Everything going ok, getting ready to win final team fight and end match.
Vidya card overheats. >:I
Come back to this
Hooray for losing games you deserved a win in.
Carrying ranked game
Started by
Guest_ElatedOwl_*
, Aug 11 2012 02:00 PM
22 replies to this topic
#1
Guest_ElatedOwl_*
Guest_ElatedOwl_*
-
- Guests
Posted 11 August 2012 - 02:00 PM
Team is mediocre, but I'm es #1 lee sin NA.
Everything going ok, getting ready to win final team fight and end match.
Vidya card overheats. >:I
Come back to this
Hooray for losing games you deserved a win in.
Everything going ok, getting ready to win final team fight and end match.
Vidya card overheats. >:I
Come back to this
Hooray for losing games you deserved a win in.
#2
SpleenBeGone
-
- Administrators
-
- 14,951 posts
Deer Leader of the Goriest Revolution
- LocationHouston
Posted 11 August 2012 - 02:01 PM
What kind of card do you have that overheated? o.O
#3
Guest_ElatedOwl_*
Guest_ElatedOwl_*
-
- Guests
Posted 11 August 2012 - 02:05 PM
Radeon HD 5700. My power supply isn't modular and my case is tiny, and my female companion decided to turn the AC off. 80 degrees in PC room + card running hot + awful airflow = upset card.
#4
SpleenBeGone
-
- Administrators
-
- 14,951 posts
Deer Leader of the Goriest Revolution
- LocationHouston
Posted 11 August 2012 - 02:09 PM
What kind of extra cables do you have? And can you post your case? Maybe I can keep this from happening again. >.>
#5
Guest_ElatedOwl_*
Guest_ElatedOwl_*
-
- Guests
Posted 11 August 2012 - 02:17 PM
Just extra from the PSU; sata cables, extra rail, extra 4 pin. The case is from a really, really old eMachine because I was too cheap to buy a new one. I'd take a picture but getting pictures from my phone is too much work. ;p
I'm saving up for a new rig anyway, want an 8 core so I can virtualize a server.
I'm saving up for a new rig anyway, want an 8 core so I can virtualize a server.
#6
SpleenBeGone
-
- Administrators
-
- 14,951 posts
Deer Leader of the Goriest Revolution
- LocationHouston
Posted 11 August 2012 - 05:22 PM
You could always cut down unused lines and tape them over like they did before modular ones.
virtual 8 cores from an i7, or logical ones off of a xeon?
virtual 8 cores from an i7, or logical ones off of a xeon?
#7
Guest_ElatedOwl_*
Guest_ElatedOwl_*
-
- Guests
Posted 12 August 2012 - 11:53 AM
http://www.newegg.co...N82E16819103960 Zambezi.
I plan on using the PSU I have now for my new build so I don't wanna cut any of it :x
I plan on using the PSU I have now for my new build so I don't wanna cut any of it :x
#8
SpleenBeGone
-
- Administrators
-
- 14,951 posts
Deer Leader of the Goriest Revolution
- LocationHouston
Posted 12 August 2012 - 12:11 PM
Oh boo, those things are paper weights.
#9
Guest_ElatedOwl_*
Guest_ElatedOwl_*
-
- Guests
Posted 12 August 2012 - 12:18 PM
They only get that consensus because when they first came out they had an issue with throttling when they didn't need to and software isn't optimized for 8 cores.
But, if you're going to dedicate a server to 4 cores and still use it for games etc. it's the obvious choice. ;p
But, if you're going to dedicate a server to 4 cores and still use it for games etc. it's the obvious choice. ;p
#10
SpleenBeGone
-
- Administrators
-
- 14,951 posts
Deer Leader of the Goriest Revolution
- LocationHouston
Posted 12 August 2012 - 12:46 PM
They're not technically 8 cores though, and the Opterons based on the same thing get smoked by xeons. Plus, I believe after all the fixes the 8150's got less than a 10% increase in performance. What would you be doing that needs more than two server cores anyways?
#11
Guest_ElatedOwl_*
Guest_ElatedOwl_*
-
- Guests
Posted 12 August 2012 - 01:12 PM
It is indeed 8 true cores. MS SQL Server + IIS instance
#12
SpleenBeGone
-
- Administrators
-
- 14,951 posts
Deer Leader of the Goriest Revolution
- LocationHouston
Posted 12 August 2012 - 01:36 PM
I should have said 8 dedicated cores, sorry. Every pair of cores shares a few resources that end up bottlenecking it. That's why everything up to quad threaded programs they perform better with each module cut in half. Ivy bridge, although being more expensive, is around 70% more productive in what you want to do, along with using 60% the power. Over the course of a year, you'd save around $40 in electrical off of it, if you're paying for that yourself. Assuming the average 4 year upgrade cycle on high end parts, you'd easily pay the difference in electrical.
Edit: This could all change with Piledriver though, if they manage to get it out before Haswell.
Edit: This could all change with Piledriver though, if they manage to get it out before Haswell.
#13
Guest_ElatedOwl_*
Guest_ElatedOwl_*
-
- Guests
Posted 12 August 2012 - 02:00 PM
Zambezi will out perform with VMs. With software meant for quad core CPUs i7 is only like 5%, I'll pull up some links after this match
#14
SpleenBeGone
-
- Administrators
-
- 14,951 posts
Deer Leader of the Goriest Revolution
- LocationHouston
Posted 12 August 2012 - 02:12 PM
I'd like to see, as the numbers I'm using are under a pure *nix environment, or windows server 2008.
Although nearly every thing I've seen on heavy threaded applications there's > 5% difference. The exception to this being heavily threaded photoshop tools, in that instance Zambezi actually outperforms all the quad core sandy chips.
All that being said, you really can't go wrong with the high end chips from either company at this point in most instances. And if you do decide to go with the 8150, I suggest a very good cooling solution so you can OC it, as sql scales very well with clock rate.
Edit: If you wanted some real world numbers, in a situation that you'd be in, I have both an i5 and i7, and can section off 2 cores and 2 cores/4 threads on a VM, load them up with whatever SQL test you come up with, and run BF3, WoW, etc.
Although nearly every thing I've seen on heavy threaded applications there's > 5% difference. The exception to this being heavily threaded photoshop tools, in that instance Zambezi actually outperforms all the quad core sandy chips.
All that being said, you really can't go wrong with the high end chips from either company at this point in most instances. And if you do decide to go with the 8150, I suggest a very good cooling solution so you can OC it, as sql scales very well with clock rate.
Edit: If you wanted some real world numbers, in a situation that you'd be in, I have both an i5 and i7, and can section off 2 cores and 2 cores/4 threads on a VM, load them up with whatever SQL test you come up with, and run BF3, WoW, etc.
#15
Guest_ElatedOwl_*
Guest_ElatedOwl_*
-
- Guests
Posted 12 August 2012 - 04:56 PM
Here's a benchmark http://www.cpubenchm...8150+Eight-Core
So we're looking at ~10% difference (from an arbitrary number)(I've also heard you can overclock the bulldozer to 4.2ghz with stock cooling, can't find a ref for it however). You gotta keep in mind win7 (and the majority of software you're going to run) is catered to quad core processors. 99% of the time, i7/i5 will outperform, but when we're looking at multiple VM instances bulldozer becomes a lot more attractive. Things like WoW will only run on one thread, and is a good case of the intel chipset being a clear cut winner.
Here's another good source that isn't arbitrary numbers http://www.phoronix....1204_virt&num=3 (graphs fairly irrelevant, check descriptions)
So we're looking at ~10% difference (from an arbitrary number)(I've also heard you can overclock the bulldozer to 4.2ghz with stock cooling, can't find a ref for it however). You gotta keep in mind win7 (and the majority of software you're going to run) is catered to quad core processors. 99% of the time, i7/i5 will outperform, but when we're looking at multiple VM instances bulldozer becomes a lot more attractive. Things like WoW will only run on one thread, and is a good case of the intel chipset being a clear cut winner.
Here's another good source that isn't arbitrary numbers http://www.phoronix....1204_virt&num=3 (graphs fairly irrelevant, check descriptions)
#16
SpleenBeGone
-
- Administrators
-
- 14,951 posts
Deer Leader of the Goriest Revolution
- LocationHouston
Posted 12 August 2012 - 07:47 PM
Ah, but remember there's the IB now, you're looking at closer to a 20% difference, and from a 77w part. As far as the cooling, the little 2/4 setups can overclock around that high with the cpu fan at 100%, but overall the FX range has really terrible thermals. Now, as far as thread counts, you have to keep in mind that even though you're going to have 8 cores, only 4 will be dedicated to the server, and 4 more for whatever else. Clock for clock, two sandy cores beat out two bulldozer modules in performance, and Ivy even more so.. The closest representation I can find is an i3-2120 vs a FX-4100.
Now, in real word conditions, as the tests you linked show, things are a bit different. VM 4.1 runs horribly on an i7 chip. Hopefully this is something that gets fixed in the future though. The benchmark I referenced was using VM on a SB Xeon and Interlagos Opteron, where the 6 core Xeon scored a 63ms response time over a 170ms time on the Opteron: http://www.anandtech.com/print/5058
Considering the only real difference between core and xeon is the xeons are binned higher, I assumed that VM would work equally well on each. For down, in the desktop chips, the bulldozer performs better it seems. I'd keep an eye out for a VM update before you buy one though, to see if they improve performance on the i7, because if they do, for mysql purposes, the intel chip would smoke the amd one.
Also, WoW hasn't run on a single core for a very long time, and the new 64 bit client not only fills all 4 cores of my i5, but loads them quite well, as well as the BF3 multiplayer, which is why I suggested the two.
Now, in real word conditions, as the tests you linked show, things are a bit different. VM 4.1 runs horribly on an i7 chip. Hopefully this is something that gets fixed in the future though. The benchmark I referenced was using VM on a SB Xeon and Interlagos Opteron, where the 6 core Xeon scored a 63ms response time over a 170ms time on the Opteron: http://www.anandtech.com/print/5058
Considering the only real difference between core and xeon is the xeons are binned higher, I assumed that VM would work equally well on each. For down, in the desktop chips, the bulldozer performs better it seems. I'd keep an eye out for a VM update before you buy one though, to see if they improve performance on the i7, because if they do, for mysql purposes, the intel chip would smoke the amd one.
Also, WoW hasn't run on a single core for a very long time, and the new 64 bit client not only fills all 4 cores of my i5, but loads them quite well, as well as the BF3 multiplayer, which is why I suggested the two.
#17
SpleenBeGone
-
- Administrators
-
- 14,951 posts
Deer Leader of the Goriest Revolution
- LocationHouston
Posted 12 August 2012 - 08:24 PM
I did a bit of research on cooling for the 8150 to help you out if you go for it, it seems that you can expect around 4.6ghz stable on a good air cooler, which would be a decent increase in performance, if you get a case that can provide good airflow. the 3770, if there's an update by then can get to 4.9, and a 2600k to 5ghz even. (odly, SB runs cooler than IB)
#18
Guest_ElatedOwl_*
Guest_ElatedOwl_*
-
- Guests
Posted 13 August 2012 - 03:43 PM
You're overlooking the nature of IIS and how it handles each of its application instances. The database I'm not really concerned with, it'll chokehold on I/O rather than CPU. (unless I invest in an SSD for it) Also, the BF reference brings up my point - an i5 or i7 is going to be miles ahead simply because the majority of software is optimized for 4 cores (win7).
i7/i5 is going to be miles ahead in the majority of things, but once we start talking multiple VMs bulldozer will handle it much more smoothly.
i7/i5 is going to be miles ahead in the majority of things, but once we start talking multiple VMs bulldozer will handle it much more smoothly.
#19
SpleenBeGone
-
- Administrators
-
- 14,951 posts
Deer Leader of the Goriest Revolution
- LocationHouston
Posted 13 August 2012 - 03:48 PM
Ah, I assumed that sql would be your main focus, from what we had discussed earlier. Good luck then.
#20
Guest_ElatedOwl_*
Guest_ElatedOwl_*
-
- Guests
Posted 13 August 2012 - 03:55 PM
Thanks - and thanks for the links and research as well.
