ASUS Pro WS W790E-SAGE SE + Intel Xeon Sapphire Rapids SPR-SP

[JosefHrib]

For me works fan control in w11 without problem.

Now with 4x Phanteks PH-F120T30 (and before with 9x Noctua NF-A12x25 PWM).
Fan headers on motherboard plus fan hub Noctua NA-FH1 and app.

I tried many apps, from Asus up to Fan.Control. And in my eyes is best of the best:
The first setup is a bit more difficult, but it's worth it.

GitHub - Rem0o/FanControl.Releases: This is the release repository for Fan Control, a highly customizable fan controlling software for Windows.

This is the release repository for Fan Control, a highly customizable fan controlling software for Windows. - Rem0o/FanControl.Releases

github.com

 

[Bert]

The BMC web portal (page I showed screenshot of) is accessed entirely by web browser, no special tools needed. You'd just need to make sure the BMC port on the motherboard is connected to network and has an IP address; I think the default behavior might even be that the BMC network is bonded to one of the 10gig connections so no extra network connection is required.

I figured it out afterwards. Asus BMC web page is so superior over SM, I thought it was a desktop app. Fan controls are so easy and powerful. Just used the curve, more than enough for me. It is great to have such a user friendly platform, running with high memory clocks and very powerful performance. Amazing workstation set up that costs under $2000 or less if you don't gobble up memory.

It is sad that W790 platform is a dead end with no support from Emerald Rapids. Intel is jumping many steps to play the catch up. Ideally, they should put 4NM CPUs on W790 platform for people to invest.

 

[JosefHrib]

I figured it out afterwards. Asus BMC web page is so superior over SM, I thought it was a desktop app. Fan controls are so easy and powerful. Just used the curve, more than enough for me. It is great to have such a user friendly platform, running with high memory clocks and very powerful performance. Amazing workstation set up that costs under $2000 or less if you don't gobble up memory.

It is sad that W790 platform is a dead end with no support from Emerald Rapids. Intel is jumping many steps to play the catch up. Ideally, they should put 4NM CPUs on W790 platform for people to invest.

I'm still hoping that Intel will release at least a few top tier pieces EMR W, but it doesn't look like it.

 

[Bert]

Has anyone figured out how to find the drivers for "coprocessors"? I assume these are accelerators but I couldn't figure out how to install the drivers for them.

 

[RolloZ170]

Has anyone figured out how to find the drivers for "coprocessors"? I assume these are accelerators but I couldn't figure out how to install the drivers for them.

they are on the driver page of your motherboard Intel QAT drivers.
(only if your MB supports CPU with QAT)
but do not expect them to work on early Eng.Samples.
if you don't use them, don't install drivers.

 

[JosefHrib]

Has anyone figured out how to find the drivers for "coprocessors"? I assume these are accelerators but I couldn't figure out how to install the drivers for them.

Intel® QuickAssist Technology (Intel® QAT) Driver for Windows* for Hardware Version 2.0

Intel® QuickAssist Technology (Intel® QAT) offers acceleration for cryptographic operations and data compression, enabling enhanced performance and power efficiency in data center workloads. This package includes the Intel® QAT Driver for Windows* for Hardware Version 2.0.

www.intel.com

 

[Bert]

I finally set up my workstation and let me share my experience.

Lightroom is blazingly fast now with QYF8 (no overclocking) although I am still using same I/O devices (cheap Sata SSDs on RAID 0 via Adaptec ASR 71605 and Intel VROC). The only problem is memory. Lightroom crashed as 32GB memory was not enough for 56 cores; increased memory to 64GB and all is good. I am also running on 3 DIMMs, and probably the system is memory bound at this moment. Coming from 2x 2690v4; the difference is huge.

So far, didn't see any odd behavior. Even if there are bugs with these ES chips, nothing to impact Lightroom and Windows.

My only failed action is enabling bifurcation and I believe this is because of my HP Z Turbo Quad Pro card.

 

[JosefHrib]

I finally set up my workstation and let me share my experience.

Lightroom is blazingly fast now with QYF8 (no overclocking) although I am still using same I/O devices (cheap Sata SSDs on RAID 0 via Adaptec ASR 71605 and Intel VROC). The only problem is memory. Lightroom crashed as 32GB memory was not enough for 56 cores; increased memory to 64GB and all is good. I am also running on 3 DIMMs, and probably the system is memory bound at this moment. Coming from 2x 2690v4; the difference is huge.

So far, didn't see any odd behavior. Even if there are bugs with these ES chips, nothing to impact Lightroom and Windows.

My only failed action is enabling bifurcation and I believe this is because of my HP Z Turbo Quad Pro card.

I using ES QYFS and without any problems too. My disks NVMe via ASUS PCIe 5.0 Card and it's perfect.

 

[horstbuck]

FWIW I've only been up and running for a few days but I've got a QYFU with 2 sticks of Kingston Fury (32GB, 5600) running at 4800, a cheap gen 4 nvme add-in card with 4 nvmes (no raid) and a Noctua cooler running Windows 10 Pro Workstation. Cinebench 23 is 50800, CPUmark is 66122. This is without any tweaking. So far I'm quite pleased with this $150 cpu.

 

[Bert]

I am not suggesting anyone to do this as this may damage your CPU and/or motherboard but has anyone attempted bclock overclocking? I remember hitting 109 easily when I tested, I am not sure how MB can hit so high without breaking anything (corrupting data on NVMe or graphics card etc). In the old Asus Z10PE, you were lucky to get 103.

 

[twin_savage]

has anyone attempted bclock overclocking?

I have, I could only run ~106.4MHz before problems happened though. In addition it was far more difficult for me to get a stable core OC while running the bclk OC, I would achieve 200-300MHz less core OC with the bclk OC than without.

The major benefit to the bclk OC was that it sped up all of the memory and cache subsystem which is my primary bottleneck.

 

[Bert]

I have, I could only run ~106.4MHz before problems happened though. In addition it was far more difficult for me to get a stable core OC while running the bclk OC, I would achieve 200-300MHz less core OC with the bclk OC than without.

The major benefit to the bclk OC was that it sped up all of the memory and cache subsystem which is my primary bottleneck.

Hmm not sure why hitting 109 was so easy for me.

What is your CPU multiplier? There is a hard limit around 4 GHz so you need to limit the cpu multiplier if it is more than 37.

Again I am not suggesting but you can overclock memory directly without BCLCK overclock

 

[Kizune]

I was able to get about 109 but only with the older PCIe gen.3 GPU. With 3090 once I clock over 102.5 it stops being detected. Same goes for PCIe gen.4 SSDs - no matter what connection I was using they just weren’t working.

 

[twin_savage]

What is your CPU multiplier?

I was running a x43 for all core workloads and x46 for 1-2 core workloads with that 106.4 blck OC; keep in mind this is a 16 core Xeon though.
It was actually an Optane 905p that would drop out when I went higher on the bclk rather than the CPU itself.

I've since given up on bclk OC'ing, I can get better and more stable results adjusting cpu multi+memory+mesh ratio.

 

[pisiiki]

I am not suggesting anyone to do this as this may damage your CPU and/or motherboard but has anyone attempted bclock overclocking? I remember hitting 109 easily when I tested, I am not sure how MB can hit so high without breaking anything (corrupting data on NVMe or graphics card etc). In the old Asus Z10PE, you were lucky to get 103.

I did it and the problem was my 4090, without it I think I went up to 110, otherwise 102/103. Btw, why would this damage anything?

 

[Bert]

I was running a x43 for all core workloads and x46 for 1-2 core workloads with that 106.4 blck OC; keep in mind this is a 16 core Xeon though.
It was actually an Optane 905p that would drop out when I went higher on the bclk rather than the CPU itself.

I've since given up on bclk OC'ing, I can get better and more stable results adjusting cpu multi+memory+mesh ratio.

What is your cpu? w5-3435X?

 

[twin_savage]

What is your cpu? w5-3435X?

Yes. An interesting thing I've noticed on the lower core count XCC CPUs is they can not get as high of memory read speeds as the high core count skus, but they seem to be able to write to memory just as fast or slightly faster than the high core count CPUs.

 

[RolloZ170]

https://forums.servethehome.com/index.php?threads/sapphire-emerald-rapids-memory-bandwidth-pcie-root-complex-discussion.42917/

 

[JosefHrib]

I tried with my QYFS EVGA RTX 3090 Ti FTW3, ASUS ROG RTX 4090 OC and both gpus have problem with 103 and more. This is standart situation. If you want go higher than 103 you must using older gpu.

 

[Bert]

CPU 115x34=3910,Mesh 25x115=2875,Memory ? maybe 5420
View attachment 36989

How can this be even stable a@ 115mHz? Do you have NVMes running from PCI-E?