[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)