Most powerful computer under 100w.

[ThatsABigOne]

Hello everyone! I am trying to piece together a system that will be used for image processing/testing. I will answer these questions:

1. PC will be used for image processing/coding. Noise doesn't matter, but it must consume less than 100w at peak load.

2. No budget.

3. Country: USA

4. Brand preference: Intel and Nvidia. Custom programs will be taking advantage of Cuda. The most amount of cores on CPU is critical. Dual core with HT would work, preferably quad core with HT(that is mostly unrealistic).

5. Current parts will consist of a mobo that is mITX 1150 with dual ethernet. The PSU is slim factor(not out of 110v outlet).

6. The system will be run at stock speeds. Need flexibility to undervolt as much as I can.

7. Monitor will 'virtualized' and therefore the resolution is undetermined. Aiming around 1080P. This

8. Planning to build this computer as soon as possible.

9. No software is needed.

This is what I came up with:
Motherboard: http://www.gigabyte.us/products/product-page.aspx?pid=4600#ov
or http://us.msi.com/product/mb/Z87I.html
or http://us.msi.com/product/mb/Z87I-AC.html
CPU: I have trouble finding low power Core i5 with HT. Any hints?
GPU: Something like GT640.
RAM: Any 8gb stick would suffice.
Case: None, making it myself.
PSU: None.
Drives: None.
Storage: Cheapest 120gb with good power consumption. I need help with this.
CPU cooler: Modified Corsair H50.

Any help would be greatly appreciated... Thank you!

 

[lakedude]

Dual core with HT would work, preferably quad core with HT(that is mostly unrealistic).

CPU: I have trouble finding low power Core i5 with HT.

AFAIK in the desktop market the big difference between the i5s and the i7s is that the i7s have SMT(HT) while the i5s do not.

Basically an i5 with HT is an i7...

Laptops are different.

 

[lakedude]

I think the i7-4765T is the CPU for you...

http://ark.intel.com/products/75121

http://www.anandtech.com/show/7007/intels-haswell-an-htpc-perspective/9

 

[ThatsABigOne]

I think the i7-4765T is the CPU for you...

http://ark.intel.com/products/75121

http://www.anandtech.com/show/7007/intels-haswell-an-htpc-perspective/9

Oh wow, that looks like a perfect CPU for our usage. Can one undervolt non K chips? I have been out of the loop for a while as I had i7 960 for last 4 years.

 

[lakedude]

I read that Broadwell we coming out in Q1 but now I think it has been pushed back to Q3. Broadwell will be a die shrink to a 14nm process which will in all likelihood be more efficient and use less power which sounds perfect for your needs.

Not sure on the underclock/undervolt question.

If you have trouble finding the "T" chip you might be able to achieve similar result by underclocking and undervolting a "K" chip but if the BIOS ever got set back to defaults you would draw more power than you are wanting.

 

[Torn Mind]

Samsung SSDs tend to be very good at power consumption.

I can undervolt on my Asrock H77 board and i7-3770S. Probably doable on most desktop boards. The manual of the BIOS can confirm if the option is there.

 

[richaron]

1. PC will be used for image processing/coding. Noise doesn't matter, but it must consume less than 100w at peak load.

I assume this limit is because of the "slim factor" PSU? What are the exact specs on 3.3/5/12V? If you need 100w because of a UPS or something before PSU, you must take PSU efficiency into account. And you're already going to be tight with power.

4. Brand preference: Intel and Nvidia. Custom programs will be taking advantage of Cuda. The most amount of cores on CPU is critical. Dual core with HT would work, preferably quad core with HT(that is mostly unrealistic).

You might need to choose between a nice CPU and a dedicated video card. If you really need a dedicated GPU for Cuda (lets guess ~50W minimum), you'll probly need to make compromises. Simple maths, rough figures from parts above; CPU ~35W + Mobo/RAM ~20-30W(?) + fan/SSD >=5W = 30-40W Max for GPU.

I've never looked up power figures with disabled iGPU and/or underclocking/volting CPU, it could well make the difference. And before any final decisions I would wait and see what the 750 brings to the table (~10 days).

 

[bgt]

You can underclock a 4770K, no problem. I have tested it at 2Ghz, really low power draw.

 

[ThatsABigOne]

I assume this limit is because of the "slim factor" PSU? What are the exact specs on 3.3/5/12V? If you need 100w because of a UPS or something before PSU, you must take PSU efficiency into account. And you're already going to be tight with power.



You might need to choose between a nice CPU and a dedicated video card. If you really need a dedicated GPU for Cuda (lets guess ~50W minimum), you'll probly need to make compromises. Simple maths, rough figures from parts above; CPU ~35W + Mobo/RAM ~20-30W(?) + fan/SSD >=5W = 30-40W Max for GPU.

I've never looked up power figures with disabled iGPU and/or underclocking/volting CPU, it could well make the difference. And before any final decisions I would wait and see what the 750 brings to the table (~10 days).

Yeap, I am definitely picking CPU/GPU combo. That is why I picked a GT640 in the first place. Some models are consuming around 45W according to Toms Hardware.

The PSU will be unique as it needs to take a 24v DC input, instead of 110v/220v. I am not researching on PSU as it is a job for another team in my project. It will have to be 100w at the 'wall'.

Samsung SSDs tend to be very good at power consumption.

I can undervolt on my Asrock H77 board and i7-3770S. Probably doable on most desktop boards. The manual of the BIOS can confirm if the option is there.

Thanks for the confirmation. I will take a look if there are any H-xx mobos that have dual ethernet.

 

[Carson Dyle]

Exactly what parts do you currently have? It sounds like you're saying you have a miniITX case and PSU and nothing else. Does it have to be miniITX, because the case and PSU will ultimately be a small part of the overall cost of the system. Not that it can't easily be done with current miniITX boards, it just seems like an odd constraint.

Curious... Why is peak power so important? If this system is to be used exclusively for video rendering and power costs are important, I would think that the goal would be a system that can do the most work for the least amount of energy used, regardless of peak power.

 

[Blue_Max]

Intel's S-branded chips use less power than the normal (or K) versions. The T-series, even less still.

I really enjoyed my i3 3220T at only 35W, but was still 2c/4t and a great performer.
Heck, you'd have wattage to spare! The i3 T chip is also cheap enough to allow more budged for larger storage, etc.

 

[ThatsABigOne]

Exactly what parts do you currently have? It sounds like you're saying you have a miniITX case and PSU and nothing else. Does it have to be miniITX, because the case and PSU will ultimately be a small part of the overall cost of the system. Not that it can't easily be done with current miniITX boards, it just seems like an odd constraint.

Curious... Why is peak power so important? If this system is to be used exclusively for video rendering and power costs are important, I would think that the goal would be a system that can do the most work for the least amount of energy used, regardless of peak power.

It has to fit into a small 8*8*4 box. The GPU will be mounted on 'top' of motherboard via PCIe riser and custom mounting bracket.

Reason for small peak power is that the pictures are going to be taken on the fly(think like google car) and will be transcoded over mobile connection.

 

[ThatsABigOne]

Intel's S-branded chips use less power than the normal (or K) versions. The T-series, even less still.

I really enjoyed my i3 3220T at only 35W, but was still 2c/4t and a great performer.
Heck, you'd have wattage to spare! The i3 T chip is also cheap enough to allow more budged for larger storage, etc.

That is true, but often S and T models are lower clocked versions of regular CPUs.

 

[lakedude]

Intel's S-branded chips use less power than the normal (or K) versions. The T-series, even less still.

I really enjoyed my i3 3220T at only 35W, but was still 2c/4t and a great performer.
Heck, you'd have wattage to spare! The i3 T chip is also cheap enough to allow more budged for larger storage, etc.

An "S" isn't going to do it if we need to power a video card. It is curious that some of the Haswell "T" chips go down to 35 watts TDP including 4C8T, 2C4T, 2C2T but not 4C4T??The 4C4T only gets down to 45watts? There is no way that the 4C8T is going to draw the same power as the 2C4T or the 2C2T at the same clock regardless of the stated TDP.

How about this @ 25watts TDP? (no on chip graphics)

http://ark.intel.com/products/75053

 

[mfenn]

The key question here is how to allocate your limited thermal budget between the CPU and GPU. To answer this question effectively, we need some benchmarks.

What is your fundamental unit of work?
How many fundamental units can one Haswell core perform per second?
Are there any scaling limitations with multiple cores?
How many fundamental units can a GT 640 perform per second?
How many fundamental units can a GTX 650 perform per second? (These are the two CUDA GPUs that have any hope of fitting into the power budget)

 

[Blue_Max]

An "S" isn't going to do it if we need to power a video card. It is curious that some of the Haswell "T" chips go down to 35 watts TDP including 4C8T, 2C4T, 2C2T but not 4C4T??The 4C4T only gets down to 45watts? There is no way that the 4C8T is going to draw the same power as the 2C4T or the 2C2T at the same clock regardless of the stated TDP.

How about this @ 25watts TDP? (no on chip graphics)

http://ark.intel.com/products/75053

It gets that 25W by really dropping its minimum speed to a lowly 1.8GHz.

What do you even need a video card for, other than CUDA extensions for certain applications? The built-in HD4600 graphics on the Intel chips is surprisingly good... Unless you're planning more than just a few games and forgot to mention it?

...I checked earlier, and AMD does have some 4-core APU's that are only 65W if you do need some 3D gaming (which performs maybe double what the Intel HD4600 would but sacrifices a little CPU power to do it.)

 

[ThatsABigOne]

This computer will not be used for gaming. CUDA is for image recognition and vectorization. I talked to software engineers and they said that they would rather have as much threads as possible that are slow, not fast and few threads, therefore that Xeon that lakedude mentioned could work for our application.

Mfenn, you brought a good point. The key is to balance how much to allocate for CPU vs GPU power. In our case, CPU is more important. I think that GT640 would suffice.

I think I found that Xeon 1230L or Core i7 4765T to be perfect. I consider this case solved. Thank you all for input!

 

[richaron]

I hope you got all you needed.

You'll be lucky to get one of those CPUs under 100W at the wall with a gt640, and as I said above it would be wise to see what the gtx750 brings. There's a chance you'll get vastly more processing power withing the same power envelope.

 

[ThatsABigOne]

I hope you got all you needed.

You'll be lucky to get one of those CPUs under 100W at the wall with a gt640, and as I said above it would be wise to see what the gtx750 brings. There's a chance you'll get vastly more processing power withing the same power envelope.

Hopefully that's will be a reality. :ninja:

 

[piasabird]

Cell Phones.

 

[Ken g6]

Cell Phones.

Actually, that's a good point. How would your developers feel about writing in RenderScript for Android instead of CUDA for x86 and nVidia? (I'm sure I wouldn't like it, but you could ask. )

Otherwise, don't forget to make your RAM as low-voltage as possible.

Edit: I guess you want just one stick.

 

[Blue_Max]

1.25V! Very nice!

And the nVidia 600-series sure made some impressive power reductions... I love being able to put a GTX 660 into any system I want!

 

[lakedude]

It has to fit into a small 8*8*4 box. .

I know you said that the PS was not part of your responsibility but does the PS need to fit inside that little box?

Also that i7-4765T has a total TDP of 35 watts including graphics which are not going to be used in favor of the discrete card. That being the case the actual power draw for the CPU should be less.

 

[lakedude]

It gets that 25W by really dropping its minimum speed to a lowly 1.8GHz.

Yes but that is only 0.2GHz less than the chip the OP said was perfect.

I've got an "S" chip and it never runs as slow under load as the numbers would seem to indicate. They say it runs 3.1 GHz but I've never seen that in practice. It either runs much slower than 3.1 to save power when there is no load or slightly faster than 3.1 when there is a load. I'm baffled as to why they say it runs 3.1 GHz???

 

[lakedude]

Have you considered the possibility of using a laptop based system? A laptop based system would be smaller, lower power and would already use DC power inputs.