| Index | Recent Threads | Unanswered Threads | Who's Active | Guidelines | Search |
 |
World Community Grid Forums
Category: Community
Forum: Hardware Chat Room
Thread: Lenovo P710 Xeon vs. M710 |
| No member browsing this thread |
|
Thread Status: Active Total posts in this thread: 13
|
|
| Author |
|
|
ericinboston
Senior Cruncher Joined: Jan 12, 2010 Post Count: 265 Status: Offline Project Badges: 
|
Hi. I recently purchased purchased 5 Lenovo M710 Small Form Factor machines for about $485 each (I get a discount). They ship with the Intel Core i7-7700 Processor ( 8M Cache , 3.6GHz ) chip so I am crunching 8 WUs at a time per box.
----------------------------------------I was considering purchasing the P710 which includes 2 Xeon chips and a 650W power supply. I did a quick config and for $2470 I can get the below specs for a P710 dual-Xeon workstation. All this P710 will do is crunch WCG. 1)I'm wondering if it's a good buy (and since the Xeon chips are from early 2016) 2)Each Xeon seems to have 20 threads so that would mean 40 threads crunching WUs at the same time...correct? 3)In general, will this single P710 be the same or better than 5 M710 machines as far as WCG crunching? If so, then it would be easier to manage since it would be 1 box thus 1 IP address, 1 power cord, and probably only 300watts vs 500 watts my 5 M710s are using. 4)I don't need more than 16GB to run these 2 Xeon chips at 100% do I? I thought I recalled some kind of snafu that Windows and Intel teamed together to force users to buy more and more RAM in order to use more CPUs/cores/threads/whatever. 40 threads of WCG is going to use 4GB at the absolute most (for the 2 Cancer projects) Thank you very much in advance! P710 system $2470: • Processor : 2 x Intel Xeon E5-2630 v4 Processor (10 cores, 20MB Cache, 2.2GHz) • Operating System : Windows 10 Pro 64 • Memory : Quantity 2 x 8GB 2400MHz ECC RDIMM • First Video Adapter : NVIDIA NVS 315 DMS59 to DVIx2 1GB • First Graphic Card DVI Dongle : DVI to VGA Dongle • 1st HDD selection : 1TB Hard Drive,7200RPM,3.5",SATA • First Optical Device : Rambo8 DVD Burner/CD-RW SATA • Ethernet Adapter : 2x port Integrated Ethernet • Power Supply : Tower 650W 92% • Warranty : 3 Year On-site  [Edit 2 times, last edit by ericinboston at Nov 22, 2017 8:05:08 PM] |
||
|
|
Hype
Cruncher Germany Joined: Nov 18, 2011 Post Count: 43 Status: Offline Project Badges: 
|
Hey there,
----------------------------------------I calculated both specs: i7-7700 x5: 40 threads give a total of 224 Gflops, or around ~ 275k WCG PPD. E5-2630 v4 x2: 40 threads give a total of 129 Gflops, or around ~ 160k WCG PPD. So the 5 i7's are a lot more powerful than the dual xeon spec.  |
||
|
|
ericinboston
Senior Cruncher Joined: Jan 12, 2010 Post Count: 265 Status: Offline Project Badges:
|
Hey there, I calculated both specs: i7-7700 x5: 40 threads give a total of 224 Gflops, or around ~ 275k WCG PPD. E5-2630 v4 x2: 40 threads give a total of 129 Gflops, or around ~ 160k WCG PPD. So the 5 i7's are a lot more powerful than the dual xeon spec. Thanks!! Would you mind sharing your calculations? This way I can do this on my own down the road. |
||
|
|
ericinboston
Senior Cruncher Joined: Jan 12, 2010 Post Count: 265 Status: Offline Project Badges:
|
Not sure if anyone is reading this tonight (Wed) but Lenovo is having a killer sale right now...the M710 Tower, Tiny, and Small Form Factor (SFF) are all on sale much cheaper than I've ever seen. I just grabbed the SFF model for $399 (I bought the same exact build 2 weeks ago for $461 so I am saving quite a bit now (and I can get the price difference back on my card)!
----------------------------------------● Intel Core i7-7700 Processor ( 8M Cache , 3.6GHz ) ● Windows 10 Home 64 ● Small Form Factor 85% Power 210W ● 4GB DDR4 2400 UDIMM ● Integrated Graphic Card ● 500GB Hard Drive, 7200 RPM, 3.5", SATA ● Integrated Gigabit Ethernet ● Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 3165 (1x1) with Bluetooth 4.0 ● 1 Year On-site [Edit 1 times, last edit by ericinboston at Nov 22, 2017 11:46:50 PM] |
||
|
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
Some thoughts on comparing the Xeon E5-2630 v4 with i7-7700:
The Xeon is a bit older than the i7-7700, but I would guess the difference in the architecture should not be dramatic. So I would just compare the number of threads and GHz to have an idea of the speed difference. 2x Xeon E5-2630 v4: 2x 20 Threads x 2,4 GHz = 96 Threads*GHz i7-7700: 8 Threads x 4 GHz = 32 Threads*GHz (I used the all-core turbo boost frequency in calculation, although it might be better to deactivate Turbo Boost to increase energy efficiency) So the 2x Xeon System should be 3x as fast as a i7-7700. That is approximately the result RoundFour posted. My guess would be, that the Xeon System is more energy efficient, but if that makes up for the much higher price/output is doubtful. Some more thoughts: - why not build a dual Xeon System from ES (Engineering Sample) Xeons? Not as convenient as buying a ready system, but much cheaper (I would guess app. half your quoted price?). From my experience, Xeon systems make no sense when paying full price compared to a consumer grade CPU, whereas ES Xeons do (based on cost per WCG point, including purchase price and electricity cost) - building your own system (Xeon or i7 or whatever) might generally be a better idea than buying a complete system, when used as a cruncher only. With a complete system you buy much useless stuff (hard drive, CD/DVD, Windows...) A chruncher only needs Mainboard, CPU, Ram, Graphics card if not integrated, PSU and a USB stick to run linux from. Calculate yourself, but I would guess you get the same thing even cheaper than a heavily disounted Lenovo machine - a Ryzen 1700 might be a good alternative to the two discussed here... |
||
|
|
ericinboston
Senior Cruncher Joined: Jan 12, 2010 Post Count: 265 Status: Offline Project Badges:
|
... 2x Xeon E5-2630 v4: 2x 20 Threads x 2,4 GHz = 96 Threads*GHz i7-7700: 8 Threads x 4 GHz = 32 Threads*GHz (I used the all-core turbo boost frequency in calculation, although it might be better to deactivate Turbo Boost to increase energy efficiency) So the 2x Xeon System should be 3x as fast as a i7-7700. That is approximately the result RoundFour posted. Hi....that's not how I understood RoundFour...he stated the Xeon system was significantly slower than the 5 i7s. I think you are comparing the dual Xeon box to a single i7 chip...so sure...it's 3x faster...but that 1 Xeon box compared to 5 i7 boxes is now considerably slower. The build vs. buy would really have to be a homerun for me. As I and others have stated in other threads, the only reason to build is for the thrill of actually building and the ability to buy cutting edge technology. Even part for part, I'm probably going to save $50 at most building my own system vs. buying it off the shelf. Then I have to spend the time building and of course if any 1 part fails, I have to deal with that specific manufacturer. I've tried websites that will basically help me build but they essentially are ambiguous telling me to call before ordering to get a 100% confirmation my config will work. I'm very surprised there isn't a thread/forum here (hint, hint WCG) that would allow/promote forum users to post the EXACT specs of everything they bought, with hyperlinks, etc. so that I could go build something that Joe Smith built 2 months ago. Currently at $399 ($385 if you don't need a WIFI card), I can't find any comparable system that beats (at crunching) these Lenovo M710 series with i7 chips. I would love to find a comparable single-box, dual CPU Xeon (or whatever) that provides the same crunching performance as 5+ M710 machines at the same cost or maybe $200 more expensive...because a single box would give me 1 power plug, 1 IP address, 1 physical machine to locate, and 1 machine in general to manage. The $200 premium I pay for the single box would likely save me money in electricity bills within 16 months and again, the $200 premium would overall be so much easier to manage 1 box. [Edit 1 times, last edit by ericinboston at Nov 24, 2017 2:34:36 AM] |
||
|
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
Hi Ericinboston,
the real answer is in the cost of electricity isn't it (5 x I7's would be here in Germany an electricity bill of ~800€ per year)? I would argue that the XEON setup is more efficient when you compare point per watt and only one system to maintain. The Broadwell XEONs V4 are great and their instruction set is richer than what BOINC supports. i7 V5 and V6 are not really needed for boinc but are very efficient. Rather than a dual cpu low core setup (<10 cores) I suggest you look for a single CPU higher core count setup (>10 cores). I built and a run a system with an E5-2628L v4 (12 cores / 24 threads at 2.1 GHz all turbo on a headless Supermicro X10SRI board. The whole system cost me around 800$, draws less than 100 Watt from the wall and CPU is between 53 and 57 degree celsius). Depending on project around 100K WCG points per day. Server rigs usually have efficient power supplies and are built for 24/7. Every watt counts (for me). If electricity cost is not relevant for you and if you don't want to build yourself then compare with used server rigs (like HP Proliant DL360e) with XEON V2 (instruction set is also richer than what BOINC needs). There is more than one way to skin a cat. You need to find the parameter which you want to optimize. I set myself a target: 1 million points per month at the lowest watt with the systems which I need in stand-by for my smart home anyhow. Thomas |
||
|
|
Hype
Cruncher Germany Joined: Nov 18, 2011 Post Count: 43 Status: Offline Project Badges:
|
$399 for a full i7 7700 spec is a pretty good price, I can't do a custom build with that CPU in Germany for this price.
----------------------------------------That's around 336€, the i7 7700 alone costs 290€ here. Then I have 46€ left for mainboard, ram, cooler ... won't work out :-) Normally building a custom rig is cheaper, but this deal is pretty good I have to say. Sheridon is right about the Ryzen 1700, at the moment you can't get more bang for the buck. I'd love to build a dual Xeon machine, but the dual socket boards are just too expensive and I can't find any used ones for a good price. Sheridon, do you have any experience with ES CPUs? Are they reliable? As I'm also from Germany, I also have to think about electricity costs, just like DE008009 said. I can get a cheap 3-5 year old used i7, but the electricity costs over 3 years will eat up any savings I made from the purchase. So what I do to calculate WCG PPD is this: - Look up CPU on https://setiathome.berkeley.edu/cpu_list.php (or LHC@Home, Asteroids@Home, not sure if WCG has a list like that? - Take average Gflops per core and multiply by # of threads - Then I compare this to my E3-1245 v2, which does 35k PPD - New CPU for example has 250% more Glops, so should do around 87.5k Formula: Gflops: (Gflops/core * # threads) WCGPPD_OldCPU * ((Gflops_NewCPU) / (Gflops_OldCPU)) And yes, of course there is the thrill to build yourself, I could never buy something finished. I love to calculate, research prices and finally got everything together to build it. Right now I'm researching for two weeks already and didn't buy anything yet :-D |
||
|
|
ericinboston
Senior Cruncher Joined: Jan 12, 2010 Post Count: 265 Status: Offline Project Badges:
|
Hi Ericinboston, the real answer is in the cost of electricity isn't it (5 x I7's would be here in Germany an electricity bill of ~800€ per year)? I would argue that the XEON setup is more efficient when you compare point per watt and only one system to maintain. Hi Thomas and thanks for the reply. You are correct in that I have to take into consideration how much wattage any/all boxes use. The M710 machines use 97watts (I have a kill-o-watt thing). So let's say that is 100watts for easy math. Times that by 5 is 500 watts. The dual-core Xeon I mentioned ships with a 650 power supply so that's the max it would use...but in reality it probably only eats 350 watts max. So 500 watts vs. 350 watts (or possibly more). But any savings I would get from electricity costs would be vastly negated by the sheer prices in the systems. I can get 5 i7 systems for $1999 while the dual Xeon is $2650. That's a $650 difference AND the Xeon system is fairly slower. I forget how much each i7 would cost in electricity each month...it was pretty small like $10.00. The math at this website is pretty straightforward: http://www.ase.org/resources/lesson-plan-which-light-bulb-really-cheaper-6-9 so if I spent $120/year per M710 machine that's $600 per year in electricity while the Xeon machine would be around $350. So that $250 in savings would take about 3 years for me to recoup just on electricity and wouldn't take into consideration the tens of thousands of WUs that the savings in electricity did not crunch. But...electricity is a known given...every computer uses electricity. :) So I have to find the balance of system performance vs. cost to operate. Right now, $1999 vs $2695 seems like a no-brainer to me. I was really hoping the 2 year old Xeons would be faster. |
||
|
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
Hi Ericinboston, the real answer is in the cost of electricity isn't it (5 x I7's would be here in Germany an electricity bill of ~800€ per year)? I would argue that the XEON setup is more efficient when you compare point per watt and only one system to maintain. Hi Thomas and thanks for the reply. You are correct in that I have to take into consideration how much wattage any/all boxes use. The M710 machines use 97watts (I have a kill-o-watt thing). So let's say that is 100watts for easy math. Times that by 5 is 500 watts. The dual-core Xeon I mentioned ships with a 650 power supply so that's the max it would use...but in reality it probably only eats 350 watts max. So 500 watts vs. 350 watts (or possibly more). But any savings I would get from electricity costs would be vastly negated by the sheer prices in the systems. I can get 5 i7 systems for $1999 while the dual Xeon is $2650. That's a $650 difference AND the Xeon system is fairly slower. I forget how much each i7 would cost in electricity each month...it was pretty small like $10.00. The math at this website is pretty straightforward: http://www.ase.org/resources/lesson-plan-which-light-bulb-really-cheaper-6-9 so if I spent $120/year per M710 machine that's $600 per year in electricity while the Xeon machine would be around $350. So that $250 in savings would take about 3 years for me to recoup just on electricity and wouldn't take into consideration the tens of thousands of WUs that the savings in electricity did not crunch. But...electricity is a known given...every computer uses electricity. :) So I have to find the balance of system performance vs. cost to operate. Right now, $1999 vs $2695 seems like a no-brainer to me. I was really hoping the 2 year old Xeons would be faster. If these systems are running traditional platter hdds, you could pick up some cheap usb3 flash drives, load linux onto those, and boot/run from those and be able to disconnect the platter drives. That should save you a few watts, as well as lowering heat that needs dissipating. I think Sgt. Joe uses usb drives on headless systems, and has reported it works well. |
||
|
|
|