Overclock.net › Forums › Cooling › Water Cooling › Best Water-cooling solution money can buy
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Best Water-cooling solution money can buy - Page 8

post #71 of 94
@ OP, Why not get a dual or quad 1567 board with those Octo core CPUS. I mean 4 Xeons at 2.66Ghz for a total of 32 cores 64 threads would be best best right? Then if money is no issue why not get 4-8 in a small blade server and have 32 CPU's for 256 Cores and 512 Threads... And if money is really not an issue you can expand it up to what 128 CPUS... I mean just how much money is enough money to be an issue.
ROJO
(14 items)
 
Endless
(15 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i5-7600K MSI Z270 G M7 GTX 1080 FE ti CORSAIR Vengeance LPX 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
SAMSUNG 960 EVO M.2 SAMSUNG 850 Pro  LITEON CX1-JB512-HP M.2 LITEON CX1-JB512-HP M.2 
CoolingOSMonitorKeyboard
Corsair H115i Win 10 Pro Asus ROG PG348Q  Ducky DK 9008S 
PowerCase
SeaSonic SS-750KM3 750W NZXT S340 Elite 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel® Xeon® Processor E5-1650 v3  ASRock X99 Extreme4 Quadro K1200 Kingston  
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveCooling
SAMSUNG 950 PRO M.2  SAMSUNG 850 PRO  WB Black Cooler Master Hyper 212 EVO 
OSMonitorMonitorMonitor
Windows 7 Ultimate BenQ GW2760HS Black 27" BenQ GW2760HS Black 27" BenQ GW2760HS Black 27" 
PowerCaseAudio
SeaSonic M12II 750 SS-750AM2 750W Fractal Design Define XL R2 Black klipsch R-15PM 
  hide details  
Reply
ROJO
(14 items)
 
Endless
(15 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i5-7600K MSI Z270 G M7 GTX 1080 FE ti CORSAIR Vengeance LPX 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
SAMSUNG 960 EVO M.2 SAMSUNG 850 Pro  LITEON CX1-JB512-HP M.2 LITEON CX1-JB512-HP M.2 
CoolingOSMonitorKeyboard
Corsair H115i Win 10 Pro Asus ROG PG348Q  Ducky DK 9008S 
PowerCase
SeaSonic SS-750KM3 750W NZXT S340 Elite 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel® Xeon® Processor E5-1650 v3  ASRock X99 Extreme4 Quadro K1200 Kingston  
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveCooling
SAMSUNG 950 PRO M.2  SAMSUNG 850 PRO  WB Black Cooler Master Hyper 212 EVO 
OSMonitorMonitorMonitor
Windows 7 Ultimate BenQ GW2760HS Black 27" BenQ GW2760HS Black 27" BenQ GW2760HS Black 27" 
PowerCaseAudio
SeaSonic M12II 750 SS-750AM2 750W Fractal Design Define XL R2 Black klipsch R-15PM 
  hide details  
Reply
post #72 of 94
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blameless View Post
There are practical applications where one thread is all that will be run and response time/latency is the critical factor.
Don't even start with me on this, you'll get nowhere real fast. The processing time between a 2Ghz processor and a 5Ghz processor running a serial process (keep in mind that a process can have any number of methods being executed, any number of classes instantiated, and any amount of memory allocated) isn't the question here. It's completely irrelevant, because in this guy's make-believe scenario, a tertiary process would have to wait for the former process to complete before it can begin. Said tertiary process could be executed in parallel and the entire batch the program is working on would instantly be twice as fast, twice as efficient.

Moreover (as if I need to say more at this point), there isn't a process under the sun that couldn't be run faster with more cpu allocated to it. This imaginary proprietary application runs a singular process in series on a single core and consumes 5-10% cpu. Either this guy is the worlds worst programmer, or he's full of it.

Where does that leave us? It leaves us in trollville. Joy.
beast
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 920 @ 4Ghz Gigabyte X58A-UD7 rev 1 GTX 580 EK Nickel+Acetal 6GB Corsair Dominator @ 2000 
Hard DriveOSMonitorKeyboard
WD 1TB Windows 7 64 Ultimate 2x Viewsonic 24" Razer Reclusa 
PowerCaseMouse
Corsair HX1000 Corsair Obsidian 800D Razer Death Adder 
  hide details  
Reply
beast
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 920 @ 4Ghz Gigabyte X58A-UD7 rev 1 GTX 580 EK Nickel+Acetal 6GB Corsair Dominator @ 2000 
Hard DriveOSMonitorKeyboard
WD 1TB Windows 7 64 Ultimate 2x Viewsonic 24" Razer Reclusa 
PowerCaseMouse
Corsair HX1000 Corsair Obsidian 800D Razer Death Adder 
  hide details  
Reply
post #73 of 94
Quote:
Originally Posted by majkara View Post
...I previously had Asus Ramapage III Extreme...
The ASUS Maximus IV Extreme, of course .
ThermoChilled
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Phenom II X6 1100T ASUS Crosshair IV Extreme EVGA GTX 580 SuperClocked STT WX200UB2G7 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
VelociRaptor WD6000HLHX Sony Optiarc AD-7260S Arch Linux x86_64 + JWM NEC MultiSync PA241W-BK 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Topre Realforce 87UKB Corsair CMPSU-850AX Lian Li Tyr PC-X500FX Logitech G9x 
Mouse Pad
ZOWIE GEAR P-TF 
  hide details  
Reply
ThermoChilled
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Phenom II X6 1100T ASUS Crosshair IV Extreme EVGA GTX 580 SuperClocked STT WX200UB2G7 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
VelociRaptor WD6000HLHX Sony Optiarc AD-7260S Arch Linux x86_64 + JWM NEC MultiSync PA241W-BK 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Topre Realforce 87UKB Corsair CMPSU-850AX Lian Li Tyr PC-X500FX Logitech G9x 
Mouse Pad
ZOWIE GEAR P-TF 
  hide details  
Reply
post #74 of 94
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by kiwwanna View Post
@ OP, Why not get a dual or quad 1567 board with those Octo core CPUS. I mean 4 Xeons at 2.66Ghz for a total of 32 cores 64 threads would be best best right? Then if money is no issue why not get 4-8 in a small blade server and have 32 CPU's for 256 Cores and 512 Threads... And if money is really not an issue you can expand it up to what 128 CPUS... I mean just how much money is enough money to be an issue.
Please read what the intended use of the application is and you will then see that the above would be an 'overkill', but would be very useful for another application where that particular app is multi-threaded. Thanks for your suggestion anyway .
post #75 of 94
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by mhaneline View Post
Don't even start with me on this, you'll get nowhere real fast. The processing time between a 2Ghz processor and a 5Ghz processor running a serial process (keep in mind that a process can have any number of methods being executed, any number of classes instantiated, and any amount of memory allocated) isn't the question here. It's completely irrelevant, because in this guy's make-believe scenario, a tertiary process would have to wait for the former process to complete before it can begin. Said tertiary process could be executed in parallel and the entire batch the program is working on would instantly be twice as fast, twice as efficient.

Moreover (as if I need to say more at this point), there isn't a process under the sun that couldn't be run faster with more cpu allocated to it. This imaginary proprietary application runs a singular process in series on a single core and consumes 5-10% cpu. Either this guy is the worlds worst programmer, or he's full of it.

Where does that leave us? It leaves us in trollville. Joy.
You really are full of it and have no idea what the intended application is to do. 'Blameless' managed to understand it all and even summarise it for you, and you still dont seem to get it. The processing time is exactly what we are talking about here and I have been conducting tests on my 5 Ghz test right, and with 3.33Ghz i7 out of the box, I get 60%-70% improvement in execution time when running it around 5Ghz. Please do not write anything if it is not constructive. Everyone else is helping and you are hell bent on diverting from providing any help at all. You really are becoming a pain the ass Sir !!!!
post #76 of 94
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by adamlau View Post
The ASUS Maximus IV Extreme, of course .
Thanks, appreciated
post #77 of 94
Quote:
Originally Posted by majkara View Post
You really are full of it and have no idea what the intended application is to do. 'Blameless' managed to understand it all and even summarise it for you, and you still dont seem to get it. The processing time is exactly what we are talking about here and I have been conducting tests on my 5 Ghz test right, and with 3.33Ghz i7 out of the box, I get 60%-70% improvement in execution time when running it around 5Ghz. Please do not write anything if it is not constructive. Everyone else is helping and you are hell bent on diverting from providing any help at all. You really are becoming a pain the ass Sir !!!!
If it takes 1 second to complete your process using 5-10% cpu, what makes you think it wouldn't take .5 seconds to complete the same process using twice the cpu? What makes you think that you couldn't do two of the same processes at the same time? If you're so concerned with processing time, you wouldn't queue up processes to be completed one at a time. You would process them in batch parallel to be completed asynchronously.

Here's your chance to prove my years of complex software architecture useless.
beast
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 920 @ 4Ghz Gigabyte X58A-UD7 rev 1 GTX 580 EK Nickel+Acetal 6GB Corsair Dominator @ 2000 
Hard DriveOSMonitorKeyboard
WD 1TB Windows 7 64 Ultimate 2x Viewsonic 24" Razer Reclusa 
PowerCaseMouse
Corsair HX1000 Corsair Obsidian 800D Razer Death Adder 
  hide details  
Reply
beast
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 920 @ 4Ghz Gigabyte X58A-UD7 rev 1 GTX 580 EK Nickel+Acetal 6GB Corsair Dominator @ 2000 
Hard DriveOSMonitorKeyboard
WD 1TB Windows 7 64 Ultimate 2x Viewsonic 24" Razer Reclusa 
PowerCaseMouse
Corsair HX1000 Corsair Obsidian 800D Razer Death Adder 
  hide details  
Reply
post #78 of 94
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by mhaneline View Post
If it takes 1 second to complete your process using 5-10% cpu, what makes you think it wouldn't take .5 seconds to complete the same process using twice the cpu? What makes you think that you couldn't do two of the same processes at the same time? If you're so concerned with processing time, you wouldn't queue up processes to be completed one at a time. You would process them in batch parallel to be completed asynchronously.

Here's your chance to prove my years of complex software architecture useless.
N.D.A. and you will realise why I cant describe the app.

Furthermore, I have run the app as a multi-threaded app, but because of how Windows operating system works, it turned out to be a lot slower. The Windows scheduler is a royal pain in the ass, and it does not guarantee pre-emption time between threads.
Edited by majkara - 1/24/11 at 12:56pm
post #79 of 94
Quote:
Originally Posted by majkara View Post
N.D.A. and you will realise why I cant describe the app.

Furthermore, I have run the app as a multi-threaded app, but because of how Windows operating system works, it turned out to be a lot slower. The Windows scheduler is a royal pain in the ass, and it does not guarantee pre-emption time between threads.
Windows scheduler is an application in windows that allows you to schedule processes to be run. It has nothing to do with the windows message loop, and how threads are generated/processed/terminated. lol @ the NDA thing.


Anyway, my protip for you is to study up on parallel processing, then get yourself as many physical cpus as you can, with as many cores on each that you can (pretty much exactly what Charliehorse suggested.. SR-2). There's a reason $500,000 HP servers come with 2.4Ghz processors and not 5Ghz overclocked processors. They're not queuing serial processes. They're batch processing in parallel across 128 CPUs and 512 cores.
beast
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 920 @ 4Ghz Gigabyte X58A-UD7 rev 1 GTX 580 EK Nickel+Acetal 6GB Corsair Dominator @ 2000 
Hard DriveOSMonitorKeyboard
WD 1TB Windows 7 64 Ultimate 2x Viewsonic 24" Razer Reclusa 
PowerCaseMouse
Corsair HX1000 Corsair Obsidian 800D Razer Death Adder 
  hide details  
Reply
beast
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 920 @ 4Ghz Gigabyte X58A-UD7 rev 1 GTX 580 EK Nickel+Acetal 6GB Corsair Dominator @ 2000 
Hard DriveOSMonitorKeyboard
WD 1TB Windows 7 64 Ultimate 2x Viewsonic 24" Razer Reclusa 
PowerCaseMouse
Corsair HX1000 Corsair Obsidian 800D Razer Death Adder 
  hide details  
Reply
post #80 of 94
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by mhaneline View Post
windows scheduler is an application in windows that allows you to schedule processes to be run. It has nothing to do with the windows message loop, and how threads are generated/processed/terminated. Lol @ the nda thing.


Anyway, my protip for you is to study up on parallel processing, then get yourself as many physical cpus as you can, with as many cores on each that you can (pretty much exactly what charliehorse suggested.. Sr-2). There's a reason $500,000 hp servers come with 2.4ghz processors and not 5ghz overclocked processors. They're not queuing serial processes. They're batch processing in parallel across 128 cpus and 512 cores.
dude, off topic completely !!!!
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Water Cooling
Overclock.net › Forums › Cooling › Water Cooling › Best Water-cooling solution money can buy