Hardware Discussion Thread

Squeaky the Squirrel

Squeaky the Squirrel wrote: »

Where you see that?

NHK in Japan, who are pretty influential when it comes to cutting edge broadcasting tech, have said they're going straight to 8K because its too expensive to upgrade their whole infrastructure to 4K only to have to upgrade to 8K some years later.

ED E

If these start hitting the stores at consumer prices it might push AMD and nVidia to strive forward to get performance at those resolutions. Might see a huge jump in performance for 8XX and 9XXX cards?

Too pov for any of it anyways ^^

Tea_Bag

I think everyone is getting a little too excited here. the 4k screens they're showing off are 56"+, waaay to big to be used for gaming. getting those pixels to fit in a <30" display is going to be even more expensive. it's the same reason 99% of laptops are still 720p when 25*14 is becoming mainstream in desktops.

I'd put us at 6-10years before we can afford to get them.

Tea_Bag

Tea_Bag wrote: »

I think everyone is getting a little too excited here. the 4k screens they're showing off are 56"+, waaay to big to be used for gaming. getting those pixels to fit in a <30" display is going to be even more expensive. it's the same reason 99% of laptops are still 720p when 25*14 is becoming mainstream in desktops.

I'd put us at 6-10years before we can afford to get them.

It's actually becoming very easy and cheap to make high-DPI LCD displays. Thanks to the mobile and tablet sector, a huge amount of R&D has been put into it. They have gotten very good at it.

Certainly we're not going to have affordable 4K monitors tomorrow but within 3 years a 27" 4K monitor should be the same price as a branded 27" 2560.

PseudoFamous

Tea_Bag wrote: »

I think everyone is getting a little too excited here. the 4k screens they're showing off are 56"+, waaay to big to be used for gaming. getting those pixels to fit in a <30" display is going to be even more expensive. it's the same reason 99% of laptops are still 720p when 25*14 is becoming mainstream in desktops.

I'd put us at 6-10years before we can afford to get them.

as an example, ipad 3rd and 4th gens already have 2K resolution. They're 10 inches. We can do that pixel density with ease.

Vicxas

With the Hasweel CPUs due to be announced for March/April. Should any potential upgraders wait until they start to push down the Ivybridge processors in price?

Serephucus

CPUs don't really go down in price*. They might reduce slightly, if someone bought a bunch of them and has to get rid of them quickly (unlikely), but they tend to just go EOL pretty quick instead. The only reason you'd wait for Haswell is to buy Haswell.

*The exception being if Haswell does really well, and a bunch of people throw 3570Ks on Adverts.

Vicxas

Doubtful, the Haswell seems only aimed at integrating the onboard GPU performance from what ive read.

Serephucus

It's quite a bit more than that. Performance improvement, and a much bigger focus on overclocking.

marco_polo

Vicxas wrote: »

With the Hasweel CPUs due to be announced for March/April. Should any potential upgraders wait until they start to push down the Ivybridge processors in price?

Even now the i5-2500k is only €15-20 less that the i5-3570K so it won't drop them by much and it will be over a relatively long period.

What you usually see after lauch day is not the that price of the older chip plummeting, but the price of the replacement chip skyrocketing.

Squeaky the Squirrel

Ophelia

^What could it be?:pac:

Turn volume down first.:eek:

beno619

I'm waiting Haswell and it's painful playing BF3 on my xps with an gt 540m :L
I hope it's worth the wait..

Squeaky the Squirrel

beno619 wrote: »

I'm waiting Haswell and it's painful playing BF3 on my xps with an gt 540m :L
I hope it's worth the wait..

That yoke that's coming after Haswell, yea, I think you should hold out for that. Meant to be insanely powerful.

beno619

Squeaky the Squirrel wrote: »

That yoke that's coming after Haswell, yea, I think you should hold out for that. Meant to be insanely powerful.

Broadwell ? Any indication of how long the new socket will last? that's the main reason for holding out, don't want to be left behind on 1155.

Squeaky the Squirrel

beno619 wrote: »

Broadwell ? Any indication of how long the new socket will last? that's the main reason for holding out, don't want to be left behind on 1155.

Ahh, I just messing beno, waiting for next big release is balls, you'll be forever waiting. Just buy best you can now and be done with it.

My opinion.

challengemaster

beno619 wrote: »

Broadwell ? Any indication of how long the new socket will last? that's the main reason for holding out, don't want to be left behind on 1155.

He was in fact, taking the mickey :pac: He has a point though, there's a rather pointless ideology in PC components of "Sure i'll wait for the newer one", as things get replaced so quickly.

New socket is rumored to last til 2015

beno619

Haha I wasn't sure, my sarcasm sensors are a little off, Well its going to be my 1st build and I just hate to think that 3 months after dropping a grand on a shiny new machine it's technically be old tech, it also helps that I can't afford it right now

challengemaster

Actually just because AMD builds are being recommended more and more....

Anyone know why (or care to hazard a guess) AMD have gone for 6 & 8 core, while intel isn't going higher than 6 cores for the foreseeable future.

Tea_Bag

There were 2 routes to take, get more cores, then start optimising them, or start optimising the cores you already have, and add on a few more later. they just went opposite routes. that's why I think AMD will have at least 1 more push in them.

intel's architecture has matured, and they'll soon have no where to go but start from the ground up, or add more cores.
AMD is at the youth of their steamroller arch, and it has so much room for optimisations, while already having the 8 cores to boot.

Tea_Bag

There were 2 routes to take, get more cores, then start optimising them, or start optimising the cores you already have, and add on a few more later. they just went opposite routes. that's why I think AMD will have at least 1 more push in them.

intel's architecture has matured, and they'll soon have no where to go but start from the ground up, or add more cores.
AMD is at the youth of their steamroller arch, and it has so much room for optimisations, while already having the 8 cores to boot. yet as we see, their new chips are only slightly behind intels. imagine what happens after their tock?

marco_polo

challengemaster wrote: »

Actually just because AMD builds are being recommended more and more....

Anyone know why (or care to hazard a guess) AMD have gone for 6 & 8 core, while intel isn't going higher than 6 cores for the foreseeable future.

The thing is the are not really 8 cores, basic philosopy behind bulldozer was essentially saving on die space, by sharing certain features like cache floating point units etc. This article explains the thought behind it quite nicely.

http://www.realworldtech.com/bulldozer/2/

Ther are strong signs that steamroller will be a good improvement over piledriver again as they make refinement to some of the poorer original architecure decisions that really hurt performance, such as going givng each integer core a dedicated decoder again, increasing the L1 cache etc.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/08/29/amd_papermaster_steamroller_seamicro_opteron/

All of this is very much related to their APU push as more shared x86 resources ultimately leave more space for GPU resources on the die, which is where AMD are ultimately trying to go with all of this. heterogeneous computing.

The two main issues for AMD are that firstly, that the problem about trying to predict the future is that you can't be certain that when you get you will have a product that anybody need. And secondly the more pressing question is whether AMD can actually survive financially in the interim to get there at all.

AlmightyCushion

As above, they aren't really 8 cores. A quad core Intel has 4 integer units and 4 floating point units. Every amd 8 core has 8 integer units and 4 floating point units. Floating point units are generally used more so for most uses an Intel will be better.

beno619

Corsair are releasing more CL watercoolers H90 & H110
http://www.anandtech.com/show/6677/corsair-scales-up-h90-and-h110-released

Serephucus

beno619 wrote: »

Corsair are releasing more CL watercoolers H90 & H110
http://www.anandtech.com/show/6677/corsair-scales-up-h90-and-h110-released

Meh. If you're going to spend the sort of money a H110 requires, get a H220 from Swiftech. A far superior product.

On another note: Started a bit of OCing with the 3570K today. Got to 4.1GHz at 1.1V, tried 4.2 and got errors in IBT. 1.15V is stable, thinking I might get to 4.3 with it. How's that sound in comparison to other people's 3570Ks? Trying to gauge how good of a chip I have.

marco_polo

AlmightyCushion wrote: »

As above, they aren't really 8 cores. A quad core Intel has 4 integer units and 4 floating point units. Every amd 8 core has 8 integer units and 4 floating point units. Floating point units are generally used more so for most uses an Intel will be better.

The vast majority of operations are integer because it is much faster. Otherwise getting rid of one floating point unit would't make any sense at all. Even SPEC classify a floating point intensive application as one that has spends as little as 10% of its time doing floating point arthmetic.

Bulldozers real problem were that it was designed for much greater CPU frequencies than AMD were able to meet at launch (it was originally planned to lauch with a base clock that ended up being the about the maximum of its overclocking potential), the other main problems were high percentages of cache misses and huge performance penalties for branch mispredicton.

The goal of piledriver is to targeted the frequency/power issue, and the main goal of steamroller to address the other two major flaws.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/6201/amd-details-its-3rd-gen-steamroller-architecture

The floating point performance issues will remain, but again the intention of AMD here is to encourage software developers to move this sort of stuff to the GPU which is better at it (When CPU/GPUs are finally fully integated by 2014/2015 according to their roadmap).

The big problem for AMD is that their market share does not leave them in much of a position to dictate the future of software development, why as a developer would I write substantialy more difficult code to perform floating point operations for a GPU, when the manufacture most encouraging it has such a small maket share?

beno619

Serephucus wrote: »

Meh. If you're going to spend the sort of money a H110 requires, get a H220 from Swiftech. A far superior product.

Wow just checked the prices had no idea the H220 would be that affordable, hopefully it puts corsair under a bit of pressure,
Ive never understood the premium for the H100 over H80 when essentially its the same performance in a different form factor.

BloodBath

beno619 wrote: »

Wow just checked the prices had no idea the H220 would be that affordable, hopefully it puts corsair under a bit of pressure,
Ive never understood the premium for the H100 over H80 when essentially its the same performance in a different form factor.

It's funny how these coolers are becoming popular at a time when TDP's for proc's are coming down to the point that they are completely redundant even for heavy overclocking.

Serephucus

BloodBath wrote: »

It's funny how these coolers are becoming popular at a time when TDP's for proc's are coming down to the point that they are completely redundant even for heavy overclocking.

Not the case. Watercooling is still far superior to air cooling.

Thermal results:
http://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/5093/xspc_raystorm_750_rx360_liquid_cooling_kit_review/index10.html

Noise:
http://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/5093/xspc_raystorm_750_rx360_liquid_cooling_kit_review/index11.html

BloodBath

Serephucus wrote: »

Not the case. Watercooling is still far superior to air cooling.

Thermal results:
http://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/5093/xspc_raystorm_750_rx360_liquid_cooling_kit_review/index10.html

Noise:
http://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/5093/xspc_raystorm_750_rx360_liquid_cooling_kit_review/index11.html

I have no doubts the thermals and noise levels are better. Although I doubt the difference in noise levels is really noticeable depending on case.

Is it going to affect your max overclock on say a 3570k compared to a €30 cooler like the hyper 212 evo. Not from what I've seen.

Maybe good for higher TDP hexa core I7's and amd's but I don't see the point for 3570k's. These TDP's are only going to come down even further with the next die shrink.

Genghiz Cohen

Did that guy what showed the AMD core beating the Intel ones ever get back with his second video?

Serephucus

Ivy's TDP came down yes, but a 3570K benefits from water a lot more than Sandy did. When you get up past around 4.7, you start hitting thermal limits. Most people at around 4.7 will get to ~80°C, where-as water will keep things at closer to 60-65, leaving additional room.

BloodBath

I don't think that's true. Sandy's could take large voltage increases and push over 5ghz easily if you could keep them cool enough. Ivy's can't take voltage as well and have trouble transferring that heat unless you are willing to modify the proc itself. Delidding and replacing the crappy thermal compound intel went with or having direct die contact is a risk most aren't willing to take.

I'm at 4.8 with my lowly 212 evo maxing at 75c. I know my temps would be lower with water but I don't think my overlclock would be much higher.

Serephucus

Segwaying nicely into my overclocking so far...

4.6, temps and volts well within limits, but I try for 4.7 or above, and I get a BSOD straight off, with a 0x1A error. Weird thing is it's listed as a memory error. How's that make any sense?

BloodBath

What voltage are you at? Mine is the same.

I can get to 4.5-4.6 only adding 0.05 volts over stock. I have to add another 0.15 to get that last 200mhz.

It's probably not worth it. I might clock back to 4.5-6 with my nice low voltage and temps.

Serephucus

I dumped a bunch of volts into it to start, was going to go top-down from volts, was doing quick tests each multi. At 1.3 at the moment, which should be enough for 4.7, depending on the chip.

BloodBath

I'm still messing around with mine as well. I'm stable at 4.7ghz and 1.3v maxing at around 68c it seems.

4.8 takes another 0.05v for 100mhz and pushing to 75c

I don't plan on trying any higher than that.

Serephucus

Well, I can try 1.4V or something, see if that works, I'm just not sure if it's the chip, or something else.

BloodBath

What about the other settings?

What board are you using?

I followed this handy guide for mine but it's for Asrock boards.

Still might be useful.

http://www.overclock.net/t/1198504/complete-overclocking-guide-sandy-bridge-ivy-bridge-asrock-edition

Serephucus

Same guide, same settings. Z77 Ex4 board.

M00lers

Lads, if you were to pick up a 7950 in the next few weeks what cards would make your shortlist?

Seem to be great VFM at the moment and would eventually end up in a secondary rig in approx 6 -8 months. Was looking at the Gigabyte Windforce 3X and the many many Sapphire versions!!!!

Would like a quiet cooler if possible.

Cheers,
Moo

Genghiz Cohen

Is there much difference between the 7950 and the 7870?
http://goo.gl/veqxb

marco_polo

Genghiz Cohen wrote: »

Is there much difference between the 7950 and the 7870?
http://goo.gl/veqxb

To quickly give a fairly quick rough idea here. A HD7870 would be a very good card choice for 1080p gaming.

moolers2000 wrote: »

Lads, if you were to pick up a 7950 in the next few weeks what cards would make your shortlist?

Seem to be great VFM at the moment and would eventually end up in a secondary rig in approx 6 -8 months. Was looking at the Gigabyte Windforce 3X and the many many Sapphire versions!!!!

Would like a quiet cooler if possible.

Cheers,
Moo

I would also shortlist HD7950s like the Club3D Royal King, MSI Twin Frozer III and the HIS IceQ as well.

I haven't seen anyone stocking the newer IceQ X2 revision over here yet (it is on Newegg alright for a reasonable enough price relative to other HD7950), but it looks like a pretty good overclocker from this review.

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/HIS/HD_7950_X2_Boost/31.html

Squeaky the Squirrel

Swiftech® to unveil new H220 all-in-one CPU cooler during CES 2013

ED E

Squeaky the Squirrel wrote: »

Swiftech® to unveil new H220 all-in-one CPU cooler during CES 2013

We all knew about that days ago See Linus' video.

marco_polo

Finally got around to finding the approximate, sans voltage adjustment, overclocking limits of my HIS 7850. Voltage adjustment seem to be disabled on the card so was limited to GPU, memory and board power adjustments (I might double check with afterburner tomorrow but it voltage options ain't there in iTurbo, even though the software does seem to allow it on certain other HIS cards).

Only fairly reasonable results I suppose, but not bad considering it is pre-overclocked from 860 to 1000MHz anyway, got from 1000/1100MHz core and 1200/1350MHz on the memory. Seems 1110 is a definite no no for the GPU and while there might be another 10MHz or so in the memory (definately not 20MHz), as 1350 is a nice even number I'll leave well enough alone tonight as I can't be face another bout of testing for such a small gain.

Will check out afterburner tommorrow see if i can creep up a bit further if voltage options are available.

Dcully

Have my i5 2500K running @ 4.7 ghz stable.
Temps dont go over 60° C ,coolermaster hyper plus 212.

tuxy

It takes slightly over 1.4 volts to get my 2500k stable @ 4.5 ghz

I have used it in two different motherboards p67 and z77 and have read up on what all the different setting in bios does.
I lost the silicon lottery bad.

Serephucus

Seems something similar happened with me. I need just over 1.3 to get 4.6 stable, and a ridiculous 1.375 to get 4.7.

challengemaster

Have been thinking about turning a spare PC into a NAS (another one of Serephucus' planted ideas), ended up watching some Hak5 episodes... got the idea that I could run proxmox and install freenas as a VM. Anyone see any blatantly obvious flaws with a virtual NAS?

Wossack

dont see any advantage doing that vs just offering the storage directly