Zen 2 for Distributed Computing: Any interest?

[Markfw]

Support for Zen, Zen+ and Zen 2 is a bit confusing to me. Take the ASRock Taichi x470 and x570 boards for example.

Taichi X470 support

The CPU support list does list Zen, Zen+ and Zen 2.
The latest bios offers AMD AGESA Combo-AM4 1.0.0.3 ABB support but with this disclaimer:
"ASRock do NOT recommend updating this BIOS if Pinnacle, Raven, Summit or Bristol Ridge CPU is being used on your system."

No bios support for AMD AGESA Combo-AM4 1.0.0.3 ABBA yet

Taichi X570 support

The CPU support list only includes Zen+ and Zen2

The latest bios supports AMD AGESA Combo-AM4 1.0.0.3 ABBA

My question is will B450 and X470 boards offer AGESA 1.0.0.3 ABBA and further updates in the future?

I would say most would. So far the updates to older boards have been slow. I only have 1.0.0.3 in most ATM. I have not even bothered with the later ones, and some are available,. and some not. Thats an X370 Taichi, and X470 Taichi and an ASUS x470 prime pro. They are all working fine at and 3200 memory or better, so I can be patient.

 

[extide]

Support for Zen, Zen+ and Zen 2 is a bit confusing to me. Take the ASRock Taichi x470 and x570 boards for example.

Taichi X470 support

The CPU support list does list Zen, Zen+ and Zen 2.
The latest bios offers AMD AGESA Combo-AM4 1.0.0.3 ABB support but with this disclaimer:
"ASRock do NOT recommend updating this BIOS if Pinnacle, Raven, Summit or Bristol Ridge CPU is being used on your system."

No bios support for AMD AGESA Combo-AM4 1.0.0.3 ABBA yet

Yeah those boards do support all of those chips with the newer bios -- just they don't necessarily have any improvements targeted at them. Boards that drop support are pretty explicit about it.

Taichi X570 support

The CPU support list only includes Zen+ and Zen2

The latest bios supports AMD AGESA Combo-AM4 1.0.0.3 ABBA

My question is will B450 and X470 boards offer AGESA 1.0.0.3 ABBA and further updates in the future?

Ah, well officially AMD is not supporting Ryzen 1st gen (1000 series) on X570 see: https://www.amd.com/en/chipsets/x570

Although some mobo makers may have made it work -- but this isn't quite the situation I was talking about -- although it is admittedly a bit confusing.

 

[Assimilator1]

Well it seems the MSI B450 Gaming Pro Carbon is quite happy running the Zen 2's RAM speed at default speed (& higher), so that's going to be my choice for a mbrd, phew .

It seems (I think) that the 3600X has gone up recently, is it worth the extra £37 over the 3600?
4.8% more speed for 19% greater cost! Hmm.... Are their other advantages to the 3600X that are not obvious by the basic specs? Like maybe all core boost speed being higher under sustained loads? (e.g DC).

 

[crashtech]

If you factor the total cost of the system and expected power cost over time, the higher core count 3700x invariably wins in computational power versus cost. But if you must stay with the hexacore, there's no doubt that the 3600 is better for DC.

 

[Assimilator1]

Yea hexacore is more than enough for my modest gaming needs, which is my PCs next most CPU work.
Does the 3600X use disproportionatley more power than the 3600 then? But wouldn't the 3600X have a quite a bit higher all core loaded clock speed vs the 3600 due to the higher TDP allowance?? I need to dig threw the reviews again..... but I'm still all ears .

 

[UsandThem]

But wouldn't the 3600X have a quite a bit higher all core loaded clock speed vs the 3600 due to the higher TDP allowance?? I need to dig threw the reviews again..... but I'm still all ears .

Surprisingly this generation, no. Save the money, and use it towards a nice cooler or another component. Or step up to the 3700 (Which is currently $305 on Newegg's EBay store).

Which was surprising when there was a noticeable difference between the 2600 / 2600X, and the 2700 / 2700X.

There is not enough difference in performance between the 3600 / 3600X to justify a $50 price difference, so that's we are seeing retailer's 3600X begin to fall.

 

[crashtech]

The 3600 is a tremendous value, about the best bang for the buck in a new CPU out there, afaik.

 

[Assimilator1]

Ok, good to know, well I'm not going to pull the trigger yet as I need to figure out what memory I need. Maybe by then the price will have dropped?

UsandThem
The 3700X is about £319 here, so it's a lot more than the 3600X (and a little more than you guys pay).

 

[crashtech]

There's more than one way to figure the value. Using CPU prices in isolation, the 3600 is by far the best value. Using total system cost plus expected lifetime energy usage, the higher core count CPUs like the 3700X are the clear winner. I don't know how long you plan to keep this system, but it might be worth doing the math and maybe spending the extra, afaik, some games are beginning to use all those cores, and that trend will only continue. Not to mention higher output for DC!

 

[biodoc]

The way AMD defines TDP is complicated. Here's a video from gamer's nexus with an attempted explanation and cooler recommendations. I think if you plan on overclocking to the chips limits, then you'll need effective cooling and expect the power draw to be way north of the TDP. How does AMD decide which chip to throw into the 3600 or 3600X bin? Is there a testing process? Are the chips in the 3600X bin more stable at higher frequencies?

 

[crashtech]

Typically the higher bin will have more frequency headroom but less power efficiency. Afaik the go somewhat hand in hand (leakage).

 

[Assimilator1]

There's more than one way to figure the value. Using CPU prices in isolation, the 3600 is by far the best value. Using total system cost plus expected lifetime energy usage, the higher core count CPUs like the 3700X are the clear winner. I don't know how long you plan to keep this system, but it might be worth doing the math and maybe spending the extra, afaik, some games are beginning to use all those cores, and that trend will only continue. Not to mention higher output for DC!

Re system cost & energy usage, I think you're getting mixed up here, whilst I'm sure the 3700X is more efficient (ppd/£), it is definitely going to use more energy over what ever time period is chosen. Plus the nearly £100 extra cost of the CPU.
I wasn't aware of any games using all 6 cores, but I've not looked into it for years as I pretty much only play Elite Dangerous these days (occasionally older games), but a quick bit of Googling found this here on AT Games that recommend 6 cores ), if I play ED with VR that does run better with 6 cores (which I would like to do again if I can be sure motion sickness won't be a long term problem, I've had mixed results with a little bit of testing I did. And btw I was more GPU limited than CPU limited).

Anyway, 6 core CPUs has only fairly recently (~2.5 yrs) entered the mainstream segment, so I think it will be quite a long time before they become the bare minimum or even mid recommended amongst most games. And beyond then, if I need an octa-core CPU I can upgrade to one & it'll be much cheaper! .
The higher DC output is tempting , but aside from the fact I've never spent more than ~£200 on a CPU (which I'd only done for my current CPU), I'm looking forwards to a big drop in energy usage with my PC by sticking with 6 cores & going from my Ivybridge to a Zen2. I plan to buy an M3 (e92) soon as a 'fair weather/weekend fun' car, cutting my energy bill will help to offset that a little bit (I'm going to dial back my TV & broadband package too - now done! Thanks for 'reminding' me gone from £91(!)/mth to £66).

Can't remember if I mentioned this, but the Zen2 CPU I get will be the 1st CPU I won't be overclocking since my Pentium 166MMX in my 1st rig 21 1/2 yrs ago!
Seems to be no point with the Zen 2s as far as I've seen .

 

[VirtualLarry]

Anyway, 6 core CPUs has only fairly recently (~2.5 yrs) entered the mainstream segment, so I think it will be quite a long time before they become the bare minimum or even mid recommended amongst most games.

I disagree. 6C is the realistic minimum these days, for playing modern AAA games, with 8C or 6C/12T being a more comfortable choice. (Of course, the old standby FX-6300 and FX-8350 might get some play here too, for certain values of "play".)

 

[Assimilator1]

Ok, can you give some links of such games needing 6C as a realistic minimum? (h/w req's links?)

 

[crashtech]

@Assimilator1 , yes, I certainly meant ppd/£! But I'm going to stop annoying you about it, get the 3600! It's always possible to upgrade it later if your use case changes and/or the octacores come down in price.

 

[StefanR5R]

Ok, can you give some links of such games needing 6C as a realistic minimum?

The type of games which I like to play can be played with less than six cores, but it's definitely more fun with more cores. ;-)

It is not known yet if there will be a year 2020 edition of these games though.

 

[Markfw]

Ok, can you give some links of such games needing 6C as a realistic minimum? (h/w req's links?)

From what I have seen/read on these forums, the game may SAY 4 cores or 6 cores, but in real gameplay (especially if you stream at the same time) it seems that most modern games like 8 cores, even as many as 12 in some cases, and with SMT on, as many as 24.

But most agree that 8c/16t will do pretty much any game with streaming. 6c/12t is marginal.

 

[Assimilator1]

I don't stream, although I do occasionally record videos from Elite, my 6C Ivy seems to handle that fine .

Still curious to know some of the games which need 6C as a realistic minimum.

crashtech
Wasn't annoyed, just not convinced of the 8C need for my rig .

Btw guys, any recommendations for RAM make? Or any to specifically avoid?
(I usually go for Crucial).

 

[StefanR5R]

As some of you know, I moved to a different place this year in spring. Recently we had the first few cold days since, and from these I learned that my four GPU-less computers alone are more than enough to heat the entire apartment. (¹That's even though they are all located in a single room, not spread out to different rooms. ²And it's even though the building is older and the apartment bigger than my former place. ³Maybe when it's getting really cold in January, I'll need a bit more heating than this.)

So in short, I should downsize my DC gear in terms of heat output, and for that I need to look into upgrade options with an efficiency level that currently only the 64-core SKUs of EPYC can provide, and maybe the 48-core SKUs come close to. Anything else would merely be a sidegrade with insubstantially improved efficiency, it seems.

I am looking forward to the Threadripper 3000 announcements which should happen this month, but one is for certain: At stock they won't be as energy-efficient as EPYC 7002. Whether or not BIOS settings will allow to drive their energy use down to EPYC levels will remain to be seen.

Until then, does anybody know

• whether the usual Ryzen BIOSes have options to set a cTDP such that the processor firmware runs them at similar voltage/frequency levels as the server siblings?¹

• whether it is possible to operate Ryzen 3000 (non -G) PCs as headless Linux nodes, i.e. without a graphics card installed?²

Edit,
¹) This may be wishful thinking. It means to take 4 16-core Ryzens and run them at 56 W each. But there is a rub: The 64-core Epyc comes with one big IO die. The 4 Ryzens come with 8 smaller IO dies (4 internal to the CPUs, 4 as southbridges on the mainboards). Not to mention the rest of the minimum required periphery, which quadruples if going from Epyc to Ryzen in this manner. (Except for RAM which stays the same amount, just unregistered instead of registered.)
²) This may be mostly a question of whether or not the PC BIOS still boots if there is no GPU. Linux then needs to be set up such that there is still some sort of virtual terminal, I suppose. I haven't researched this way of using Linux yet, always only set up Linux on computers which had one or another kind of display adapter.

 

[biodoc]

whether the usual Ryzen BIOSes have options to set a cTDP

Yes, my gigabyte aorus master x570 has that option in the bios. Let me know if you want me to do some tests.

This is some info on a 2700X with different cTDP settings

 

[StefanR5R]

Thanks. Would be interesting to learn whether this option alone removes the constant voltage limitation referred to in post #128. And then, throughput tests with a repeatable workload would certainly be interesting. But there is no rush with this; especially not as long as the TeAm is engaged in too many competitions at once. :-)

 

[Howdy]

@biodoc
3900X, GTX1080Ti x 2, Linux Mint 19.2, Win10 dual boot

What MOBO are you running with this set up.........asking for a friend.....

 

[biodoc]

@biodoc
3900X, GTX1080Ti x 2, Linux Mint 19.2, Win10 dual boot

What MOBO are you running with this set up.........asking for a friend.....

Gigabyte Aorus Master x570. It's my main computer so I wanted some "nice to have features". Time will tell if it's a good choice.

 

[crashtech]

The only X570 board I want is $700:
X570 Aorus Xtreme
I strongly believe it should not have to cost that much to take a regular board and put that heat pipe in that you can see running along the innermost memory slot. That should not cost hundreds more.

 

[Howdy]

The only X570 board I want is $700:
X570 Aorus Xtreme
I strongly believe it should not have to cost that much to take a regular board and put that heat pipe in that you can see running along the innermost memory slot. That should not cost hundreds more.

I agree!!

I'm umm er my friend trying to decide between a x470 OR x570. I quite honestly do not see me needing a 570 but I am concerned about cooling of the VRM on a 470 running a 3900x. I find nothing that says there would be any issue with my YouTube worm hole I have fallen in. I do have an x470 MOBO that I could swap out the CPU and see if I run in to any issues. OTOH I'd rather start from scratch with a new machine that is to replace my DD. Either way I have time to decide since there is nothing wrong with my current DD.