4 ms·

I went through this about a year ago, to build a low-TDP ECC workstation. I do not have stats on failure rates, just this anecdotal experience. Asrock and Asus

I went through this about a year ago, to build a low-TDP ECC workstation. I do not have stats on failure rates, just this anecdotal experience. Asrock and Asus seem to be the boards to get. For RAM, I got two sticks of Samsung M391A4G43MB1, and verified. The advice I remember from the forums was to stick to unbuffered ram (UDIMMS).

loeg 6y ago
Yes, the consumer parts only support UDIMMs. If you want RDIMMs, you have to pay for EPYC.
everybodyknows 6y ago
Did you consider any off-the-shelf ECC boxes? Found some here -- bottom of the EPYC product line starts at $2849 ...! https://www.velocitymicro.com/wizard.php?iid=337 https://www.velocitymicro.com/wizard.php?iid=337
- cturner 6y ago
  The TDP on EPYC chips is a lot higher. I think of Threadripper as mid-tier, and EPYC as the high-end. Ryzen is remarkable because you can buy new equipment with ECC, at consumer prices. I am hazy, but don't think that has been possible since the 386 era ('parity ram').
  - loeg 6y ago
    > The TDP on EPYC chips is a lot higher. EPYC TDP ranges from "a lot lower" (35W embedded, 120W regular) up to "comparable with" (180-240W, a single 280W model) relative to Threadripper (180-250W last gen; current gen is all 280W). It's definitely not a lot higher on the Epyc side. > I think of Threadripper as mid-tier, and EPYC as the high-end. This oversimplifies to the point of not being a useful intuition (or is arguably even incorrect). Threadripper is a SKU with a moderate number of cores at relatively high clocks; (high-power) EPYC SKUs have a lot of very efficient cores running at lower clocks. They both have a niche, but Threadripper has unambiguously better single-core performance due to the ~20% higher clocks. And single-core IPC still matters in many applications (to oversimplify: Amdahl's law; but also, latency-sensitive applications).
    - sitkack 6y ago
      AMD is more accurate in their TDP specs than Intel is, they can't really be compared.
      - loeg 6y ago
        This is not responsive to he comment you're replying to, which is comparing AMD to AMD.
        sitkack 6y ago
        My comment was corrupted by rowhammer. Not only was it misdirected, the content is also probably wrong.

loeg 6y ago

Yes, the consumer parts only support UDIMMs. If you want RDIMMs, you have to pay for EPYC.

everybodyknows 6y ago

Did you consider any off-the-shelf ECC boxes? Found some here -- bottom of the EPYC product line starts at $2849 ...! https://www.velocitymicro.com/wizard.php?iid=337 https://www.velocitymicro.com/wizard.php?iid=337

cturner 6y ago
The TDP on EPYC chips is a lot higher. I think of Threadripper as mid-tier, and EPYC as the high-end. Ryzen is remarkable because you can buy new equipment with ECC, at consumer prices. I am hazy, but don't think that has been possible since the 386 era ('parity ram').
- loeg 6y ago
  > The TDP on EPYC chips is a lot higher. EPYC TDP ranges from "a lot lower" (35W embedded, 120W regular) up to "comparable with" (180-240W, a single 280W model) relative to Threadripper (180-250W last gen; current gen is all 280W). It's definitely not a lot higher on the Epyc side. > I think of Threadripper as mid-tier, and EPYC as the high-end. This oversimplifies to the point of not being a useful intuition (or is arguably even incorrect). Threadripper is a SKU with a moderate number of cores at relatively high clocks; (high-power) EPYC SKUs have a lot of very efficient cores running at lower clocks. They both have a niche, but Threadripper has unambiguously better single-core performance due to the ~20% higher clocks. And single-core IPC still matters in many applications (to oversimplify: Amdahl's law; but also, latency-sensitive applications).
  - sitkack 6y ago
    AMD is more accurate in their TDP specs than Intel is, they can't really be compared.
    - loeg 6y ago
      This is not responsive to he comment you're replying to, which is comparing AMD to AMD.
      - sitkack 6y ago
        My comment was corrupted by rowhammer. Not only was it misdirected, the content is also probably wrong.