Mini iTX: Two approaches

Forum to discuss and compare Hardware profiles and Benchmarking
User avatar
Dirk Broer
Corsair
Corsair
Posts: 1962
Joined: Thu Feb 20, 2014 11:24 pm
Location: Leiden, South Holland, Netherlands
Contact:

#1 Mini iTX: Two approaches

Post by Dirk Broer »

There's more than one way to crunch, but basically you need
  1. CPU
  2. A Motherboard
  3. RAM
  4. A PSU
  5. Something to hold your OS
  6. Something to hold your data
  7. Connectivity
Then there's nice-to-have-too's:
  1. A GPU
  2. A Case
  3. Cooling
  4. USB Ports for your ASICs
If we want to go all-out, and money is no objection :albino: , we should choose as much computing power as is possible on a mobo, so quad socket 2011-3 mobos with four 22-core Xeon's, 1 TB of registered ECC RAM, SSDs in RAID-6, triple redundant PSUs, four Gigabit Ethernet ports and several nVida Quadro cards per mobo, all this in a lavishly cooled 19'' rack tower. :clown: Sadly, this is not the case for most of us. :pale:
The other end of the crunching spectrum is to focus on as much cores within as small an amount of Wattage as possible -the ARM octa-cores. :flower:
In between lies the iTX approach that can also be divided in Hold it, that's two different powers, I hear you thinking.
You're right, but the computational power of the iTX housed Xeon comes at a price.
Whereas the Pentium -an Atom sheep in wolf's clothing- will have more than enough power using a 60 Watt laptop brick, the Xeon is more likely to need at least a 300 Watt PSU for its 22 cores and its Quadro GPU, 600 Watt may be even likelier.
The 'Pentium' is best locked up in an as-tiny-as-possible casing, to have enough computing power per cubic feet man cave.

So my advice for Xeon iTX: as heat tends to go upward, go for a case with a horizontal placed mobo and with enough space for both intake and outake fans -and when you do not trust air for your cooling, it should also have enough room for one or more radiators. The Bitfenix Prodigy was among the first cases that took this iTX approach -still a bit limited in the PSU deepness dimension-, later followed with e.g the Cooler Master HAF Stacker 915R/F, the Cooltek W1, the Fractal Design Define Nano S, the Phantek Enthoo Evolv ITX and the Thermaltake Core X1.

For Bay Trail, Braswell or AMD AM1 my advice is to go for cases like the Antec ISK 110 or one of several Inter-Tech cases with internal 60 Watt PSU.
Image
User avatar
Dirk Broer
Corsair
Corsair
Posts: 1962
Joined: Thu Feb 20, 2014 11:24 pm
Location: Leiden, South Holland, Netherlands
Contact:

#2 High-Performance iTX Cases

Post by Dirk Broer »

What is the best iTX case for high-performance crunching? It has to be well-ventilated and have room for a GPU too, so that rules out the very compact low-power casings. duh...
Basically this boils down to 'what is the biggest case that is still iTX?', iTX meaning here that there are -at max- just three slots for add-on cards -for that Titan-Z, nVidia Quadro or AMD Tahiti.

Loud and ineffective 80 mm fans should be avoided, as well as PSUs that take in hot air from the inside of the casing. Fanports should also be able to house radiators of the same dimension.
We crunchers have our CPUs at 100% for 24/7/365, so that poor PSU will never have a chance to cool down.
Contenders Width
in cm
Deep
in cm
Height
in cm
Volume
in dm³
Fan ports
200mm
Fan ports
140mm
Fan ports
120mm
Fan ports
80mm
PSU
position
Bitfenix
Prodigy
25.0
35.9
40.4
36.26
1
2
5
0
good
(below)
Cooler Master
HAF 915R
22.7
58.0
24.9
32.78
0
4
6
0
bad
(above)
Cooler Master
HAF 915F
22.7
58.0
24.9
32.78
0
4
6
0
good
(far before)
Cooltek
W1
24.2
36.2
35.6
31.19
0
4
2
0
good
(below)
Corsair
Graphite 380T
29.8
40.0
35.5
42.32
1
1
3
0
good
(below)
Corsair
Obsidian 250D
27.2
35.0
29.1
27.70
1
1
2
2
good
(below)
Fractal Design
Define Nano S
20.3
41.2
34.4
28.77
0
4
6
0
good
(below)
NZXT
Manta
24.0
45.2
43.0
46.65
0
4
5
0
good
(below)
Phanteks
Enthoo Evolv ITX
23.0
41.0
37.5
35.36
1
5
5
0
good
(below)
Thermaltake
Core X1
28.0
47.1
42.6
56.18
3
5
8
0
good
(below)
Zalman
M1
26.1
42.6
39.4
43.81
0
0
4
0
good
(below)
Note that some fan positions exclude others (e.g. either one 200 mm or two 120 mm, or either four 140 mm or six 120 mm).

I think it is safe to declare the Thermaltake Core X1 the utter behemoth of high-performance iTX crunching. You can even stack them!
Image
Image
User avatar
Dirk Broer
Corsair
Corsair
Posts: 1962
Joined: Thu Feb 20, 2014 11:24 pm
Location: Leiden, South Holland, Netherlands
Contact:

#3 Low-Power Cases

Post by Dirk Broer »

While the Thermaltake Core X1 offers the chance to go all-out, some people live in areas where the price of a KWh is the equivalent of 25 Euro cents/30 US Dollar cents -or more. These people can opt for the other end of iTX-use: low-power crunching.

The low-power iTX boards are either Intel Atom-based and feature soldered-on CPUs, or based upon low-power AMD designs that can be either soldered-on or be Socket AM1 PGA-ZIF based.
These systems use very little power, and the little that they use can be minimized even further by: So we look for well-ventilated cases with a small internal -or external- PSU. Fan ports or 5.25'' bays are of no importance, nor is there need for an expansion slot for a GPU -quite a contrast with the Thermaltake Core X1...
As most of these mini cases come with a standard, the 'width' of them is quite small as compared to the 'height'. You can also use them horizontally, but space-wise that's not so effective -at least not on the rack that I am using.
ContendersWidth in cmDeep in cmHeight in cmVolume in dm³USB front portsPSU
ImageAntec ISK 110
8.0
21.3
25.1
4.28
4x USB 2.0
90 W
ImageCompucase 8K01BS-SA12U
7.0
29.0
26.8
5.44
2x USB 2.0
120 W
ImageInwin Chopin
8.4
21.7
24.4
4.45
2x USB 3.0
150 W
ImageInter-Tech E-2011
6.0
25.0
19.0
2.85
2x USB 2.0
60 W
ImageInter-Tech E-3002
6.0
21.5
19.0
2.45
2x USB 2.0
60 W
ImageLC-Power LC-1350mi
6.5
19.0
22.0
2.72
2x USB 3.0
75 W
ImageLC-Power LC-1360mi
8.3
32.0
25.0
6.64
2x USB 3.0
75 W
ImageLC-Power LC-1370WII
7.0
31.5
25.0
5.51
2x USB 3.0
90 W
It is not easy to declare a winner here, much depends on your onboard connectors. Me myself, I -all three of us actually- am very satisfied with the Antec ISK 110 for my Asus and MSI AM1 boards, as it makes use of all onboard USB 2.0 connectors (normal AM1 iTX boards not having USB 3.0 -unless you take the luxorious Asrock AM1H-ITX). Bay Trail and Braswell boards do have a USB 3.0 connector and not enough USB 2.0 to make this particular Antec work properly -you would need to downgrade your onboard USB 3.0 to USB 2.0 by means of a adapter.
The In Win Chopin looks good, but has a too powerful PSU for low-power crunching, and the Compucase 8K01BS-SA12U is hampered this way too. The Inter Techs score best in the power department.
Image
User avatar
Dirk Broer
Corsair
Corsair
Posts: 1962
Joined: Thu Feb 20, 2014 11:24 pm
Location: Leiden, South Holland, Netherlands
Contact:

#4 iTX crunching: alternative CPU platform

Post by Dirk Broer »

What can be bought, Mini iTX-wise?

Let's start with some exotics and start with VIA CPUs. Yes, they still make CPUs.

Jetway seems to be the only manufacturer that makes them nowadays and they offer/offered several J7F2, J7F4 and J7F5 boards with VIA C7 or VIA Eden CPUs. These boards mostly have room for just one stick of DDR2 RAM (1GB max) and are best left alone.
Another series is their NF76 and NF77 boards, with VIA C7, VIA Eden or VIA Nano CPUs. RAM is here 2GB max, the CPU still single-core.
Top of the list for Jetway VIA-based iTX boards is their NC73 and NC74 series, both based upon the VIA Nano L2007 (65nm, 1.6GHz), that offer two RAM slots for a max of 8GB. As the VIA Nano L2007 is also single-core it is not worth the effort, BOINC-wise, Jetway makes much more interesting boards than these.

Luckily, VIA also makes boards themselves, top-of-the-bill being the VIA EPIA-M920 Mini-ITX Board.
Image
This is what you ought to buy when you do not want either Intel or AMD, but still want to run x86(-64) code.
As the board cost US$355.00, VIA shot itself in the foot with it. I can buy an octa-core Atom C2758 board for that money. :brilsmurf:
Image
Image
User avatar
Bryan
Boinc Brigadier
Boinc Brigadier
Posts: 2621
Joined: Thu May 21, 2015 6:18 pm

#5 Re: Mini iTX: Two approaches

Post by Bryan »

I guess we are on opposite ends of the spectrum. I'm seriously considering a new build with 280W TDP - 36 cores/72 threads :roll:
Image
User avatar
scole of TSBT
Boinc Major General
Boinc Major General
Posts: 5980
Joined: Mon Feb 03, 2014 2:38 pm
Location: Goldsboro, (Eastern) North Carolina, USA

#6 Re: Mini iTX: Two approaches

Post by scole of TSBT »

Bryan wrote:I guess we are on opposite ends of the spectrum. I'm seriously considering a new build with 280W TDP - 36 cores/72 threads :roll:
How does crunching performance compare between a 24 thread CPU vs 36 thread CPU? I've wondered if the memory bandwidth gets saturated and kills performance. Would be a pissa if you paid that kind of premium for 36 thread CPUs if they couldn't complete any more WUs than a 24 or 28 thread CPUs. I've not researched. Just asking.
Image
User avatar
Dirk Broer
Corsair
Corsair
Posts: 1962
Joined: Thu Feb 20, 2014 11:24 pm
Location: Leiden, South Holland, Netherlands
Contact:

#7 Re: Mini iTX: Two approaches

Post by Dirk Broer »

:character-spongebobdance:
Bryan wrote:I guess we are on opposite ends of the spectrum. I'm seriously considering a new build with 280W TDP - 36 cores/72 threads :roll:
You either have a larger income or lower KW/h prices than me -or both :bigsmurf:

But seriously: if I win big in the lottery, I'll build a system -and when the price is big enough more- with two 24 core Xeons, 48 cores/96 threads. And there seems to be an upcoming AMD Zen with 32 cores/64 threads per CPU, I hope SuperMicro still makes quad AMD boards for them...128 cores/256 threads :character-spongebobdance:
Image
User avatar
Dirk Broer
Corsair
Corsair
Posts: 1962
Joined: Thu Feb 20, 2014 11:24 pm
Location: Leiden, South Holland, Netherlands
Contact:

#8 Re: Mini iTX: Two approaches

Post by Dirk Broer »

scole250 wrote:How does crunching performance compare between a 24 thread CPU vs 36 thread CPU? I've wondered if the memory bandwidth gets saturated and kills performance. Would be a pissa if you paid that kind of premium for 36 thread CPUs if they couldn't complete any more WUs than a 24 or 28 thread CPUs. I've not researched. Just asking.
Would that be the reason AMD plans for octa-channel DDR4 with Zen?
Image
User avatar
Bryan
Boinc Brigadier
Boinc Brigadier
Posts: 2621
Joined: Thu May 21, 2015 6:18 pm

#9 Re: Mini iTX: Two approaches

Post by Bryan »

scole250 wrote:
Bryan wrote:How does crunching performance compare between a 24 thread CPU vs 36 thread CPU? I've wondered if the memory bandwidth gets saturated and kills performance. Would be a pissa if you paid that kind of premium for 36 thread CPUs if they couldn't complete any more WUs than a 24 or 28 thread CPUs. I've not researched. Just asking.
That's the question I've been trying to find the answer to myself :?: The E5-2697 v4, from a memory perspective, may have a bigger bottleneck than our X5675 machines. The old ones have a 3 channel 32 Gb memory bandwidth and the new one is 4 channel 77 Gb bandwidth (1.33G/thread vs 1.1G/thread). That is DDR3 1333 versus DDR4 2400 memory modules plus the extra channel. The v4 has a 45Mb instruction cache versus 12Mb on the 5675 so ideally there would be fewer short memory fetches.

Zombie has a modern 2 CPU Xeon - dual E5-2630 v3, 32 threads, and Sphynx and I have had our Dells on the same project. His machines were producing exactly like he had 8 threads more than our machines. That doesn't sound like that big a deal, but his machine is clocked at 2.4G and ours are 3.06G. That's probably architecture and not solely a function of memory.

None of what I've said really answers the question you asked and that I still have. If I had the same generation Xeon with fewer cores and a higher clock rate how would they compare. The only option along those lines is a 24 thread E5-2687 at 3G versus E5-2697 36 threads at 2.3G. In the only benchmark I found the 2687 is a little faster on single core (both CPUs have about the same turbo speed) but that is not really applicable to our usage. The test just used 1 core/thread where we use all cores threads running single WU so both machines will drop close to their base clock rate. That would give the 3G machine a big edge. So it doesn't answer the question would 48 threads running at 3G outperform 72 threads running at 2.3G. I'd bet on the 72 thread machine. Of course on the multi-thread benchmarks the 2697 totally blows the 2687 away.

The other option that is going through my head is the new I7-6950X which will be out shortly. That is 10C/20T and overclocks to well over 4G. It is much easier to wrap your head around the performance of that machine versus 72 threads of dual Xeons.

Sorry Dirk, I didn't mean to hijack your thread. I always read your stuff on the small computers. I find it fascinating, not something I plan on doing, but fascinating none-the-less. And yes, our electricity rates are MUCH lower than Europe.

EDIT: the dual Xeon route would be a nice WuProp machine :lol:
Image
User avatar
Dirk Broer
Corsair
Corsair
Posts: 1962
Joined: Thu Feb 20, 2014 11:24 pm
Location: Leiden, South Holland, Netherlands
Contact:

#10 Mini iTX: the Mini-iTX power-house

Post by Dirk Broer »

Let's asume you bought a Thermaltake Core X1 for maximum iTX performance -or perhaps even two, to stack them up and use them with large radiators, pumps and tubing- what are you filling it with?

AMD-wise, you have just one option: buy the top model APU (the A10-7890K at the moment) and use a -preferably AMD- high end video card. Do not bother with virtual crossfire, you're no gamer. Fill the AMD A88X mobo to the max with DDR3-2133 RAM -or 2400, when you want to OC- because the IGP of the APU needs it. Some AMD A88X based boards can take up to 64 GB in their two slots -in theory. You may have trouble locating modules bigger than 8 GB, so you're likely to be stopped at 16 GB.
I say 'preferably AMD' high end video card because it is near impossible to get Linux crunching going on both AMD and nVidia driver at the same time and, ever since Windows 8.1, I have troubles with Windows too when using more than one brand Video driver. As soon as OpenCL starts, the machine goes down.
Using the A10-7890K IGP and an AMD card you can crunch two GPU projects at the same time (and with the 6 GB AMD FirePro S10000 you should be able to run at least six WUs at the same time, if not more) and four CPU ones -not counting nci.

Using Intel offers more opportunities. Do you want to go Socket 1151, or do you want to go Socket 2011-3? Socket 1151 means either using the i7-6700K (and then any Z170 iTX board will do) or the Intel Xeon E3-1275 v5. The latter choice will bind you to e.g. the ASRock E3C236D2I -the important part here being the C236 for the chipset- when you want what the Xeon can give to you. Combined with a high-end video card of the same capabilities/price level as the FirePro S10000 you ought to have a potent cruncher, but you are limited to eight CPU threads.

All in the end my conclusion is to go for Socket 2011-3 when you want really more bang for your buck. Here we face the same problem as with Socket 1151: choosing the i7 means you max out at the 10-core Core i7-6950X using a X99-based iTX board, e.g. ASRock X99E-ITX/ac.
When you want a Xeon to give you even more cores/threads, you are halted at the 22-core Xeons E5-2696 v4 and E5-2699 v4, as I could find no better Xeon iTX board than the ASRock EPC612D4I with Intel C612 chipset.

Still, that's 44 CPU threads, plus eventual nci WUs and the GPU WUs from the 12 GB nVidia Quadro K6000.
Image
User avatar
scole of TSBT
Boinc Major General
Boinc Major General
Posts: 5980
Joined: Mon Feb 03, 2014 2:38 pm
Location: Goldsboro, (Eastern) North Carolina, USA

#11 Re: Mini iTX: Two approaches

Post by scole of TSBT »

I think he has his heart set on a dual E5-2697 v4, 72 thread system. Slap 8x 16GB sticks of Corsair DDR4, a couple SSDs and a couple Tesla P100s. DO IT!

Now how you gonna keep that mess cool during the summer? Maybe we need to move this a separate thread and keep Dirk's on topic.
Image
User avatar
Bryan
Boinc Brigadier
Boinc Brigadier
Posts: 2621
Joined: Thu May 21, 2015 6:18 pm

#12 Re: Mini iTX: Two approaches

Post by Bryan »

scole250 wrote:I think he has his heart set on a dual E5-2697 v4, 72 thread system. Slap 8x 16GB sticks of Corsair DDR4, a couple SSDs and a couple Tesla P100s. DO IT!

Now how you gonna keep that mess cool during the summer? Maybe we need to move this a separate thread and keep Dirk's on topic.
That's pretty much the description w/o the Teslas. I'll probably put in a non-crunching GPU :lol:

Zombie did a dual Xeon build a few months back. He used the HAF X chassis and has a H100i water cooler mounted on the top and a single (but thick) Corsair water cooler mounted where you have the normal chassis exhaust fan.

I'm seriously giving this some thought .... that doesn't mean I will actually pull the trigger.

Last post .... the thread is yours Dirk!
Image
User avatar
Dirk Broer
Corsair
Corsair
Posts: 1962
Joined: Thu Feb 20, 2014 11:24 pm
Location: Leiden, South Holland, Netherlands
Contact:

#13 Re: Mini iTX: Two approaches

Post by Dirk Broer »

scole250 wrote:I think he has his heart set on a dual E5-2697 v4, 72 thread system. Slap 8x 16GB sticks of Corsair DDR4, a couple SSDs and a couple Tesla P100s. DO IT!

Now how you gonna keep that mess cool during the summer? Maybe we need to move this a separate thread and keep Dirk's on topic.
HPC (as in High Performance Computing) also means HPC (as in High Performance Cooling), I think we all agree on that, no matter what the size of you casing is. My first iTX board died on me due to cooling related causes. This would not have happened in the Thermaltake Core X1, which even seems to anticipate upcoming 180mm fans and related radiators.
Image
Image
User avatar
Dirk Broer
Corsair
Corsair
Posts: 1962
Joined: Thu Feb 20, 2014 11:24 pm
Location: Leiden, South Holland, Netherlands
Contact:

#14 Re: Mini iTX: Two approaches

Post by Dirk Broer »

Well, the possibilities for an iTX build have increased significantly over the last year.

An AMD iTX Socket AM4 system can now have at max an eight core, 16 thread Ryzen 7 2700X (is that rumoured ten core, twenty thread Ryzen 7 2800X vapoware? Or AMD's next surprise?) and as there is no IGP that might conflict, driver-wise you can stick in the biggest GPU that will fit your iTX case -which in the case on a Thermaltake Core X1 is bigger than my budget. The boards and CPUs are reasonably priced though, having just one GPU means any B350 or B450 iTX board will do -even the Asrock A320 iTX -not for sale here- is enough. The 2700X is just over 250 Euro's (the only slightly less capable 1700X has dropped to around 150-170...)

Intel offers you now a choice of no less than three platforms for an iTX build: Sockets 1151, 2011-33 and 2066.
The last is the most interesting as it supports the Intel Core i9-9980XE, 18 cores and 36 threads. A tad more expensive than the AMD solution though: The i9 is some $2,000 and the board is some $400. What board? The Asrock X299E-ITX/ac.
Warning: You can have three of the above AMD iTX systems running for less than the costs of the Socket 2066 powerhouse, and have more cores/threads running too.

Socket 2011-3 then? Only two boards in the $300 range, one (the more expensive) with the by now ancient X99 chipset -so only core i7- and one with the Intel C612 chipset, allowing a 22-core Xeon E5-2699 v4. Pity that is costs around $4,500 here, making the Intel iTX 2011-3 solution twice as expensive as the 2066 soloution.
Warning: You can have three of the above AMD iTX systems running for far less than the costs of the Socket 2011-3 powerhouse, and have more cores/threads running too.

So in the end only Intel's Socket 1151 platform can hope to be price-competitive for an iTX build. The Core i7-9900K has double the cores/threads of the old i7-6700K and is equal the the Ryzen 7 2700X, just more than twice as expensive though at around $550 (tray)-630 (boxed -both here). Socket 1151 iTX boards are priced at same level a AM4 iTX boards.
Warning: You can have two of the above AMD iTX systems running for the same amount of money as the costs of the Socket 1151 iTX system, and have twice the amount of cores/threads running, too.
Image
User avatar
Dirk Broer
Corsair
Corsair
Posts: 1962
Joined: Thu Feb 20, 2014 11:24 pm
Location: Leiden, South Holland, Netherlands
Contact:

#15 Re: Mini iTX: Two approaches

Post by Dirk Broer »

What do I write that you do not understand? What is confusing?
If you want to build an iTX system because you do not have enough space for a full-sized system you can either make the system as small as possible or as big as the limits of the iTX format will permit.
There is a choice between socket AM4 for AMD CPUs and 1511, 2011-3 and 2066 for Intel CPUs for the 'big' iTX approach, while the 'small' approach will have the choice between AMD and Intel onboard solutions -of which AMD presently has no good alternative.

Me personally I run four 'small' iTX systems: three AMD Socket AM1 systems (comparable to the onboard AMD A5-5000, but just a bit faster) and an Intel Pentium J5005 system.
All four costed next to nothing when compared to a mATX or a full-size ATX system. All four systems run four cores/four threads and have inbuilt GPUs (IGPs) -it is just that three of them run Linux that presently does not see IPG GPUs from AMD or Intel. Maddening, because they did work in the past.

If I want more 'bang' out of my present small iTX boxes I would buy AM4 itx boards and fill them with Ryzen 5 2400G's. The number of cores stays the same, but the threads are doubled and the IGP recognized by Linux -hopefully. And for my bigger iTX cases like this one Image
I can go all-out as described before: Ryzen 7 2700X plus whatever card is best/affordable.
Image
davidbam
General Bitchin'
General Bitchin'
Posts: 6371
Joined: Wed Aug 15, 2018 1:15 pm
Location: Huntly, Scotland
Contact:

#16 Re: Mini iTX: Two approaches

Post by davidbam »

Anyone going the Socket 2011-3 route might want to consider the Xeon E5-2696 v4 instead of the Xeon E5-2699 v4 - they seem more reasonably priced for very similar specs
I think this is fool-proof but could you just try it for me please? • There are 10 types of people in the world; those who understand binary, and those who don’t
Image
User avatar
Dirk Broer
Corsair
Corsair
Posts: 1962
Joined: Thu Feb 20, 2014 11:24 pm
Location: Leiden, South Holland, Netherlands
Contact:

#17 Re: Mini iTX: Two approaches

Post by Dirk Broer »

Presently the Bitfenix Prodigy iTX case holds an Asrock B550 Phantom Gaming-ITX/ax, rocking a Ryzen 7 5700G supported by 2x 32GB 3600 DDR4 sticks, cooled with a Noctua NH-U12S -Yes, it has the space for that. It is one of two replacements for my three AM1 systems -the other being an Asrock Fatal1ty X370 Gaming-ITX/ac that presently holds my Athlon A12-9800GE, but will be replaced with my Ryzen 5 2400G next tax return.
Image
Post Reply Previous topicNext topic

Return to “Benchmarking and Hardware”