How do you even cool this thing - i9-10990XE + 10th gen i3/i5 spotted

[BigDamn]

[Arika]

3 hours ago, Husky said:

With that power consumption, I am not sure who would purchase that CPU.

considdering that most people overshoot on their PSU by way more than they need, power consumption is only really brought up on paper

[Husky]

1 minute ago, Arika S said:

considdering that most people overshoot on their PSU by way more than they need, power consumption is only really brought up on paper

The thing is, most people aren't going to be purchasing this CPU. They would rather go for a 9900K, 3700X, 3900X or something along those lines. Maybe companies with many workstations might consider it but then again I am pretty sure that they definitely do care very much about power consumption as they might have 100s of workstations and those extra hundreds of watts add up - and this is coming from someone with an OC'ed R9 390X that dims the lights in my room under load due to its power consumption combined with my house's poor wiring lol.

[goodtofufriday]

2 hours ago, AkatsukiKun said:

I'm wondering if you lived in a place with a winter season, did you feel the need to crack open your window?

I live in NYC. I kept the heat off in winter, and after long enough did open a window lol. 

[Mr.Meerkat]

4 hours ago, goodtofufriday said:

As someone who ran a FX 9590 in tandem with two radeon 6990s, this is fine. 

As someone who used to have a 5820K@4.2GHz build with dual 290Xes OCed at 1200MHz, I completely concur with your statement. During the winter, I had to open up my window because it pumped out too much heat 

[Unixsystem]

1 hour ago, Husky said:

I would think that a production house would care very much about power consumption and efficiency. I could be wrong as I don't have any experience with them but they could probably be rolling out hundreds of systems and that extra power consumption all adds up. And it adds up in other areas too - such as extra waste heat which could potentially require more air conditioning to keep the workspace comfortable which adds to even more operation cost and expenditure. I would think that all these little things add up and create quite a considerable impact.

I'm talking about a team of maybe a dozen people or a bit more. Any actual data center or massive scale company like Pixar or whoever is almost certainly using Xeons of some sort. 

 

For a team like Linus's, for example, do you think he would really care about an extra $50-100 a month on his electric bill if it meant his editors could work even 5% faster?

 

Don't get me wrong, efficiency and power usage matters and lower is always going to be better, but for the market that this CPU is theoretically aimed at, it's an absolute drop in the bucket. If an individual or company is unwilling to cover <$10/month/workstation, then they are absolutely not the target market for a $1500+ CPU and probably don't do the right kind of work to benefit from it anyway.

 

The only people that would even consider this CPU (outside of wealthy enthusiasts) are those who can take an extra 4 cores and translate that directly to an increase in productivity and subsequently profit.

[mr moose]

1 hour ago, Husky said:

The thing is, most people aren't going to be purchasing this CPU. They would rather go for a 9900K, 3700X, 3900X or something along those lines. Maybe companies with many workstations might consider it but then again I am pretty sure that they definitely do care very much about power consumption as they might have 100s of workstations and those extra hundreds of watts add up - and this is coming from someone with an OC'ed R9 390X that dims the lights in my room under load due to its power consumption combined with my house's poor wiring lol.

 

Most people buy based on price/performance (even those who build systems for commercial use still consider price/perf as much if not more than power draw) so this product will either sink or swim based on that.  Sure the odd company out there will have a bean counter suggesting otherwise,  but productivity generally always trumps power consumer at the levels we are talking here.

[Bombastinator]

Some probably stupid ideas:

This isn’t a part of computing I know much about (I had to look up HFT for example.  It apparently means High Frequency Trading)

So I am approaching this from a position of nearly pure ignorance.  This is only very rarely useful, but what the heck?

 

I was thinking about CPU cooling recently, and to address the concept of “how do you cool this thing” I got 2 possibles pulled directly from the hindquarters, neither of which may work.  Chances are they’ve already been tried and have failed to work.

1: abandon metal conduction.  

A. Go all liquid all the time.  Instead of a heat spreader with TIM, put some sort of massive surface area increaser right on the die, and water(?)cool the die.  Make the heat spreader plate not a small thing but a big thing and put water connectors on it.  Causes all kinds of problems that would have to be solved. Fluid dynamics of the moving water and uneven heating problems (silicon is a crystal and crystals like to crack if they aren’t heated evenly) are two that come to me off hand.  There are probably at least several more though.  Why does Pyrex not crack when heated unevenly?  I used to know but I’ve forgotten.

 

B. There was talk of Intel using graphite film to increase surface area for laptops and running it into the laptop back panel.  The problem with it that I saw is graphite isn’t flexible.  For a desktop it wouldn’t have to be.  Make the heat spreader out of graphite and make it big.  Threadripper big.  Then cool that.

 

2. Increase the size of the silicon. Not the CPU.  Just the silicon.  I’m suspecting there is a reason this isn’t done.  It’s too obvious.

 This is sort of what AMD did when they made their multi part chips.  They spread their heat source across the pcb. I notice the things are farther apart than they strictly speaking need to be.  They’re not set up against each other and they could have been.  That may be intentional. The piece of silicon they etch the cpu onto doesn’t actually have to be the same size as the cpu.  It can be bigger.  It’s wasteful of fab and silicon of course.  Silicon isn’t a great conductor of heat though, so wide and thin.

[cj09beira]

8 minutes ago, Bombastinator said:

2. Increase the size of the silicon. Not the CPU.  Just the silicon.  I’m suspecting there is a reason this isn’t done.  It’s too obvious.

 This is sort of what AMD did when they made their multi part chips.  They spread their heat source across the pcb. I notice the things are farther apart than they strictly speaking need to be.  They’re not set up against each other and they could have been.  That may be intentional. The piece of silicon they etch the cpu onto doesn’t actually have to be the same size as the cpu.  It can be bigger.  It’s wasteful of fab and silicon of course.  Silicon isn’t a great conductor of heat though, so wide and thin.

amd created a problem when they went to chiplets, usually a chip has 2 main heat areas, the cores and the cache, all the rest is relatively cooler, so the rest can help cool the cores and cache, with chiplets you are separating the hottest part of the die, on to it self and there is also less dark silicon (where there is no transistors), add 7nm's density on top of that and you have the recipe for some high temps, hopefully we find a better way to cool chips soon, or we move to another material that has better thermal conductivity, i am rooting for diamond just because it would be cool

[Bombastinator]

38 minutes ago, cj09beira said:

amd created a problem when they went to chiplets, usually a chip has 2 main heat areas, the cores and the cache, all the rest is relatively cooler, so the rest can help cool the cores and cache, with chiplets you are separating the hottest part of the die, on to it self and there is also less dark silicon (where there is no transistors), add 7nm's density on top of that and you have the recipe for some high temps, hopefully we find a better way to cool chips soon, or we move to another material that has better thermal conductivity, i am rooting for diamond just because it would be cool

Diamond is carbon.  Graphite is carbon. Graphene is carbon.  They may be already there.

 

if adding low temp stuff to the die heats it enough to keep it from cracking but adds more die surface are for cooling, just add more stuff.  It doesn’t even have to be useful stuff.  Other levels of cache that run cooler?  Throw some controllers on there just for fun?. A map of Westeros?  It doesn’t matter.

[mr moose]

2 minutes ago, comander said:

Most businesses also buy on price:performance. 

(Price of employee + price of tools)/total_performance

If your employee costs $200k a year (median pay at Google and Facebook) [roughly 700-800k over 3 years if you include benefits and taxes], and you can increase their performance by 2% over a 3 year span by spending an extra $2000, then you're spending an extra 1/4th of a percent for a 2% boost. Heck, if employee costs are half that then it still makes sense. 


These are hypotheticals, but you really need to look at the whole picture. 
 

 

I don;t think you even need to consider the pay of the employee,  if you run a business you are simply doing the math on the cost versus the performance of the tool.  If any tool improves productivity by 2% but only increases running costs by 1%, power consumption in this case, then power consumption is not a spec people will care about.  

 

This is why we see large companies always upgrading their fleet,  the cost of buying/hiring new vehicles is covered by other factors due to having new vehicles.

[Bombastinator]

9 minutes ago, mr moose said:

 

I don;t think you even need to consider the pay of the employee,  if you run a business you are simply doing the math on the cost versus the performance of the tool.  If any tool improves productivity by 2% but only increases running costs by 1%, power consumption in this case, then power consumption is not a spec people will care about.  

 

This is why we see large companies always upgrading their fleet,  the cost of buying/hiring new vehicles is covered by other factors due to having new vehicles.

I once remember someone saying they the way a business owner determines pay is by figuring out how much profit an employee produces and then determining what percentage of that amount they can pay the employee.  If that number goes above 1/1 heaven and earth must be moved to remove that employee.

[mr moose]

1 minute ago, Bombastinator said:

I once remember someone saying they the way a business owner determines pay is by figuring out how much profit an employee produces and then determining what percentage of that amount they can pay the employee.  If that number goes above 1/1 heaven and earth must be moved to remove that employee.

There are many different ways to work it out, but they also have to factor in necessary productivity to ensure stability and growth.  Sometimes it costs more to employ someone than they can effectively provide in revenue growth, however not having them there means overall failure of the business due to failing productivity during peak demand.

[leadeater]

7 hours ago, Waffles13 said:

For a team like Linus's, for example, do you think he would really care about an extra $50-100 a month on his electric bill if it meant his editors could work even 5% faster?

Cost per month it's much of an issue but total power can be. If you've got 10 workstations that can each pull 900W+ peak you then need to spec the power cabling and circuit breakers to handle that peak, you can't size for average or typical. That means in a 230V country you need 6mm2 cable and 40A or greater breakers which is not at all common so you would need to run two 4mm2 32A circuits just for those computers and depending on building may not be at all cheap. Then you have to make sure that the distribution box has a large enough input to handle that with everything else, all the way back to the main building distribution. For 120V countries the situation is slightly worse due to the higher current requirements but the pains are common to both.

 

There is an upper point where regular office power just isn't suited and money isn't a solution either, at least not to the point where you're having to re-wire the entire building and change out all power distribution boards.

 

Few high power workstations is trivial but it become non-trivial very quickly.

[Bombastinator]

28 minutes ago, mr moose said:

There are many different ways to work it out, but they also have to factor in necessary productivity to ensure stability and growth.  Sometimes it costs more to employ someone than they can effectively provide in revenue growth, however not having them there means overall failure of the business due to failing productivity during peak demand.

In which case the period of examination was too short and needs to be lengthened.

[KingKetchupMOD]

That's pretty darn cool!

[Bombastinator]

42 minutes ago, leadeater said:

Cost per month it's much of an issue but total power can be. If you've got 10 workstations what can each pull 900W+ peak you then need to spec the power cabling and circuit breakers to handle that peak, you can't size for average or typical. That means in a 230V country you need 6mm2 cable and 40A or greater breakers which is not at all common so you would need to run two 4mm2 32A circuits just for those computers and depending on building may not be at all cheap. Then you have to make sure that the distribution box has a large enough input to handle that with everything else, all the way back to the main building distribution. For 120V countries the situation is slightly worse due to the higher current requirements but the pains are common to both.

 

There is an upper point where regular office power just isn't suited and money isn't a solution either, at least not to the point where you're having to re-wire the entire building and change out all power distribution boards.

 

Few high power workstations is trivial but it become non-trivial very quickly.

And the moral of that story children is don’t ever even think about complaining about math in high school not being important in later life.  Any of it.   Sure.  You could plug all that into a spread sheet, IF you knew what the numbers even did.  Cause if you miss one you’re hosed.

[Unixsystem]

50 minutes ago, leadeater said:

Cost per month it's much of an issue but total power can be. If you've got 10 workstations what can each pull 900W+ peak you then need to spec the power cabling and circuit breakers to handle that peak, you can't size for average or typical. That means in a 230V country you need 6mm2 cable and 40A or greater breakers which is not at all common so you would need to run two 4mm2 32A circuits just for those computers and depending on building may not be at all cheap. Then you have to make sure that the distribution box has a large enough input to handle that with everything else, all the way back to the main building distribution. For 120V countries the situation is slightly worse due to the higher current requirements but the pains are common to both.

 

There is an upper point where regular office power just isn't suited and money isn't a solution either, at least not to the point where you're having to re-wire the entire building and change out all power distribution boards.

 

Few high power workstations is trivial but it become non-trivial very quickly.

That's a factor I wasn't really taking into consideration. 

 

However, I'd assume that the calculation still works out much the same, just add the cost of an infrastructure overhaul into the equation. I'd assume that any business with enough employees to overdraw the current wiring can probably afford to pay an electrician to renovate a room or two and install some heavier duty gear behind the scenes to keep it all working. And if they can't, they probably can't afford $20k+ in CPUs. 

 

It increases the time to pay itself off, but unlike the computer hardware I doubt that an office electrical upgrade is going to become outdated in a few years. 

[Bombastinator]

11 minutes ago, Waffles13 said:

That's a factor I wasn't really taking into consideration. 

 

However, I'd assume that the calculation still works out much the same, just add the cost of an infrastructure overhaul into the equation. I'd assume that any business with enough employees to overdraw the current wiring can probably afford to pay an electrician to renovate a room or two and install some heavier duty gear behind the scenes to keep it all working. And if they can't, they probably can't afford $20k+ in CPUs. 

 

It increases the time to pay itself off, but unlike the computer hardware I doubt that an office electrical upgrade is going to become outdated in a few years. 

Maybe you Haven’t hired an electrician lately.  Putting in a single service and wiring a garage with household style power cost me 6 grand.  You can’t get more power than your building’s service is rated for, or you get to pay the power company to upgrade the pole wiring TO the service, and that could be 30 grand easy.  Maybe triple that if it’s really bad.  That’s why power companies like power poles.  Imagine having to dig all that wire up.

[Bombastinator]

3 minutes ago, comander said:

I still don't use trignometric identities... and I haven't had to integrate secant(x)^3 in the real world ever. 

Algebra, arithmetic, statistics, boolean algebra, linear algebra, etc. I use daily though. 

Trig is useful for building things big enough that gravity matters a lot.  Like houses.  It also helps with visualizing calculus.  It’s math you can see.

[Brooksie359]

2 hours ago, Bombastinator said:

I once remember someone saying they the way a business owner determines pay is by figuring out how much profit an employee produces and then determining what percentage of that amount they can pay the employee.  If that number goes above 1/1 heaven and earth must be moved to remove that employee.

That's a pretty dumb way to run a business. I mean if that were the case then HR wouldn't be a thing or accounting. They don't strictly speaking make you money but it is pretty hard to have a running business without them. Also I work for a firm and as people move up the ladder they usually bill less hours not more and begin doing more administrative work and less work on projects they can charge clients for. 

[leadeater]

1 hour ago, Waffles13 said:

That's a factor I wasn't really taking into consideration. 

 

However, I'd assume that the calculation still works out much the same, just add the cost of an infrastructure overhaul into the equation. I'd assume that any business with enough employees to overdraw the current wiring can probably afford to pay an electrician to renovate a room or two and install some heavier duty gear behind the scenes to keep it all working. And if they can't, they probably can't afford $20k+ in CPUs. 

 

It increases the time to pay itself off, but unlike the computer hardware I doubt that an office electrical upgrade is going to become outdated in a few years. 

I mean they could but you first have to consider is the upgraded workstations actually worth it, if you only gain 5%-10% extra productivity over other hardware offerings is it actually worth both the cost and the disruption to business to go ahead with the electrical work. That's even if you own the building or alternatively get approval from the owner to get it done.

 

As you said it's more likely to just go with Xeon based workstations with slightly more power optimized processors that are perfectly capable and sit more in the 500W peak range, or even just lower power Cascade Lake-X options.

[mr moose]

1 hour ago, Bombastinator said:

In which case the period of examination was too short and needs to be lengthened.

There are many times in the growth of a business,  that it would have too much work for the current number of employees but not enough to pay the wages of new staff,  unless there is growth potential, those periods would wax and wane a bit before settling depending on the type of business.

[Bombastinator]

4 minutes ago, Brooksie359 said:

That's a pretty dumb way to run a business. I mean if that were the case then HR wouldn't be a thing or accounting. They don't strictly speaking make you money but it is pretty hard to have a running business without them. Also I work for a firm and as people move up the ladder they usually bill less hours not more and begin doing more administrative work and less work on projects they can charge clients for. 

The majority of businesses are too small to have either.  HR: the owner.  Accounting: the owner.  Management: the owner Janitorial: the owner.  The saying about drumming a small business is you get to make you own hours.  You get to pick which 12.

[CarlBar]

9 hours ago, AkatsukiKun said:

I'm wondering if you lived in a place with a winter season, did you feel the need to crack open your window?

 I live in such a place and even a simple 2700X + 2080Ti rig needs that fairly often. Then again it is a roughly 800 ish cubic ft room, with the combi Boiler in the cupboard.