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813131754
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813128509

Those are UEFI boards which will help with larger AF drives. 

For Intel go with Z68 boards. 
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813131790
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813128507
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813157264

> I need lots of SATA ports
> (fortunately, I bought a pair of 2TB drives a fortnight ago, just 
before
> the prices went ballistic).

Above boards have lots of SATA ports. 
 
> I'm not a gamer, but I want a system with plenty of grunt. Video
> performance is not critical, on board would suffice, except I need
> something with dual output to drive two monitors. Do any of the onboard
> jobbies do this or is a separate Nvidia still the best option?

Dual output what ? DSUB, DVI ? A fanless card :
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814102933

Something more powerful :
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814150543
 

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Another hardware thread

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 717 bytes --]

On Sat, 12 Nov 2011 23:00:15 +0200, masterprometheus wrote:

> For AMD I'd recommend to go for a 960T :
> http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819103995
> It's a 95W and as a Zosma it's actually a 6-core. Most of those (not
> all unfortunately) can be unlocked to a 6-core. Has Turbo functionality.

That sounds like a poor gamble. A 3.0GHz CPu that I may be able to unlock
to 6 cores for £20 less than a genuine 6 cores 3.2GHz 1090T. I either get
slightly less for slightly less, or a lot less for slightly less :(


-- 
Neil Bothwick

"God created the world in six days.  On the seventh day he also decided
to create England... just to try out his Practical Joke Weather Machine."

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

[gentoo-user] Re: Re: Another hardware thread

[masterprometheus]

Neil Bothwick wrote:

> On Sat, 12 Nov 2011 23:00:15 +0200, masterprometheus wrote:
> 
>> For AMD I'd recommend to go for a 960T :
>> http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819103995
>> It's a 95W and as a Zosma it's actually a 6-core. Most of those (not
>> all unfortunately) can be unlocked to a 6-core. Has Turbo 
functionality.
> 
> That sounds like a poor gamble. A 3.0GHz CPu that I may be able to 
unlock
> to 6 cores for £20 less than a genuine 6 cores 3.2GHz 1090T. I either 
get
> slightly less for slightly less, or a lot less for slightly less :(
> 

Well when I checked the 960T was $125 at Newegg and 1090T was $170. 
That's a $45 difference. With $30 of this you can get a good cooler like 
this one :
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16835233082

Then overclock and beat the 1090T easily in most tasks (even with 4 
cores). 

But if you're not in a budget get the best you can. An Intel core i7 
2600K is a great choice if you can afford it. Already fast, easily 
overclockable and hyperthreading will help with media encoding etc.

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Another hardware thread

[Dale]

masterprometheus wrote:
> Neil Bothwick wrote:
>
>
>> I'm thinking
>> Gigabyte for motherboard, based on comments made here in similar
> threads
>> (like the one Dale started a while ago).
>

I highly recommend Gigabyte.  My mobo has been great.  Everything runs 
cool and stable but I don't overclock either.  This mobo will but I just 
don't use that feature.

I'm not saying anything bad about ASUS just that I don't have a lot of 
experience with it.  I have messed with one once for a friend,  He 
worked fine and no complaints.  I only had it for a couple days tho.

Dale

:-)  :-)

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Another hardware thread

[Érico Porto]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 980 bytes --]

I have a asus board that does some pretty fair work on overclocking, but it
had a feature called Everyready, an feature to boot and load a webbrowser
or some games in 6 seconds.. But it crashed after the first bios update..

Érico V. Porto


On Sat, Nov 12, 2011 at 11:46 PM, Dale <rdalek1967@gmail.com> wrote:

> masterprometheus wrote:
>
>  Neil Bothwick wrote:
>>
>>
>>  I'm thinking
>>> Gigabyte for motherboard, based on comments made here in similar
>>>
>> threads
>>
>>> (like the one Dale started a while ago).
>>>
>>
>>
> I highly recommend Gigabyte.  My mobo has been great.  Everything runs
> cool and stable but I don't overclock either.  This mobo will but I just
> don't use that feature.
>
> I'm not saying anything bad about ASUS just that I don't have a lot of
> experience with it.  I have messed with one once for a friend,  He worked
> fine and no complaints.  I only had it for a couple days tho.
>
> Dale
>
> :-)  :-)
>
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1701 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Another hardware thread

[Érico Porto]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1374 bytes --]

What kind of computer are you looking for? If you are not a gamer but do
like to watch high res videos, go for a fanless video board. If you like to
do image processing, nvidia boards are also a good idea because of CUDA
capabilities..

Érico V. Porto


On Sun, Nov 13, 2011 at 12:09 AM, Érico Porto <ericoporto2008@gmail.com>wrote:

> I have a asus board that does some pretty fair work on overclocking, but
> it had a feature called Everyready, an feature to boot and load a
> webbrowser or some games in 6 seconds.. But it crashed after the first bios
> update..
>
> Érico V. Porto
>
>
>
> On Sat, Nov 12, 2011 at 11:46 PM, Dale <rdalek1967@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> masterprometheus wrote:
>>
>>  Neil Bothwick wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>  I'm thinking
>>>> Gigabyte for motherboard, based on comments made here in similar
>>>>
>>> threads
>>>
>>>> (like the one Dale started a while ago).
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>> I highly recommend Gigabyte.  My mobo has been great.  Everything runs
>> cool and stable but I don't overclock either.  This mobo will but I just
>> don't use that feature.
>>
>> I'm not saying anything bad about ASUS just that I don't have a lot of
>> experience with it.  I have messed with one once for a friend,  He worked
>> fine and no complaints.  I only had it for a couple days tho.
>>
>> Dale
>>
>> :-)  :-)
>>
>>
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2353 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Another hardware thread

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 612 bytes --]

On Sun, 13 Nov 2011 00:11:11 -0200, Érico Porto wrote:

> What kind of computer are you looking for? If you are not a gamer but do
> like to watch high res videos, go for a fanless video board. If you
> like to do image processing, nvidia boards are also a good idea because
> of CUDA capabilities..

General desktop use, but that does include some image processing and
plenty of virtualisation. It will also be a build host for some lower
powered Gentoo systems, so fast compile times, and plenty of cores, are
advantages.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

DOS never says "EXCELLENT command or filename"...

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Another hardware thread

[Stefan G. Weichinger]

Am 2011-11-13 12:56, schrieb Neil Bothwick:

> General desktop use, but that does include some image processing
> and plenty of virtualisation. It will also be a build host for some
> lower powered Gentoo systems, so fast compile times, and plenty of
> cores, are advantages.

Nearly the same use here, KVM-virtualization, still one
VMware-player-driven-VM ....

I play with the thought of getting myself a nice new machine for work,
better to spend some money on hardware than on taxes (2012 is near ...).

Performance is one issue, another one is energy/noise ... the phenom
1090t seems to pull in a lot and need good (and maybe noisy) fans.

I just start to compare. 6 cores, yep, sounds good for both
gentoo-compile-work and VMs ...

Stefan

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Another hardware thread

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1141 bytes --]

On Wed, 16 Nov 2011 00:51:44 +0100, Stefan G. Weichinger wrote:

> I play with the thought of getting myself a nice new machine for work,
> better to spend some money on hardware than on taxes (2012 is near ...).

My thoughts exactly.

> Performance is one issue, another one is energy/noise ... the phenom
> 1090t seems to pull in a lot and need good (and maybe noisy) fans.

I'll be using my existing water cooling setup, so no need to worry about
that. However, after some research, I've decided to stick with Intel and
orders an i7 2600k today. I wasn't sure whether it was worth the extra
over the i5, but knew I would only regret it the first time I had to wait
for something. I rationalised the cost by getting "only" 8GB of RAM, but
leaving the slots free for another 8GB should I feel the need for it.

> I just start to compare. 6 cores, yep, sounds good for both
> gentoo-compile-work and VMs ...

The Intel chips are only four cores, but appear to give a lot more
bang-per-core, especially with the i7's hyperthreading.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

If you consult enough experts, you can confirm any opinion.

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Another hardware thread

[Stefan G. Weichinger]

Am 2011-11-16 01:20, schrieb Neil Bothwick:
> On Wed, 16 Nov 2011 00:51:44 +0100, Stefan G. Weichinger wrote:
> 
>> I play with the thought of getting myself a nice new machine for
>> work, better to spend some money on hardware than on taxes (2012 is
>> near ...).
> 
> My thoughts exactly.

Same world ;-)

>> Performance is one issue, another one is energy/noise ... the
>> phenom 1090t seems to pull in a lot and need good (and maybe noisy)
>> fans.
> 
> I'll be using my existing water cooling setup, so no need to worry
> about that. However, after some research, I've decided to stick with
> Intel and orders an i7 2600k today. I wasn't sure whether it was
> worth the extra over the i5, but knew I would only regret it the
> first time I had to wait for something. I rationalised the cost by
> getting "only" 8GB of RAM, but leaving the slots free for another 8GB
> should I feel the need for it.

I am more Intel-biased also, as I always chose Intel for my own boxes.
I quickly clicked a new box together in some online configurator, the
difference between 8G and 12G wasn't too much, I could get that in by
downgrading a bit on the graphics card (which even in the lower version
would be much more powerful than the one I have right now).

I use 8G now and it rarely gets really to full use. It just doesn't feel
too clever to not take one step up when buying new stuff ;-)

Very often one looks back a year after and regrets "I should have chosen
the bigger CPU, more RAM, whatever" .... I will decide the RAM-issue
when I order.

> 
>> I just start to compare. 6 cores, yep, sounds good for both 
>> gentoo-compile-work and VMs ...
> 
> The Intel chips are only four cores, but appear to give a lot more 
> bang-per-core, especially with the i7's hyperthreading.

yep. That would mean 8 threads w/ i7 (4 "real" and 4 "hyper") vs. 6
"real" threads w/ amd?

I also tend to i7 2600k, some reviews look very good.

I will see what your reports tell us :-)

Stefan

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Another hardware thread

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 462 bytes --]

On Wed, 16 Nov 2011 10:56:39 +0100, Stefan G. Weichinger wrote:

> Very often one looks back a year after and regrets "I should have chosen
> the bigger CPU, more RAM, whatever" .... I will decide the RAM-issue
> when I order.

That's why I switched the money from RAM to CPU. If I want more RAM I can
buy it later. Upgrading a CPU is not so cost-effective :(


-- 
Neil Bothwick

In possession of a mind not merely twisted, but actually sprained.

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Another hardware thread

[Stefan G. Weichinger]

Am 16.11.2011 11:09, schrieb Neil Bothwick:
> On Wed, 16 Nov 2011 10:56:39 +0100, Stefan G. Weichinger wrote:
> 
>> Very often one looks back a year after and regrets "I should have
>> chosen the bigger CPU, more RAM, whatever" .... I will decide the
>> RAM-issue when I order.
> 
> That's why I switched the money from RAM to CPU. If I want more RAM
> I can buy it later. Upgrading a CPU is not so cost-effective :(

good point, yes.

You "only" upgrade CPU and board now and re-use cooling etc ?

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Another hardware thread

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 502 bytes --]

On Wed, 16 Nov 2011 12:11:25 +0100, Stefan G. Weichinger wrote:

> You "only" upgrade CPU and board now and re-use cooling etc ?

Why not? The cooling I have is already more than my CPU needs and, most
importantly, is extremely quiet. The loudest noise on my PC is the hard
drive stepper motors.

I also have new hard drives, but I bought those a couple of weeks ago,
just before the prices went ballistic.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

Irritable? Who the bloody hell are you calling irritable?

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Another hardware thread

[Stefan G. Weichinger]

Am 2011-11-16 12:25, schrieb Neil Bothwick:
> On Wed, 16 Nov 2011 12:11:25 +0100, Stefan G. Weichinger wrote:
> 
>> You "only" upgrade CPU and board now and re-use cooling etc ?
> 
> Why not? The cooling I have is already more than my CPU needs and, 
> most importantly, is extremely quiet. The loudest noise on my PC
> is the hard drive stepper motors.

my ssd died lately :-( *that* was quiet (turned down the hdds when not
needed)

> I also have new hard drives, but I bought those a couple of weeks 
> ago, just before the prices went ballistic.

Same here, 2x1TB are enough in my workstation, more stuff in the basement.

I just wonder which i7-2xxx to choose.

I read:

"K processors do not support Intel TXT, Intel VT-d [3] and vPro.[4]"

(
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Intel_Core_i7_microprocessors#.22Sandy_Bridge.22_.2832_nm.29
)

For KVM I need VT-x ... OK, I assume VT-d is nice to have, but not needed?

I ask myself if I need the K-version at all, I don't want to overclock ...

-

Did you also consider the newer i7-2700k? Maybe too expensive because
it's so new. And I assume it's not that much faster.

Although I only assume that, I have to research it ...

Stefan

[gentoo-user] Re: Re: Another hardware thread

[masterprometheus]

Stefan G. Weichinger wrote:


> 
> I ask myself if I need the K-version at all, I don't want to overclock 

No, if you're not going to overclock the K version is not needed. 

> 
> Did you also consider the newer i7-2700k? Maybe too expensive because
> it's so new. And I assume it's not that much faster.
> 
> Although I only assume that, I have to research it ...

The 2700K is nothing different than the 2600K. The only plus is a 100 MHz 
frequency boost. Not worth the extra $70 over a 2600/2600K. 

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Re: Another hardware thread

[Stefan G. Weichinger]

Am 2011-11-16 16:22, schrieb masterprometheus:
> Stefan G. Weichinger wrote:
> 
> 
>> 
>> I ask myself if I need the K-version at all, I don't want to
>> overclock
> 
> No, if you're not going to overclock the K version is not needed.

But as far as I read reviews online it is easy and rather safe to do so
w/ the matching motherboard. So why not ... go for it.

>> Did you also consider the newer i7-2700k? Maybe too expensive
>> because it's so new. And I assume it's not that much faster.
>> 
>> Although I only assume that, I have to research it ...
> 
> The 2700K is nothing different than the 2600K. The only plus is a 100
> MHz frequency boost. Not worth the extra $70 over a 2600/2600K.

Yep. So Intel noticed "wow, we get a few of them which run stable even
at 100MHz more, let's sell them for some more money"   ;-)

I will check prices here locally (Europe ...).

Stefan

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Re: Another hardware thread

[Michael Mol]

On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 10:46 AM, Stefan G. Weichinger <lists@xunil.at> wrote:
> Am 2011-11-16 16:22, schrieb masterprometheus:
>> The 2700K is nothing different than the 2600K. The only plus is a 100
>> MHz frequency boost. Not worth the extra $70 over a 2600/2600K.
>
> Yep. So Intel noticed "wow, we get a few of them which run stable even
> at 100MHz more, let's sell them for some more money"   ;-)

More likely, it's to avoid criticism for missing a regular incremental
release schedule. "This is as good as we got. Ship it."

It sounds like they're hitting the limits of their process again:

http://hardocp.com/article/2011/11/14/intel_core_i73960x_sandy_bridge_e_processor_review

-- 
:wq

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Re: Another hardware thread

[Stefan G. Weichinger]

Am 16.11.2011 17:00, schrieb Michael Mol:
> On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 10:46 AM, Stefan G. Weichinger <lists@xunil.at> wrote:
>> Am 2011-11-16 16:22, schrieb masterprometheus:
>>> The 2700K is nothing different than the 2600K. The only plus is a 100
>>> MHz frequency boost. Not worth the extra $70 over a 2600/2600K.
>>
>> Yep. So Intel noticed "wow, we get a few of them which run stable even
>> at 100MHz more, let's sell them for some more money"   ;-)
> 
> More likely, it's to avoid criticism for missing a regular incremental
> release schedule. "This is as good as we got. Ship it."
> 
> It sounds like they're hitting the limits of their process again:
> 
> http://hardocp.com/article/2011/11/14/intel_core_i73960x_sandy_bridge_e_processor_review

interesting, thanks

[gentoo-user] Re: Re: Re: Another hardware thread

[masterprometheus]

Stefan G. Weichinger wrote:

> Am 2011-11-16 16:22, schrieb masterprometheus:
>> Stefan G. Weichinger wrote:
>> 
>> 
>>> 
>>> I ask myself if I need the K-version at all, I don't want to
>>> overclock
>> 
>> No, if you're not going to overclock the K version is not needed.
> 
> But as far as I read reviews online it is easy and rather safe to do so
> w/ the matching motherboard. So why not ... go for it.

Oh I would definitly do that (overclock it I mean). But if there isn't 
someone with the same name, you've said : 

>I ask myself if I need the K-version at all, I don't want to overclock 
> ...

Change of heart ? Understandable as these CPUs are easy to overclock. If 
you don't need the hyperthreading just get the 2500K and a good HSF. You 
can easily run it @4.5GHz 7/24 and safely. 

> 
>>> Did you also consider the newer i7-2700k? Maybe too expensive
>>> because it's so new. And I assume it's not that much faster.
>>> 
>>> Although I only assume that, I have to research it ...
>> 
>> The 2700K is nothing different than the 2600K. The only plus is a 100
>> MHz frequency boost. Not worth the extra $70 over a 2600/2600K.
> 
> Yep. So Intel noticed "wow, we get a few of them which run stable even
> at 100MHz more, let's sell them for some more money"   ;-)

True but Intel's MSRP was just $10-15 more than a 2600K. Vendors decided 
to up the price a bit. Not uncommon with new products.

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Re: Re: Another hardware thread

[Stefan G. Weichinger]

Am 16.11.2011 19:05, schrieb masterprometheus:

> Oh I would definitly do that (overclock it I mean). But if there
> isn't someone with the same name, you've said :
> 
>> I ask myself if I need the K-version at all, I don't want to
>> overclock ...
> 
> Change of heart ? Understandable as these CPUs are easy to overclock.

Yes, I know. I meant before: "I don't want to overclock if it's risky
and unstable ..." :-)

> If you don't need the hyperthreading just get the 2500K and a good
> HSF. You can easily run it @4.5GHz 7/24 and safely.

phew, that sounds fast, yes ....

I assume the HT will do something to compiling stuff (read:
gentoo-emerging everyday)?

>> Yep. So Intel noticed "wow, we get a few of them which run stable
>> even at 100MHz more, let's sell them for some more money"   ;-)
> 
> True but Intel's MSRP was just $10-15 more than a 2600K. Vendors
> decided to up the price a bit. Not uncommon with new products.

I'd be ready to just spend a little more and get the faster CPU as I
change my work-pcs only every few years. I still use a C2D E6600 for
everyday purposes ... but maybe I just go for the 2600k, it will be more
than enough to make things fly in comparison.

Stefan

[gentoo-user] Re: Re: Re: Re: Another hardware thread

[masterprometheus]

Stefan G. Weichinger wrote:

> Am 16.11.2011 19:05, schrieb masterprometheus:
> 
>> Oh I would definitly do that (overclock it I mean). But if there
>> isn't someone with the same name, you've said :
>> 
>>> I ask myself if I need the K-version at all, I don't want to
>>> overclock ...
>> 
>> Change of heart ? Understandable as these CPUs are easy to overclock.
> 
> Yes, I know. I meant before: "I don't want to overclock if it's risky
> and unstable ..." :-)

There is always a slight risk. But with a good HSF you will be ok. 
 
>> If you don't need the hyperthreading just get the 2500K and a good
>> HSF. You can easily run it @4.5GHz 7/24 and safely.
> 
> phew, that sounds fast, yes ....
> 
> I assume the HT will do something to compiling stuff (read:
> gentoo-emerging everyday)?
> 
>>> Yep. So Intel noticed "wow, we get a few of them which run stable
>>> even at 100MHz more, let's sell them for some more money"   ;-)
>> 
>> True but Intel's MSRP was just $10-15 more than a 2600K. Vendors
>> decided to up the price a bit. Not uncommon with new products.
> 
> I'd be ready to just spend a little more and get the faster CPU as I
> change my work-pcs only every few years. I still use a C2D E6600 for
> everyday purposes ... but maybe I just go for the 2600k, it will be 
more
> than enough to make things fly in comparison.

Then a 2600K is a good investment for you. But maybe you should wait for 
the Ivy Bridge CPUs (probably @March). Or maybe :
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819116492

(note that no stock cooler included <g>)

With a matching mobo like one of these :
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813131803
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813131801

Seriously too much money for a small performance difference. But 6 cores 
(with HT of course), 4 channel memory architecture (up to 64 GB), support 
for PCI-e v3.0, 12MB L3 cache, all those sound good. No integrated video, 
though.

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Re: Re: Another hardware thread

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 612 bytes --]

On Wed, 16 Nov 2011 20:05:55 +0200, masterprometheus wrote:

> > Yep. So Intel noticed "wow, we get a few of them which run stable even
> > at 100MHz more, let's sell them for some more money"   ;-)  
> 
> True but Intel's MSRP was just $10-15 more than a 2600K. Vendors
> decided to up the price a bit. Not uncommon with new products.

That makes sense, if the old version is only a tenner less than the new
one, no one would buy it, so they get discounted. Last month's latest and
greatest often gives the best value.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

What Aussies lack in Humour they make up for in Beer!

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Re: Re: Another hardware thread

[Stefan G. Weichinger]

Am 16.11.2011 20:23, schrieb Neil Bothwick:

>> True but Intel's MSRP was just $10-15 more than a 2600K. Vendors 
>> decided to up the price a bit. Not uncommon with new products.
> 
> That makes sense, if the old version is only a tenner less than the
> new one, no one would buy it, so they get discounted. Last month's
> latest and greatest often gives the best value.

correct. That sums up what I experienced as well back then w/ core2duo
etc.

When I look up the difference between i7-2600k and i7-2700k at that
one shop w/ the online configurator, it is right now ~29 EUR, taxes
included.

I think i7-2600k is the sweet spot right now.

What board did you choose?

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Re: Re: Another hardware thread

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 468 bytes --]

On Wed, 16 Nov 2011 22:33:24 +0100, Stefan G. Weichinger wrote:

> I think i7-2600k is the sweet spot right now.

It's working nicely for me. I can't believe the difference in compile
times, it's almost like using a binary distro.
> 
> What board did you choose?
> 

Gigabyte Z68X-UD3H-B3

It seemed the best of the available offerings at a reasonable price.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

There is absolutely no substitute for a genuine lack of preparation.

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Re: Re: Another hardware thread

[Mark Knecht]

On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 5:27 PM, Neil Bothwick <neil@digimed.co.uk> wrote:
> On Wed, 16 Nov 2011 22:33:24 +0100, Stefan G. Weichinger wrote:
>
>> I think i7-2600k is the sweet spot right now.
>
> It's working nicely for me. I can't believe the difference in compile
> times, it's almost like using a binary distro.
>>
>> What board did you choose?
>>
>
> Gigabyte Z68X-UD3H-B3
>
> It seemed the best of the available offerings at a reasonable price.
>
>
> --
> Neil Bothwick

Who's gonna be the first to buy an Intel Knight's Corner machine? 50+ cores...

- Mark

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Re: Re: Another hardware thread

[Stefan G. Weichinger]

Am 2011-11-17 02:27, schrieb Neil Bothwick:
> On Wed, 16 Nov 2011 22:33:24 +0100, Stefan G. Weichinger wrote:
> 
>> I think i7-2600k is the sweet spot right now.
> 
> It's working nicely for me. I can't believe the difference in
> compile times, it's almost like using a binary distro.

Wow, sounds promising (and a bit boring ;-) ?)

>> What board did you choose?
>> 
> 
> Gigabyte Z68X-UD3H-B3
> 
> It seemed the best of the available offerings at a reasonable
> price.

Thanks, good luck, Stefan

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Re: Re: Another hardware thread

[Stefan G. Weichinger]

Am 2011-11-17 11:44, schrieb Stefan G. Weichinger:
> Am 2011-11-17 02:27, schrieb Neil Bothwick:
>> On Wed, 16 Nov 2011 22:33:24 +0100, Stefan G. Weichinger wrote:
>>
>>> I think i7-2600k is the sweet spot right now.
>>
>> It's working nicely for me. I can't believe the difference in
>> compile times, it's almost like using a binary distro.
> 
> Wow, sounds promising (and a bit boring ;-) ?)

A question somehow related:

Right now I have everything built with rather CPU-specific CFLAGS.

Specific L1/L2-cache-sizes and stuff, set after doing something like
"gcc -Q --help=target -march=native" .... (gentoo wiki).

I wonder if this C2D-E6600-specific stuff would boot on the i7-2600k?
Yeah, I could just try it.

But maybe I should do something to prepare that migration?

Thanks for any insight on this, Stefan

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Re: Re: Another hardware thread

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1077 bytes --]

On Thu, 17 Nov 2011 23:13:31 +0100, Stefan G. Weichinger wrote:

> Right now I have everything built with rather CPU-specific CFLAGS.
> 
> Specific L1/L2-cache-sizes and stuff, set after doing something like
> "gcc -Q --help=target -march=native" .... (gentoo wiki).
> 
> I wonder if this C2D-E6600-specific stuff would boot on the i7-2600k?
> Yeah, I could just try it.
> 
> But maybe I should do something to prepare that migration?

I did a new installation as the old one had started life on an Athlon64
about 8 years ago and then migrated to the C2D. But it will probably work
as long as you kernel included support for both types of hardware.

If you're feeling adventurous, GCC 4.6, currently masked for testing, has
specific -march options for the i7 and Sandybridge i7, according to the
Gentoo Wiki CFLAGS page.

Using 4.5.3 and -march=native, I had a couple of showstopping build
failures, that were fixed by switching to -march=core2 -mtune=generic.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

Newspaper Ad: Dog for sale: eats anything and is fond of children.

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Re: Re: Another hardware thread

[Stefan G. Weichinger]

Am 2011-11-18 01:04, schrieb Neil Bothwick:
> On Thu, 17 Nov 2011 23:13:31 +0100, Stefan G. Weichinger wrote:
> 
>> Right now I have everything built with rather CPU-specific
>> CFLAGS.
>> 
>> Specific L1/L2-cache-sizes and stuff, set after doing something
>> like "gcc -Q --help=target -march=native" .... (gentoo wiki).
>> 
>> I wonder if this C2D-E6600-specific stuff would boot on the
>> i7-2600k? Yeah, I could just try it.
>> 
>> But maybe I should do something to prepare that migration?
> 
> I did a new installation as the old one had started life on an
> Athlon64 about 8 years ago and then migrated to the C2D. But it
> will probably work as long as you kernel included support for both
> types of hardware.
> 
> If you're feeling adventurous, GCC 4.6, currently masked for
> testing, has specific -march options for the i7 and Sandybridge i7,
> according to the Gentoo Wiki CFLAGS page.
> 
> Using 4.5.3 and -march=native, I had a couple of showstopping
> build failures, that were fixed by switching to -march=core2
> -mtune=generic.

Thanks a lot. Will try. hardware order planned for next week maybe.

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Re: Re: Another hardware thread

[Stefan G. Weichinger]

Am 18.11.2011 10:46, schrieb Stefan G. Weichinger:
> hardware order planned for next week maybe.

Right now I consider simply skipping the "K"-CPU and get some pre-built
system w/ full guarantee and stuff (even the K-CPU is outdated soon, and
the "normal" i7-2600 is also much faster than my C2D-E6600).

The HP Z210 SFF brings the i7-2600-CPU, this should also bring enough
power into my office ;-)

I just wonder about the Intel C206 chipset. AFAI see from the specs it
should support the on-cpu-graphics (although I would get a Nvidia Quadro
600 w/ that box) and -more important- the whole Intel-VT-stuff for using
KVM.

correct? anyone using such a board?

It might be a bit small though ... 2 hdds are possible, but I wonder if
the whole system is still silent then ...

Stefan

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Re: Re: Another hardware thread

[Stefan G. Weichinger]

Am 2011-11-21 09:45, schrieb Stefan G. Weichinger:
> Am 18.11.2011 10:46, schrieb Stefan G. Weichinger:
>> hardware order planned for next week maybe.
> 
> Right now I consider simply skipping the "K"-CPU and get some pre-built
> system w/ full guarantee and stuff (even the K-CPU is outdated soon, and
> the "normal" i7-2600 is also much faster than my C2D-E6600).
> 
> The HP Z210 SFF brings the i7-2600-CPU, this should also bring enough
> power into my office ;-)

Case closed: ordered a HP Elite 7300 right now.
H67-Chipset, i7-2600, bigger Tower, 6 GB RAM for a start, more to be
added later.

Stefan

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Re: Re: Another hardware thread

[Stefan G. Weichinger]

Ad CFLAGS for i7-2600:

Is that too much ricer-style?  -->

### gcc -march=native -E -v - </dev/null 2>&1 | sed -n 's/.* -v - //p'

CFLAGS="-O2 -D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 -march=core2 -mcx16 -msahf -maes
-mpclmul -mpopcnt -mavx --param l1-cache-size=32 --param
l1-cache-line-size=64 --param l2-cache-size=8192 -mtune=generic"

gcc-4.5.3-r1 ...

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Re: Re: Another hardware thread

[Michael Mol]

On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 11:55 AM, Stefan G. Weichinger <lists@xunil.at> wrote:
>
> Ad CFLAGS for i7-2600:
>
> Is that too much ricer-style?  -->
>
> ### gcc -march=native -E -v - </dev/null 2>&1 | sed -n 's/.* -v - //p'
>
> CFLAGS="-O2 -D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 -march=core2 -mcx16 -msahf -maes
> -mpclmul -mpopcnt -mavx --param l1-cache-size=32 --param
> l1-cache-line-size=64 --param l2-cache-size=8192 -mtune=generic"
>
> gcc-4.5.3-r1 ...

That's equivalent to, what, "-O2 -D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 -march=native" ?
I don't see anything to complain about.

Actually, it's pretty interesting seeing what that processor comes
down to for -march=native. I wish there were a database of processors
and their decomposed compiler tuning flags for comparison. That would
be *very* interesting, from the standpoint of proc shopping and
looking at the evolution of CPUs.

-- 
:wq

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Re: Re: Another hardware thread

[Stefan G. Weichinger]

Am 23.11.2011 18:05, schrieb Michael Mol:
> On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 11:55 AM, Stefan G. Weichinger <lists@xunil.at> wrote:
>>
>> Ad CFLAGS for i7-2600:
>>
>> Is that too much ricer-style?  -->
>>
>> ### gcc -march=native -E -v - </dev/null 2>&1 | sed -n 's/.* -v - //p'
>>
>> CFLAGS="-O2 -D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 -march=core2 -mcx16 -msahf -maes
>> -mpclmul -mpopcnt -mavx --param l1-cache-size=32 --param
>> l1-cache-line-size=64 --param l2-cache-size=8192 -mtune=generic"
>>
>> gcc-4.5.3-r1 ...
> 
> That's equivalent to, what, "-O2 -D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 -march=native" ?
> I don't see anything to complain about.

Ok, thanks.

compiled gcc-4.6.2 (hey, it only takes ~16min now!):

# /usr/bin/gcc-4.6.2  -march=native -E -v - </dev/null 2>&1 | sed -n
's/.* -v - //p'
-D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 -march=corei7-avx -mcx16 -msahf -mno-movbe -maes
-mpclmul -mpopcnt -mno-abm -mno-lwp -mno-fma -mno-fma4 -mno-xop -mno-bmi
-mno-tbm -mavx -msse4.2 -msse4.1 --param l1-cache-size=32 --param
l1-cache-line-size=64 --param l2-cache-size=8192 -mtune=corei7-avx

If I am "feeling adventurous" (Neil) I could now try my luck by choosing
this nice new compiler w/ options. Maybe *after* a nice backup.

> Actually, it's pretty interesting seeing what that processor comes
> down to for -march=native. I wish there were a database of processors
> and their decomposed compiler tuning flags for comparison. That would
> be *very* interesting, from the standpoint of proc shopping and
> looking at the evolution of CPUs.

Wouldn't a wiki-page do the trick? gentoo-wiki ...

S

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Re: Re: Another hardware thread

[Michael Mol]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1843 bytes --]

On Nov 23, 2011 1:50 PM, "Stefan G. Weichinger" <lists@xunil.at> wrote:
>
> Am 23.11.2011 18:05, schrieb Michael Mol:
> > On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 11:55 AM, Stefan G. Weichinger <lists@xunil.at>
wrote:
> >>
> >> Ad CFLAGS for i7-2600:
> >>
> >> Is that too much ricer-style?  -->
> >>
> >> ### gcc -march=native -E -v - </dev/null 2>&1 | sed -n 's/.* -v - //p'
> >>
> >> CFLAGS="-O2 -D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 -march=core2 -mcx16 -msahf -maes
> >> -mpclmul -mpopcnt -mavx --param l1-cache-size=32 --param
> >> l1-cache-line-size=64 --param l2-cache-size=8192 -mtune=generic"
> >>
> >> gcc-4.5.3-r1 ...
> >
> > That's equivalent to, what, "-O2 -D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 -march=native" ?
> > I don't see anything to complain about.
>
> Ok, thanks.
>
> compiled gcc-4.6.2 (hey, it only takes ~16min now!):
>
> # /usr/bin/gcc-4.6.2  -march=native -E -v - </dev/null 2>&1 | sed -n
> 's/.* -v - //p'
> -D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 -march=corei7-avx -mcx16 -msahf -mno-movbe -maes
> -mpclmul -mpopcnt -mno-abm -mno-lwp -mno-fma -mno-fma4 -mno-xop -mno-bmi
> -mno-tbm -mavx -msse4.2 -msse4.1 --param l1-cache-size=32 --param
> l1-cache-line-size=64 --param l2-cache-size=8192 -mtune=corei7-avx
>
> If I am "feeling adventurous" (Neil) I could now try my luck by choosing
> this nice new compiler w/ options. Maybe *after* a nice backup.
>
> > Actually, it's pretty interesting seeing what that processor comes
> > down to for -march=native. I wish there were a database of processors
> > and their decomposed compiler tuning flags for comparison. That would
> > be *very* interesting, from the standpoint of proc shopping and
> > looking at the evolution of CPUs.
>
> Wouldn't a wiki-page do the trick? gentoo-wiki ...
>
> S
>

ISTR gcc's i7 optimizations giving someone in here trouble within the last
couple weeks. As I recall, they dropped back to march and mtune=core2.

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2498 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Re: Re: Another hardware thread

[Stefan G. Weichinger]

Am 2011-11-23 20:02, schrieb Michael Mol:

> ISTR gcc's i7 optimizations giving someone in here trouble within the
> last couple weeks. As I recall, they dropped back to march and mtune=core2.

I don't expect wonders from the new compiler and its options. For now I
am more constrained by the fact that the nvidia-card in that new and
shiny box only has one DVI-output, so I can't attach both of my
VGA-only-TFTs.

This is more of a performance issue to me than some %s gained by
gcc-issues, I assume.

Gotta go and buy another graphics card ...

Thanks anyway for sharing, I will keep the new gcc and maybe compile
single pkgs for testing.

Stefan

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Re: Re: Another hardware thread

[Michael Mol]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 903 bytes --]

DVI-I outputs may be converted to VGA with a simple adapter; the connector
at the computer contains both analog and digital signaling.

ZZ
On Nov 23, 2011 5:42 PM, "Stefan G. Weichinger" <lists@xunil.at> wrote:

> Am 2011-11-23 20:02, schrieb Michael Mol:
>
> > ISTR gcc's i7 optimizations giving someone in here trouble within the
> > last couple weeks. As I recall, they dropped back to march and
> mtune=core2.
>
> I don't expect wonders from the new compiler and its options. For now I
> am more constrained by the fact that the nvidia-card in that new and
> shiny box only has one DVI-output, so I can't attach both of my
> VGA-only-TFTs.
>
> This is more of a performance issue to me than some %s gained by
> gcc-issues, I assume.
>
> Gotta go and buy another graphics card ...
>
> Thanks anyway for sharing, I will keep the new gcc and maybe compile
> single pkgs for testing.
>
> Stefan
>
>
>
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1230 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Re: Re: Another hardware thread

[Stefan G. Weichinger]

Am 2011-11-24 00:45, schrieb Michael Mol:
> DVI-I outputs may be converted to VGA with a simple adapter; the
> connector at the computer contains both analog and digital signaling.

If there is only one ... this results in one VGA-output only as well ...
and I need 2.

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Re: Re: Another hardware thread

[Michael Mol]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 380 bytes --]

Fair enough. :)

ZZ
On Nov 24, 2011 12:25 AM, "Stefan G. Weichinger" <lists@xunil.at> wrote:

> Am 2011-11-24 00:45, schrieb Michael Mol:
> > DVI-I outputs may be converted to VGA with a simple adapter; the
> > connector at the computer contains both analog and digital signaling.
>
> If there is only one ... this results in one VGA-output only as well ...
> and I need 2.
>
>
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 649 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Re: Re: Another hardware thread

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 502 bytes --]

On Thu, 24 Nov 2011 06:22:45 +0100, Stefan G. Weichinger wrote:

> > DVI-I outputs may be converted to VGA with a simple adapter; the
> > connector at the computer contains both analog and digital
> > signaling.  
> 
> If there is only one ... this results in one VGA-output only as well ...
> and I need 2.

Is there no on-board video?


-- 
Neil Bothwick

We can sympathize with a child who is afraid of the dark, but the
tragedy of life is that most people are afraid of the light.

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Re: Re: Another hardware thread

[Stefan G. Weichinger]

Am 24.11.2011 10:53, schrieb Neil Bothwick:

> Is there no on-board video?

Yes, there is.

yesterday: Enabled it, removed the PCIe-card, removed the "Do not
remove"-covers from the onboard-DVI-connectors ....

Unfortunately only one of these brings analog signal, the other one is
DVI-D  .... so it doesn't have those 4 pins needed for my adapter.

:-(

S

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Re: Re: Another hardware thread

[Michael Mol]

On Thu, Nov 24, 2011 at 6:25 AM, Stefan G. Weichinger <lists@xunil.at> wrote:
> Am 24.11.2011 10:53, schrieb Neil Bothwick:
>
>> Is there no on-board video?
>
> Yes, there is.
>
> yesterday: Enabled it, removed the PCIe-card, removed the "Do not
> remove"-covers from the onboard-DVI-connectors ....
>
> Unfortunately only one of these brings analog signal, the other one is
> DVI-D  .... so it doesn't have those 4 pins needed for my adapter.

Is the onboard video of the same chipset as your video card? If so,
you should be able to run them just fine at the same time. I once had
an onboard ATI chipset (HD3200) working together with a Radeon 5770 to
push five displays--two VGA, two DVI and one HDMI.


-- 
:wq

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Re: Re: Another hardware thread

[Stefan G. Weichinger]

Am 24.11.2011 16:06, schrieb Michael Mol:

> Is the onboard video of the same chipset as your video card? If so,
> you should be able to run them just fine at the same time. I once had
> an onboard ATI chipset (HD3200) working together with a Radeon 5770 to
> push five displays--two VGA, two DVI and one HDMI.

Onboard = on-CPU in this case: core-i7-2600 brings Intel HD3000.
And the video card is a Nvidia GeForce GT530.

I assume that won't work out?

No energy for fiddling today, had a decent server-crash at a customer.
Glad to have my box running with one TFT, at least today :)

thanks, Stefan

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Re: Re: Another hardware thread

[Michael Mol]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1591 bytes --]

On Nov 24, 2011 11:33 AM, "Stefan G. Weichinger" <lists@xunil.at> wrote:
>
> Am 24.11.2011 16:06, schrieb Michael Mol:
>
> > Is the onboard video of the same chipset as your video card? If so,
> > you should be able to run them just fine at the same time. I once had
> > an onboard ATI chipset (HD3200) working together with a Radeon 5770 to
> > push five displays--two VGA, two DVI and one HDMI.
>
> Onboard = on-CPU in this case: core-i7-2600 brings Intel HD3000.
> And the video card is a Nvidia GeForce GT530.
>
> I assume that won't work out?
>
> No energy for fiddling today, had a decent server-crash at a customer.
> Glad to have my box running with one TFT, at least today :)
>
> thanks, Stefan

Never tried mix & match with Intel. I'd say it's worth a try, as long as
you can stay away from the proprietary drivers. Sounds likely you'll be
hunting for a new card, though.
On Nov 24, 2011 11:33 AM, "Stefan G. Weichinger" <lists@xunil.at> wrote:

> Am 24.11.2011 16:06, schrieb Michael Mol:
>
> > Is the onboard video of the same chipset as your video card? If so,
> > you should be able to run them just fine at the same time. I once had
> > an onboard ATI chipset (HD3200) working together with a Radeon 5770 to
> > push five displays--two VGA, two DVI and one HDMI.
>
> Onboard = on-CPU in this case: core-i7-2600 brings Intel HD3000.
> And the video card is a Nvidia GeForce GT530.
>
> I assume that won't work out?
>
> No energy for fiddling today, had a decent server-crash at a customer.
> Glad to have my box running with one TFT, at least today :)
>
> thanks, Stefan
>
>
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2128 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Re: Re: Another hardware thread

[Stefan G. Weichinger]

Am 24.11.2011 18:20, schrieb Michael Mol:

> Never tried mix & match with Intel. I'd say it's worth a try, as long as
> you can stay away from the proprietary drivers. Sounds likely you'll be
> hunting for a new card, though.

planning to get into my car after my first coffee ...
thx, greets, Stefan

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Re: Re: Another hardware thread

[Stefan G. Weichinger]

Am 18.11.2011 01:04, schrieb Neil Bothwick:

> If you're feeling adventurous, GCC 4.6, currently masked for
> testing, has specific -march options for the i7 and Sandybridge i7,
> according to the Gentoo Wiki CFLAGS page.

Being adventurous now.

compiled sys-devel/gcc-4.6.2, and set

CFLAGS="-O2 -march=corei7-avx -mcx16 -msahf -mno-movbe -maes -mpclmul
-mpopcnt -mno-abm -mno-lwp -mno-fma -mno-fma4 -mno-xop -mno-bmi
-mno-tbm -mavx -msse4.2 -msse4.1 --param l1-cache-size=32 --param
l1-cache-line-size=64 --param l2-cache-size=8192 -mtune=corei7-avx"

Built my kernel for a start, runs fine.
Considering to emerge world after a nice backup ;-)

Has anyone done that already? Successfully?

Stefan

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Re: Re: Another hardware thread

[Stefan G. Weichinger]

Am 19.12.2011 12:01, schrieb Stefan G. Weichinger:

> Built my kernel for a start, runs fine.
> Considering to emerge world after a nice backup ;-)

correction: emerge system for a start ... sure ...

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Re: Re: Another hardware thread

[Stefan G. Weichinger]

Am 19.12.2011 12:36, schrieb Stefan G. Weichinger:
> Am 19.12.2011 12:01, schrieb Stefan G. Weichinger:
> 
>> Built my kernel for a start, runs fine.
>> Considering to emerge world after a nice backup ;-)
> 
> correction: emerge system for a start ... sure ...

update:

running my ~amd64 system without problems after having recompiled nearly
all packages with masked gcc-4.6.2 and

CFLAGS="-O2 -march=corei7-avx -mcx16 -msahf -mno-movbe -maes -mpclmul
-mpopcnt -mno-abm -mno-lwp -mno-fma -mno-fma4 -mno-xop -mno-bmi -mno-tbm
-mavx -msse4.2 -msse4.1 --param l1-cache-size=32 --param
l1-cache-line-size=64 --param l2-cache-size=8192 -mtune=corei7-avx

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Another hardware thread

[Adam Carter]

> Performance is one issue, another one is energy/noise ... the phenom
> 1090t seems to pull in a lot and need good (and maybe noisy) fans.

I've just bought a 965 (a 1100T wouldn't boot despite being supported
by the latest bios). The CPU fan is very quiet when the system is
idling, but spins up and gets noisy when working hard.