New Homelab build, should I go 14700k or 14900k?

[jkimmerling]

Hello all, I am purchasing the parts for a new build, and I am down to the CPU choice. I was trying to figure out if I should go with the 14700k or the 14900k (or possibly a Ryzen based chip, and if so, which one?).

It is going to be a Truenas server, running mostly:

• The *ARR stack
• Nextcloud
• Jupyter notebook (the data science variation)
• Livebook
• Databases (Redis, Postgres, Mongo, etc)

So mainly a basic NAS, but also a Dev environment/server.

Thanks in advance!

 

[louie1961]

If you have any plans on doing any AI inferencing, I would say neither. See here.

Intel Core i9-14900K, Core i7-14700K and Core i5-14600K Review: Raptor Lake Refreshed

www.anandtech.com

 

[bayleyw]

7950X. Much more efficient than a 14900K, no E-cores to cause you scheduler trouble, and no ISA disadvantage since the consumer Intel parts do not support AVX-512.

But, we need more details. Is your Jupyter work GPU accelerated? How much RAM do your databases need? The consumer parts only support 192GB, and even then only with some effort.

 

[jkimmerling]

7950X. Much more efficient than a 14900K, no E-cores to cause you scheduler trouble, and no ISA disadvantage since the consumer Intel parts do not support AVX-512.

But, we need more details. Is your Jupyter work GPU accelerated? How much RAM do your databases need? The consumer parts only support 192GB, and even then only with some effort.

Some of the notebooks will be GPU accelerated.

The RAM usage from the DBs will be pretty low. This will be a personal DEV/learning/playground situation. If I need HEAVY lifting, I'll probably just use my work's vertexai/collab notebooks.

The NAS portion of the server is just for media for me and my wife. The “dev” side is just a playground/personal project setup for me.

 

[jkimmerling]

Or should I go something like an AMD EPYC (would need to be used, probably off ebay from china lol)

 

[Chriggel]

Sounds like you can get away with a much smaller CPU then. I'd stay away from these Intel CPUs anyway. Big engineering fail in my opinion. If you want to go Intel, i5-14600 seems more reasonable. You'll still have the P/E core situation though, I'm not a fan. If you want/need something bigger, Intel is off the table.

7700 sounds good if you want to go AMD, or 7900 if you want a bigger one. If you want to go to the max, you have to choose between the 7950X and 7950X3D. The X is generally ever so slightly faster in application performance than the X3D, but the differences are very small. The X3D manages the roughly same performance with a smaller TDP, but it's more expensive and only one chiplet has the 3D cache. Tough choice, but then again, it doesn't really matter in the end.

Either way, you probably want ECC support, especially for the storage part. It's somewhat easier with AMD, with Intel it's also possible, but you need to get a W680 board which limits your options.

Choosing an Epyc (or Threadripper) would only make sense if you need much more cores and/or the PCIe connectivity.

 

[jkimmerling]

Sounds like you can get away with a much smaller CPU then. I'd stay away from these Intel CPUs anyway. Big engineering fail in my opinion. If you want to go Intel, i5-14600 seems more reasonable. You'll still have the P/E core situation though, I'm not a fan. If you want/need something bigger, Intel is off the table.

7700 sounds good if you want to go AMD, or 7900 if you want a bigger one. If you want to go to the max, you have to choose between the 7950X and 7950X3D. The X is generally ever so slightly faster in application performance than the X3D, but the differences are very small. The X3D manages the roughly same performance with a smaller TDP, but it's more expensive and only one chiplet has the 3D cache. Tough choice, but then again, it doesn't really matter in the end.

Either way, you probably want ECC support, especially for the storage part. It's somewhat easier with AMD, with Intel it's also possible, but you need to get a W680 board which limits your options.

Choosing an Epyc (or Threadripper) would only make sense if you need much more cores and/or the PCIe connectivity.

So the "Max 128gb" on the Ryzens is not an issue? I had read that the zfs in Truenas can eat up a lot of memory if you go 80-100TB. That is one reason I was contemplating an Epyc or similar.

 

[Chriggel]

The maximum memory for Ryzen CPUs is 192 GB at the moment (4x48 GB). For your average ZFS pool at home, you'll be fine with much less than that. ZFS will use all the memory that you give it, no matter how much it is, but that doesn't mean that it strictly NEEDS arbitrary amounts of memory to work. The vast majority of memory that ZFS uses is for ARC, which improves performance a lot because data can be served from memory rather then the disks. But if you're only requesting one sequential data transfer at a time, you'll hardly notice any difference. The amount of memory you really need to get the performance you need depends on your use case much more than on the amount of storage.

 

[Tech Junky]

Epyc

There's the new 4004 coming soon which is a drop in on a AM5 board.... I've pondered going Epyc for years as something different to play with but, the entry price is way too high for just tinkering with it. I don't keep up with the Epyc tech details enough to spot whether it's a viable option or not off the top of my head.

https://www.amd.com/en/products/processors/server/epyc/4th-generation-9004-and-8004-series.html#specs

Looks like every other processor on a server lineup with a ton of cores but slightly slower than the consumer version. The big advantage though is the # of cores going beyond 16 and number of PCIE lanes being unlocked.

 

[Chriggel]

Looks like every other processor on a server lineup with a ton of cores but slightly slower than the consumer version. The big advantage though is the # of cores going beyond 16 and number of PCIE lanes being unlocked.

Well, not just PCIe lanes being unlocked, but being physically present in the first place. But yes, that's the idea. Wasn't aware of the Epyc 4004 yet, super interesting, will keep an eye out for those. The question is what has AMD planned for those to make them so different from the existing Ryzen CPUs so that you want to use Epyc in AM5.

 

[Tech Junky]

AMD planned for those to make them so different

AM5 vs the expensive boards for starters.

The issue then becomes finding a board that has full length / wired slots vs the crappy consumer options with all of the limited and split lanes.... I suppose there might be more options like the mid tier ASRock rack boards that fit the middle of the road configurations without the hefty full on Epyc boards.

I could see the miners wanting them but, storage geeks also. Considering the top of the line CPU currently would push 128 lanes of PCIE 5 it opens the doors to U.3 storage en mass.

It all depends on how creative you can get with the new options and how deep your pockets are.

 

[jkimmerling]

For EPYC I was thinking something like "AMD EPYC 7532 + Supermicro H11SSL-i", which i can get used off Ebay for ~$900

 

[Chriggel]

AM5 vs the expensive boards for starters.

The issue then becomes finding a board that has full length / wired slots vs the crappy consumer options with all of the limited and split lanes.... I suppose there might be more options like the mid tier ASRock rack boards that fit the middle of the road configurations without the hefty full on Epyc boards.

I could see the miners wanting them but, storage geeks also. Considering the top of the line CPU currently would push 128 lanes of PCIE 5 it opens the doors to U.3 storage en mass.

It all depends on how creative you can get with the new options and how deep your pockets are.

Well, the difference between the board prices isn't really the point. The Epyc 4004 will not suddenly offer the same feature set as the bigger Epyc CPUs on AM5. The AM5 platform is inherently limited by the socket in terms of memory channels and PCIe lanes. That's why the Threadripper/Epyc sockets are so big. AMD needs to distinguish Epyc AM5 from Ryzen AM5 within the limits of the AM5 socket, it will be interesting to see what they can come up with. Otherwise they're just going to be renamed Ryzen CPUs and that would be pointless. Dedicated Epyc AM5 boards could play a role, offering a more server friendly layout. But if that happens and the CPUs aren't different, you could use Ryzen CPUs in these boards just as well.

For EPYC I was thinking something like "AMD EPYC 7532 + Supermicro H11SSL-i", which i can get used off Ebay for ~$900

Sure, but only you can decide if you really need more cores but slower cores, eight memory channels and all the PCIe lanes
Such a system would be very different from your initial idea of an Intel S1700 system.

 

[jkimmerling]

Well, the difference between the board prices isn't really the point. The Epyc 4004 will not suddenly offer the same feature set as the bigger Epyc CPUs on AM5. The AM5 platform is inherently limited by the socket in terms of memory channels and PCIe lanes. That's why the Threadripper/Epyc sockets are so big. AMD needs to distinguish Epyc AM5 from Ryzen AM5 within the limits of the AM5 socket, it will be interesting to see what they can come up with. Otherwise they're just going to be renamed Ryzen CPUs and that would be pointless. Dedicated Epyc AM5 boards could play a role, offering a more server friendly layout. But if that happens and the CPUs aren't different, you could use Ryzen CPUs in these boards just as well.



Sure, but only you can decide if you really need more cores but slower cores, eight memory channels and all the PCIe lanes
Such a system would be very different from your initial idea of an Intel S1700 system.

IT is mainly because the Ryzen 9 chips are all stated to have a max memory of 128gb (off the AMD site), and that seems like it could be a bottle neck down the road.

 

[louie1961]

Sounds like you can get away with a much smaller CPU then

Honestly for basic NAS stuff and Nextcloud, the OP could get by with core i3 processor, or less. It's the dev stuff that is the wild card. I run 2 instances of Openmediavault, ansible, and homeassistant on a N100 CPU, and that is overkill. My main Proxmox node runs Nexcloud, three separate instances of Wordpress (all in their own VMs with their own DB), and 12 docker containers on an i5-12500, and even that is overkill, TBH

 

[Chriggel]

IT is mainly because the Ryzen 9 chips are all stated to have a max memory of 128gb (off the AMD site), and that seems like it could be a bottle neck down the road.

That's usually not a hard cap, but based on the parts that were available at the time when the spec was written. If it is a hard cap however, and the CPUs don't like the odd 48 GB modules, then 128 GB would be correct. I don't see how that would limit anything anytime soon though. Sounds like nothing of your dev stuff will need substantial amounts of memory. And the storage stuff won't need that much either, unless you need to keep lots of stuff in the ARC. But only you know what you're using your storage for. You said you're using it for media for you and your wife. That sounds like one, at most two parallel users who stream a video. TrueNAS will barely need any memory to do that.

If you, for example, start with 2x16 GB, then you'll probably be fine. 16 GB for all the storage and 16 GB for your dev stuff. If you get a board with 4 slots, and you probably will, then you can always add more later on.

From my experience, if you don't know specifically how much memory you need for your environment, you probably need very little.

Honestly for basic NAS stuff and Nextcloud, the OP could get by with core i3 processor, or less. It's the dev stuff that is the wild card. I run 2 instances of Openmediavault, ansible, and homeassistant on a N100 CPU, and that is overkill. My main Proxmox node runs Nexcloud, three separate instances of Wordpress (all in their own VMs with their own DB), and 12 docker containers on an i5-12500, and even that is overkill, TBH

Yeah, this is quite common, many people tend to oversize their hardware. That's just how it is.

 

[jkimmerling]

That's usually not a hard cap, but based on the parts that were available at the time when the spec was written. If it is a hard cap however, and the CPUs don't like the odd 48 GB modules, then 128 GB would be correct. I don't see how that would limit anything anytime soon though. Sounds like nothing of your dev stuff will need substantial amounts of memory. And the storage stuff won't need that much either, unless you need to keep lots of stuff in the ARC. But only you know what you're using your storage for. You said you're using it for media for you and your wife. That sounds like one, at most two parallel users who stream a video. TrueNAS will barely need any memory to do that.

If you, for example, start with 2x16 GB, then you'll probably be fine. 16 GB for all the storage and 16 GB for your dev stuff. If you get a board with 4 slots, and you probably will, then you can always add more later on.

From my experience, if you don't know specifically how much memory you need for your environment, you probably need very little.



Yeah, this is quite common, many people tend to oversize their hardware. That's just how it is.

i am having a hard time finding a motherboard that supports 192gb of ECC ran for a ryzen 9 7900. It seems the only ones that support ecc are the 128gb max motherboards

 

[T_Minus]

i am having a hard time finding a motherboard that supports 192gb of ECC ran for a ryzen 9 7900. It seems the only ones that support ecc are the 128gb max motherboards

Sometimes the boards say that if the dimm\capacity wasn't available when the board was tested with various memory and they do in fact work.

The 7900 IMO is the "sweet spot" for price\performance in that series as well as power usage.

What boards are you considering currently, and which RAM?

 

[jkimmerling]

Per a suggestion off my post in reddit, and after a bit of thought on future expansion, I went with an SM H12SSL and an Epyc 7313. I REALLY liked the PCIEx16 slots, and the ability to easily add more drives due to the number of SATA ports. I also saw a "need" to have more than 128/192 GB of RAM as time goes on. So that pushed my choice.
Also, I did have a major typo, my pool will be 80TB-100TB. Also, it will be starting out at 30TB (four 16 TB drives on RAIDZ2).

 

[Bert]

Per a suggestion off my post in reddit, and after a bit of thought on future expansion, I went with an SM H12SSL and an Epyc 7313. I REALLY liked the PCIEx16 slots, and the ability to easily add more drives due to the number of SATA ports. I also saw a "need" to have more than 128/192 GB of RAM as time goes on. So that pushed my choice.
Also, I did have a major typo, my pool will be 80TB-100TB. Also, it will be starting out at 30TB (four 16 TB drives on RAIDZ2).

Seems like quite an expensive option. Do you really need such a strong platform?


have you considered power cost of running this platform 24/7? Perhaps you need a simple nas with low power and a second system for hedt with plenty of memory and pcie lanes. You turn on hedt system only when you need it.

Also not clear if you need ipmi. Ipmi is 10+ watt.