Any recommendation for cheap full size LGA 3647 cooler/heatsink for Supermicro X11DPH-T?

[wildpig1234]

Even the Xeon Silver 4114 (around $7 last I checked) is better than the 4208, since the Silver models lack pretty much all of the new stuff added after Skylake.

I just cant see why on earth anyone would spend so much right now on 4208... lol. make zero sense

 

[nexox]

The 4210R is even more confusing, specs almost identical to the 4114 but they're rarely available under $350 used, and that R suffix is only worth a little bit of cool points.

 

[wildpig1234]

The 4210R is even more confusing, specs almost identical to the 4114 but they're rarely available under $350 used, and that R suffix is only worth a little bit of cool points.

I just looked up spec for 6240 and it's not really any better than 6140 still only 18cores but costs 10X as much on ebay....lol...

 

[nexox]

Once you get to the 6200 line you at least get some benefits like DCPMM support and higher memory clocks, plus I think one or two other architecture features, but yeah, the prices aren't right yet. I'm holding out for a pair of 6240R CPUs to upgrade my workstation one day, maybe whenever they get to $50 per socket or so.

 

[nabsltd]

Even the Xeon Silver 4114 (around $7 last I checked) is better than the 4208, since the Silver models lack pretty much all of the new stuff added after Skylake.

What did Intel do to the 2nd Gen Scalable? They all seem worse than the closest equivalent 1st Gen. And, now that 1st Gen are discontinued and heading towards End of Service, they are dirt cheap and make the comparison even worse.

Gen3 and beyond have the advantage of things like more and fatter PCIe lanes, so even if you don't get much gain in the compute power, you get gains in other places.

 

[nexox]

What did Intel do to the 2nd Gen Scalable? They all seem worse than the closest equivalent 1st Gen. And, now that 1st Gen are discontinued and heading towards End of Service, they are dirt cheap and make the comparison even worse.

The whole Scalable Xeon release was messed up with various issues so they had to ship Skylake before it was really done, then Cascade Lake was kind of what they wanted in Skylake, then AMD undercut Intel on pricing and the answer was a half-generation release of the Cascade Lake Refresh CPUs. So pretty much typical Intel product marketing.

 

[wildpig1234]

The whole Scalable Xeon release was messed up with various issues so they had to ship Skylake before it was really done, then Cascade Lake was kind of what they wanted in Skylake, then AMD undercut Intel on pricing and the answer was a half-generation release of the Cascade Lake Refresh CPUs. So pretty much typical Intel product marketing.

I am getting some intro into the skylake/cascade lake only because i want to get an intro dip into the AVX-512 which i hope will make these cpus significantly faster than broadwll, and epyc when avx-512 is being used. I guess we will see...

But yeah, intel server cpu prices are bonker sometimes.

 

[wildpig1234]

6132 is about $20 for 14 cores, presumably much better than 50% the performance of the 6140, so that's cheaper per core and performance, but if you actually want higher performance, not just value, I think the 6150, at $125 is the next step up. In cascade lake that almost gets you a 4208, this generation has a couple more years before it's cost competitive with skylake.

Just bought two of the 6132. seems like a decent set of cpu compared to 2690 v4 but at cheaper price and has AVX-512

 

[wildpig1234]

Also, the 20 core 6138 seems like a good cheaper substitute with equal performance compared to 2698 v4?

 

[nabsltd]

You'll never notice the difference between a 6138 and a 2698 v4 in the real world. A 100-hour task on the 2698 would take 103 hours on the 6138.

This is assuming that the software can't take advantage of the new instructions available in the 6138. For some workloads (e.g., video encoding), the 6138 would likely be much faster.

 

[nexox]

Given the low-ish TDP of the 6138 the 6140 probably gives you better multithread performance even with two fewer cores, at about the same price.

 

[wildpig1234]

Given the low-ish TDP of the 6138 the 6140 probably gives you better multithread performance even with two fewer cores, at about the same price.

You'll never notice the difference between a 6138 and a 2698 v4 in the real world. A 100-hour task on the 2698 would take 103 hours on the 6138.

This is assuming that the software can't take advantage of the new instructions available in the 6138. For some workloads (e.g., video encoding), the 6138 would likely be much faster.

So 2698 v4 is slightly faster than 6138 or 6140? I guess if my program uses avx 512 then 2698 v4 will be a lot slower?

 

[nexox]

So 2698 v4 is slightly faster than 6138 or 6140? I guess if my program uses avx 512 then 2698 v4 will be a lot slower?

I don't know, comparisons across generations are hard, there are standard benchmarks but they don't represent any particular real application. Your workload may be affected differently by any of the changes between the two - memory and cache layout, instruction sets, and presumably a bunch of smaller things - it could go either way between the 2698 v4 and the 6140. If you can use any newer instruction set features then that will typically be a huge gain, because they only go to the trouble of adding that stuff unless there's a serious benefit.

 

[wildpig1234]

I don't know, comparisons across generations are hard, there are standard benchmarks but they don't represent any particular real application. Your workload may be affected differently by any of the changes between the two - memory and cache layout, instruction sets, and presumably a bunch of smaller things - it could go either way between the 2698 v4 and the 6140. If you can use any newer instruction set features then that will typically be a huge gain, because they only go to the trouble of adding that stuff if there's a series benefit.

2698 v4 passmark: PassMark - Intel Xeon E5-2698 v4 @ 2.20GHz - Price performance comparison (cpubenchmark.net)
6140 passmark: PassMark - Intel Xeon Gold 6140 @ 2.30GHz - Price performance comparison (cpubenchmark.net)

It basically kinda depends like you say. But i am just hoping that programs like y cruncher for calculating pi which use avx 512 will be a lot faster...

 

[wildpig1234]

There's always the cooler that Lenovo use in the P920 workstation which isn't too expensive.

I've had good results from the Supermicro SNK-P0070APS4 4U coolers in 743 chassis

Thanks for this suggestion! These lenovo coolers work great and they are a lot cheaper than the supermicro ones. But they are definitely a little louder . Also, I notice that the fan on this cooler sucks air through the cooler fins, instead of blowing the air through the fins. I think it's more effective cooling to blow the air through the fin instead of sucking air through the fin so i might try to reverse mount the fan.

 

[wildpig1234]

6132 is about $20 for 14 cores, presumably much better than 50% the performance of the 6140, so that's cheaper per core and performance, but if you actually want higher performance, not just value, I think the 6150, at $125 is the next step up. In cascade lake that almost gets you a 4208, this generation has a couple more years before it's cost competitive with skylake.

after spending several days testing out single and dual 6132,6138, 6140, I can definitely confirm that 6132 is THE BEST value for the money. Hard to believe that you can get TWO of these cpu for $40. This is probably the cheapest way to get AVX512.
I can also tell you that avx512 is really good thing to have if your program uses it. For example, y cruncher with avx512 allows 6132 to punch way above its class. Two 6132 with 28 cores is not that much slower than a single epyc 7702 64 core cpu when you can take advantage of avx512

 

[wildpig1234]

which is better, 6150 or 6152 for the fastest multicore speed? If my application takes advantage of AVX-512, which is better for fastest multicore speed?

 

[nexox]

The 6150 has a 10% higher TDP, so it should get somewhat higher all core turbo, but whether that's enough to make up the four fewer cores is likely workload specific.

 

[wildpig1234]

what would happen if i put a 8175M 240W cpu into the X11DPH MB which supermicro claims to only support up to 205W TDP cpu? The 8175M is not that much more expensive than the 6150/2 and it has much higher TDP

 

[nexox]

You need to go read through the thread about modding the VRMs to be sure, but I imagine you could make it work.